Kodak Ektachrome 64T

[Ektagraphic]

Hello-
Hearing Fuji has discontinued their last tungsten film, I got the urge to try some...I went streight to Ektachrome 64T. I also bought an 85B filter to use it in daylight. I was wondering if you had any comments and suggestions for me....Also, how should I alter my exposure when I use a handheld meter not the TTL one of the camera? Thanks

 

[2F/2F]

The filter should have an exposure factor on the box or in the instructions. If it doesn't, you can likely go with the Wratten filter factor, which is 1.5. That means add 2/3 or 1/2 stop in practical use (0.75 stops technically). Or just call the film EI 40 on your light meter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wratten_number

 

[Ektagraphic]

Thanks. There is no data at all on the filter box.....

 

[Q.G.]

If it doesn't, you can likely go with the Wratten filter factor, which is 1.5. That means add 2/3 or 1/2 stop in practical use (0.75 stops technically).

A factor of 1.5 would 'technically' be a reduction of 0.58 stops. So 1/2 will be fine.

 

[budrichard]

Bring a tripod.
T films are made for 3200K light or the old incandescent temperature. They can give different colors under flourescent light. ASA 64 is SLOW under indoor conditions which is why there was High Speed Ektacrome at 160 and 320 ASA at one time which with large f stop lenses could be useful indoors. 64T is useless for handheld work even with Leica M and the reason for the demise of T films is digital.
I use enough film so I never had to shoot T film outdoors, so I have no experience except to say that your probably better off with something like K64 outdoors than 64T.-Dick

 

[Ektagraphic]

Well I plan to use it outdoors because I just want to try something new.

 

[BobNewYork]

Outdoors without the 85B and the images have a "winter moonlight" feel to them - it's funky for some subjects.

Bob H

 

[2F/2F]

A factor of 1.5 would 'technically' be a reduction of 0.58 stops. So 1/2 will be fine.

Indeed. My mistake. I am so used to just halving filter factors of 2 and 4 from yellow and blue filters that I did it with 1.5 as well.

 

[nickandre]

I've shot it as super8 stock. It was grainy (gee, wonder why...) but it gave this amazing look to it. The cameras all have 85A filters which made the final image 200 degrees cold, but it was okay. I've heard the results with still film are quite impressive because that tungsten stock in particular has a huge dynamic range to it. Having ordered a roll of Fuji 64T a week before it was discontinued, I just loaded up the TLR and fired off a roll last night propping the camera up on rocks and small footladders because I had forgotten my good-fo'-nuthin' tripod. I'm excited to say the least. Given that I want some tungsten film remaining in production when I graduate from highschool I'll probably start shooting the Kodak stuff for night work.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I am just so excited to try something new (to me..). I also just bought a Super 8 camera and I got some Ektachrome 64T movie film for that too. I I don't have a projector (yet...my dad use to have one but it went away through a few moves...still have the movies!! I even have some from his High School football games..). I plant to have Dwayne's put telecine it to DVD so I can just watch it on TV. I do hope to get a projector soon...I am guessing it is like slides, how they are best when projected....I think it is pretty cheap to have Dwayne's to put it to DVD for $9.95. Does anyone know how the quality of this service is?

 

[nickandre]

I used MovieStuff transfers. They use a special frame by frame technique. But projecting it is the best way to view it.

You'll have trouble exposing. Depending on your camera they may need corrections. They were all designed for the Kodachrome 40T stock which kodak pulled in '05. Dwaynes still runs it if you have some (expensive.)

 

[aluk]

Ektagraphic --

If you haven't already, try getting your super 8 film directly from Kodak. Here in Canada they offer this service, and it is a fair bit cheaper than buying it in the stores, especially if you can get a student discount. Further to tiberiusz's comment above, see the attached article from smallformat magazine (which has unfortunately stopped publishing in English) to determine whether your camera can take 64 speed film.

 

[Ektagraphic]

Thanks........Does this stuff compare at all to the original Ektachrome 64 when filtered and shot in daylight? I have heard great things about that film, but I have never had the pleasure of shooting it.

 

[digiconvert]

Great to see the enthusiasm of Ektagraphic in trying something different. I used the Fuji Tungsten fil for that reason , got some really interesting night time shots , but you need a trippod and a cable release for that.
Have fun - post the results of your stills please. As for the cine film you can get it telecined into a format which you can work on with video programmes like Final Cut on Apple - not sure if there's a Windoze equivalent

 

[Ektagraphic]

Thanks! I love to try diffrent thing...usually thing that are old, but new to me.....I also seem to gravetate to things that are or are going to be discontinued soon enough and tings unusual.... like Polaroid, Tunsten Film, Super 8, and Kodachrome.

 

[Ian Cooper]

If you're interested in Super-8, then www.filmshooting.com and www.cinematography.com might be of interest.

I seem to remember Roger Evans saying that Dwaynes are using one of his work-printer style machines for telecine.

The reports of the quality seemed to suggest they weren't getting the best out of the machine when they first started using it, although it might have improved since. You're best bet is to have a wade through the archives of the above two forums as the subject has been discussed there previously - just I can't remember what the opinions were!

If you want to carry out further editting in the realm of digital, then it's best to avoid DVD as an intermediate storage technique as the quality is pretty poor compared to other digital storage options.



Ian.

 

[BobNewYork]

........... then it's best to avoid DVD as an intermediate storage technique as the quality is pretty poor compared to other digital storage options.



Ian.

Why is that? Would the same apply for still images and to CDs?
(I know we're not a digi forum - but you started it Ian

Bob H

 

[Ektagraphic]

I am just going to try the Dwayne's Telecine for now. It is the cheapest I have found ($9.00). I push most of my photography budget into 35mm. I hope to get a projector some day and for some rolls maybe I won't bother with telecine.

 

[perkeleellinen]

This is an interesting project (64T in daylight). Do keep us updated. Have you read the data sheet? If I read it right, it recommends a combination of filters for shooting 64T in daylight (The Fuji T64 data sheet recommends a different combination).

 

[Ian Cooper]

Why is that? Would the same apply for still images and to CDs?
(I know we're not a digi forum - but you started it Ian

Bob H

Oh dear, I'll put the hard-hat on and slip into a bullet proof vest first.
...and type in whispered tones... with any luck nobody will notice!

When still images are saved to CD or DVD it tends to be done as a data file. In that situation the use of a CD or DVD doesn't affect the 'quality', as the CD/DVD is just a storage medium, in the same way as a 3.5" floppy or hard disc is.

Having your cine film transferred to "DVD" will create a 'video DVD' capable of playing back on a DVD player. The file format used to save the video data is MPEG2 - quite a lossy compressed format. Whilst it can be adequate for 'final delivery', if you want to carry out further editting then you are much better off having it transferred to something with less compression. If you don't have the means to handle formats such as DigiBeta/BetaSP etc, then even MiniDV is better than a DVD. MiniDV still uses a lossy compresion format, but it is less severe than that used on DVDs.

I suppose the best analogy to still photography is the recommendation not to use highly compressed JPEGs until you've finally finished editting and tweaking your photograph - use a format such as TIF for as long as possible and only compress down to a JPEG right at the end of the process. Likewise with DVDs - don't save your transferred cine film to DVD until after you've editted and adjusted it all.

If you look closely at sequences on DVD containing a lot of moving fine detail, then you can see compression artefacts as the algorythms struggle to cope with all the high frequency information, the data rate used to generate the DVD can also have a large effect on the degradation of the image. High data rates give better quality, but can lead to problems playing back on some DVD players and PCs.


Right, did I get away with it?
To make up for it I can always discuss the joys of the 16mm clockwork K3, or the elegant Beaulieu R16 as recompense?!
...the delights of respooling 400ft recans down to 100ft daylight loads?
...my plans to adapt Arri Std mount lenses to a Russion K3 bayonet mount camera?
....all of which remains in the non-digital domain!

 

[c6h6o3]

If I had to pick one film as my all time favorite it would be 64T. Low contrast, long tonal scale and perfect color balance. Use an 85B Wratten filter and give 2/3 stop extra exposure (Just set your meter to 40). Out to 100 seconds there is no concern about reciprocity. It's a Type L film, designed for long exposures.

 

[BobNewYork]

Oh dear, I'll put the hard-hat on and slip into a bullet proof vest first.
...and type in whispered tones... with any luck nobody will notice! .......

Right, did I get away with it?
To make up for it I can always discuss the joys of the 16mm clockwork K3, or the elegant Beaulieu R16 as recompense?!
...the delights of respooling 400ft recans down to 100ft daylight loads?
...my plans to adapt Arri Std mount lenses to a Russion K3 bayonet mount camera?
....all of which remains in the non-digital domain!

Thanks Ian. Don't worry - got your back mate

Bob H