More "new" colour films

[Steve@f8]

Yes, that's to be expected. You could probably balance this out almost entirely in digital post processing, however.

Everyone seems to want a piece of the repurposed 'alternative' film these days. I admit, I also couldn't resist, but I just got a big roll of Vision3 250D, develop at home and remove the remjet after processing. Works a treat. Since you're in the UK, this may be attractive for you (check frame24.co.uk) if you are willing to commit to a whole 400ft (or even 1000ft) roll.

somehow I forget about post processing correction when I have my film head on, but that makes sense.

 

[cmacd123]

Typo there, I meant Remjet.
Thanks for confirming it’s basically Cinestill, so Candido 800 will come out a bit blue in daylight if used without a warming filter.

MOvie Tungsten films all are suposed to be used with an 85 (not an 85A, although that is close enough) filter. back when it was a thing to offer slides from negs from many small Movie Labs, I did get burned at least one time when I overexposed without the 85 filter, and managed to blow out just the Bleu colours.

 

[lamerko]

MOvie Tungsten films all are suposed to be used with an 85 (not an 85A, although that is close enough) filter. back when it was a thing to offer slides from negs from many small Movie Labs, I did get burned at least one time when I overexposed without the 85 filter, and managed to blow out just the Bleu colours.

There is a bit of confusion with these filters. Technically, the "correct" filter is 85B, which warms from 5500K to 3200K, as tungsten films are balanced. And the filter 85 without a letter warms up to 3400K. In reality, 200K is not much, and daylight varies in a very large range depending on the atmospheric conditions and the time range. But in many places it has become a household name when it says "filter 85", in fact it is about 85B.

 

[Agulliver]

Quick update as the thread is active again.

I've ordered more of the Candido 800 film as it's just sooo good for gigs, and being regular C41 process I can hand it into the lab around the corner.

I have shot one of the "Poly Film Lab" films and had it processed, absolutely nothing wrong but being ECN2 the processing cost more and my local lab can't do it. But the film itself did exactly what I wanted. I've also had some B&W cine film processed by Poly Film Lab....took quite a while but their hand processing was fairly consistent, probably better than my own and half the price of machine processing with other labs. They told me that they're two or three volunteers working at the lab on weekends so turnaround can be an issue when they've received a lot of films for processing. But they did it, and I'm happy with the products and services of both them and Candido.

 

[cmacd123]

There is a bit of confusion with these filters. Technically, the "correct" filter is 85B, which warms from 5500K to 3200K, as tungsten films are balanced. And the filter 85 without a letter warms up to 3400K. I

As I was saying, the "correct" filter in MP practice is a #85 Although like many other things, the astute Photographer will run carefully controlled tests and make their own decisons. BUT Kodak's data sheets do suggest the PLAIN #85
see the chart on page two of this sheet for 5219, perhaps the most popular of the Vision films https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/Film/VISION3-5219-7219-sell-sheet-EN.pdf

 

[lamerko]

View attachment 358319


As I was saying, the "correct" filter in MP practice is a #85 Although like many other things, the astute Photographer will run carefully controlled tests and make their own decisons. BUT Kodak's data sheets do suggest the PLAIN #85
see the chart on page two of this sheet for 5219, perhaps the most popular of the Vision films https://www.kodak.com/content/products-brochures/Film/VISION3-5219-7219-sell-sheet-EN.pdf

You should note three things:
1. In your filter information, we have an adjustment from 5300K to 3200K. In others, for example Tiffen, in the description there is a correction from 5500 to 3400K, which is exactly the same;
2. The balance of modern tungsten films is 3200K, and the definition of "daylight" is 5500K. The balance of "day" films such as 250D and practically all normal C-41 is 5500K;
3. In the Kodak document from the link you indicated, there is the following explanation (screenshot attached);

In other words, it means a filter that warms from 5500K (daylight) to 3200K (tungsten balance). This is the 85B filter. The descriptions say filter 85, but it's probably the whole series. But again - this is just wording, in practice the light is never exactly 5500K or 3200K. And it is not particularly important for C-41 and ECN-2 films. But it would matter at E-6. For the 500T (5219) specifically, Kodak says 200K more or less is no problem:

These films are balanced for exposure with tungsten illumination (3200K). You can also expose them with tungsten lamps that have slightly higher or lower color temperatures (+/- 200K) without correction filters since final color balancing can be done in post-production.

 

[koraks]

adjustment from 5300K to 3200K. In others, for example Tiffen, in the description there is a correction from 5500 to 3400K, which is exactly the same;

No, I don't think you can equate 5300->3200 and 5500->3400 because in both cases the difference is 2100. It's not a linear scale. See e.ge. here: https://www.giangrandi.ch/optics/blackbody/blackbody.shtml And here: https://www.rp-photonics.com/color_temperature.html

In a practical amateur setting, I wouldn't worry about the intricacies. But be careful in interpreting the color temperature scale; there's a story hiding behind it.

 

[lamerko]

No, I don't think you can equate 5300->3200 and 5500->3400 because in both cases the difference is 2100. It's not a linear scale. See e.ge. here: https://www.giangrandi.ch/optics/blackbody/blackbody.shtml And here: https://www.rp-photonics.com/color_temperature.html

In a practical amateur setting, I wouldn't worry about the intricacies. But be careful in interpreting the color temperature scale; there's a story hiding behind it.

In my opinion, this is just a marketing approach, not a technical one. In both cases, it is a matter of filter #85

Tiffen 52mm 85 Color Conversion Filter

 

[koraks]

this is just a marketing approach

Not sure if I understand you correctly. I was pointing out how color temperature relates to black body radiation spectra. This shows that the ratio between red and blue (which is how color temperature is simplistically/empirically determined) is non-linear for (seemingly) linear changes in color temperature. The product information for the Tiffen filter doesn't say that it'll drop 5300K to 3200K, probably because it doesn't....the numbers will be slightly off. Again, it's not a practical concern, but the whole thing wasn't to begin with...

 

[Agulliver]

The difference between log and linear scales are not marketing.

For amateur purposes, the two filters may be interchangeable. For a professional shooting a serious motion picture, they would not. Because they each do slightly different things.

 

[lamerko]

Not sure if I understand you correctly.

The idea is that if we use two filters with the same marking, they should be identical, even if they are from different manufacturers. Hoya 85 and Tiffen 85 should be the same. Otherwise they should not carry these markings. These marks are Kodak's as follows:

85 Series Color Conversion Chart
An 85 decreases the color temperature from 5500-3400 Kelvin
An 85A decreases the color temperature from 5500-3100 Kelvin
An 85B decreases the color temperature from 5500-3200 Kelvin
An 85C decreases the color temperature from 5500-3800 Kelvin

 

[koraks]

if we use two filters with the same marking, they should be identical

Ah I see your point. Yes, you'd expect that! I do suspect manufacturers allow themselves minor liberties in implementation.

 

[cmacd123]

Before I leave this, I should point out the Tiffen, among others make an 85N3 and 85N6 filter. a #85 combined with a ND. As while 5219 is quite handy in a studio, it is VERY fast when your camera can only practically use a 1/60 second range shutter speed. And your audience might find changing to 50D stock for outdoor shots to have a jarring difference in texture.

recall that the light does vary from place to place. Particularly with Latitude. SO a cinematographer may chose a different filter from the recommended #85 based on Her tests of the shots she is planning with the director. As well as the Post Production work flow.

 

[PolyFilmLabs]

Quick update as the thread is active again.

I've ordered more of the Candido 800 film as it's just sooo good for gigs, and being regular C41 process I can hand it into the lab around the corner.

I have shot one of the "Poly Film Lab" films and had it processed, absolutely nothing wrong but being ECN2 the processing cost more and my local lab can't do it. But the film itself did exactly what I wanted. I've also had some B&W cine film processed by Poly Film Lab....took quite a while but their hand processing was fairly consistent, probably better than my own and half the price of machine processing with other labs. They told me that they're two or three volunteers working at the lab on weekends so turnaround can be an issue when they've received a lot of films for processing. But they did it, and I'm happy with the products and services of both them and Candido.

Hey All, just replying here as a way of an update for anyone finding this thread.

We have had a crazy few years with ups and downs both in terms of resourcing, turn around time, equipment reliability, multiple premises moves (4!!!!) and all that when running the lab part time.

Our problems have been exacerbated recently by no other lab we know of in the UK now offering BW Reversal processing of Photo or Cine films and this has led to being inundated with orders for this, and whilst appreciated these take an age to process - 45min per batch of up to 5 rolls (photo) and an hour for Cine films.

Lots of posted feedback has been negative and rightly so in those instances particulalry around turn around times, it's been one rough ride.

We started the lab before ECN2 really took off because we did ECN2 for our own Super8 films - we wanted to provide something others didn't or at a price that was more affordable. That's how we got into BW Reversal too because we also did that ourselves and had requests etc etc.

I say this because I want people to know that we make no money at all at the moment - in fact it costs us considerably to keep the lab going both in money, time and effort. We do it because of a sense of trying to offer alternatives to people - albeit not the most polished - but have had some rough feedback mainly because people order from us expecting a Take It Easy or Analog Wonderland type turnaround. We aren't a traditional commercial lab and have never tried to be. We could be, we have the c41 processors and the lab scanners but then we would just be like the rest who already do a good job - so we don't see the point in that. The key takeaway i hope anyone reading this has is expectation management.

We are re evaluating whether to keep the lab service runninflg now with all the negative feedback recently, as well as the ongoing challenges in running a niche film service and wondering whether what we offer is worth it for the community anymore. Not looking for sympathy just a genuine statement as film supplies have recovered, kodak are moving to no remjet ECN2 making it very easy now for people to home develop this in C41 chems etc and BW Reversal has and always will be a niche. John Salim does fantastic Oscar nominated worthy E6 so there may not be a need for us anymore.

Thet said, on the retail front we still think we offer good value. We are very open about our expired films mainly the superia surveillance / industrial films- they are very well stored and whilst some are rated at 90ft we've measured them at around 100ft (they have a little excess like Kodak does). We still aim to provide re spooled Ektachrome - it is always bought fresh - our turnover of the film stock is 1-3 months and it's always immediately cut and then frozen and thawed on order. We will see how long we can keep that going.

We are focussing more and more on workshops and actually helping filmmakers like us which was always the original intent before we went down the full Photo Lab route. Anyways that's it by way of an update.

Also AGulliver I did see another post in the Cine group about Bellini BW Reversal kit but can't reply there. The kit is great on the basis you know what you are doing with it. It doesn't use a hardener, at least not in our view so the emulsion is very soft post processing and lots of times comes off in 2nd dev. We started out with this kit but quickly migrated to the Ilford method using a permangenate bleach. It has good shelf life provided you mix the bleach parts separately for storage and only combine when needed. Using argon gas (wine preserver) works wonders on the PQ Universal and Perm. Bleach for longevity.

Also we have stress tested the Ilford method on R100, TriX, Adox and Rollei and miraculously we get very similar results on our own sensitometrically exposed film strip tests based on the manufacturer data sheet recommendations which is excellent e.g. trix 90sec dev, R100 10-11min, Adox 10min-11min etc etc

Anyways, hope this insight is helpful for anyone coming across it!

Cheers, Nick
Poly Film Labs