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.
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.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.
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
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
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.
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.
this is just a marketing approach
Not sure if I understand you correctly.
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
if we use two filters with the same marking, they should be identical
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?