New fast (800) Tungsten balanced film called Cinestill

cmacd123 · Jul 21, 2014

Dr Croubie said:
Or, translated, that means "We bought two 1000' cans and loaded them into 35mm canisters". A few 1000' cans are hardly going to diminish the worldwide supply too much, something tells me that it'll be back as another "limited edition" every year or so, to keep the prices up...

well 4000 rolls at 5.5 ft each would take 22 1000ft cans. (assuming that they are 36 exposure rolls.)

Perhaps the cinestill guys got a few 200T short ends in their last batch of film....

BTW, I was a great fan of using ECN film back in the days when there were many suppliers who would provide it. Here in Canada there was a place called C+L labs in Richmond hill. Biggest in the states were Dale Labs in Florida and RGB in Hollywood. These labs would run the film in real ECN-2 Process and print on mostly eastman colour print, although some used Fuji or Agfa Print film. I even shot a bit of AGFA XT Negative which was AGFA's Movie Negative.

Looking at them now, some of the early ones have bad fading in the slides as the Kodak stock at the time was made with the assumption that it only had to last a year in the Theatre circuit. But then the LPP stock came out and it has held up.

I also played with home developing using a mix it yourself chemistry using CD-4. but never too seriously.

Dr Croubie · Jul 21, 2014

cmacd123 said:
well 4000 rolls at 5.5 ft each would take 22 1000ft cans. (assuming that they are 36 exposure rolls.)

Yeah, I missed a factor somewhere in my mental maths. Still, not many rolls in the grand scheme of things. In fact, the more there are of places like Cinestill and now Lomography who repackage cine film for stills, the more of a market there might be overall.
Although, from what I'd think about the size and number of the coating lines for Cine film compared to the size of the lines for Ektachrome, they've already killed Ektachrome for being uneconomical so using Cine film for stills is not going to save that market by any means...

Richard Man · Jan 4, 2015

Resurrecting an old thread, I shot a roll on Cinestill T500 at ISO800 indoor during New Year's Eve in my XPanII. I really like it! I hope the due stability is not an issue :-/

I am going to try some Cinestill 50 when they are available!

Nzoomed · Jan 4, 2015

didjiman said:
Resurrecting an old thread, I shot a roll on Cinestill T500 at ISO800 indoor during New Year's Eve in my XPanII. I really like it! I hope the due stability is not an issue :-/

I am going to try some Cinestill 50 when they are available!

Awesome shot!
If your worried about dye stability, just make some nice high res scans and a print, thats better than nothing.

cmacd123 · Jan 5, 2015

The Dye stability SHOULD be in the 100 Year club, IF it is processed in ECN-2. Totally unknown if processing in C-41 as the colour developing agent is different.

At one time the Movie PRINT stock had bad stability, as most movie prints did not live to see their first birthday anyway. BUT movie Negatives are generally kept forever and so that stock always had the best stability that Kodak knew how to make at the time.

rexp2 · Jan 6, 2015

I have processed several hundred feet of Vision III 500T film using both C41 and ECN-2 formulated per Kodak's published method. Scanning the film using a Nikon Coolscan 5000 with Vuescan in raw mode and inverting with Colorneg, resulted in a magenta colour cast in the C-41 case. I found this to be the case with commercial C-41 cross-processing and when I did it myself using Fuji-Hunt chemistry. Processing in the ECN-2 chemistry eliminates this problem. I was able to source all of the specified chemicals with the exception of the anti-fog which I thus ignored with no noticeable fog problems.

I have experimented with silver retention in this film by bypassing the bleach step. Scans of these negatives compared with the same negatives following a bleach and fix operation leads to a very interesting effect. In general, I prefer the reduced colour saturation from silver retention and typically skip the bleach altogether. The bleach is pH sensitive and does require some adjustment, thus, skipping it makes processing much simpler. Not paying attention to pH results in Prussian Blue formation which contaminates the emulsion.

Finally, Kodak specifies a replenishment scheme for this film in large scale operations. I found that I could adapt the replenishment operations to my processing of 2 rolls per week with most excellent results on chemical usage and waste minimization.

frobozz · Jan 6, 2015

rexp2 said:
I was able to source all of the specified chemicals with the exception of the anti-fog which I thus ignored with no noticeable fog problems.

That's probably what I'll do too once I get set up for this, but (for the moment at least) you can still get the AF-2000 pretty cheap direct from Kodak. 2 5L containers for $55.25 (plus shipping I assume). Part number is 5160049, call them at (800) 621-FILM (3456)

Duncan

Photo Engineer · Jan 6, 2015

I found the above photo rather low in saturation and the shadows were quite blue.

PE

Nzoomed · Jan 6, 2015

I know a professional photographer who used Cinestill reguarly and reckons there is no issues with using it in C41 as far as the results come out, of course i would expect there must be some differences in colour shift if processed in the correct ECN2 chemistry, but obviously it cant be much to worry about as lots of photographers are using it and are happy with the results, in addition to this the anti-halation remjet backing is also removed on this film and the results are still sharp and acceptable.

GarageBoy · Apr 3, 2015

It'd be nice is movie labs took short pieces of ECN 2

Photo Engineer · Apr 3, 2015

They do, you just have to know how to piggy back onto their process.

PE

cmacd123 · Apr 3, 2015

Photo Engineer said:
They do, you just have to know how to piggy back onto their process.

PE

And probably know the folks at the lab. Some labs need 6 inches of film to make a splice pre-processing, while others can do it with a couple of perfs. BUT making two splices to run 6 feet of film, with the chance that a broken splice will "unthread" the processor, which likely runs over 100feet a minute, means that the folk at the lab is doing a lot of hassle to develop the film, and if they even still do print from ECN, the printer would use 20 feet of print stock to print ANYTHING, and the to change the "Points" (Exposure) would likly take the whole 6 feet. so you exposure would have to be dea on and you would have had to be sure to use your 85 filter. (Unless using the 50D, or 250D. of course)

Photo Engineer · Apr 3, 2015

You said what I said but in 6 paragraphs!

PE

cmacd123 · Apr 3, 2015

Photo Engineer said:
You said what I said but in 6 paragraphs!

PE

Yes, But I said how much work it is to climb up...

Xmas · Apr 4, 2015

Truzi said:
I find it interesting, though if I go this route I'll probably try to find some Vision3 and proper developer and do it myself. However, my skill-level has to increase before I attempt it.

For me, the color shifts would not be as important as longevity. I'd expect color "issues" from cross-processing, but would want the images, however they turned out, to last. That is probably why I've not yet tried cross-processing, as fun as it sounds to me. I have some terrible, grainy, ill-lit, half-blurred photos I took in my childhood when I was first learning to use a camera. They have lasted, so I still have those memories.

If you can bake Xmas cake it (ECN2) is easy with a modern (cheap) micro scale and availability of raw chemicals, removing the REM jet is the only difficult thing, (and filtering the solutions after each batch - which some people {need to} do with mono cine anyway.).

It is easy easy to bulk load cine film with a medium sized cbag and daylight loader, just wash and dry hands first.

But with Agfa Vista being so cheap one could wonder - why?

Without REM jet it is dull day only film, Same as most PET based mono.

dmr · Apr 15, 2015

I picked up a couple of rolls of this a while ago on a whim and just recently used it for some indoor shots of the (soon to be closed) Riviera Casino a few weeks ago. It definitely has a different look and feel to it.

With 20/20 hindsight I wish I would have exposed it at 640 or maybe even 400.

Here are most of the shots from that shoot:

http://omababe.blogspot.com/2015/04/bibi-riv.html

New fast (800) Tungsten balanced film called Cinestill

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency