What happens after ISO 800 is gone?

[Ektagraphic]

I am yet to buy a roll of Gold 800 to shoot other than shooting it in a disposible....I wonder if one can get good results with it.

 

[DanielStone]

I have a couple of rolls and I haven't shot any yet....Good film you say? I am excited to work with it because I have seen a couple of nice shots taken on it. I wish they offered it in 120. This appears to be the ultimate film. Kodak's data said that it can be push processed to ISO 25,000 That's a lot higer than digital can go I wonder what grain looks like there.

funny thing, Nikon and Canon's newest cameras can top 100k iso ratings(hypothetical though)

still pretty remarkable though. so 25000 iso film might not be the fastest any more...

i shot a roll of TMZ a few years back(my 4th of 5th roll of film) at 6400 for a class project, my printing skills really sucked back then(still do kinda, no darkroom ) but the meager prints looked kinda cool, albeit pretty high contrast. I might have to try to find those negs again and try re-printing them again...

-Dan

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Actually I think that "really 400 film" thought, is an urban myth.

It can't be a push in a practical sense because the process at any normal mini-lab is standard.

To qualify as a push ya-gotta change the process time.

The 400 speed film is exposed at 800 and DX coded as such. So when they enter the 800 DX into the machine, the film exposed at 800 is processed at 800, not intentionally pushed. However, anyone can fool a stupid machine with a homemade black and silver checkerboard configured in just the right way.

 

[B&Wpositive]

The majority of single-use cameras are loaded with 800 speed film, and I would imagine that Kodak and Fuji are both still selling tons of those things, so some type of 800 speed film will be around for quite awhile.

That's not professional film. The products are totally different.

 

[B&Wpositive]

The 400 speed film is exposed at 800 and DX coded as such. So when they enter the 800 DX into the machine, the film exposed at 800 is processed at 800, not intentionally pushed. However, anyone can fool a stupid machine with a homemade black and silver checkerboard configured in just the right way.

Sorry, that's not how it works. All C-41 film gets processed the same, regardless of ISO.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Gets processed the same. But if you processed ISO 800 C-41 at the time required for ISO50, wouldn't you get grossly overdeveloped negs? Time's kinda gotta matter IMHO.

 

[hrst]

Well, there is no real alternative (but digital, of course). Push processing and different kind of contrast boosting like B&W dev & bleaching is possible but is not the same thing. Just shoot it to keep it alive. I wouldn't be so afraid. I don't see the end yet, even near. Let's start panicking when there's less than three ISO800&1600 films available. Now there are at least:

Kodak Portra 800 35mm
Kodak Portra 800 medium format
Fujicolor Superia 800 35mm
Fujicolor Superia 1600 35mm
Fujicolor Pro 800Z 35mm
Fujicolor Pro 800Z medium format
Ferrania FG800 35mm (http://www.ferraniait.com/solutions/photography/ph_infoFG800.htm)

Different sizes should be counted as different products because they are different coatings&different master rolls and they are discontinued normally one at a time (of course if the other one is still selling enough).

 

[hrst]

Gets processed the same. But if you processed ISO 800 C-41 at the time required for ISO50, wouldn't you get grossly overdeveloped negs? Time's kinda gotta matter IMHO.

C-41 processing has always the same developing time (3'15). The is no thing like "process at 800".

 

[Christopher Walrath]

So, you could take the two aforementioned ISOed color films (800 and 50) and process them in the same tank and they would come out right? Asking because I don't process color film but this sounds wrong to my thinking.

 

[hrst]

Yes. It works like that. That's one reason I like developing color. Same with E6. A standard process regardless of film/film speed. Processing machines are not interested in DX codes, or if they are, it's just for adjusting the replenishment ratios.

Push processing is a different thing, though, of course. 3'45 instead of 3'15 is one-stop push. C-41 films are very seldom push processed. It causes some color crossover and gives only very little extra shadow speed.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Then what is so different about C41 processing that you could, theoretically, process ISO12 and ISO1600 pushed to ISO 12800 in the same tank, side by side, simultaneously.

 

[Ektagraphic]

How is push processing acomplished?

 

[hrst]

Christopher, the films are designed so that they develop in same time. Faster films have bigger grains but that's not a reason that they would need more developing time if they are just designed correctly to meet the specification of the process. BW's could have been designed like this, too, but there has not been a standardized process.

If you put ISO12 and ISO1600 to same tank and give it a 3-stop push to make the ISO1600 to 12800, then the ISO12 film will be ISO100, simultaneously --- theoretically speaking, because 3-stop push won't work well at all and it doens't increase the real film speed much. (And there are no ISO12 films available.)

 

[Christopher Walrath]

No 12's available, given. Three stop push untenable at times, granted. Just blows my mind that C-41 can be so 'universal' for lack of a better term and black and white requires more exacting rote and handling. I would think that C-41 would be more difficult than B&W rather than almost foolproof as indicated by the apparent versatility. Just tkes more steps, more time and more space. But is it really that much more foolproof? Just asking for discussion sake. Thanks for this. Really good discussion going here. Sorry, OT.

 

[hrst]

And, by the way, the highest ISOs in digital cameras are not real ISOs either. Usually the shadows block up completely. It's very similar to pushing film.

There's about one to two stop real difference in current film and digital technology in the favor of digital. Real 1600 ISO films are available and the best, current digital SLR's have real ISO 3200-6400. Digital ISO 12800 is bullshit and looks bad, unless the subject is carefully selected for these test images and post-processed. Film can be pushed to 3200-6400 at the same "quality", and film scans can also be post-processed.

 

[hrst]

I would think that C-41 would be more difficult than B&W rather than almost foolproof as indicated by the apparent versatility. Just tkes more steps, more time and more space. But is it really that much more foolproof? Just asking for discussion sake. Thanks for this. Really good discussion going here. Sorry, OT.

Well, C-41 is very easy at home. It's just that you have to keep the temperatures and times more closely. As you can see from what I said, 3'15 is the processing time and 3'45 is already one-stop push, so you have to be careful. Agitation is almost continuous. Temperature is 37.8C/100F. Remaining steps are to completion, like in BW, so only the developer is critical. There's only one step more (bleach) compared to BW and the whole process usually takes less time than BW because of the short development time and usually a bit shorter final wash.

So, if you are able to keep temperatures with water bath, which is not difficult if you ask me, I would say it's very foolproof. Especially if you use developer as one-shot. You can't mess up with charts because you have always the same time, temperature and dilution.

E6 is as easy as C41, but a bit more tedious because of many extra steps.

You don't need any extra apparatus. Just normal spiral tanks you use with BW, a sink or basin for water bath and a fever thermometer.

Try it. It's easy and fun.

 

[Christopher Walrath]

Just might do that. Thanks for the walk through and the give and take.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I have heard that the chemistry is a lot more dangerous than B&W......

 

[hrst]

Urban myth. Not true. Usually less dangerous. Hydroquinone in BW developers is a VERY BAD monster (well, not really bad at all, but everything is so relative...)

The next myth is that color chemicals are more expensive and they expire quickly. And, in reality, they are cheaper and don't expire quickly at all, many BW developers go bad faster.

 

[AgX]

Fuji and Kodak are not the sole manufacturers of ISO 800 CN films!

As hrst already indicated there is still Ferrania 800 CN at offer (though production might be cancelled).

And there is Agfa who manufacture a 800 CN too.

 

[lxdude]

Chris, think of C-41 as a standard process that films are designed to. Just as with E-6. And just as with E-6, push and pull processing can be done, but with C-41 film latitude will cover errors E-6 films can't. Push and pull processing is only applied to films exposed at other than their nominal ISO, not to different speeds exposed at their nominal ISO speeds.

I consider the "cheap film is all the same speed" thing to be a myth. Even if true, it would work as a result of latitude, not processing. It seems it would be easy to tell from edge markings: would a company go to all the trouble to imprint different edge markings in order to deceive users? If true, it would be reprehensible, as it would be fraudulently stating one film is more sensitive. Higher speed film is usually more expensive, so people would be paying for nothing, and I think a few lawyers would have filed a class action suit by now, if some Attorneys General hadn't beaten them to it.

I think the myth may have arisen from the fact that many cheaper point-& shoot cameras don't have the full complement of DX contacts (they sense 50, 64, and 80 as 50, and expose for 50, as an example) and rely on latitude to cover the error, and it eventually got turned around to where the film was the same for different stated ISO's.

As I recall, the machines do use the DX info as an aid in printing.

 

[perkeleellinen]

The next myth is that color chemicals are more expensive and they expire quickly.

Can you expand on this a little? I'm shooting ~ 20 rolls of colour per year and have always thought my level to be too low and the chemical volumes too high for the chemistry to last long enough. I'd love to hear I'm wrong.

 

[Athiril]

For 35mm shooters, there is always Kodak Vision2 500T. There is a favorable comparison of 500T being faster than 800Z.

For 120... Provia 400X

Fuji and Kodak are not the sole manufacturers of ISO 800 CN films!

As hrst already indicated there is still Ferrania 800 CN at offer (though production might be cancelled).

And there is Agfa who manufacture a 800 CN too.

Does it come in 120?

 

[AgX]

Yes.

Under the Rollei brand a reversed converted (for red shift effect) 800 CN film is offered in type 120 as well as 135.

I assume it is the Ferrania Solaris FG 800 Plus. You `just´ have to respool it and then live with a mirrored edge signing.

 

[Athiril]

Pain in the butt. Redbird? That means it'll be very expensive here like crossbird and the only place that'll have it is Vanbar. Just checked they only have it in 35mm. And disposable redbird 35mm cameras.

Though Crossbird is $11/roll there.