What is happening to Cinestill?

[MCB18]

Why did Cinestill go after the QWD folks? They sell Vision 3 films, labeled as such, with the rem-jet, and the corresponding ECN-2 chemistry. And yet they (QWD) claim they got a "courtesy" letter from Cinestill, too. Did Cinestill just send out letters to all of their competition, hoping to muscle them a little?

According to the QWD folks, it’s because CineStill wants to make ECN-2 in general look bad. And it makes sense tbh, considering that I, as a random ass person in my basement, can sell rolls for $7 and make a not insignificant profit, compared to CineStill’s $16 with a somewhat small profit margin (due to shipping the film across the ocean… twice).

 

[Agulliver]

According to the QWD folks, it’s because CineStill wants to make ECN-2 in general look bad. And it makes sense tbh, considering that I, as a random ass person in my basement, can sell rolls for $7 and make a not insignificant profit, compared to CineStill’s $16 with a somewhat small profit margin (due to shipping the film across the ocean… twice).

Cinestill's chosen supply and business model is entirely Cinestill's problem. Bad mouthing other competing products by even suggesting they are poor quality *when they are not poor quality*.....is what we call "sharp practice".

 

[MCB18]

Cinestill's chosen supply and business model is entirely Cinestill's problem. Bad mouthing other competing products by even suggesting they are poor quality *when they are not poor quality*.....is what we call "sharp practice".

Hey, I said it makes sense why they do it. I didn’t say it wasn’t shitty behavior…

 

[dutchsteammachine]

CineStills products are all inferior to companies selling Vision film with the remjet layer still on.

Halations are horrible.

I can buy proper vision3 35mm cartridges here with remjet still on for 10 dollars a pop, and have it processed in ECN-2 at that place as well.

 

[MCB18]

CineStills products are all inferior to companies selling Vision film with the remjet layer still on.

Halations are horrible.

I can buy proper vision3 35mm cartridges here with remjet still on for 10 dollars a pop, and have it processed in ECN-2 at that place as well.

I agree with this fully. I love ECN-2, and as I buy bulk rolls and develop all my film at home anyway, it is actually more economical than B&W in 35mm, which is crazy.

Them claiming that ECN-2 is a bad process, with inferior results, is plain bullshit. Cine film in C-41 is just another example of cross-processing. If done well, it’s fine, and some folks like the look. If done poorly, it’s really bad. ECN-2 will give considerably more consistent results, and will also allow extreme flexibility in terms of color grading, which is literally the point of this type of film!

 

[Agulliver]

Yep the claims about ECN-2 being bad/inferior is BS.

I totally get that there's a market for remjet-less VIsion 3 film. I've used it myself from another company, and it allows me to use my local lab which does C41 but not ECN-2. There's a viable market there. But poo-pooing all their competitors and those selling the original ECN-2 material for still use is just not on.

 

[dutchsteammachine]

In a lot of indoor situations such at clubs, raves I am always amazed by the detail and colours in 500T exposed as 1000. Colours are much more consistent and natural compared to portra 800.

From what I have read pushing film for a scanning workflow is useless, and it throws off the colour layers. It doesn't magically increase sensitivity like people think.

I just set my camera to 1/45th, f2,0, between 28-35mm and shoot the clubs with that.

 

[mshchem]

In a lot of indoor situations such at clubs, raves I am always amazed by the detail and colours in 500T exposed as 1000. Colours are much more consistent and natural compared to portra 800.

From what I have read pushing film for a scanning workflow is useless, and it throws off the colour layers. It doesn't magically increase sensitivity like people think.

I just set my camera to 1/45th, f2,0, between 28-35mm and shoot the clubs with that.

Makes sense that tungsten balanced film looks more natural when using warm sources like incandescent or soft white LED lamps.

 

[Agulliver]

Yep, I've experimented with Candido 800 film which is Vision 3 500T without the remjet....shooting at a festival and a jazz club. It is without doubt the best film for gigs under artificial light that I've used in some 42 years of gig photography.

 

[JParker]

That Petapixel "article" reads like a CineStill promo. With nice pictures and all. All on Cinestill film, of course

Certainly not a promo, as CineStill has never been an advertizing partner of Petapixel. Much more background info:

CineStill's Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Week | The PetaPixel Podcast

When two sides go at it, the truth is always somewhere in between.

petapixel.com

I am personally not a "fan" of CineStill. Tried their films, was not convincing for me. I find their strategy with establishing 800T as a trademark problematic and not optimal, either. But I think we should nevertheless try to keep a balanced and differentiated perspective on the topic.