EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
Hey all, as luck would have it the documentary company running my course at university mentioned to me the other day that they still had some film in stock from their film days. They said i could help myself...well guess what im now the proud owner of 1600ft of color neg! this stuff is motion picture film so it needs to be processed ECN-2 but the main film motion picture film processor in NZ has said they would process it for me the same price asc-41 would cost me normally. Now i was wondering if any of you have had the chance to shoot something similar, i know there are some tweaks you have to do once scanned, but i would like to see some examples of 50asa color neg if there is any!
blazejs
Established
There was Konica Impresa 50. Very sharp. But there's no colour negative ISO 50 anymore. Except for Velvia 50, but it's slide.
devilnd
Newbie
I've tried Kodak vision2 50D.
In my opinion the result is very, very good.
In my opinion the result is very, very good.
EcoLeica
Check out my blog!!!
did the vision 50 have to be ecn-2 processed?
dmr
Registered Abuser
Not to send you to another forum, but some of the folks on APUG (www.apug.org) have played around with both shooting and processing cine film in 35mm still cameras. They usually seem to get it as remainders of rolls that were used, but not entirely, for production.
Some have claimed acceptable results processing it in C41 (AFTER removing the rem-jet backing) but others say the contrast is weak and should be developed in ECN2.
You will get a color negative, but without the amber mask, kind of like what you get when you cross-process E6 slide film in C41.
Some have claimed acceptable results processing it in C41 (AFTER removing the rem-jet backing) but others say the contrast is weak and should be developed in ECN2.
You will get a color negative, but without the amber mask, kind of like what you get when you cross-process E6 slide film in C41.
grainhound
Well-known
I’ve used: Kodak 5205 / 250D, Fuji 8592 / 500D, 8563 / 250D, and 8522 / 64D. The comments on apug about the weak contrast surprised me, though I may have missed that they referred to home processing in C-41 chemistry. My film was processed by a motion picture processing house. I had commercial 4x6 prints made of the Kodak 250D, and, for me, they’re excellent quality. Contrast is not weak at all, and there is an amber mask on all of the stock I’ve used.
I scanned the Fuji negs; they were the easiest scans I’ve made. Had 8x10s made of a few because of a sale on enlargements from jpg files, and I’m quite happy. Modern cine film is made for scanning; that’s often how it’s used in transfer. The only problem I had was that the Fuji 250D was already scratched, as it had probably been in a camera and not shot. The place I bought it from gave me two 150 foot rolls in compensation for the 210 feet I had bought. I thought this was quite generous, though a 150 foot reel of film is nearly useless for motion pictures, as it’s less than two minutes worth, if I’ve got the math right. That means two things. 1] It’s possible to get cine film for $.14 to $.38 per foot, and 2] You may have to buy rolls of 200-400 feet and break them up for your bulk loader. Stock also tends to fluctuate daily.
I have a few scans from the Fuji 8592 / 500D here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58668&page=5
see posts 118, 120, & 125.
I am working, slowly, to organise my life and get some scans up on flickr (for the bigger file size). I’ll post a link when I get them up.
EcoLeica, I have a couple of Fuji 64D scans I won’t be too embarrassed to post, but I don’t know if that will be much of a preview for you. I’d guess the Kodak 50D will be very nice as well. Expect it to be sharp, with great dynamic range, and excellent colours. You’re being overcharged for the processing, but (two very important buts) 1] cine processing houses aren’t very much interested in business from guys like us because they have to splice our pathetically tiny rolls of ~5 feet into the 1000 feet + of what they’re doing (PITA), and 2] you probably don’t have much choice. I’ll stick with b/w for home development.
I scanned the Fuji negs; they were the easiest scans I’ve made. Had 8x10s made of a few because of a sale on enlargements from jpg files, and I’m quite happy. Modern cine film is made for scanning; that’s often how it’s used in transfer. The only problem I had was that the Fuji 250D was already scratched, as it had probably been in a camera and not shot. The place I bought it from gave me two 150 foot rolls in compensation for the 210 feet I had bought. I thought this was quite generous, though a 150 foot reel of film is nearly useless for motion pictures, as it’s less than two minutes worth, if I’ve got the math right. That means two things. 1] It’s possible to get cine film for $.14 to $.38 per foot, and 2] You may have to buy rolls of 200-400 feet and break them up for your bulk loader. Stock also tends to fluctuate daily.
I have a few scans from the Fuji 8592 / 500D here: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58668&page=5
see posts 118, 120, & 125.
I am working, slowly, to organise my life and get some scans up on flickr (for the bigger file size). I’ll post a link when I get them up.
EcoLeica, I have a couple of Fuji 64D scans I won’t be too embarrassed to post, but I don’t know if that will be much of a preview for you. I’d guess the Kodak 50D will be very nice as well. Expect it to be sharp, with great dynamic range, and excellent colours. You’re being overcharged for the processing, but (two very important buts) 1] cine processing houses aren’t very much interested in business from guys like us because they have to splice our pathetically tiny rolls of ~5 feet into the 1000 feet + of what they’re doing (PITA), and 2] you probably don’t have much choice. I’ll stick with b/w for home development.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Agfa Ultra 50 was one stunning film I miss.
Mark Wood
Well-known
and Agfa CT-18 for me...