olakiril
Well-known
For me it looks like they just used the same emulsion as the 250D and not just repackaged it as they had with 800T.
Here is a review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gotjQZVtxgg
pyeh
Member of good standing
Olakiril, I completely agree with you, and all the other FAQ statements by Cinestill support this, which makes the parts that Fjall pointed out inconsistent and confusing. Also Cinestill's history is all about repurposing cine film, so I don't get it. I dislike the obfuscation and dissembling that these small scale manufacturer-retailers feel they need to make use of, presumably to build mystery and intrigue.
bluesun267
Well-known
Generally I support variety--and even a middleman such as Cinestill can provide a useful service (bulk loading and packaging a unique film stock) which is absolutely worth something--
Not $11/roll though. Just my opinion of course.
That they now join the dubious ranks of middlemen who feel compelled to try to confuse their buyers simply announces loudly that they've become victims of their own hype. And that they know they are charging too much for what they do.
They are not a manufacturer. We all know there are just 2 manufacturers capable of producing color film. And there is a 3rd possibly on the way (Orwo)--but that is a rumor at this point, and I'll believe it either when I see an actual color product from Orwo or am able to confirm it via a trusted source.
Personally I try to support only original manufacturers of film because I feel it is in my best interest that the largest percentage of every dollar, pound, euro or yen of profit go toward the future solvency of the manufacturers.
But ultimately it is up to Kodak to decide whether it wants to continue enriching the owners of Cinestill while cannibalizing sales of their own still camera films. I'm frankly surprised they have allowed and even encouraged Cinestill to do this for this long.
If Cinestill don't want random people like me to make these kinds of assessments, they are welcome to return to a policy of honest marketing and fair pricing.
Not $11/roll though. Just my opinion of course.
That they now join the dubious ranks of middlemen who feel compelled to try to confuse their buyers simply announces loudly that they've become victims of their own hype. And that they know they are charging too much for what they do.
They are not a manufacturer. We all know there are just 2 manufacturers capable of producing color film. And there is a 3rd possibly on the way (Orwo)--but that is a rumor at this point, and I'll believe it either when I see an actual color product from Orwo or am able to confirm it via a trusted source.
Personally I try to support only original manufacturers of film because I feel it is in my best interest that the largest percentage of every dollar, pound, euro or yen of profit go toward the future solvency of the manufacturers.
But ultimately it is up to Kodak to decide whether it wants to continue enriching the owners of Cinestill while cannibalizing sales of their own still camera films. I'm frankly surprised they have allowed and even encouraged Cinestill to do this for this long.
If Cinestill don't want random people like me to make these kinds of assessments, they are welcome to return to a policy of honest marketing and fair pricing.
olakiril
Well-known
Well, what Fjall posted doesn't strictly contradict being a 250D emulsion:
Translation: Kodak provides CineStill the 250D emulsion without the remjet from factory. Cinestill was first to remove the remjet, then told Kodak to provide them the emulsion without the remjet. That's the extent of "developing with our partners".
Translation: The Cinestill 400D now comes with anti-static lubricant that was previously removed in other CineStill stocks when remjet layer was removed.
Translation: Kodak provides CineStill the 250D emulsion without the remjet from factory, not recutting already existing 250D stock.
Very well structured questions, very well structured answers. Marketing at work.
olakiril
Well-known
In my opinion supporting other companies makes sense in you want to display a healthy market. It has been done in various other markets. Car & Food industries are a prime example. This semi-controlled competition is only beneficial to Kodak. Do you think you will find many that argue for any Cinestill stocks being better than Portra 400 ?
Marketing is the art of being at the borders of honesty (unfortunately the same applies to modern politics) and fair can be defined only between two parties.
At the end of the day if you like halations straight out of camera and without messing with the remjet removal yourself, that's the price to get them.
Here is a video about film prices in South Africa.
Is CineStill 800T Worth All The Hype?
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
Hi Nick,
You must use the workflow that makes you happy, naturally. But for what it's worth, using bulk film is really easy and for the Ilford types available saves a considerable amount of money. Most of the 135 BW I shoot is from 100 foot rolls. If you are ever curious about seeing how easy it is to use bulk loaded film I would be happy to walk you through it.
Until a couple of months ago I might even have had a spare loader here to give you: but I have given two away in recent months. They do however come up at reasonable prices occasionally.
Cheers,
Brett
I think I've actually got a loader floating around in a box somewhere... I've been meaning to start bulk loading B&W, just need to choose a stock and take the time to figure out the process!
olakiril
Well-known
Nothing too complicated, very worth the little effort. Just make sure to use a good tape to stick the lips of the film from the loader and the one from the cartridge together.
The only complications come with rolls that are larger than what the loaders can handle such as the 250D. In this case you need to respool parts of it.
pyeh
Member of good standing
Olakiril, you made a good analysis of the Cinestill doublespeak. They are marketeers at the heart of it, and cynical. I just think there is no need for them to be that way. Their offerings are perfectly fine without the grandstanding.
ptpdprinter
Veteran
I guess if you like the look of Vision3 film with the remjet backing removed and cross-processed in C41 chemicals, and are willing to pay more for it, knock yourself out. I don't see the draw.
If I may help in any way Nick, please don't hesitate to let me know. Very happy to show you how I do it. Bring your loader up, and we'll get you started. With great films like HP5+ and FP4+ costing roughly half that of pre-loaded cassettes it's a no-brainer. Sadly Kodak's pricing for bulk Tri-X, TMAX 400 and TMX make bulk loading that scarcely worthwhile, but there are other types of BW available in 100 foot rolls. I have had zero problems bulk loading. I just wish there were some colour options available. I've just about used up all my bulk RVP.
Cheers,
Brett
olakiril
Well-known
If you don't like cutting the long reels yourself then they are already pre-cut versions at least for Kodak 500T which is a great film and can be developed in C41:
https://filmphotographystore.com/products/35mm-color-bulk-roll-100-ft-kodak-vision3-500t
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJEM1XS8l9s
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
Thanks Brett, I'll take you up on that! Just need to work through all the HP5+ and Tmax400 rolls in the fridge before I buy a bulk roll
Getting a bit off topic, but do you buy empty cartridges for bulk rolling or recycle used ones?
bluesun267
Well-known
Yep I totally get your point. And it's not my job to look out for Kodak's best interests if they are not interested in doing it themselves.
But we're just barely a decade away from Kodak's bankruptcy, and while things are luckily looking better for film photography, it would seem premature to regard this industry as even remotely as resilient as such widely popular and internationally diverse markets as food and cars. There's already too many players attempting to sell a very small number of original emulsions under too many different labels. It's starting to feel a bit ridiculous; but then I'm hardly new to the film photography thing, so I can't speak for the youngins'. Perhaps this quagmire of brands is stimulating to some.
Film is mostly a specialty/luxury item, and for most consumers there's a finite budget that can be spent on it. It may not be an exact 1:1 ratio but for every roll of Cinestill sold there's going to be a very real number fewer rolls of Portra, Ektar, Superia, etc. sold. I feel it gets much closer to a 1:1 ratio when Cinestill's prices approach and even overtake Kodak's as they seem to be doing.
olakiril
Well-known
Here is a fairly positive review of this film stock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fppy5scm2M
The bright highlights (and overexposing a bit I guess) create some interesting results. Colors look good as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Fppy5scm2M
The bright highlights (and overexposing a bit I guess) create some interesting results. Colors look good as well.
james.liam
Well-known
Over-exposure seems to be a style among the hipster new-to-film set. Nice colors though, with a warm cast. Blues look a bit too understated.
Mooshoepork
Established
Being deliberately obtuse/lying to people at work lol
Bingley
Veteran
So I have now shot several rolls of Cinestill 400D. I applaud Cinestill for bringing a new color film to market. Still trying to decide what I think about it. It seems to have a brownish tinge when shot at box speed. I’ve been experimenting w/ shooting it at 250 and 320, to evaluate giving it a bit more exposure. Here are some sample images:
Cinestill 400D, exposed at ISO 250, on a Rollei 35, Tessar 40/3.5 lens:
Cinestill 400D, exposed at ISO 250, on a Rollei 35, Tessar 40/3.5 lens:
Attachments
