Exposing Eastman (Double-X) 5222 in the Leica

Al Kaplan said:
"Perspective" doesn't define honesty. If you want to save money then buy short ends.
Click to expand...

Agreed. To put it into a larger perspective, and without referring directly to the previous poster in particular, the world would be a much better place if the general level of honesty would be higher - the line between small "perspective dishonesty" and larger "general dishonesty" is so thin that, to me, is better to consider it non-existing and just live honestly all the way 😀 More, I do believe that starting from "perspective dishonesty" one might easily loose sight of the line and end up living in a world were "honesty" as a value is replaced by "personal gain"...
 
I get sample film because I work in the camera department on movies here. If I use the film or not, we're still getting it. I've still not run any of it through one of my cameras because afaik the color film isn't c41 process, and I'm happy with actual print film as it's higher quality and more archival, and I have my own development times and developers.

If you think it's dishonest, tell the film house your intentions. I have friends who have no problems getting samples from panavision letting them know that they just want to run it through a film slr to experiment with different kodak or fuji stocks for a project. Basically, if you're going after film stock, you should be talking to the film houses anyways.

I simply tell them I'm getting it for a movie because I am getting it for a movie.

Edit: I was putting the amount a film uses into perspective just to show how much film stock can be kept on hand at any given time, and how little they mind giving you a few hundred feet.
 
Last edited:
Ive posted on here about shooting ratios in the motion picture industry before but the main reason why you have 75 or 100 foot short ends available to you in the first place is because on many jobs, it makes no sense to even load these in the first place if you are shooting sync. At 4 perf, 100 feet is just over one minute of time. On a music video or something thats one thing, but if you are shooting sync, if you are conscious and fast, by the time you have the camera up to speed and slated you 've got maybe 40 seconds to shoot and if you cut you are probably not going to try to eek another take out that mag, so you are stopping everything to reload and in the big picture, it makes no sense. So those short ends get reserved for the b unit shooting inserts or more realistically, the garbage.

Not condoning dishonesty, its just amazing that anyone saves 100 feet of 35mm as inside the industry, its not worth to us what it is to say the still photographer outside the industry who can load 17 camera loads for his leica out that. With the structure of how we shoot, one minute and seven seconds of time is not nearly as long as one might think it is...
 
WoolenMammoth said:
Ive posted on here about shooting ratios in the motion picture industry before but the main reason why you have 75 or 100 foot short ends available to you in the first place is because on many jobs, it makes no sense to even load these in the first place if you are shooting sync. At 4 perf, 100 feet is just over one minute of time. On a music video or something thats one thing, but if you are shooting sync, if you are conscious and fast, by the time you have the camera up to speed and slated you 've got maybe 40 seconds to shoot and if you cut you are probably not going to try to eek another take out that mag, so you are stopping everything to reload and in the big picture, it makes no sense. So those short ends get reserved for the b unit shooting inserts or more realistically, the garbage.

Not condoning dishonesty, its just amazing that anyone saves 100 feet of 35mm as inside the industry, its not worth to us what it is to say the still photographer outside the industry who can load 17 camera loads for his leica out that. With the structure of how we shoot, one minute and seven seconds of time is not nearly as long as one might think it is...
Click to expand...


I have the stock because I keep thinking I'll use it for a short project on my own (a guy I do freelance for has an old mitchell and another an arri). I've still got a few hundred feet of tri-x reversal in 16mm that I just found this past week, some has been shot, but I think I'm just going to throw it all away. Anyways, at the end of a production, the short ends are up for grabs, just like tape, pancro, and other expendables.

But yeah, 100' isn't worth wasting a magazine on, considering most of the time we're using 1000' magazines, and the smallest being 200' for like, a splinter unit doing cutaways and other b-roll
 
3832002128_30deb71146.jpg
I was running dangerously low on XX - three cans left so I decided to stock up. Just picked these up on monday aug 17.
I have been shooting through a mess of films lately just to empty space for this batch of XX. A friend who went digital gave away his filmstock (a Mazda 3 trunk filled). There was Tech Pan, Pan F, FP4, HP5, Tmax 100 and 400 etc - big bags of each (as well as about 60 rolls of 120, again Tech Pan, Tri X 320, Tmax 400.....). My Bessa III arrived last week so I am also shooting with that one - set a goal of 3 rolls a/day for a month.
September will be the start of XX again!
 
Last edited:
I do have an Olympos F but at the moment it has decided to lock up the advance so it has to go in for service. Also I do have my old, heavy and rather noisy Konica Autoreflex which has a choice of full frame and 1/2 frame + a Mercury Univex II and some other unspecified 1/2 frames around. Nice format actually and with modern film you can get some rather good 11x14's from them.
 
I'm going back to ADOX Borax MQ for my next film run (by this weekend).
Need to remix fresh developer and replenisher. I have eight rolls of XX to process, it's been building up for a bit.
Need to get out and properly test my new 35mm F2.8 Summaron 🙂
 
I wish that I'd never sold my Olympus Pen collection. I can't say that I miss the Mercury II. It was big, heavy, and noisy as can be, but an interesting relic exemplifying why the U.S. could never dominate the 35mm camera market. :bang:
 
Nokton48 said:
I'm going back to ADOX Borax MQ for my next film run (by this weekend).
Need to remix fresh developer and replenisher. I have eight rolls of XX to process, it's been building up for a bit.
Need to get out and properly test my new 35mm F2.8 Summaron 🙂
Click to expand...

8 rolls, I wish! I just counted them and there are 18 rolls of 35, 1/2 dozen 120 and 5 cameras are loaded with film at the moment ( and I just developed 10 rolls on monday!!!!) - and as a friend is coming this week end (another shooter) - there is bound to be even more by the time Monday rolls around.
 
I find the trick is to develop everything - put it in filepages - and then every night go through 10 pages with a loupe and mark the ones that look interesting. Once it is done - go back over them again and do the sequencing etc. Use a different color pen for the second edit.
Coming back from trips I usually have 60-75 rolls to do and this system works pretty well.
I have always admired Koudelka's editing system. His private stuff is developed at Magnum, filed, numbered and dated and put in a box. After they have sitting in the box for several years - he goes through them and "after a long time - the emotional reason for the shot is gone - only the esthetics remain". I dont know if it is Magnum lore - but it kind of makes sense - and it is very attractive to us - the chronic procrastinators!
 
It does make sense! The past few months Ive been going through my collection of contact sheets going back to 1961. I made prints from a lot of these images years ago because they were shot on assignment. Some of the contacts have check marks and even actual crops marked on them. Looking at them now I see a lot of images that I really like hidden amongst the ones that were ignored back then. You're right, the emotion is gone. Now it's like looking at another photographer's images.

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
 
Tom A said:
8 rolls, I wish! I just counted them and there are 18 rolls of 35, 1/2 dozen 120 and 5 cameras are loaded with film at the moment ( and I just developed 10 rolls on monday!!!!) - and as a friend is coming this week end (another shooter) - there is bound to be even more by the time Monday rolls around.
Click to expand...


I have four more rolls of XX in my cameras (so that's twelve all together), eight rolls of 120 (and six more to finish up), and nine rolls of Neopan 1600/Delta 3200.

Is that better?

-Dan
 
Al Kaplan said:
It does make sense! The past few months Ive been going through my collection of contact sheets going back to 1961. I made prints from a lot of these images years ago because they were shot on assignment. Some of the contacts have check marks and even actual crops marked on them. Looking at them now I see a lot of images that I really like hidden amongst the ones that were ignored back then. You're right, the emotion is gone. Now it's like looking at another photographer's images.

http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com
Click to expand...


It’s the hardest thing for me to remove the emotional involvement in the shot.

I develop, scan and get it posted to the Internet only to cringe a few weeks later when I happen to look over some off the images I've posted.

I tried leaving the exposed film for six months before developing in it. It kind off worked but I love working in the darkroom. I developed 12 roll's from the GF670. I planned to do only 6 and leave the other six for at least a month or two......... But........ Once I get started I just love the process and the magic in hanging up the film and seeing your images for the first time never fades. 12 roll's and 12 times I was as happy as a kid in a candy shop.

I just need to shoot more so that I can't complete my development/scanning in one day.
 
Nokton48 said:
I have four more rolls of XX in my cameras (so that's twelve all together), eight rolls of 120 (and six more to finish up), and nine rolls of Neopan 1600/Delta 3200.

Is that better?

-Dan
Click to expand...

Dan. that is much better! I did run 17 rolls - but have added 12 more to the pile. I am trying to use up the odd assortment of films in various plastic bags so that I can go into XX mode at the end of the month!!
I am trying to shoot all the slow films before the North West gloom descends upon us.
 
Tom A said:
Dan. that is much better! I did run 17 rolls - but have added 12 more to the pile. I am trying to use up the odd assortment of films in various plastic bags so that I can go into XX mode at the end of the month!!
I am trying to shoot all the slow films before the North West gloom descends upon us.
Click to expand...

Can't you just push and/or adjust development to regain some of the contrast? Surely a flat sky doesn't mean one has to use faster films.
 
Finally ran my accumulation of Eastman 5222 XX. Eight rolls in a Nikor Metal tank, Mixed up fresh ADOX Borax MQ, and the ADOX Borax Replenisher. That is still my favorite developer for this film, although I have to say, everything I've tried with XX has "come out" well, although the stuff in Rodinol was a bit thin for my taste.

Negs look great, lots of very sharp detail and georgeous midtones. Now I'm off to accumulate more XX rolls to process. I have to admit I've been using my Hasselblads alot recently, although I have alot of new lenses for the Leicas, for me to enjoy. The 400mm Telyt, the 280mm Telyt, the 35mm F2.8 Summaron, and I have my eye on the 135mm F2.8 for the Visoflex. Did they make a short-mount for the 135mm F2.8 with markings on it, or just the unmarked one?

This is still my favorite 35mm film.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom