Kodak 250D/500T

S

sara

Well-known
Local time
10:10 PM
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
553
Has anyone shot 250D or 500T on normal 35mm film?

I bought a few rolls some time ago, and I actually shot it once (500T in daylight) and realised I got colours that were kinda strange (I don't really shoot much tungsten film), then read that I had to use a filter to achieve natural colours if I do.

I DO want to try and master movie film.
I saw online that I had to use a "85 filter"...do they sell these for Leica lenses?
 
I have used the Fuji equivalent to the Kodak motion picture films.
64D and 500T film stocks.
I rarely shoot with the 500T, as it is really expired.
For using the tungsten film with daylight you'd want to use an 85B filter.
Should be able to find them in sizes for Leica lenses, like 39mm.

I enjoy the results from the daylight balanced motion picture film.
 
Be aware that 250D and 500T, and all the Kodak Color motion picture film stocks have a coating of RemJet(sp) on them. If you process the film yourself, and remove the remjet before processing the film, no problem. But if you send the film out to a lab to process, and they don't know about the remjet and run it through their processor, it will really screw up their processor.

As far as filters, if you use 250D in daylight, no filter needed. 500T in tungsten lighting, no filter needed. 500T in daylight, 85B filter. Can't remember the filter for 250D in tungsten light, might be an 80A.

Best,
-Tim
 
Timmyjoe said:
Be aware that 250D and 500T, and all the Kodak Color motion picture film stocks have a coating of RemJet(sp) on them. If you process the film yourself, and remove the remjet before processing the film, no problem. But if you send the film out to a lab to process, and they don't know about the remjet and run it through their processor, it will really screw up their processor.

As far as filters, if you use 250D in daylight, no filter needed. 500T in tungsten lighting, no filter needed. 500T in daylight, 85B filter. Can't remember the filter for 250D in tungsten light, might be an 80A.

Best,
-Tim
Click to expand...

Thanks both!

Ok, I guess I really need to try out this 85B filter thing. I was wondering why the colours looked a bit odd in daylight, but then again I'm not a tungsten film shooter so this was the first!

As for processing, no worries :) I work in a photo lab and we hand process movie films, removing remjet at the same time! We sell movie films, which is why I got some to try out. :)
 
The Kodak data sheet suggests an 85 filter for using 500T in daylight, and exposing it at EI 320.

http://motion.kodak.com/KodakGCG/up...5219/Resources/EKEI-4032_Vision3Sellsheet.pdf

These Vision3 stocks have incredible latitude, so you could probably shoot it anywhere from EI 16 to EI 1600 and achieve good results. If you can't process it with ECN2 chemicals, give RA4 developer a go. You should get better colour that using C41 developer. Have a look at this post for more information:

http://ntphotoworks.com/shop/colour-motion-picture-films-the-end-game/
 
Or...

You could just shoot Vision3 250D (5207) film at daylight. Less grain and no need for filters.

I'd only shoot 500T at daylight when I know I'll be mixing daylight and tungsten light on the same roll. In this case it makes sense since you get iso500 speed at night (when you need it) and iso320 (filtered) at day (when you generally don't need fast film)...
 
I have a lot of expired Fuji F-500T which. I tried it in C41, it was ok, but quite grainy - maybe my process fault, maybe too old... Anyway, now I tried to develop it as traditional B&W film. 6 min in Rollei Supergrain, exposed as iso100.

34058537166_ea1b716aef_o.jpg
 
Very pleasing, Valdas! Grainy, yet, feels sharp. Does the negative comes dark? I did Kodak 50D in HC-110 and negatives were dark. Took me two minutes for exposure under enlarger.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Very pleasing, Valdas! Grainy, yet, feels sharp. Does the negative comes dark? I did Kodak 50D in HC-110 and negatives were dark. Took me two minutes for exposure under enlarger.
Click to expand...

The negative was OK, in fact, I bracketed - I set the camera at iso200 and did +1 and -1, iso 100 came out the best. I am not sure about the wet printing, but visually the negative is ok, almost as traditional BW...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom