New Film To Try - My Inner Geek Is Excited!

PMN

PMN

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,531
Name
Paul
Edit My Images
Yes
'Morning all,

Just thought I'd share this as I haven't seen much of this stuff being shot generally. On Sunday I picked up 15 little black cartridges of joy filled with Kodak Vision3 250D...

lDxBrnH.jpg


I've never shot cinefilm so I'm well excited to get out and see what I can get with it! From bits I've seen it seems gorgeous, quite Portra-ish in terms of contrast but with very different colour so should be interesting! A few of these rolls are going to the Hooley so there'll be two of us screwing it up. :D

I'll post some bits when I get my first few rolls devved. I'd better get firing through the Vista I currently have in the 35mm cameras!
 
This inner and outer geek would like to see some results!

Is it normal C41 processing?


Steve.
 
Interesting. I've been thinking about cinefilm recently as there seem to be quite a few different ones, I would also be interesed in results and how to process.
 
Much like Kodachrome it has a Rem-Jet backing that needs to be removed at some point in devving, once that's done you can develop in in normal C-41 but to get better results the conditions need to be modified a little.
 
Funnily enough I actually posted about something similar the other day with another member getting some Kodak Vision2 50D:

Be aware that motion film uses the ECN-2 process, and not C-41 like still colour negative film. Whilst their both based around similar chemicals, the processes are NOT entirely interchangeable and I wouldn't expect the best quality if you process it in C-41; also be aware that motion film has a rejet backing which needs to be removed prior to developing so I'm unsure if you'll be able to get it easily developed as no still format film uses a remjet backing anymore (Kodachrome was the last one that did).

I wouldn't drop it into a lab to be developed as the remjet backing could seriously screw up their processing chemicals/equipment if it's not removed prior to the developing; if you're going to get it developed the only way I can see you getting it done is to have it done by a motion film lab in the proper ECN-2 process (although most have a minimum order of at least 1000 feet and it won't be cheap), or do it at home yourself.
Click to expand...
 
That looks really interesting Paul, look forward to seeing your shots and Hooley's Hooley'd attempts.
 
Mind = blown

I think you've got this cracked Dean
 
  • Like
Reactions: PMN
Strappy said:
Guys, it's cine film. Unless you're able to wind on at 24fps it's not going to work in a stills camera.







What? o_O
Click to expand...


A wise old owl.
 
Let your inner geek run free, no shame I that!

Looks an interesting film, like others, I am looking forward to seeing the output from that unusual emulsion.
 
Looks like 35mm to me.
Remjet removal isn't so tricky but it's time consuming, and time is money in a lab.
I'd be interested to process one though, let me/us know how you go on.
 
It should be quite similar in characteristics to Portra seeing as the Vision technology was what applied to the latest Portra emulsions.
 
Superior exposure latitude would be my guess.
 
RumpFace said:
Why have a negative cine film? I don't get it.
Click to expand...
Because that's how very nearly every film has been shot since the dawn of cinema! Negative film is a lot more easy to shoot and low contrast compared to positive film. Obviously you don't distribute the (highly expensive and valuable source element!) original camera negative (OCN) for projection in cinemas.

Traditionally an inter-positive is made of the OCN, which is used for assembling rough edits etc. When the final cut has been agreed, the OCN is cut to what has been finalised with the inter-positive, and from this cut OCN another inter-pos is made which subsequently has an inter-neg made. Positive projection prints for distribution can then struck from this inter-negative.

Why go to all the trouble of striking prints from an inter-neg? The simple reason is making thousands of projection prints from the OCN would end up eventually wearing it out; this is another reason for the use of low contrast neg film over high contrast positive as for ever inter-neg/pos generation the contrast (and grain) increase as they are inherited from the previous generations. Before about 1968 all prints used to be made from the OCN as the grain/contrast build up was too great for the film technology of the time (and hence why so many classic films before that year are in desperate need of restoration - the OCN's are simply worn out).

These days though, about 99% of films shot on film go through the Digital Intermediate (DI) process. In this the OCN is digitally scanned, and edited, colour graded etc digitally. After the edited film is recorded back onto film via a laser, lightjet etc, and the projection prints are made from this. As well as the advantages of being able to more easily and comprehensively edit and colour grade etc the source material, this also conveniently skips out the generation loss of the traditional inter-pos/neg route, as well as also giving a ready made DCP digital print for projection by digital projectors in cinemas because hardly any cinemas actually show real film prints these days.

Does that answer your question?

Sam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top