Nick De Marco Posted December 3, 2015 Share #1 Posted December 3, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Just published a short review of the (quite)new Cine Still 50 iso Daylight film on my blog: http://rangefinderchronicles.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/the-colour-of-film-cine-still-film-50.html?showComment=1449132023993 The photos are taken with a Leica M3 and 50mm Summilux ASPH Nick Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253895-the-colour-of-film-short-review-of-cinestill-50d-film-in-a-leica-m3/?do=findComment&comment=2941721'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 3, 2015 Posted December 3, 2015 Hi Nick De Marco, Take a look here The colour of film - short review of CineStill 50D film in a Leica M3. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sblitz Posted December 3, 2015 Share #2 Posted December 3, 2015 have used the film, still not completely convinced of its palate vs portra, will gladly read your review. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AAK Posted December 4, 2015 Share #3 Posted December 4, 2015 I looked at your photos and I must say that I really like the color renditions and the contrast. My immediate reaction when I glanced at the first one here was that it looked like a photo from the 1960s, maybe Kodachrome (and I mean that as a compliment). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rpavich Posted December 4, 2015 Share #4 Posted December 4, 2015 Good read. thanks for posting it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forestlander Posted December 4, 2015 Share #5 Posted December 4, 2015 And some photos taken with Cinestill 800 Tungsten: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/252511-bucharest-nights-by-cinestill-800/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digbyhp Posted December 5, 2015 Share #6 Posted December 5, 2015 Thanks for the post - I like the colours, very 'classical' - like old slides. I agree that the 50 ASA speed may be a bit limiting, but a good reason to give the Summilux a work-out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 6, 2015 Share #7 Posted December 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have been using both the CineStill films for a while and I'm not seeing the same harsh contrasty colours as Nick, both render colours as 'pastel' unless the colour has been cranked up in post processing. I don't mean to say the colours don't have punch, but the lack of an anti-halation backing mellows the contrast and consequently the vibrancy of the colour. And for people wondering if 50 ISO is fast enough the 800 ISO film can still be used in daylight, there is no massive colour shift even when not using a correction filter, the images are just a little cooler (and if you don't like it are easily correctable in post processing if you have scanned them). Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted December 6, 2015 Share #8 Posted December 6, 2015 Steve, I have read that the lack of natural colors from the Cinestill branded film is not necessarily a result from the removal of the halation layer but simply a result of the cross processing in C41 chems instead of the proper processing indicated for the movie stock it is. I believe a link on APUG was it that pointed out a nice comparison of shots made from the movie stock in either proper ECN-2 processing and E41 cross processing. The ECN-2 processing resulted in what one would come to expect to see from the movies while E41 processing leads to the known flat, washed out look we know (which can be punched up during scanning and digital PP of course. The interesting thing about the movie stock really is the cost of using very lowly priced movie stock, rolling it yourself and processing it either with access to proper ECN-2 processing (preferred but hardly ever possible for most people) or cross processing it while dealing with the anti halation gunk removal in the process. Cinestill unfortunately removed the low cost factor from the equation :-( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 6, 2015 Share #9 Posted December 6, 2015 I believe a link on APUG was it that pointed out a nice comparison of shots made from the movie stock in either proper ECN-2 processing and E41 cross processing. The ECN-2 processing resulted in what one would come to expect to see from the movies while E41 processing leads to the known flat, washed out look we know (which can be punched up during scanning and digital PP of course. So that assumes Nick had his film processed in the full cinema ECN-2 process to see the difference between what I see and what he see's? Except he describes it as a C-41 film? Sure you aren't trying to make this more complicated than it needs to be? Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted December 7, 2015 Share #10 Posted December 7, 2015 which can be punched up during scanning and digital PP of course Steve, you missed this part of my post above. Nick obviously scanned his negatives (or had them scanned), during which process ANY color and contrast adjustment can be added to any form of negative (within reason) and as the resulting files can be manipulated on a computer, the pushing of colors and contrast is of course a trivial task. I only was commenting to your post above mentioning that your results form Cinestill film are of the more usually seen "muted" colors and lower contrast (which is exactly the described effect of cross processing this ECN-2 designated film in a C41 process). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 7, 2015 Share #11 Posted December 7, 2015 (which is exactly the described effect of cross processing this ECN-2 designated film in a C41 process). I don't understand why you keep calling it cross processing? The film has had it's Remjet layer removed and is meant to be processed in C-41 chemicals, nothing else. So it's not cross processing, the film is what it is, it has become a 35mm C-41 colour film with it's own palette of colour irrespective of how the colour is treated in scanning and post processing. If you processed it in any other chemicals that would be cross processing. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted December 7, 2015 Share #12 Posted December 7, 2015 No Steve, I am afraid, it is not. When I investigated seriously into using the cinema film myself with IXMOO cassettes, I investigated in many corners on the net about both how to best remove the remjet coating and what methods best to use to develop this film with a JoBo Auto processor. The ECN-2 chemical process designed for the cinema stock, the Cinestill 800 film is based on does not only differ from E41 chems by remjet removal agents. It's color processing formulation is indeed different from E41. As I mentioned earlier, there is an interesting read from a clever fellow (I believe it was on APUG) who indeed went through the pains of actually comparing same film stock developed both in commercial ECN-2 through a contact in a movie film lab and E41. The actual color response is ENTIRELY different. The contrast is entirely different. Kodak motion stock is NOT designated to be developed in E41 chems. It just so happens that it works quite nicely and provides usable results. Actually the receipts on a home grown receive to replicate a ECN-2 development are available online. The whole motion picture stock for stills thing is nothing new and clever people who have done this for more than a decade have left a lot of good info about it in diverse places - again, best start to find info on it is on APUG - several good threads on how to and intel. Processing Cinestill film with E41 chems is cross processing. Cinestill stock is in fact re-rolled Kodak Vision3 stock with the remjet coating pre-removed so cross processing in commercial E41 processors is possible without ruining the machines and chems. The removal of the remote coating and re-rolling of the film does not magically alter the films designated best used processing chems, which are defined as ECN-2. If you are interested, here is a good place to start to read up: http://www.apug.org/forums/forum40/103118-ecn-2-c-41-image-color-differences.html I decided at some point that the difficulty in procuring the respective chems here in China mainland and dedicating a lot of time for very little volume I do in color film is not worth pursuing. My IXMOOs are stored and I only shoot and process B&W but use mainly digital now. I was very interested in the Kodak motion stock as of it's comparably low cost (film stock/ 36 exposures when rolled with IXMOO's) and the possibility to develop the film itself. The Remjet coating really isn't an issue when developing with manual inversion tanks or semi automated with a JoBo (it really is only an added additional process of soaking, washing and scrubbing the film). The Cinestill offering really only is interesting when the only choice of developing is a commercial E41 process lab. This is unfortunately no viable option for me in Shanghai any longer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted December 9, 2015 Share #13 Posted December 9, 2015 waiting for my winter batch ..... recently read that cinematographers will rate it at 1000 and process at 800. Going to give that a try. Personally i wish the backing was there, the halos are at times annoying. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted December 10, 2015 Share #14 Posted December 10, 2015 have been using both the CineStill films for a while and I'm not seeing the same harsh contrasty colours as Nick, both render colours as 'pastel' unless the colour has been cranked up in post processing. I don't mean to say the colours don't have punch, but the lack of an anti-halation backing mellows the contrast and consequently the vibrancy of the colour. And for people wondering if 50 ISO is fast enough the 800 ISO film can still be used in daylight, there is no massive colour shift even when not using a correction filter, the images are just a little cooler (and if you don't like it are easily correctable in post processing if you have scanned them). Steve Steve - Agree, though my results with the 50 have been with a slightly warm/golden rendering. I think the grainy results are probably from underexposure. And the contrasty results are from the scanning workflow. Here are some examples from the beach... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253895-the-colour-of-film-short-review-of-cinestill-50d-film-in-a-leica-m3/?do=findComment&comment=2945960'>More sharing options...
A miller Posted December 10, 2015 Share #15 Posted December 10, 2015 a few more... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253895-the-colour-of-film-short-review-of-cinestill-50d-film-in-a-leica-m3/?do=findComment&comment=2945961'>More sharing options...
A miller Posted December 10, 2015 Share #16 Posted December 10, 2015 A couple of examples of the Cinestill 800 in the daylight. Very useable and perfectly fine colors. I think that both Cinestills are great films. We already have the portras and Fuji Pro 400H (and others) for the very accurate and perfectly balanced rendition. The Cinestills provide a slight deviation from perfect balance. BUT THAT'S GOOD! Kodachrome was most certainly not the most accurate and balanced color film; but its rendition is the most celebrated in the world in many genres! Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/253895-the-colour-of-film-short-review-of-cinestill-50d-film-in-a-leica-m3/?do=findComment&comment=2945962'>More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 10, 2015 Share #17 Posted December 10, 2015 Thank you Adam, perfect examples of the colour and characteristics of CineStill films, oh and great photographs as well. The colour is strong without being harsh and the skin tones wonderful. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hendriphile Posted December 10, 2015 Share #18 Posted December 10, 2015 The color rendering actually reminds me a bit more of Ektachrome 64 than it does Kodachrome. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.