[alan_smithee_photos]

Came across CineStill film online recently. Looks pretty interesting. Anybody have experience with it?
CineStill Film

I should probably spring for a role (which, at $10 is pretty close to Portra pricing at this speed) and find out.

[mattt]

Never shot it myself... But how about this:

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[gofour3]

The only issue I see is that it’s Tungsten film and if you use it outside in daylight you will get a heavy blue cast in your shots. You will need to use a colour correction filter (#85) to compensate for the temperature difference in the lighting.

Phil.

[Skullsroad]

I have three rolls but I haven't got around to shooting them yet. Going to try shooting in mixed conditions, with and w/o a warming filter.

PF member "wuzet" posted up a shot here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/8-pentax-film-slr-discussion/53503-cool-l...ml#post2541611

[alan_smithee_photos]

I have three rolls but I haven't got around to shooting them yet. Going to try shooting in mixed conditions, with and w/o a warming filter.

PF member "wuzet" posted up a shot here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/8-pentax-film-slr-discussion/53503-cool-l...ml#post2541611

Cool. Interested to hear what you think. Thx for the link to wuzet's photo; I'd missed that (and didn't come across it in Search).

Re: filters, lazy person that I am, I'd probably opt for embracing the blue cast rather than try to make it true to life. Like to get a sense for just how out of balance it's likely to be.

I shoot so much indoor mixed natural light I find this film really intriguing.

[Eyewanders]

Cool. Interested to hear what you think. Thx for the link to wuzet's photo; I'd missed that (and didn't come across it in Search).

Re: filters, lazy person that I am, I'd probably opt for embracing the blue cast rather than try to make it true to life. Like to get a sense for just how out of balance it's likely to be.

I shoot so much indoor mixed natural light I find this film really intriguing.

I just went searching the forums to find a thread on the stuff and here it is.

You guys shot any of it yet? It's crazy fun stuff. I've a couple shots with it up on my flickr stream from the past couple months.

[hks_kansei]

I've looked at the website, but the details seem vague.

So it's an 800asa Tungsten balanced 35mm film, I got that bit.

But it keeps mentioning Xpro and C41?

is it a positive E6 (or some other process) film that they recommend to cross process in C41 chems? or is it a natural C41 negative film that may be processed in E6 if you wish?



It always throws me when film manufacturers label things as "cross process" since to me cross processing is nothing to do with the film, and all to do with what chemicals you decide to dunk it in.



Basically, say one were to use this in Tungsten light, exposed at 800asa, and then developed in C41 chemicals.
Would you get a normal balanced negative? or would you get a colour shifted, cross processed looking, positive?

[Eyewanders]

I've looked at the website, but the details seem vague.

So it's an 800asa Tungsten balanced 35mm film, I got that bit.

But it keeps mentioning Xpro and C41?

is it a positive E6 (or some other process) film that they recommend to cross process in C41 chems? or is it a natural C41 negative film that may be processed in E6 if you wish?

It always throws me when film manufacturers label things as "cross process" since to me cross processing is nothing to do with the film, and all to do with what chemicals you decide to dunk it in.

Basically, say one were to use this in Tungsten light, exposed at 800asa, and then developed in C41 chemicals.
Would you get a normal balanced negative? or would you get a colour shifted, cross processed looking, positive?

My understanding (and someone can correct me if I'm slightly off) is this is simply motion picture film that *normally* would require ECN-2 chemistry development, ala Seattle Filmworks and several others over the years who made it possible to use the stuff in 35mm format simply by requiring you develop it with them (they would indeed use ECN-2 chemistry and the remjet backing would not be of consequence). These fellas have developed a way to somehow (they're not saying exactly how and who would blame them) remove the remjet backing layer BEFORE development which enables them to cut and roll it for 35mm AND the shooter can safely develop it in C-41 chemistry. So in essence by doing so it *is* cross-processing and the color shifts and "character" of this particular film (when developed in C-41) as a result of exactly this.... Just as processing C-41 in E6 chemistry or vice-versa creates that x-pro look, or as processing using tetenal does the same.

---------- Post added 06-03-14 at 07:54 AM ----------

Incidentally, the base film stock they use is Kodak Vision3 500T: KODAK: KODAK VISION3 500T Color Negative Film 5219/7219

[hks_kansei]

Ah, that makes sense.
I know very little about movie film and the checmicals/methods they use.

I'm assuming then that this is positive/slide film?

[Eyewanders]

Ah, that makes sense.
I know very little about movie film and the checmicals/methods they use.

I'm assuming then that this is positive/slide film?

You clearly didn't click the link above that says "color negative" didja?

[Jonathan Mac]

This stuff looks very good indeed - wonderful colours!

[ChrisPlatt]

Last week I received some Eastman 5222 Double X black and white cinema film.
It's ISO200 which IMO is about ideal.
I've seen some very nice results from others using this film, so I'm looking forward to trying it.

Chris

[dreamsof"LX"]

Waaaaay back when I have used Kodak 5247 (http://125px.com/docs/motionpicture/kodak/ti0835.pdf). They came back as a pair of color neg + slides.
I remember the slides being rather thin in color and quite tinged with green (? ). Need to go digging through boxes in order to refresh my memories.
The film was purported to have a very wide exposure lattitude.

[cagimaha]

I just got my first roll of this back from being developed, here's a couple of examples:









They were all shot rated at ISO 500 without any correction filters in fading daylight, the last one with only light from a convenient streetlight.

In all I'm really impressed with the film, though perhaps not the most accurate of colour renditions it produces pleasant, if a little cold skin tones and seems to have an impressive exposure latitude. Anything really underexposed is somewhat grainy but that's not entirely unappealing at times.

[fuent104]

Nice work. If this stuff really is repackaged Kodak 5219 stock, you will see dramatically improved grain results if you rate it at 320 iso. I have seen a ton of this stock shot at both 320 and 500, and the difference is dramatic.