Orwo NC500 35mm test - by Mark Wiggins - YouTube clip

[Mark Wiggins]

On 4/24/2024 at 2:56 AM, Jon O'Brien said:

The level of grain seems to be good for a gritty, period drama story. It has an almost hand made, artisanal look but still a high quality look if that makes sense.

That's my impression as well..

[Stephen Perera]

well I think it looks great - notwithstanding the way YouTube tries to 'correct' film grain etc - it bodes well that we have an alternative to Kodak out there albeit I can only go to 16mm format (one man band) thus this test for me is simply my subjective appreciation.....perhaps you could make the footage available or visible in a way that none of these platforms screw with it? Vimeo perhaps?

Edited April 25 by Stephen Perera

[Mark Wiggins]

4 minutes ago, Stephen Perera said:

Vimeo perhaps?

Your wish is my command.

 

[Mark Wiggins]

8 minutes ago, Stephen Perera said:

perhaps you could make the footage available or visible

I'm sorry I can't post more footage from the test.  I do not own the footage.

[Stephen Perera]

Just now, Mark Wiggins said:

I'm sorry I can't post more footage from the test.  I do not own the footage.

no worries thats sufficient and thanks for your time Im sure many people here will find this interesting.....

[Stephen Perera]

No problem.....so it will take just one major director/DP to use it in a big film and it will start selling 'properly' I assume.....

[Robert Houllahan]

6 hours ago, Stephen Perera said:

Cinelab have an Arriscan yes.....

Yes we have an Arriscan and two Arrilaser recorders plus two LaserGraphics scanners and two Xena scanners.

[Stephen Perera]

I thought Mark had done the tests with Cinelab London??

[Mark Wiggins]

29 minutes ago, Stephen Perera said:

 

I thought Mark had done the tests with Cinelab London??

 

I did the tests for ORWO at Black Hanger Studios, Hampshire UK (which is owned by ORWO). The rushes then went to Cinelab London (which is actually in Slough, just outside London).

Edited April 25 by Mark Wiggins

[Karim D. Ghantous]

On 4/25/2024 at 1:44 AM, Mark Wiggins said:

Hi Folks!

I am the very Mark Wiggins who uploaded that Youtube video.

Sorry its only a brief clip.  I shot the tests for ORWO last year and they have only just published that clip on their socials. I hope they publish the rest.  I tested 35mm versions of NC500, NC400 and the black and white UN54. I have to say the UN54 looked gorgeous!

All my test footage was processed and scanned (4K) by Cinelab in the UK.

As you will see on the slate right at the start of the clip.  This was a 27mm lens at T2.8 (Panaflex Millennium XL2 and Primo lenses).  No filter.  This particular clip I rated the stock at 400 ASA but I did shoot the scene at a whole rage of ASAs (personally, I thought the 320 ASA looks better than the published clip).  This particular clip has mixed lighting.  There is a soft box with Gemini panels above.  Nanlux 1200 evokes bouncing off Ultrabounce throiugh some windows to the right of frame.  A 650W tungstan fresnel through a a frame of 216 to left of frame and a gemball (also tungstan) to the right of frame.  The room is a set on a stage.

I'd say the colour balance of the stock is somewhere between tungstan and daylight; say 4000K.  I'd say don't use it with an 85.

The NC500 (the clip) actually has warmer skin tones than the NC400.  Hopefully ORWO will publish some of my shots I did with the NC400.  ORWO say I can talk about the stock.

There is no grading.  This clip looks just like it did when it came back from the lab.

Mark

It looks good to me! The less post work you need, the better, I think.

[Mark Wiggins]

On 4/24/2024 at 2:56 AM, Jon O'Brien said:

35mm. The level of grain seems to be good for a gritty, period drama story. It has an almost hand made, artisanal look but still a high quality look if that makes sense.

That’s what I reckon too.

[Mark Wiggins]

These are earlier tests that ORWO did down at Black Hanger Studios which are available on YouTube.

i did not shoot these tests but was shown them before I shot my own tests.

For some reason they only tell you which stock was which at the end of the video.

i have also seen some low light interior tests lit only by candlelight but I don’t think they are available online.

 

[Mark Wiggins]

33 minutes ago, Mark Wiggins said:

 

These are earlier tests that ORWO did down at Black Hanger Studios which are available on YouTube.

 

I should say the first and last shot are Kodak stocks for comparison.

[Mark Wiggins]

1 hour ago, Mark Wiggins said:

should say the first and last shot are Kodak stocks for comparison.

I should have said stock not shot:

Stock 1: Kodak 35mm 250D

Stock 2: ORWO 35mm NC400

Stock 3: ORWO 35mm NC500

Stock 4: ORWO 16mm NC500

Stock 5: 16mm Kodak 250D

[Gautam Valluri]

2 hours ago, Mark Wiggins said:

These are earlier tests that ORWO did down at Black Hanger Studios which are available on YouTube.

i did not shoot these tests but was shown them before I shot my own tests.

For some reason they only tell you which stock was which at the end of the video.

i have also seen some low light interior tests lit only by candlelight but I don’t think they are available online.

 

Is the gate weave in these 35mm ORWO stock tests caused by ORWO's well-discussed perf pitch issues? I thought that was just in 16mm?

I also did not notice the gate-weave that much in Mark's test. Perhaps Cinelab stabilized it? (Would be great if anyone from Cinelab could comment). Nevermind, I rewatched the clip in 4K and the gate weave is there.

I'd be very interested in seeing it contact printed onto 3383 as well to see the quality of blacks and to see what happens to the grain.

I really like the "personality" of the 35mm NC500, it might even be worth the cost increase vis-a-vis Kodak if they solve the perf-pitch issues and sort out delivery times of their film stock.

Edited April 26 by Gautam Valluri
Correction about gate weave

[Mark Wiggins]

9 minutes ago, Gautam Valluri said:

I'd be very interested in seeing it contact printed onto 3383 as well to see the quality of blacks and to see what happens to the grain.

Hopefully the test done with candles will be made public. Lots of blacks and contrast.

[Giray Izcan]

It is double the price of v3,  which is a shame, because I really like the look of it. 

[Stephen Perera]

this has become a really interesting thread indeed. I also really like the look of it.

As a stills photographer I can test the film for stills haha....so which would you recommend I try Mark? you mentioned the UN54 looks great?

https://www.orwo.shop/collections/photo-films

[Mark Wiggins]

2 hours ago, Stephen Perera said:

.so which would you recommend I try Mark? you mentioned the UN54 looks great?

Yes. I loved what I saw of the UN54. But test them all. Unfortunately I didn’t get to do all that I wanted to in my tests as I ran out of time.

[Tyler Purcell]

On 4/24/2024 at 11:40 AM, Mark Wiggins said:

I just shot the tests and went away again and a couple of days later got sent the 4K scans of the rushes by OWRO. Every shot had a greyscale and Macbeth chart at the beginning so I assume Cinelab used them.

Oh so they did the ol'  "hands off" thing. 

That's kinda disingenuous. I get them wanting you to test it, but keeping it in the walled garden so to speak, doesn't really give anyone an idea of what the stock looks like. You don't know how they've manipulated it. 

[Tyler Purcell]

On 4/26/2024 at 1:16 AM, Gautam Valluri said:

Is the gate weave in these 35mm ORWO stock tests caused by ORWO's well-discussed perf pitch issues? I thought that was just in 16mm?

The perforation machine clearly isn't very good and the gate weave is in all the products. 

[Tyler Purcell]

On 4/26/2024 at 1:16 AM, Gautam Valluri said:

I really like the "personality" of the 35mm NC500, it might even be worth the cost increase vis-a-vis Kodak if they solve the perf-pitch issues and sort out delivery times of their film stock.

Just gonna point out, having shot with the stock quite a bit, the samples you're seeing provided by the manufacture are NOT what the stock looks like. 

All of the 35mm tests my friends did, had similar results to my tests on 16mm. Colors were completely out of whack, especially with hit with over exposure like a sun, they'd just slam hard to green. I'm still very weary of what they tested with, vs what the consumer received. Several people have made posts on this forum about NC400 and NC500, just search the group and you'll see the tests us consumers did, where we controlled the entire workflow from camera through scanning and coloring. 

Also, all of the stock I received, which was admittedly the first batch ever released, had inconsistent fluctuations that you wouldn't notice unless your shot was being held for a long time and we didn't notice it much on dark scenes. Anywhere there is direct sunlight, it was very noticeable. My videos, which were posted earlier, go over this phenomena. It's either poor coating OR all the film that came to the US, all the batches, 35mm and 16mm, sent at different times, has the same X Ray damage. The likelihood of that is slim, but for sure something to mention/discuss. 

[Mark Wiggins]

2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Just gonna point out, having shot with the stock quite a bit, the samples you're seeing provided by the manufacture are NOT what the stock looks like. 

Yes.  As I say the second video was from the manufacurer.  I posted it because people seemed to be interested.  The original post, the first world war soldier,  WAS SHOT BY ME.  I saw the original rushes that came back from the lab.  And what you are seeing is exactly what I saw.  Not only that but I have seen all the rushes that I shot as 4K files.  You have only seen the brief clip  that I have posted.  There's no more I can add.  I was hired by ORWO to shoot the tests.  I do not work for ORWO. 

[Tyler Purcell]

10 hours ago, Mark Wiggins said:

As I say the second video was from the manufacurer.  I posted it because people seemed to be interested.  The original post, the first world war soldier,  WAS SHOT BY ME.

Yes I know and the shots are lovely, well shot, good work! 

When you hand over film to another entity, the chain of custody is broken. So you have no idea what the physical film looks like. All you know is what ORWO execs allowed you to see. We do all the work ourselves, outside of the physical processing. So the film leaves our hands for a single step, which means the chain of custody is not broken. Robert from Cinelab (also commenting on this forum) has his own processing, so he has seen the processing through scanning, with identical results to ours. 

My opinion, based on all the evidence, is that ORWO did a bit of work to the files before you saw them. I know you have no skin in the game, just be aware, what you shot is not what the film looks like for anyone else on the planet. 

[Jon O'Brien]

Now, Tyler, could you be a bit more positive towards efforts to make a new film stock? There is a lot of financial risk involved for anyone doing this. Give this manufacturer a chance for heaven's sake and let them improve the stock and make adjustments to it. Okay, so you got poor results earlier on, with 16mm. Fair enough. We get that. But as Mark said, the stock is no doubt being improved. It's looking really, really promising so far, what I've seen on 35mm.

Just dwell on this thought: it's always difficult to make something that's good. It's very easy though to find fault, and to bring down. Don't always assume things are going to turn out 'like crap'. Because if that's what you always assume that's what you'll get. Give people (and new products) a chance.