best daylight film?

Landis Tanaka · April 11, 2006

yo yo whats the best daylight film to get and is it around $30?

thanks.

Trevor Greenfield · April 11, 2006

There is no such thing as the "best" film. Every film has a different purpose. If you are shooting in well lit areas, 50D is tighter grain and sharper than other daylight film like 250D. All kodak 16mm color negative stock is around $36 a roll. The reason, again, is because there is no "best" there is only film made for intended purposes.

You'd do well to take the $36 + shipping you will spend on one roll of stock with no processing and buy 2-3 books on how to shoot film.

Andrew Koch · April 11, 2006

I see in your profile that you are a student. You can get discounts when you order from Kodak or Fuji (Fujifilm is usually cheaper). I believe it is now 30% off with a student ID. (But don't quote me on this). You can also get discounts on processing, printing, and telecine. I graduate in 2 months. I will miss having the discounts. Another way to get film cheaper is to use shortends (film that has been recanned because a production never ended up using all of it). Places like Dr. Rawstock supply shortends for major discounts. Expired film is also cheaper (but risky). You are taking a chance when using anything other than fresh film, so it helps to have the film tested. Have a lab do a snip test. I believe Dr. Rawstock already tests their film, but I'm not sure.

As for which is the best daylight stock, I agree with Trevor Greenfield that there is no stock that is inherently better, or else Kodak and Fuji would only make one daylight stock each. The best way to find the type of film that you want to use is to test them out (perhaps with shortends). I don't completely agree with trevor about spending money on books. I think books can be helpful, but there is no substitute for actual practice with shooting.

Some good reading on comparing filmstocks is the technical data on Kodak and Fuji's websites. I'm not talking about the descriptions of the film, because they say that each type of film is perfect for almost any situation (they're trying to sell the film). What is more valuable is the graphs, particularly the characteristic curves. This will tell you how much latitude each stock has

Landis Tanaka · April 12, 2006

You'd do well to take the $36 + shipping you will spend on one roll of stock with no processing and buy 2-3 books on how to shoot film.

I know how to shoot film.

and I thought discounts only apply to people who are going to film schools or are in high school or something?

Will Montgomery · April 12, 2006

Lots of sun? Vision2 50D

Shooting in some shade? Vision2 250D

Don't know about FujiFilm but I heard my colorist talk about the Fuji Reala 500D as being cool for low light / night shots.

Of course with an 85 filter, tungten film will work fine outside as well. Stick to the lower speeds if there's decent sun.

Landis Tanaka · April 13, 2006

Im assuming these are all in 100 ft. rolls? and how much is that vision2 stuff? right now Im using Kodak Eastman single perforation 50D. is this stuff goooood?

Freya Black · April 13, 2006

Im assuming these are all in 100 ft. rolls? and how much is that vision2 stuff? right now Im using Kodak Eastman single perforation 50D. is this stuff goooood?

Kodak have made a few 50D stocks. Their current offering is vision2 50D, a while back there was 7245 EXR 50D which was one of my favourite stocks but it seems a lot of people prefer the new vision2 stock for that more modern Kodak look and because it intercuts with other vision stocks better. Without any product numbers it's hard to know what you are shooting.

These stocks are low in grain and look very nice but not very useful if you want a grainier look or are shooting in low light conditions. The Fuji 500D is amazing as you can shoot indooors by daylight. Kodak 250D might get you the stops you need when the sun is going down or you are in the shade. If you want to see your results right away there is the Ektachrome 100D which is a reversal film, which also gives you a very different look to colour negative films.

There is Fuji 64D if you want to try a differnt look in slow film stocks too.

They are all great stocks.

love

Freya

Edited April 13, 2006 by Freya

Landis Tanaka · April 13, 2006

well indoor films are useless to me. Im filming Backcountry skiing. If I were to buy Kodak 250D to be on the safe side (we get reeealy unpredictable weather up here in Alaska) and it happens to be sunny, will it look bad in sunny conditions?

Trevor Greenfield · April 13, 2006

I know how to shoot film.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but you dont. If you had read just one book, any book, on cinematography, such as Cinematography co-written by cinematography.com 's own David Mullen, you would understand why you need a lightmeter, can't properly expose an image by eye unless you're some kind of superman, and why there is no such thing as "bad" film that kodak sells. Im sure Fuji is exactly the same. They dont sell crap. They have poured millions into R&D to craft each and every film stock they sell. They have been around for a century or so. Film stocks are chosen for purpose and effect, not because one is bad and one is good. A book would tell you that.

and I thought discounts only apply to people who are going to film schools or are in high school or something?

Call Kodak and talk to them. You'll be suprised, they might work out a discount for you, they will certainly tell you the pricing of any stock you want, and they will even sell film to you! (ok, your parents).

Landis Tanaka · April 13, 2006

a while back there was 7245 EXR 50D which was one of my favourite stocks

yeah thats what Im using

These stocks are low in grain and look very nice but not very useful if you want a grainier look or are shooting in low light conditions.
Freya

the EXR is low in grain or the Vision2 is low in grain? if it is higher in grain, will it look all old and gross or will it be just slightly different?

Edited April 13, 2006 by Tanakaskier

Scott Fritzshall · April 13, 2006

yeah thats what Im using
the EXR is low in grain or the Vision2 is low in grain? if it is higher in grain, will it look all old and gross or will it be just slightly different?

Both are low in grain. Vision 2 should be somewhat lower grain. As a general rule, slower stocks will have less grain than faster ones. This is because faster stocks have larger silver crystals, which allow them to be more sensitive to light.

7245, 7205, and 7201 should all look very good. If you think you're going to be in cloudy conditions, you might want to favor the 7205, but really you should try to check out your location ahead of time so you know what sort of light you'll have.

You should not have any hesitations about any of these stocks quality-wise (unless you buy something thats been in someone's basement for years).

Landis Tanaka · April 13, 2006

aah alright thanks... it might be kinda tough checking out my location ahead of time though, since my location is high up in the Alaskan mountains with some of the most unpredictable weather in the world.

Andrew Koch · April 13, 2006

well indoor films are useless to me. Im filming Backcountry skiing. If I were to buy Kodak 250D to be on the safe side (we get reeealy unpredictable weather up here in Alaska) and it happens to be sunny, will it look bad in sunny conditions?

Why would indoor (tungsten) films be useless? In fact, if you are worried about the sun suddenly going down, the 7218 is 500ASA. Put on an 85 filter to make it daylight and your ASA is 320, still pretty fast. Is the reason that you find tungsten films useless because you don't have an 85? This is pretty standard with most camera packages. If not, you could always rent one for pretty cheap.

Landis Tanaka · April 13, 2006

I'm not trying to be rude here, but you dont. If you had read just one book, any book, on cinematography, such as Cinematography co-written by cinematography.com 's own David Mullen, you would understand why you need a lightmeter, can't properly expose an image by eye unless you're some kind of superman, and why there is no such thing as "bad" film that kodak sells.

all the books I could find just talked about technique. I don't need technique pointers at all, I know how composition works and whatnot. If there were a handbook that was based on things like how to load film or what kind of film is best for whatever weather.

so my above statement was correct. I know how to shoot film. I just don't know what film to shoot.

Matt Pacini · April 14, 2006

You are about to be very disappointed by your upcoming experience.

I would HIGHLY recommend doing LOTS of homework, and shoot a roll under as close conditions as you will be shooting, as possible.

Shooting in the snow is one of the most technically challenging situations to shoot in.

In other words, if you aren't very experienced, you are almost certain to get unusable footage, so TEST, TEST, TEST.

And no offense, but saying that you are experienced shooting film, then asking the questions you're asking about film, is like saying:

"I'm experienced driving a car", then asking "do cars have a steering wheel, or a stick like airplanes have?"

You will get a lot more out of this forum, if you don't try to act like a pro. There are lots of beginners here, in fact, people at every stage from complete novice, to absolute brilliant professionals (myself being somewhere in the bottom 1/3).

MP

Landis Tanaka · April 14, 2006

I didn't say I was experianced shooting film, nor did I act like a pro...unless I came off that way, in which case I apoligize.

I am a total beginner to film, I only know the basics, which is why I turned to this marvalous site where I could get help from all you wonderful wonderful people.

:wub:

Scott Fritzshall · April 14, 2006

I am a total beginner to film, I only know the basics, which is why I turned to this marvalous site where I could get help from all you wonderful wonderful people.

:wub:

The ASC has student versions of their manual, with select portions that are relevant to people who are just beginning. It's cheap, and should be useful for you.

Here's the link to get it at Amazon

Bayley Sweitzer · October 15, 2011

I just shot some tests of the Fuji ETERNA Vivid 250D for an upcoming project of mine. I don't know if I'll end up using it, but I thought I'd share, just to give you a sense of what it looks like.

(recommend watching it on YouTube so you can make it full HD)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaNYmcYAlwM

I was actually surprised by how grainy it was. Also the colors weren't as "vivid" as they advertised, but I guess that's just 250D in bright sun.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Bayley Sweitzer

Charles MacDonald · October 15, 2011

Also the colors weren't as "vivid" as they advertised, but I guess that's just 250D in bright sun.

Not as Vivid as ektachrome, but still seems to have a touch more punch than the standard fare.

Charles MacDonald · October 15, 2011

well indoor films are useless to me. Im filming Backcountry skiing. If I were to buy Kodak 250D to be on the safe side (we get reeealy unpredictable weather up here in Alaska) and it happens to be sunny, will it look bad in sunny conditions?

Snow makes for a challenge to film correctly, it is very easy to saturate the whites, while a touch of underexposure can make it look GREY. You will have to use your light meter and grey card a LOT.

very generally, the faster stocks tend to be a bit lower in contrast which may be a big help if you are trying to get shots of folks on a mountain side. You will have to plan what sort of "look" you want to achieve. The Vivid 160T for example will make ski suits "pop" a bit more. while a plain 200T may be more favourable to the scenery. (Both the T films Should be shot with an 85. and as others have pointed out a ND filter will be almost indispensable if the sun is out, even with the 50D or 64D stocks.

Jeremy Rumas · October 21, 2011

I just shot some tests of the Fuji ETERNA Vivid 250D for an upcoming project of mine. I don't know if I'll end up using it, but I thought I'd share, just to give you a sense of what it looks like.

(recommend watching it on YouTube so you can make it full HD)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaNYmcYAlwM

I was actually surprised by how grainy it was. Also the colors weren't as "vivid" as they advertised, but I guess that's just 250D in bright sun.

hey Bayley,

I'm no expert on this, but I have shot with quite a bit of Fujifilm 64D, 250D, and 500D the past few years. I've noticed that I can overexpose the 250D and 500D quite a bit and get better looking/less grainy results. Especially so in the shade, on overcast days, or when shooting dark objects or dark skinned people. In these situations just mentioned if I don't overexpose, the footage comes back more grainy and sort of dull.

-Jeremy

www.hangsuponnothing.blogspot.com