Is shooting 35mm a valid test for 16mm?

[Chris Keth]

Would shooting the 35mm version of a given stock be a valid test for the 16mm version of the same stock as far as exposure characteristics? I know it wouldn't be a valid test to see the grain or resolution of the film, but the exposure and contrast characteristics should be the same, right?

 

I'm asking because I'm interested in doing some tests with 35mm motion film loaded into SLR cartridges, rather than shooting 16mm since I don't own a 16mm camera and can't just get a hold of one whenever I want.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Several issues in trying to judge a stock by shooting still photos on it and making slides to view:

 

The processing of the negative may not be representative of the ECN-2 process at the lab you ultimately use for your 16mm negative.

 

How will the slides be printed? What print stock? How will they be color timed? Each frame timed, or the entire roll printed at the same balance? The color balance chosen can significantly influence your judgement.

 

As you note, judging grain and sharpness of a still image is very different than a moving image.

 

How will you view your slides? What color temperature projector? What screen luminance?

 

If you have access to a 16mm camera, one possibility to save on film stock cost is to shoot very short tests, make a timed print, then splice each test into a loop for projection. Even a few feet of film will give a loop that can be projected to make your judgement.

 

Also, your Kodak technical representative has demos available comparing the various Kodak stocks, which may save you the effort:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/ne...tFilmDemo.blind