Rob Webster Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Hello. How does Fuji's F-64D fare, in terms of grain, saturation and dynamic range, when compared with newer emulsions? I will be shooting day exteriors on a S16 short, and my main concern is to avoid excessive grain and colour saturation. I would be grateful for any observations you can share. Thank you, Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted March 1, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 1, 2010 Hello. How does Fuji's F-64D fare, in terms of grain, saturation and dynamic range, when compared with newer emulsions? I will be shooting day exteriors on a S16 short, and my main concern is to avoid excessive grain and colour saturation. I would be grateful for any observations you can share. Thank you, Rob It's fairly fine-grained being only 64 ASA -- it's a bit more contrasty and saturated than the Eterna stocks, closer to the Vivid 160T look. It's not as sharp and fine-grained as the Kodak Vision-2 50D stock is, however. Being Super-16, there are limits to how grainless the image is ever going to look. But 64D is a nice emulsion, I find it a bit softer and cooler than the Kodak 50D stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 Hello. How does Fuji's F-64D fare, in terms of grain, saturation and dynamic range, when compared with newer emulsions? I will be shooting day exteriors on a S16 short, and my main concern is to avoid excessive grain and colour saturation. I would be grateful for any observations you can share. Thank you, Rob Like most Fuji stock, it really likes to be over exposed. I would rate it at 40 or even 32. This will give you more saturation, but it isn't excessive. I highly recommend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 In my experience, 8622 is grainier and has less dynamic range than comparable Kodak stocks (7201, 7212, etc). Not a fan, unless I am going for that grittier, cooler look. For daylight filming, particularly landscape, I much prefer 7201 or corrected 7212. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Webster Posted March 2, 2010 Author Share Posted March 2, 2010 How does it compare with Eterna 250D, specifically? Dynamic range and grain, as mentioned above, are a priority. Thanks again for your valuable input. Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 How does it compare with Eterna 250D, specifically? Dynamic range and grain, as mentioned above, are a priority. Thanks again for your valuable input. Rob the eterna 250D being a newer more modern stock has a more dynamic range. Grain would be similar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Borowski Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 250D being newer is secondary. It's two stops faster, so it will still be much grainier. Because it is faster though, unless you overexpose 64D maybe a full F/stop, the dynamic range of 250D should be wider because the faster stock can see into the shadows better. The way I understand it, the faster stocks blend faster, bigger grains in while still having slower, smaller grains as well. I always shoot the slowest stock I can get away with, but it is important to not bring something so slow you'll get burned by not having enough light to shoot. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now