Rating Kodak 500T @ 320

Justin Cary · January 22, 2012

I've seen this a lot. I typically always open up a full stop for DI.

When DoP's refer to rating the neg at 320 is that doing the same thing as opening up a stop... or, do I rate it for 320 and continue to treat the film as I normally would if it were 320ASA? By that I mean, do I open up an additional stop after rating it at 320?

Thanks for your help. I'm shooting a project in February on S16. Trying to decide whether to go with Vision3 200T or 500T. Obviously the 500T will be quite a bit grainier, which will ultimately be an aesthetic decision.

- Justin Cary

Adrian Sierkowski · January 22, 2012

320 would be 2/3rds of a stop, not a full stop (a full stop would be rating at 250). Basically what you do is set your meter to 320, and treat the film as if that was it's true speed. You'd not over-expose it more (open up another stop on top of the 2/3rds) you'd just act as though you have a 320 speed film loaded up.

Chris Burke · January 22, 2012

I've seen this a lot. I typically always open up a full stop for DI.

When DoP's refer to rating the neg at 320 is that doing the same thing as opening up a stop... or, do I rate it for 320 and continue to treat the film as I normally would if it were 320ASA? By that I mean, do I open up an additional stop after rating it at 320?

Thanks for your help. I'm shooting a project in February on S16. Trying to decide whether to go with Vision3 200T or 500T. Obviously the 500T will be quite a bit grainier, which will ultimately be an aesthetic decision.

- Justin Cary

One stop over is a good bet for super 16. Especially Fuji. Kodak is cleaner in going to black and there for perhaps a little more forgiving. this mean you rate it at 250, not 320. tHe 7219 isn't that grainy, incredible over and under exposure latitude. I have never shot with the 7230, but according to others, it is a grainier stock, might be what you want. 7213 is also very forgiving. I accidentely shot a mag of 7213 when I thought 7219 was loaded. I was about two thirds from wide open anyway, but I couldn't tell the difference in the end. The 7213 only had less grain.

Justin Cary · January 23, 2012

Thanks to both of you. I haven't decided how grainy I really want the image. I started out thinking I was going to shoot the piece on 7213 Super 8 but, as most of us know, it's much cheaper to work with S16 or even 35 on the back end of things. I just couldn't get a legit DI for a price I was happy with. I'm able to get my S16/35 LOG DPX scans off the ARRIscan for $.02/frame. I'm thinking about going a little more clean on this piece and shooting the 7213 although I'm dying to shoot some 7219. I'll be sure to post the piece when it's all complete. Here's the last thing I had scanned at Nolo Digital Film in Chicago. They do an excellent job for an amazing price.