Michael Schroers Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Hello, I'm not really sure which film is better for shooting in Super 16mm (Daylight; Persons and nature): The Fuhi Eterna 250T or the Fuji Eterna 250 Daylight. Which has the finest grain and which is the 'sharper' one ? What would you do ? Micha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I would go for the Eterna 250T so to start with if you are shooting in very bright situation using a 85 filter will bring you to daylight and you will be down 2/3 of stop . Can you not use a Fuji Vivid Stock ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted March 28, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted March 28, 2012 They are more or less the same stock except that the tungsten version has a faster (i.e. grainier) blue layer to compensate for the lower amount of blue in 3200k light. So the daylight version probably has less grain and better sharpness in blues. In theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted March 29, 2012 Share Posted March 29, 2012 I just shot a ton of Fuji stock. The 250D is a great stock for many different situations. The tungsten stock with an 85 looks very similar to it. Uncorrected, the tungsten stock looks pretty cool. With mild correction it gives you a very unsaturated yet warm look that is quite nice. The 250D in daylight is much more saturated and very forgiving in the highlights. Rather good grain when over exposed. It can get a bit grainy when underexposed. The Vivid 250D is a beautiful stock as well. It has deeper blacks than the eterna stocks, so it looks a bit sharper. The skin tones with the vivid 250D are great, healthy yet not over done. Both the eterna 250D and the Vivid 250D do extremely well with daylight/mixed light interiors. We shot a scene with huge windows, fluorescent banks over head and tungsten lights on the walls. The overheads were about 3000k and very green, the wall sconces were about 2600k and the windows were full on bright sunlight. I supplemented that with a daylight Kino-flo. The Eterna 250D nailed it, everything looked great. Skin tones were dead on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Schroers Posted March 29, 2012 Author Share Posted March 29, 2012 Thanks for your answers. And what do you think about the 400 T ? Is it much more grainy than the 250 T ? I would like to use it in 16mm too. Mich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted March 30, 2012 Share Posted March 30, 2012 in the wide shots you see the grain a bit more, but I was very impressed with the 400T. It was the most natural looking stock I have seen. Quite sharp in the close ups. Great skin tones. Loads of shadow detail. I highly recommend it. Test first though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Schroers Posted January 30, 2013 Author Share Posted January 30, 2013 What do you think about the skin-tones of the Eterna 250 T ? Is ist to grainy to blow up to 35mm (from 16mm) ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted January 31, 2013 Share Posted January 31, 2013 (edited) funny almost a year later the same two people continue the discussion. In answer to your question, no it is not too grainy to blow up. Over expose it a full stop if you want. skin tones are great, smooth and soft, warm. With modern glass, it looks quite chic. With older lenses it looks very analogue. Snatch it up while you can. Edited January 31, 2013 by Chris Burke 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