Jump to content

Pushing Double X 5222


Recommended Posts

Hi!

I'm in pre-production on my first 35mm B&W project, making use of the new processing facilities at Kodak London. 

The work is all on location and with mostly available light - interiors and exteriors. I'm using the 5222 stock and filming in wintry Glasgow with a set of Xenon's, which have performed well wide open, in the past...

Anyone have experience pushing the 5222 or know films where I can see the results of pushing the 5222?

Any advice or experience shared is very welcome. Thanks!

All best 

Margaret

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a long-running thread at Rangefinderforum.com showing results from 5222 shot as still film stock. https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forum/cameras-gear-photography/rangefinder-forum/image-processing-darkroom-lightroom-film/film-developing-chemistry/53844-shooting-eastman-double-x-5222-in-the-leica

There's a lot of different developers used and quite a few folks have pushed and pulled the film. It's not motion, but it may help with finding out the look of the tonal curve when pushed.

Phil Forrest

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Margaret,

 

First of all, I'd ask Ruhan or Antonio at Kodak London directly. They know their own process best and can help you make the best decision for your project. The better you communicate with your lab, the better they will be able to help you and advise you. These guys are crucially important in any analog project, even if they only come after the catering in the credits. 

 

In general though: Pushing increases contrast, graininess, and decreases sharpness a bit. You get a more visceral look. If your project is intended for big screen viewing, I would be careful as cinema audiences aren't used to grain any more and on the big screen you will have lots of it. If you plan for a small screen release pushing may be perfect to communicate a more film-ish look. 

Pushing only minimally increase actual photographic speed. For every stop you push, you get about one third of a stop in speed. If you underexpose one stop and push one stop to compensate it, you will effectively lose 2/3 of a stop in film speed. 

If you want to have a look at really pushed 5222 in motion picture use, view the bw intro sequence of the first Craig Bond, Casino Royale. That has several scenic layers which use different levels of push to tell the story. 

 

Cheers, Ludwig

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might offer this caution: most photographic scanners are terrible and exaggerate graininess. So if you see 5222 scanned with an Epson flatbed or a Pakon F135+, you're going to get grain that really isn't visible with a proper scanner like a Flextight or a Northlight or whatever. I'm not against graininess, I'm just unimpressed with scanners which exaggerate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
On 11/16/2021 at 10:53 PM, Karim D. Ghantous said:

I might offer this caution: most photographic scanners are terrible and exaggerate graininess. So if you see 5222 scanned with an Epson flatbed or a Pakon F135+, you're going to get grain that really isn't visible with a proper scanner like a Flextight or a Northlight or whatever. I'm not against graininess, I'm just unimpressed with scanners which exaggerate it.

I shoot a *lot* of 5222 in my still cameras and have for years.  At first I was very unimpressed with it as a film - it was a grainy mess.  Then I got a chance to print it properly in a darkroom on photographic paper, and I was a convert for life.  I've made 20x24 enlargements from 35mm negs and even at that magnification the grain isn't objectionable at all.  I also scan lots of other 35mm negative and slide still film and it comes out fine - there is just some weird interaction between 5222 grain and still film scanners.  (I mostly use a Coolscan 5000, so it's not just the flatbed scanners.)

So far the 5222 I've shot on 16mm as motion picture film seems to come out pretty good, taking into account the smaller frame size so of course it will look a bit grainier when scanned in HD and viewed at that size.  That kind of scanning doesn't seem to trigger the weirdness.

Duncan

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2021 at 2:45 PM, Philip Forrest said:

There is a long-running thread at Rangefinderforum.com showing results from 5222 shot as still film stock. https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forum/cameras-gear-photography/rangefinder-forum/image-processing-darkroom-lightroom-film/film-developing-chemistry/53844-shooting-eastman-double-x-5222-in-the-leica

There's a lot of different developers used and quite a few folks have pushed and pulled the film. It's not motion, but it may help with finding out the look of the tonal curve when pushed.

Phil Forrest

Thanks Phil, that's very useful!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/12/2021 at 7:29 PM, Ludwig Hagelstein said:

Hi Margaret,

 

First of all, I'd ask Ruhan or Antonio at Kodak London directly. They know their own process best and can help you make the best decision for your project. The better you communicate with your lab, the better they will be able to help you and advise you. These guys are crucially important in any analog project, even if they only come after the catering in the credits. 

 

In general though: Pushing increases contrast, graininess, and decreases sharpness a bit. You get a more visceral look. If your project is intended for big screen viewing, I would be careful as cinema audiences aren't used to grain any more and on the big screen you will have lots of it. If you plan for a small screen release pushing may be perfect to communicate a more film-ish look. 

Pushing only minimally increase actual photographic speed. For every stop you push, you get about one third of a stop in speed. If you underexpose one stop and push one stop to compensate it, you will effectively lose 2/3 of a stop in film speed. 

If you want to have a look at really pushed 5222 in motion picture use, view the bw intro sequence of the first Craig Bond, Casino Royale. That has several scenic layers which use different levels of push to tell the story. 

 

Cheers, Ludwig

 

 

 

 

Ludwig thanks! This is very useful - I'd not seen the Casino Royal work - I'll look into the technical details (for instance the toilet scene, how many stops...) I suppose Kodak London processed this as well; I'll ask! 

Your answer confirms my hesitancy about pushing... it's more of an aesthetic tool then really a magic 'lets make ISO 200/250 into a high speed film' get out of jail card. I'll do some readings & tests in the main location and see what I can get away with. 

I'm not too worried about grain but the contrast is a bigger concern and loss of detail in shadow/highlight. 

Thanks again & sending best from Glasgow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Just a wee update... I decided not to push the 5222 and it was fine (for my purposes).

Here are some screen grabs with a rough grade. Overall it performed so well in a variety of situations - some quite dark - I've love to work with it again. The refined but still present grain matched well with the set of Xenons I used on the Arri 2C. Final grade is next week, I'm hopeful my colourist will pull out more then I have... or he might be in tears ?  Thanks everyone for your advice & help. Best MInterior.thumb.jpg.00086892a0b6177d6bda104088ebe752.jpg

Interior 2 stops underexposed.jpg

Interior 5 stops underexposed.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...