Sam Wells

I seem to remember shadows going slightly cool, but I had things timed to the warm side. -Sam

I got solid blacks with 7247 but you had to print for them & virtually fight the labs over the printer lights - they wanted to "help" you in the shadows thus turning your dark areas into blue-green mush :ph34r: I actually wrote on notes/camera report : NO LIGHTS UNDER (whatever) IF IT'S TOO DARK IT'S MY FAULT NOT YOURS Things have changed - for the better I might add. But, the D-Max on prints was not like Vision stock now, and I suspect if you asked for black crush on a telecine transfer they'd have asked if you make that with Kaluha & ice ;) Your ideas to induce cross color are interesting; that's what everyone hated (or in retrospect !) .... I've come to the conclusion it was what I liked about 47 ! But, with 16mm especially (in terms of noticability) it could get really veilled looking real fast if you were not extremely carefull. -Sam

Well they couldn't call it Double X because that's something else, and "Plus-X Tri-X Split" was too unweildy...... I've heard it's a little bit softer in contrast too, don't know first hand. -Sam

That's the important thing. The ultimate light meter will be the film itself, that's what it does, it yields photochemical response to light. The purpose of a meter is simply to predict what that response will be. -Sam (who in fact has never lost a meter yet, knock on wood !)

No I don't think it's different, and it's good; I think people here were assuming you would not have the resources to rig large butterfly etc. Also, Plus X reversal is supposed to be EI 100 with the new developer, I have not tried it. -Sam

If you ever saw a Technicolor IB print of "The Conformist" you'd donate your DVD player to The Salvation Army :D -Sam

But this is true with "deleted scenes" from film originals on a number of DVD's I've seen. They seem to have come right off the Avid. -Sam

I'd feel safer with the B mount for the 10-150, more back focus stability at the wide end. I have a "Std" mount on my venerable S and the 9.5-57HEC is no problem, but it's a rather lighweight zoom. I pretty much agree with Mitch otherwise. Quality of old 10-150's vary wildly. I've used one that match the Zeiss T2 zoom & others that were "unsafe for carbonated beveridge storage" :D -Sam

I'd pay $60 hr more for a Spirit, all else being equal. -Sam

For incident, I looked at the Sekonic L-358 and Minolta VF last summer. The Minolta was a few $ less, took AA's (and perhaps is less battery hog). In every othyer respect, ergonomics, display etc I liked the Sekonic better. I've had good luck with Sekonics, I have the L-778 spot meter & it's great. So I'm not interested in the combo meters right now. I put off buying the 358 as I found an older 318 quite cheap, takes a single AA, and if I dropped it in the Mekong river not the end of the world. I may buy the 358 eventually. In answer to battery use questions re recent Sekonic meters, a Sekonic sales rep said to me "well they're not just meters, they're computers" Which is true I suppose. But then, in thinking about how few readings I actually take in daylight situations, probably no big deal. Spectra IV-F is another choice. -Sam

When I tried 561, it seemed to me it could have used a slightly longer development, as the D-max was a little on the thin side, but the midtones were beautiful, so I'd not want too much of a push that you'd lose them. But, it could also be the lab was procesing in the same as if it were 7302 Thanks for the link & comments ! -Sam

Outside my house, in the morning especially, there are "50D days", there are "Kodachrome days". etc. I mean things will look that way. Is this a disease ? That's harsh, man ! Can't we just say occuptional hazard ? ;) -Sam

Since I imagined the E-6 ECO and the new Kodachrome I get to imagine the Exposure Index It can be faster if you want :) -Sam

Christian, does Filmotec / ORWO make a print stock that is similar to / essentially the same as the now-discontinued Agfa 561 ? I have heard this, but don't know. (a nice print stock, the Gordon Willis-shot Woody Allen movies were printed on this, as was Soderberg's Kafka, ) -Sam

I understand David's points. In fact, I am currently using EXR & Vision stocks to get a kind of "reversal" look & texture. I say texture because without texture, it's video :D (joke, sort of) but; Some of the best 16 > 35 blowups I've seen were from ECO, nobody believes this, except John Allen, that's why he makes millions of dollars with his optical printers (insert smiley here again) I do suspect you could engineer a good CRI from E6, but given the near-disaster CRI was :( I'm not sure what incentive there would be. But George too makes a good point re students. And, if the student users are rationale for EK to continue, and even improve B&W reversal, well then more power to that. I suppose what I really want, is not "E-6 ECO" but a new Kodachrome Commercial - wanna talk about a lost cause.... -Sam

Well it could be the most flare-prone lens ever made. It is actually rather sharp - IF you don't flare it which (I know, I had one) is a total nuisance in reality - and once you flare it, there goes your sharpness. The 10-100 T3 aren't so bad.... -Sam

Yeah but given that 85 specifically IS a daylight stock, I personally would not want it any faster for many purposes. It does not have the "endless" highlight range of a '45 Agree re price -- if it is consistent with 5285 pricing, this will put it out of the range of many of its potential constituents - 7285 may be more likely to be a substitute for shooting 35 color neg. Spectra American and Bono Labs can both process 16mm E6 BTW. I too would like to see an "E6 ECO" also -Sam

I don't know about those. I have a good cheap incident meter which is a Sekonic L 318. Simple, very small, doesn't do tricks, takes a single AA battery. It's my take it to the jungle meter ! But actually, it agrees with my pricey Sekonic 778 spot meter. -Sam

Cause they don't let just anyone drop in....... -Sam

I wouldn't pay money for a Zeiss 12.5 - 75. -Sam

Works out to 1600 US for the body. On the high side, but it was the right thing at the right time. I took it back to the dealer after a test, "let's get this one perfect" Served me well in SE Asia recently, NO issues. -Sam

Superspeeds wide open should do better than THAT but there may be issues as Mitch says. The piece on the demo DVD with (Hawk ?) anamorphics looked very iinteresting FWIW. -Sam

I paid considerably for a Rex4 body last summer, well it was a good dealer w/ guarantee... It IS apples & oranges as you imply. Bolex prices are inflated IMO - the cameras, like ANY straight 16 gear (S16 mods notwithstanding) really have little or no *commercial* value - what personal value is really subjective. With the everyone's a filmmaker mindset these days, Bolexi are currently desirable but... Depends on the trends, the previous Bolex I owned was a Rex5 and in the mid 80's I sold it for $500 and even that was hard to get..... -Sam

Yeah me 2. Poor person's 435ES ;) -sam

Stopwatch/ frame counter is the easy way to do it. If speed is constant but off, it is the mechanical governor that's off (worn) - not uncommon with well used Bolexes... Check frame line position when you do your registration test, it's easily adjutable but often off in used Bolex also. I've gone back to the innocence of the Bolex lately, it's like choosing a Nikon F over a D1 B) -Sam (F2 owner who will never sell it)