Rob Mentov

I notice that the noise in between the sprocket holes is the same as the noise in the image. Perhaps the scan itself is the problem, as John implied.

 

Edit: What's with the green light leaks on either side of the image?

The light leaks were from a source of light creeping in. The scan was done at Mel's in Montreal.

Hi all,

A small group of us recently shot a short film on kodak 5219, 500T and I wanted to get some opinions on the results. The raw scans feel almost like they resemble digital noise as opposed to film grain, especially when exported.

We shot at f2.8 and pushed the stock +1 stop , which seemed like an ample amount of light according to the meter. I'm thinking because the stocks used were recans and perhaps a couple years old, that the film might have needed to be rated at a lower ASA than 500T.

If it were a matter of the film not getting enough light, would pushing another stop solve this or would I be required add more light?

Sample link:

Even in its heyday it looked best overexposed by a stop...

Hmm, maybe 50ASA or 25ASA in that case? When did they stop manufacturing the stock?

I recently came across an old 400ft roll of 16mm Agfa XT320. I was wondering if anyone had a best guess at how many stops to overexpose this by, wasn't able to dig up an expiry date. This won't be shot for any commercial project, just experimental.