Alex Reid

Hi Tom, Hope you're well. Im interested in the book, are you based in London, if so, perhaps I could collect? Thanks, Alex

Hi Richard, Hope you're well. i'm interested in the other GG if you still have it? Thanks, Alex Reid.

Please send pics & price Many thanks, Alex Alereid@gmail.com

Hi Attila, Please could you send me pictures & price? Many thanks, Alex Reid

Thanks Michael, that was very informative. I have the 2K scan of the negative back and we are happy with the results. Its a little early to comment as I am viewing it in Log, but the footage all looks really nice to me, as expected, the 500 ASA is grainier than I remember it, I tried to rate it at 125 ASA (where possible), but this stock clip tested an average +0.50 denser than the AIM density, therefore it had 4 stops of base fog due to its age. We are shooting the second half of the film on the 27th of August and I'll be using some older 500T which is on average +0.60 denser than AIM density, looking forward to seeing the results!

Thanks Tyler, that was really helpful. I will keep my exposure compensation to around +2 stops over rather than the +5 I was considering! (I did think that was a bit drastic) What I didn't mention in my original post is that we are going for a 'look' with the old stock, we welcome any aberrations as we want a period & degraded quality. Gratefully, Alex

I am shooting a small project on Monday with old 35mm stock that I have saved since I was a loader. I just got the densitometry results back from the lab and as expected, the faster stocks have come back quite heavy, e.g. some Vision 500T came back +0.43 + 0.52 + 0.52 above the AIM RGB Densitometry numbers. Unfortunately I don't have time to shoot some tests with it, so any advice would be hugely appreciated. Should I treat each +0.10 off AIM roughly as 1 stop? Therefore if its averaging +0.50 above AIM, then I should overexpose it by 5 stops? Gratefully, Alex Reid.