John Pytlak RIP

I caution about making any definitive judgement about sharpness or graininess just looking at a "best light" image on a 13-inch monitor. On a big screen, no film has finer grain than the KODAK VISION2 50D Color Negative Film 5201. And the VISION2 250D 5205 compares favorably, given that it is over two stops faster.

Yes, other anti-halation methods are dyed base, anti-halation dyes under the emulsion, or a silver filter layer. Films may also have absorber dyes to improve sharpness and reduce halation, at a cost of some speed.

Using the 200T with the 85 and a bit of overexposure is fine. But one stop over with 5205 is well within the latitude of the film, even with a "high key" scene with lots of light areas.

As I said, they evidently assume that the darkest black found in normal objects is about 2%, and the whitest white is near 96%. With completely flat lighting (1:1 lighting ratio), 48:1 would be the tonal range of the scene (1.68 log exposure, or only about 5.5 stops). But real scenes rarely have flat lighting, so the shadow areas may only be illuminated by fill light. There are blacks darker than 2% (think black velvet fabric), and whites whiter than 96% (think fabric or paper with optical brighteners), so the 160:1 average found by Jones and Condit would be a much better starting point, and I'm sure you can find scenes where you would want to capture over a 1000:1 brightness range (3.0 log exposure, or 10 stops). "Stretching" a low contrast scene with only a 48:1 brightness range to fill a 9 stop grayscale is akin to turning up the contast.

I feel your best option would be to use KODAK VISION2 250D Color Negative Film 5205/7205. If you give it up to a stop of overexposure (i.e., rate it at EI 125D), you will get even finer grain, and still have plenty of overexposure latitude to capture the highlights. Using KODAK VISION2 200T Color Negative Film 5217/7217 with an 85 filter will give fine images too, but likely will have a bit more graininess than the 250D rated at EI 125D.

Yes. The "slate was clean" when KODACHROME film was introduced in the 1930's, and rem-jet provided the best antihalation and antistatic backing at that time. Since Kodak originally did all the processing, an additional rem-jet removal step was not a big issue in an already complex process sequence.

KODAK VISION 200T Color Negative Film 5274/7274 is still listed in the current catalog (July 1, 2006), but is not stocked in as many sales lengths as the VISION2 films. Some regions may not keep stocks of the film in inventory, since most prefer using the finer-grained KODAK VISION2 200T Color Negative Film5217/7217. Check with your local Kodak sales representative in India to discuss availability: http://wwwin.kodak.com/IN/en/motion/support/index.jhtml http://wwwin.kodak.com/IN/en/motion/about/region.jhtml

Rem-jet offers many advantages for a motion picture color negative film: 1. It is very effective in reducing halation, without the need to add additional dye or silver to the film 2. It is very conductive, and so greatly reduces static problems 3. Its frictional properties can be easily adjusted for optimum camera transport 4. Its surface is optimized to reduce the risk of ferrotyping in long rolls 5. It is removed during processing, so any superficial back-side scratches are removed with it Historically, the ECN and ECN-2 processes have always included rem-jet removal steps (prebath, water spray-off, buffers), since the process was intended for professional motion picture labs, not home enthusiasts or the local drug store to run. The black-and-white motion picture films trace their processing origins back to well before rem-jet was invented by Kodak. So they evolved and were designed for processes that did not include rem-jet removal. Notably, KODACHROME film has used rem-jet since Kodak invented it over 70 years ago.

Some formats of this older film have been discontinued: http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en...PCN072605_Q.pdf Whether 5274 is carried in a specific region depends how much is used.

Two ways to deliberately get colored shadows: 1. Flash the film with the color you want in the shadows, either with an in-camera flashing device, or by your lab. 2. Underexpose the film for that layer -- a magenta filter will restrict green exposure, giving green shadows when you time the midscale to "normal". But you will lose shadow detail in that layer. test, Test, TEST. I don't know what technique Dion used.

All the Kodak VISION2 films you mention should intercut well. One stop over will help reduce graininess, give good shadow detail and "rich" blacks. The older 5274 will be slightly higher in contrast, and have a slightly different color palette, but should be fine as long as you are not cutting it in on the same sequence.

Did you ever try to start a fire by focusing the sun with a magnifying glass? Now picture the camera's lens as a magnifying glass, and the CCD as a piece of paper. ;) My personal rule of thumb is that if the sun is bright enough to hurt your eyes, don't shoot directly into it for any length of time. Panning across the noon-day sun is likely okay, but don't hold a shot until the sun is really low on the horizon. Remember with film, the "sensor" is there for only about 1/50 second at 24fps. With a digital camera, the sensor just sits there indefinitely, so the heat can build.

Should be able to do with filtration (e.g., Tobacco, Coral), lighting, and choice of color balance in printing/transfer. Older lenses with more flare, or diffusion filters. A low contrast film like KODAK VISION2 Expression 500T Color Negative Film 5229/7229 might be a good place to start for a "softer" look": http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....4.14&lc=en

Remember, if you buy short ends or recans, the film was handled and stored by someone else. Did they store it properly? Was the film left in a hot camera truck? Did they ship the film as checked baggage where it got "zapped" by an x-ray scanner? Were the short ends lightstruck as the magazine was unloaded? Always best to have your lab run a clip test to look for any obvious problem like fog buildup or x-ray scanner lines: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/tib/tib5206.shtml

7285, like most EKTACHROME films, will respond well to a push process. Expect some loss of D-Max, and some increase in graininess. For high saturation, normal exposure is best. Not all of the new "daylight" tungsten-filament bulbs produce light near 5500K daylight. Some use bluish glass or a coating to make the light bluer, but not necessarily true "daylight"...test, Test, TEST!

As Karl Borowski notes, all films have some "native" UV sensitivity, so best to use a UV-blocking filter (e.g., Skylight, Wratten 2B, etc.) when shooting under "black light". You want the film to "see" the fluorescent colours, not the UV that excites them.

Labs can shorten the thread up in the developer tank to reduce developer time, but most labs would speed up the machine to get a pull-1 condition, knowing that the Kodak H-24 process specs are "conservative" in bleach-fix-wash times. But speeding up a machine too much may risk tail end times that are too short.

Loyd A. Jones and H. R. Condit worked in the Kodak Research Labs during the 1940's. One key paper was "Sunlight and Skylight as Determinants of Photographic Exposure II", Journal of the Optical Society of America, 39: 94-135, February 1949. They were key researchers in the science of Tone Reproduction, with the method of doing graphical prediction of tone reproduction now known as a "Jones Diagram". My Laboratory Aim Density (LAD) control method was developed using some of their methods. On your earlier post, don't forget that we are talking about the camera negative film, not the print film when we speak of latitude: The density scale of the negative becomes the exposure scale on the print film (graphical tone reproduction ala a "Jones Diagram").

Although reflectances of most "real" objects ranges from about 2% to about 96%, most scenes contain brighter highlights and "speculars", and dark objects may be in the shadows (fill light only), so the range of luminances you want to capture may be much greater. Kodak did much research in this area. Kodak researchers Jones and Condit found that the AVERAGE luminance range of scenes was 160:1 (2.2 log exposure, or just over 7 stops), but many outdoor scenes could have a greater luminance range. Fortunately, modern color negative films can capture a luminance range much greater than this, giving film tremendous latitude. And print films like KODAK VISION Premier Color Print Film can display a density range of over 5.0 density (100,000:1):

Any unprocessed film shipped as CHECKED baggage or cargo on a PASSENGER plane will likely be subjected to high-intensity x-ray inspection that will fog the film: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/...15.10&lc=en CARRY-ON baggage usually goes through a low-intensity x-ray inspection. Although a single pass through these devices will usually not produce damaging fog, many times articles are exposed multiple times, and the doses do add up. In the USA, the TSA specifically allows requesting hand inspection of ALL motion picture films, but you need to provide a changing bag and enough time for hand inspection: http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/ass...orial_1035.shtm Cargo shippers like FedEx, DHL, UPS, etc. usually can work with you to properly label and manifest any unprocessed film you are shipping. They may use x-ray inspection for some cargo, but can usually arrange for pre-inspection without risk to the film. Mail in small packages has usually not been an issue, but I suspect some areas may now use low-dose x-ray inspection. Kodak has labels to request hand inspection and help avoid x-ray exposure or opening of unprocessed film cans: Whenever possible, purchase and take delivery of your film locally, and have it processed locally at a lab accessable by ground transportation. Kodak has numerous sales offices around the world: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/ww...1.4.5&lc=en And there are good motion-picture labs worldwide: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/....4.17&lc=en

What characteristic are you looking for that the Kodak 5231 or 5222 don't offer? Remember, most labs offer the ability to change processing conditions to optimize contrast for the "look" you want: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....4.10&lc=en

As Adam Frisch notes, it really depends on the storage conditions. All the Kodak stocks keep well under the recommended refrigerated storage conditions: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/...rage_cond.jhtml In general, faster films are more sensitive to ambient radiation like gamma rays. If the film has not been stored properly, or is over two years old, or may have been subjected to x-rays or high temperature storage (e.g., a few days in a hot camera truck), you should have your lab run a "clip test" to check fog levels on each roll. Better yet, run a short picture test to see if age has increased graininess or lost any speed/contrast. If there is any fogging or graininess increase from poor storage, it will be aggravated by push processing or underexposure.

5248 keeps very well under proper refrigerated storage conditions. In general, slower films are less affected by ambient radiation like gamma rays. If the film has not been refrigerated, might have been x-rayed, or is more than two years old, you should have your lab run a "clip test" on each roll to be sure there is no significant fogging. Better yet, run a picture test to be sure you see no increase in graininess or loss of speed/contrast. 5248 responded well to a push-1 process.

The current (July 1, 2006) Kodak catalog lists KODAK EKTACHROME 100D Color Reversal Film 5285/7285 as available in only 35mm perforated BH-1866, and 16mm perforated 1R-2994. Kodak is still evaluating the business case for offering 7285 in Super-8 cartridges, which I have heard is unfortunately not very strong. Should know in a month or two. For now, some repackagers are offering 7285 in Super-8. Even less likely that Kodak will sell 7285 in DS8 or Regular-8 formats directly.

As I noted in your cross-posting, since you likely could use one of the many Kodak stocks available in 200-foot A-Minima loads to emulate the "aesthetic" you are looking for, it probably is not worth the effort and risk of "loading your own". Rewinding and winding camera film in total darkness requires great care to get uniform tension and an even wind, and to avoid issue like static marks and handling marks. Of course you must wind to get the proper orientation of emulsion-out and A-wind with the KEYKODE or MRCode reading in the correct direction.