Double-X vs. Plus-X Negative

[Will Montgomery]

Do these two stocks intercut nicely or is it better to stay with one or the other?

 

I have a shoot coming up that will have outdoor and indoor situations. The indoor scenes will probably be during the day and include sun through French doors and minimum fill lighting. Seems like Double-X would work well on those scenes but bright sun on outdoor scenes would like the Plus-X.

 

The project will be telecined and is not bound for projection at this point.

 

Are both of these films current runs and fresh or has Double-X been sitting around at Kodak for a while?

[David Mullen ASC]

Plus-X and Double-X are over a half-century old in design -- but the stock itself is fresh if you buy it new. It hasn't been sitting on a shelf for decades; they still make it.

 

Plus-X first came out in 1938! It's been modified over the years, but not significantly. Double-X came out in 1959...

 

Kodak has improved the film physically over the years in terms of anti-static, etc. whatever -- but image-wise, it's a classic silver halide technology, pre-T-grain.

Edited November 18, 2005 by David Mullen

[John Pytlak RIP]

Kodak still makes black-and-white films on a regular basis, so they are fresh. As David notes, they have been improved over the years, especially for physical characteristics.

[Laurent Andrieux]

Sorry to be a bit "off-topic", but I know french flags, french kisses and french letters, don't know yet about

French doors

... What are these ?

[John Pytlak RIP]

Sorry to be a bit "off-topic", but I know french flags, french kisses and french letters, don't know yet about ... What are these ?

 

"French Doors" are usually a pair of doors that have glass panes:

 

 

 

[Will Montgomery]

Kodak still makes black-and-white films on a regular basis, so they are fresh. As David notes, they have been improved over the years, especially for physical characteristics.

 

Perhaps another American naming invention... like French Fries.

 

image-wise, it's a classic silver halide technology, pre-T-grain.

I have seen how the stock gives a unique look even though it seems many people are shooting color negative and removing the color in duplication or telecine instead of shooting actual B&W stocks.

 

I assume this is done to get faster speed films, but the look is different.

[Leo Anthony Vale]

Perhaps another American naming invention... like French Fries.

 

---'french' refefers to the cut, long and thin. As in French style green beans.

 

---Lv

[Dirk DeJonghe]

I did a speed test with Plus-X and Double-X two weeks ago.

 

I shot a grey chart underexposed at -4 stops and looked for a density of 0.10 above D-Min.

This corresponds to a Zone 1.

 

For Plus-X I got 40ASA, for Double-X 80 ASA with standard processing to a gamma of 0.65. This is with shadow detail down to 4 stops under, probably overkill for most subjects but gives a nice full negative.

 

I had some correspondence with Kodak Chalon 3 months ago and it was confirmed that the speed ratings of the B&W negatives are somewhat optimistic. Processing with the ecological hydroquinone-free developer also loses maybe half a stop.

[Steve Wallace]

---'french' refefers to the cut, long and thin. As in French style green beans.

 

---Lv

 

I believe it is a Julienne cut (aka matchstick cut). Not to be confused with jump cut.

[Sam Wells]

Following the trend I replaced my French Doors with Freedom Doors 2 years go.

 

Very clear when I look out through them, but I wish they had glass or something...

 

It's been quite awhile since I shot B&W neg but I never had much reason to question the box rating or PlusX or DoubleX, usually had processed to 0.70... hmm...

 

Anyway, to me the difference in grain between the two is quite noticable, in 16mm you are likely to notice it more... a question of what you like.... maybe a little more than minimal fill and you can do the interior with Plus X ?

 

-Sam