64T and Velvia 50d

John Adolfi · July 18, 2006

64T and Velvia 50D. Some months some of you were going to post the 64T shot and processed as a negative. Also it's been several months since the release of Fuji's Velvia 50D. I believe many would benefit from some examples of both. Also I had a wonderfull conversation with the colorist at Flying Spot. When I asked him if 64T looked good, his response was that if you showed to properly shot and exposed tapes one shot with Kodachrome and one 64T you could not tell the difference. That was a real boost of cofidence for me considering all the negative. I get the same mixed bag of reviews from V2 200T users. some say it is sharp and beautiful others say its got grain the size of hailstones. I guess we need to have faith in Kodak's abilities and keep asking how we can improve with the tools Kodak gives us.

John Pytlak RIP · July 18, 2006

64T and Velvia 50D. Some months some of you were going to post the 64T shot and processed as a negative. Also it's been several months since the release of Fuji's Velvia 50D. I believe many would benefit from some examples of both. Also I had a wonderfull conversation with the colorist at Flying Spot. When I asked him if 64T looked good, his response was that if you showed to properly shot and exposed tapes one shot with Kodachrome and one 64T you could not tell the difference. That was a real boost of cofidence for me considering all the negative. I get the same mixed bag of reviews from V2 200T users. some say it is sharp and beautiful others say its got grain the size of hailstones. I guess we need to have faith in Kodak's abilities and keep asking how we can improve with the tools Kodak gives us.

With color negative films (e.g., 7217, 7218), a stop or so of overexposure will generally help reduce graininess by a significant amount, since more scene information is now captured by the finer-grained mid- and slow- components of the film emulsion. So Super-8 7217 exposed at EI200T will look good, but grain will get even finer at EI100T. Likewise, using Super-8 7217 in daylight with a Wratten 85 filter and an EI64D exposure rating should look very good.

Guy Bennett · July 18, 2006

64T and Velvia 50D. Some months some of you were going to post the 64T shot and processed as a negative. Also it's been several months since the release of Fuji's Velvia 50D. I believe many would benefit from some examples of both....

Why not actually shoot some of both stocks yourself, and try processing some 64T as negative, and see if the results are acceptable to you?

John Adolfi · July 18, 2006

Why not actually shoot some of both stocks yourself, and try processing some 64T as negative, and see if the results are acceptable to you?

Because I like to benefit from others experience before I'm ready to benefit others.

Edited July 18, 2006 by John Adolfi

Guy Bennett · July 18, 2006

Maybe I'm missing something here but wouldn't you be the greatest beneficiary by testing yourself the specific materials you're interested in with the very gear and lab you would use to shoot and process it?

I'm not trying to be snide (apologies if it comes across that way), at one point I had a similar question myself. A while ago I was wondering about using a particular film stock (Tri X) with a camera I had just bought (a Nizo 801m). I wasn't sure that the camera would read the film speed correctly and thus feared that the film would be over/under exposed. So I posted my question on a forum and got a lot of conflicting responses which left me perplexed. In the end I just went out and shot a roll, had it processed, and saw that my camera had no problem with Tri X. I guess the lesson was: no matter what anybody else's experiences are, you won't really know what your own experience will be until you've had it.

Anthony Schilling · July 18, 2006

Results can be very criss crossed between stocks, and with same stocks depending on exposure, telecine ect... I've had S8 200T look finer grain than some 16mm 200T, 64T ranging from super fine to really grainy. Velvia from super saturated to bland. But you learn how to get what you want within certain conditions.

Ugo Grassi · July 19, 2006

The most important thing for the 64T is the processing. I saw the 64t processed by a lot of European laboratories and the best result (really great) comes from Fotocinema in Rome.

http://www.fotocinema.com

http://www.trinityweb.it/fotocinema/super8.htm (clik on "pellicole" - bottom - to see the prices)

By the processing of this laboratory, sharpness, colors and gamma are better than the K40. Expecially the sharpness is better. The grain is a little bit more than the K40, but less than the processing by others.

I suggest to try the processing by Fotocinema.

Edited July 19, 2006 by Ugo64

John Adolfi · July 19, 2006

He brings up a great point..processing quality control. How much impact does a lab have on the processing?

Dwaynes did a less than good job on 12 rolls of Kodachrome in 2004 for me. I understand Kodachrome has very high specifics during its 14 step process. Perhaps more room for error. Is that the case with the 64t and negatives? What labs are consistantly doing outstanding jobs of processing the current stocks we have?

July 19, 2006

I was looking at filmshooting.com the other day and Steve Hyde had some example of 64t processed in ECN chemicals also he had a shot of two of 64T unfiltered

-Ronney Ross

Anthony Schilling · July 20, 2006

Forde Labs and Spectra film in the US have been giving very clean, rich results with 64T.

Charles Doran · July 20, 2006

64T and Velvia 50D. Some months some of you were going to post the 64T shot and processed as a negative. Also it's been several months since the release of Fuji's Velvia 50D. I believe many would benefit from some examples of both. Also I had a wonderfull conversation with the colorist at Flying Spot. When I asked him if 64T looked good, his response was that if you showed to properly shot and exposed tapes one shot with Kodachrome and one 64T you could not tell the difference. That was a real boost of cofidence for me considering all the negative. I get the same mixed bag of reviews from V2 200T users. some say it is sharp and beautiful others say its got grain the size of hailstones. I guess we need to have faith in Kodak's abilities and keep asking how we can improve with the tools Kodak gives us.

I've got QT files of the Velvia 50 on my website:

westsiderfilm.com/

I'll have 64T (Kodak & Fuji) clips within the next few days as well as other stocks.

David Mullen ASC · July 20, 2006

The Velvia clips look amazing, although I suspect that Spectra is doing a decent amount of noise reduction in their Super-8 transfers. With the grain reduced, the sharpness enhanced, the strong contrast, strong colors, and deep focus, it almost looks, well... like DV, which is weird. The 200T neg stuff though would not be mistaken for video.

Charles Doran · July 20, 2006

The Velvia clips look amazing, although I suspect that Spectra is doing a decent amount of noise reduction in their Super-8 transfers. With the grain reduced, the sharpness enhanced, the strong contrast, strong colors, and deep focus, it almost looks, well... like DV, which is weird. The 200T neg stuff though would not be mistaken for video.

Hi David,

thanks... I was at the telecine session and they didn't do a lot of tweaking...had to de-saturate a bit to keep the colors from popping out too much (esp. the reds). Yeah, on the other forum I usually post at (filmshooting.com) someone else mentioned part of the Velvia looking like DV -- I think the jogging on San Vicente Bl. bit. The sun was just at a perfect angle then -- just the best filming conditions imaginable.

Edited July 20, 2006 by Charles Doran

Anthony Schilling · July 21, 2006

The grain on the Velvia clip is pretty consistant as to how fine it really is. 100D represents quite similar in S8 too, for grain. The 200T could look a little tighter with some more density.

Douglas Hunter · July 21, 2006

With color negative films (e.g., 7217, 7218), a stop or so of overexposure will generally help reduce graininess by a significant amount, since more scene information is now captured by the finer-grained mid- and slow- components of the film emulsion. So Super-8 7217 exposed at EI200T will look good, but grain will get even finer at EI100T. Likewise, using Super-8 7217 in daylight with a Wratten 85 filter and an EI64D exposure rating should look very good.

John, I don't shoot film as much as I used to so pardon the question, but why do you specificy negative stocks? Grain visability lives in the mid tones in both reversal and negative stocks so why not try to push the grain down on all films (if that's is one's goal) by rating lower than the established ISO? I know some people don't like to open up on reversal film but in my experience opening up a stop on reversal is no big deal.

John Adolfi · July 22, 2006

John, I don't shoot film as much as I used to so pardon the question, but why do you specificy negative stocks? Grain visability lives in the mid tones in both reversal and negative stocks so why not try to push the grain down on all films (if that's is one's goal) by rating lower than the established ISO? I know some people don't like to open up on reversal film but in my experience opening up a stop on reversal is no big deal.

are you saying that overexposing 1 stop on reversal is a good thing?

Douglas Hunter · July 22, 2006

are you saying that overexposing 1 stop on reversal is a good thing?

You might consider it nit picky of me but I would not put it in the form of a value judegement. If something is "good" or not depends exclusively upon one's goals.

We all know the conventional wisdom that tending towards over exposure of negative and under exposure or reversal is desirable when in doubt. The times I've ever tried underexposure of reversal I was not pleased with the results, specifically when in telecine, the under exposures were not radical, but they did not provide the result I would have hoped for (a denser image on the film strip that leads to greater flexability in printing or telecine). The lesson to me was always get your desired exposure on set, and that maybe for telecine tending towards slight over exposure may provide better results, regradless of film type. These days when I shoot super 8 I am always planning on video finish, as I think most folks do. So I try to craft my shooting to look good in telecine. This definately includes being in as much control as possible over how grain appears in the image. For me Usually this takes the form of making sue that the areas I want to have reduced grain do not fall into the mid tones. When shooting in an uncontrolled environment this can take the form of a whole sale over exposure by a stop or stop and a half, as John P. was suggesting, but he made his comments specific to negative stocks. I guess this begs the question of what one means by over exposure. In the example of exposing 200 film at 100 we are talking about what is not a radical over exposure, image areas that would normally fall at N-1 will be at N, and so on. Personally I think reversal can handle this degree of vairation, but perhaps I'm missing something or people have other opinions.

Edited July 22, 2006 by Douglas Hunter