CineStill 50D Film (Review, Tips, and Photos

CineStill 50D Film (Review, Tips, and Photos | Something About Film)

Рет қаралды 1,889

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 36

@Casey_Schmidt 6 ай бұрын

I’ve used 50D in both cinestill and vision 3 version. I’ve also shot a lot of 250D which is my personal favorite. This film has unbelievable dynamic range and true to life colors. As soon as I developed my first rolls, I knew I wasn’t going to need another color film. Thanks for another fun video!

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Thank you! 250D is a stunning film. I shot a lot of it for black and while cross-processing and it really holds up for that, too.

@monsieurgolem3392 Ай бұрын

4:59, where cinestill shines.

@rickyzagalo 6 ай бұрын

We are having very nice sunny days, here where I live, so tomorrow I will go to buy one 50D. I liked a lot to shoot with 800T and 400D. Now your experience made me feel like I also must shoot with this one. The colour is very much to my taste, rich in all the colour variants present in the scene, but a bit pale. That's why I shoot a lot with Kodak Proimage, much more to my preference than Ektar. Althoug an autumn forest landscape with Ektar is amazingly beautiful.

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Nice! Yeah, the pale color tone from this is a bit different than a lot of films. I do think this is the best of the CineStill films (though I've only shot a few rolls of the 400D so far.)

@GODSPEEDseven 6 ай бұрын

Thanks for the vid! Very interesting info as I am myself slowly exploring film.

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Thank you!

@jeyycie3656 6 ай бұрын

Love you videos, however not a fan of cinestill, both as a company and his products. I would like to know if they do indeed treat the film with additional chemicals like you mentioned, other than removing the ramjet layer, (which also changes the image look by removing it). But being a young cinematographer I can tell you that cinestill doesn't really look like Vision 3 does. lab ECN-2 is really another beast and yield different result while allowing for a huge color palette and light flexibility. Also the scanners use in photo labs pale in comparaison of what cine labs use, and those bring a much different character for Vision 3, which WAS design for the digital age.

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Thank you and that's a good point that CineStill loses some of the Vision 3 image character. I suspect there's some dye sensitization for CS because the color cast is corrected for C-41 chemistry (removing the backing alone would not do that) and ECN-2 films when run through C-41 chemicals turn, generally, green. So something must be changed in the process.

@monsieurgolem3392 Ай бұрын

Oh yes, cinestill, a very tempremental stock. Its nice, but only under very specific circumstances, its not for very colorful scenes.

@artderfall 4 ай бұрын

Not sure why my post was deleted. Simply.... I want to slice 35mm down into 9mm wide strips to use in my Minox B camera where grain is a consideration. Minox 35. The smallest 35mm camera. You know where to look for used cameras.

@DavidHancock 4 ай бұрын

Not sure why, either. This is the first comment I've gotten from you. There is a guy on Etsy who makes and sells film slicers for resizing. I've ordered from him and his slicers work well.

@HealthyMaxwellRoth 5 ай бұрын

Cinestill films were one of my favourite and most used films from a loooooong time. But after all the trademark bullshit, I'd rather support other remjet remover labs.

@jw48335 6 ай бұрын

Tamron VC F1.8 FTW!

@Shanesshiit 6 ай бұрын

I have a 1000' roll of this stuff, looking forward to trying it out

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Of the 50D source stock? That's awesome. If you send it to a lab, make sure it's an ECN-2 lab. Vision stocks will wreck C-41 processing machines and ruin all the film in the machine with them. If you develop it at home, I did a video on cross-processing Vision 3 stock as black and white a couple of years back and there's some content in there on removing the remjet layer. Vision 3 50D, if developed in C-41, will have a green cast, IIRC.

@Shanesshiit 6 ай бұрын

@@DavidHancock Yeah I purchased it from some leftover stock from a film production for I think 100$. I know all about dealing with it, I develop at home, I have used many Vision stocks, just not this one yet. It's alot of film, I might give some away..

@jw48335 6 ай бұрын

I've moved to only Vision3 stocks fairly recently. IMO the cost savings by processing in a Jobo with the ECN2 kit are worth it, even if only shooting a few rolls per month. It's really not much more work than regular color negative processing, and actually less work than e6. I'm still undecided on XX. I need more of that stuff to figure out 800/1600 ISO in the Jobo. Regardless, with the sleazy patent stuff that Cinestill is doing, I will never be buying from them again.

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

ECN-2 is a very interesting at-home option. Later this year I'm hoping to try home ECN-2 developing, too.

@cosmin_aga 6 ай бұрын

Wonderful overview! Definitely one of the next films I'll shoot. I wonder what your thoughts are on the new Fujifilm 400 ISO film stock, which is supposedly made by Kodak.

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Thank you! I did a Superia 400 video late last year and in the Spectral Sensitivity section of that video touched on that very slightly. I have only shot one roll of the new Fuji that's (apparently) made under license by Kodak and that's not enough for me to decide what I think about it yet.

@b6983832 6 ай бұрын

Fuji 400 looks like Ultramax, which it probably is. It only cost more in Europe than Kodak Ultramax 400.

@b6983832 6 ай бұрын

What do you mean by saying most C41 films not being tolerant for home development? There is no problem with these provided you use professional grade chemistry and have a good control of temperature and developing time. On the contrary, cross processed ECN-2 film is very hard to print to RA-4 paper because of issues in color crossover.

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

Fair question and asterisk, as I've been learning home C-41 development I used lower-priced stocks. And those are not good in home chemistry (though to be fair they also aren't good in lab chemistry.) One thing I found with the colors in 50D is that digitizing it with a digital camera and raw files yielded colors more like the lab scans than some other films I've used. It may have been more fair to say that this film is somewhat more tolerant of home digitization than other C-41 films.

@b6983832 6 ай бұрын

@@DavidHancock Ok. I don´t scan, but I print my negatives in a darkroom. I have been using Fuji Hunt chemistry for years for both C-41 and RA-4, with good results on both Kodak and Fuji stocks. ECN-2 stocks are good for scanning, and of course, they work well for printing to print film in the motion picture industry - provided they are developed with ECN-2 chemistry. Developing these stocks is always cross processing, as the dyes are optimized for different color developing agent - CD-3 instead of CD-4 used in C-41. Scanning and digital editing can overcome many problems that exist when cross processing and/or printing these stocks to not really compatible RA-4 papers. There is very little you can do in a darkroom, except for masking and multiple exposures, which is very laborious to overcome color crossing when the pavement is too magenta, but the sky looks green in the same frame.

@cdegenova1761 6 ай бұрын

I would like to hear your opinion about reflex labs basically Chinese cinestill, a little cheaper

@DavidHancock 6 ай бұрын

I don't really have an opinion. I've never shot a Reflex Labs film stock.

@YeahItsThatBad 4 ай бұрын

Kodak should just cut out the middle man and release vision3 films in a format that will work for film photography and not produce any halations.

@DavidHancock 4 ай бұрын

I suspect that they have agreements in place with CineStill to prevent that. There is likely also some profit motivation for them not to direct-sell Vision 3, also. Right now, they make money on every roll of Vision 3 they sell to CineStill (we can assume -- it seems safe to think Kodak aren't gifting the film to them or selling at cost or under.) So Kodak is earning money, rotating stock, keeping machines going (even if it's just a little) which helps keep costs low, and that's all to their benefit. It's easy to believe that it could be less profitable for Kodak to release a similar product themselves.

@YeahItsThatBad 4 ай бұрын

@@DavidHancock this is likely the case. I assume that it would be possible to make halation free version of vision3 but some one did the math and decided it wasn't worth the trouble. With the cinestill deal they can keep doing what they are already doing (making movie film) with their existing pipeline and they get to make a little money on the side while cinestill does all the leg work.