Making "Bootleg" Cinestill 800T at Home

[@theniftywarlock]

Great video! I have a lot respect for Cinestill as they've popularized the 800t space and also filled a hole that kodak didn't have the capacity for, but calling yours "bootleg" gives them way too much credit for something they weren't the first to do, something they didn't create, and a term they weren't the first to coin.

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks, TJ! 100% agree, I have so much respect for the way they used social media to capture the attention of so many new photographers who might not otherwise have looked twice at film but it’s been a shame to watch this unfold..

[@hericperez]

This is so great that I have found this! Thank you.

[@ryanbhangdia]

Glad you enjoyed!

[@patcormick]

solid video.. for context though, I dont know if I would make a note of cinestill's price per roll as compared to bulk rolling Vision3.. bc even though the end cost is the diff of 10 dollars per roll, with significantly more rolls possible... the upfront costs of bulk loading haven't been accounted for, nor have the time and know how to bulk load... neither are things that can't be overcome, but they are points in the equation not mentioned... I think a better comparison would be something like the film photography project's pre rolled vision3 at $10 a roll... then you're comparing pre packaged rolls, one where the first company has removed the remjet for you and the second is selling it to you with it left on.. and the diff is about $5 per roll.. which again isnt crazy big savings, but for those who love the development process, this is a fun way to get to experiment with the chemicals in a diff way.

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks for your comment Pat, I’m looking forward to your video improving this comparison!

[@patcormick]

@@ryanbhangdiahey no worries! I doubt I’d do one to “improve” upon anything… just something to note here in case someone new comes along and needs more information for their own resources…

[@0M0rty]

Nice comparison, Cinestill seems to lean more green, it's probably just scanning or maybe one of the lenses has minor coating variation, but still interesting.

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks! Yeah I scanned with my digital camera and inverted in negative lab pro keeping the setting identical but there could still be variations for sure. My thought was that the there might have been the faintest of fogging from my removal of the rem jet and/or maybe something in my tap water, but who knows!

[@thealaris]

Looks like some chemical reaction to me, cinestill buys master rolls of 500t with out remjet from kodak directly nowdays, so there is no interaction with anything before process, while something in water, or water itself might interacted with dyes in film while remjet was removed

[@haushinka6940]

Bootleg 800T looking better to cinestill in my opinion! Really can’t tell the difference. Thanks for the video

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

[@xperrosinsangrex]

Because it's literally the same film. Great job removing it before the shoot! I've not been able to do it properly

[@Alex-c3o1o]

Nice video, maybe a recommendation to speed up drying process you could run the film through a salad dryer while it is still on dev reel.

[@ryanbhangdia]

Haha thanks!

[@x_and_e]

Nice, thanks for sharing!

[@DamnOrangemen]

Hey! Very nice video and inspiring to try it out for yourself. However I've got some questions! • Since the video is almost half a year old, did you continue to do this or aborted for some reasons? • Also, your attempt shows some blueish light leaks around the sprockets, which are most likely due to the rest light in your closet you could detect with the 409600 ISO video? • How did you dry your film after removal? Simply removing excess water by two finger/a rubber clamp or using a dust and scratch free tissue? How long did you hang your film before getting it out of your closet? • What would you expect how long is the film usable after this procedure? Should it be made freshly or can you contain it in a fridge for half a year? Cinestill 800T gives a 2-year best before warranty. I assume some kind of degredation by this process and am curious if you gained some experience here. Looking super forward to your answer!

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks for your comment! Sorry I didn’t see it sooner - I still do this and am still getting great results. After removing the rem jet I ran a film squeegee over the film one time and then hung it in a completely dark closet to dry. I would expect the film to be usable as long as any other film is, I certainly would never let it sit for years but that isn’t because it wouldn’t still work; rather I typically go through this process when I am specifically intending to use a film like 800T. It isn’t exactly an every day film on account of its unique characteristics. Film of any kind is always going to degrade over time so shoot what you’ve got when you’ve got it, that’d be my recommendation. That being said the “warranty” doesn’t mean your film won’t work after that date… it might have lower sensitivity and require being exposed a stop brighter but film typically doesn’t just “die” all of a sudden, in my experience.

[@kevintan1310]

What iso do you shoot at? I tried to do pre-remove the remjet on 250d and shoot at iso 400 but it seems like underexposed..

[@ryanbhangdia]

Hey Kevin, I shot it at 800 - your results may vary but for instance if you have more light leaks causing higher base fog you may loose some sensitivity. I would recommend trying to shoot at a few iso settings to see what works best for you.

[@bhangdiajake7490]

Amazing!!!! I love it!

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thank you!!

[@SiggyPony]

Very nice :) I'd even consider those to have come from the same roll if I didn't know better. I've seen bigger differences between frames on the same roll where all that changed was the shutter speed.

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks! And yeah, I was pretty impressed by the closeness :)

[@Senfgurkenpimmel]

Damn! This video ist nice. I was wondering if you had any remaining remjet on your Film after drying with the method you shown? I saw a few other videos where the people are saying that there are probably some leftovers on the film and you should wipe over the film to make sure it’s all cleaned off. Much love for your content again🙌

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks! I tried to be as thorough in getting it off as I could, and I used a squeegee in as I hung it in the dark closet which I think helped. I didn’t notice any left over rem jet when I was scanning it but I totally agree that giving it a wipe with a little microfiber cloth or something definitely helps!

[@Senfgurkenpimmel]

Thank you for your reply. I am really looking forward to your next videos. Please don’t let be 6 month again 😂

[@ryanbhangdia]

thanks for saying so, I appreciate that! definitely won't be 6 months for the next one haha, was a busy summer but hoping to get the next one our before the end of the month :)

[@cristianrueda2055]

Excellent video!

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks!

[@slothsarecool]

curious what tank that is! so tiny

[@ryanbhangdia]

The development tank? It’s one from Arista that I got via Freestyle years ago, but they were made under many different brands and in the used market you can get them really cheaply!

[@gottanikoncamera]

Very cool comparison. How does your pre-treated bootleg compare to your usually post-exposure treated bootlegs? Do you think there’s any real diff?

[@ryanbhangdia]

In terms of color I’d say there is not any difference, but the key thing is the halation effect around points of light - when you shoot it with the rem jet intact there is no halation effect but with it removed that’s what causes those red glowy effects you see on some of the pictures

[@gottanikoncamera]

@@ryanbhangdia Ah, good point! I guess it’s somewhat closer to the look of the original cine film except it’s not ECN-2. Thanks!

[@randallstewart1224]

Two observations: (1) Cinestill removes the remjet before reselling Vision 3 film out of marketing necessity - to allow the film to be processed by normal labs running it in C-41 chems. If you are shooting Vision 3 from Kodak and processing it yourself, there is absolutely no need to do this process to remove remjet before shooting. All it does is submit your film to risk if damage during the pre-washing process. It also subjects your film to halation problems which are inherent in Cinestill films. (2) The video comparison show a significant green color shift in the Cinestill/C-41 processed film, which is not there in the "washed" Vision 3/|C-41 film. The green bias is a long-noted problem with the Cinestill film. So, why does it not appear in the washed Vision 3 film also processed in C-41? Historically, I and others have assumed that this is a by-product of cross-processing the film in C-41 rather than ECN-2 chemicals, but the video suggests that there is some other factor at work here. Maybe the Cinestill process to remove remjet leaves some chemical contamination in their film product which adversely reacts with the C-41 chemistry?

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks for taking the time to comment, Randall - like I mentioned in the video I don't typically remove the rem-jet like this before shooting, rather the goal in this case was to illustrate how one might replicate the process that Cinestill uses with the express object being to replicate the halation effect that popularized their film. This all in the context of the recent controversy at which they are the center. Regarding your second observation, I'm not certain but you bring up a good question. Some speculation exists that current Cinestill production comes from Kodak without the rem-jet ever having been applied but I certainly don't know the logistics of any of that. These scans were made using the exact same settings and not altered or fussed with past the standard inversion to try and preserve the comparison aspect so I'm not sure why the green shift is more present on the Cinestill version vs my "bootleg" version!

[@thealaris]

They buy special master rolls with out remjet directly from kodak nowadays from what I know, it saves time and money, and both get profit, otherwise there would be vision3 500t markings instead of Cinestill ones, so it's probably just what you get with vision3 processed in c41 I think

[@tasost2161]

Sodium hydroxide is the stone like thing no powder? That heats up when comes in to the water?

[@ryanbhangdia]

Not certain I clearly understand your question, but you can get it in powder form. It is also referred to lye, or caustic soda.

[@jezjoseph]

What camera is shooting at 400k iso ??? 👀👀 Talk about night vision . So very interesting . Bootleg wins in. Alot of those images 👌🏾

[@ryanbhangdia]

Thanks! Haha the Sony ZV-1 for video, yeah definitely can see better than I in the dark

[@azaarbaain]

please make a tutorial on how you made it at home

[@ryanbhangdia]

Hey Farsei, can you be more specific? This video is a tutorial, showing how I made it at home..