"Q: What formats do you offer in EKTACHROME 64T?
A: At this time, we offer only S8. Kodak is investigating the possibility of releasing 16mm and 35mm in the future."
Right from kodak's website.
Some thoughts here I havent really seen discussed.
Kodak discontinued k40 to cut costs.Yet here is a film clearly designed to appease super 8 users as they have no solidified plan to release the stock in other formats.By their own logic ...it would have made more sense to slit up some 100d and some 45D for a color reversal replacement and a fine grain low speed replacement.After all...didnt I hear the argument made by kodak that producing the huge rolls of k40 for the small number of super 8 users is not a cost effective venture?They already have big rolls of the other stocks....why not slit up those rather than produce a new stock?
The upside of this is it shows that they are dedicated to super 8 by providing a new stock.However I dont see the logic of discontinuing a better product by replacing it with a slightly inferior one(if only slightly).And especially one that was already available in 16mm.
They had 2 reversal products after ALREADY discontinuing 125t vnf: k40,100d
Now they have 2 reversal products: 100d, and 64t
2 vs 2?
Unless I really suck at math I fail to see how Kodak saved money here other than the ptocessing labs.
I would be curious to try 64t in 16mm.I hope they release it.
Im still hoping to try k40 in 16mm.
Has anyone actually said anything good about 100d reversal?
I haven't really heard of anyone raving about it in 16mm.
Maybe they discontinued the wrong stock?
16mm 64t?
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
People here kept raving about 100d and wanted it in S8 until someone recently posted samples of very poorly processed custom-made 100d from Pro8mm. The consensus was that Pro8mm had screwed it up.
Wittner Kinotechnik, however, is about to release genuine Kodak 100d in S8 pretty soon, and pretty much everyone here loved the idea.
Wittner Kinotechnik, however, is about to release genuine Kodak 100d in S8 pretty soon, and pretty much everyone here loved the idea.
"Mama don't take my Kodachrome away!" -
Paul Simon
Chosen tools of the trade:
Bauer S209XL, Revue Sound CS60AF, Canon 310XL
The Beatles split up in 1970; long live The Beatles!
Paul Simon
Chosen tools of the trade:
Bauer S209XL, Revue Sound CS60AF, Canon 310XL
The Beatles split up in 1970; long live The Beatles!
There isn't a whole lot of logic in the axing of K40....never was and never will be so don't go looking for it.
64T better fits the amateur super 8 user in that it is a tungsten balanced product and all super 8 colour reversal films have been tungsten balanced. That was the specification when super 8 was launched 40 odd years ago...so in a way 100D wouldn't fit the bill.
Personally I'd have liked to see both. I'd still like a high sped tungsten balanced film to replace VNF (which itself replaced E160)
64T better fits the amateur super 8 user in that it is a tungsten balanced product and all super 8 colour reversal films have been tungsten balanced. That was the specification when super 8 was launched 40 odd years ago...so in a way 100D wouldn't fit the bill.
Personally I'd have liked to see both. I'd still like a high sped tungsten balanced film to replace VNF (which itself replaced E160)
The government says that by 2010 30% of us will be fat....I am merely a trendsetter 
If its pretty good ,seems like it would be an excellent alternative to k40.
I'm skeptical of shooting indoors anyway of something rated at 40 or 64.
Man that's a lot of light to have indoors.I dont know many super 8 users who shoot indoors with a big lighting setup.i know reversal is more forgiving of underexposure but still a lot of footcandles.
I'm skeptical of shooting indoors anyway of something rated at 40 or 64.
Man that's a lot of light to have indoors.I dont know many super 8 users who shoot indoors with a big lighting setup.i know reversal is more forgiving of underexposure but still a lot of footcandles.
But doesn't shooting indoors with 100D mean the speed drops with 2 stops? I'm sure you would have to use artificial light, 100asa is not that much.edgebsl wrote:If its pretty good ,seems like it would be an excellent alternative to k40.
I'm skeptical of shooting indoors anyway of something rated at 40 or 64.
Man that's a lot of light to have indoors.I dont know many super 8 users who shoot indoors with a big lighting setup.i know reversal is more forgiving of underexposure but still a lot of footcandles.
We'll knock back a few, and talk about life, and what is right
-
John_Pytlak
- Posts: 927
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:54 pm
- Location: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
- Contact:
KODAK EKTACHROME 100D Color Reversal Camera Film 5285/7285
The KODAK EKTACHROME 100D Color Reversal Camera Film 5285/7285 is quite popular for both 16mm and 35mm users, primarily for creating an alternative "look", either with normal E-6 processing or "cross processing" in the ECN-2 process:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/produ ... .6.4&lc=en
http://www.cameraguild.com/technology/t ... limits.htm
http://millimeter.com/production/video_spike_lees_new/
http://www.cinematechnic.com/jda/marlins_2k.html
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/produ ... .6.4&lc=en
http://www.cameraguild.com/technology/t ... limits.htm
http://millimeter.com/production/video_spike_lees_new/
http://www.cinematechnic.com/jda/marlins_2k.html
John Pytlak
EI Customer Technical Services
Research Lab, Building 69
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
EI Customer Technical Services
Research Lab, Building 69
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
Well, since super 8 and K40 were originally aimed at amateur home movie users, the limit of any shooting indoors would have normally been inside somebody's house with one cine lamp. I've got a 1000W lamp of a type quite common in the 70's and with K40 it's good for a large sized living room...the limitation is that it can only be run for 5 mins at a time.edgebsl wrote:
I'm skeptical of shooting indoors anyway of something rated at 40 or 64.
Man that's a lot of light to have indoors.I dont know many super 8 users who shoot indoors with a big lighting setup.
Back in the day, should a large scale production be envisaged (filming a stage show for example) then ektachrome 160 would have been employed and often stage spotlights are sufficient for this film.
The government says that by 2010 30% of us will be fat....I am merely a trendsetter
-
John_Pytlak
- Posts: 927
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:54 pm
- Location: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
- Contact:
Blinding Movie Lights
I remember relatives shooting 8mm KODACHROME movies indoors at important family events when I was a child. Four short-lived high wattage spotlamps on a "light bar" with ceramic sockets to take all the heat. Would blow the fuse if anything else was on that circuit!
Looking at those old films today brings back memories of how uncomfortably bright those lights were --- people all squinting, or shielding their eyes from the glaring light. And of course, not much "artistry" in the lighting. Certainly it was a film more suited to outdoor use.
Amazing how much more flexibility a 500T or even a 200T film offers for indoor shooting today.
Looking at those old films today brings back memories of how uncomfortably bright those lights were --- people all squinting, or shielding their eyes from the glaring light. And of course, not much "artistry" in the lighting. Certainly it was a film more suited to outdoor use.
Amazing how much more flexibility a 500T or even a 200T film offers for indoor shooting today.
John Pytlak
EI Customer Technical Services
Research Lab, Building 69
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
EI Customer Technical Services
Research Lab, Building 69
Eastman Kodak Company
Rochester, NY 14650-1922 USA
I don't doubt that and I shall try shooting some 500T at a party later this month...but since projection is my thing I'd still prefer a fast(ish) reversal film.
I remember in the early 90's using the 100W lamp in my parents kitchen, where I was filming my dad working on restoring parts of his vintage car. I don't recall it being particularly hot under the lamp but considering maybe 900W of that went to heat it must have been.
It was worth it, in 1995 a magazine did a 5 page spread on his car and the journalist watched the film (projected onto a beaded screen of course!) to convince himself the restoration had indeed been a single-handed effort.
I remember in the early 90's using the 100W lamp in my parents kitchen, where I was filming my dad working on restoring parts of his vintage car. I don't recall it being particularly hot under the lamp but considering maybe 900W of that went to heat it must have been.
It was worth it, in 1995 a magazine did a 5 page spread on his car and the journalist watched the film (projected onto a beaded screen of course!) to convince himself the restoration had indeed been a single-handed effort.
The government says that by 2010 30% of us will be fat....I am merely a trendsetter
I don't doubt that and I shall try shooting some 500T at a party later this month...but since projection is my thing I'd still prefer a fast(ish) reversal film.
I remember in the early 90's using the 100W lamp in my parents kitchen, where I was filming my dad working on restoring parts of his vintage car. I don't recall it being particularly hot under the lamp but considering maybe 900W of that went to heat it must have been.
It was worth it, in 1995 a magazine did a 5 page spread on his car and the journalist watched the film (projected onto a beaded screen of course!) to convince himself the restoration had indeed been a single-handed effort.
I remember in the early 90's using the 100W lamp in my parents kitchen, where I was filming my dad working on restoring parts of his vintage car. I don't recall it being particularly hot under the lamp but considering maybe 900W of that went to heat it must have been.
It was worth it, in 1995 a magazine did a 5 page spread on his car and the journalist watched the film (projected onto a beaded screen of course!) to convince himself the restoration had indeed been a single-handed effort.
The government says that by 2010 30% of us will be fat....I am merely a trendsetter
I tested the pro8 100D and something was definately wrong, either bad processing or really expired film. If it we're handled right, the grain structure, color saturation, and detail would look awsome in S-8. I just shot some more 16mm 100D on a project.. will remind everyone how it's supposed to look with some stills here soon.
100D and Vision 3 please
-
clivetobin
- Posts: 346
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:31 am
- Location: Spokane Valley, WA, USA
- Contact:
E160G
Not to quibble (which I am of course doing) but you are forgetting the highly forgettable Ektachrome 160G film, which was nominally daylight balanced but gave equal-opportunity ugly results under either daylight or tungsten. Although admittedly not as ugly as normal film shot with the wrong filter setting.Angus wrote: ...all super 8 colour reversal films have been tungsten balanced...
Kodak even made some of their XL cameras so they lacked the 85 filter and would ONLY shoot the Type G stuff, which of course is now long discontinued. Not to mention having the experimental rubbery gears that turn to powder after a while. Other manufacturers had more sense or maybe foresight.
Just being someone who has jumped into the whole film thing in the last year or so....Ive missed out on the kodachrome thing.Now that I've seen some examples on this forum ,I'm astonished at the grain and contrast with it in super 8.I have shot mostly 16mm and the grain is sometimes more evident in my stuff than some of the s8 k40 footage Ive seen here.That makes me think that the results in 16mm would be incredible.
I hope to shoot some 16mm k40 this year before its gone.Does it come in single perf?
I hope to shoot some 16mm k40 this year before its gone.Does it come in single perf?