Kodak's current view on Vision 2 50D and Ektachrome 100D?

Post by **T-Scan** » Sat Aug 18, 2007 4:57 pm

I accidentally under exposed a few carts of 100D at 160ASA last spring... It wasn't too bad actually, not totally acceptable but not a total loss either. With reversal, it's a lot easier to work with an under exposed image on a transfer and pull out information by yanking it up... but it's a lot harder to tone down overexposure.

Post by **Lunar07** » Sat Aug 18, 2007 7:36 pm

Jim Carlile wrote:
Jim -
This is no different from issues arising from E64T.
Kodak will notch 100D according to smpte specs - 0.5000 with no filter notch. That is all there is to it. You are making an issue where none exists. There are many many cameras that can read this notch. Even the 40/160 cameras can read it provided they have manual exposure.
The difference between 64T and E100D is that with 64T, the worst that will happen is you'll be 2/3 stop overexposed. With 100D, you'll be 2/3 stop underexposed. That's much worse. So it's not the same problem at all.

I am aware of the difference. Actually with 100D the issue is a non-issue. While with E64T there is overexposure and it is hard to find a 40/160 camera with - correction; with 100D there is underexposure and MANY if not MOST of these cameras have + correction

With +1 correction you end up with 1/3 overexposure with 100D. You see, as I said, there is no problem at all. Actually the problem is so lessened with 100D compared with E64T.

Post by **Mitch Perkins** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:37 am

VideoFred wrote:
Anything else I should look at?
I can not wait to shoot something.
My dog.. where is my dog :P

Fred.

You're a beautiful man, Fred. ~:?)

Maybe the smart corporate move is to view the little gauge as an added point in the main argument, to professionals, for shooting film. A "trickle up" effect for 16/35mm...

A camera without manual exposure/filter has limited/specialized potential...

Mitch

Post by **Jim Carlile** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 4:06 am

Juergen wrote:I asked Wittner for it. There is no problem in reality

Daylight material like Cinevia from GK-Film (Fuji Velvia 50 D) had a ASA/ISO 40 notch and no filter notch.
Wittnerchrome 100 D (Ektachrome 100D) is similar: ASA/ISO 100 notch, no fiter notch.

If they are speed notching 100D at the 100T notch size then it is being rated at ASA 64 by SMPTE cameras. Everybody else is rating it at 40. That's a 1/3 and 2/3 stop overexposure, not underexposure, so it will work out.

98% of all results with Ektachrome 100 D are good, Wittner says.

Maybe, but with that speed notch, it's overexposed in all cameras. SMPTE cameras will rate it at ASA 64 per the super 8 system, and that's only if they can read a straight 100ASA speed notch.

Kodak Ektachrome 64T was far more a problem for a lot of cameras because they cannot read ASA/ISO 64 and Kodak brought this product into the market anymay. In reality we now can see, that the problems with cameras that can only read ASA/ISO 40 are very small - nearly no problems.

The worst that can happen with 64T is that it is overexposed in many cameras by 2/3 of a stop. But in the case of 100D, all cameras will be overexposing it if the speed notch is for ASA 100T. I'm not sure that's much of an advantage.

But either way, the 'error' is on the side of overexposure, not under. I can't imagine why Kodak would want to notch E100D at ASA 100T, guaranteeing that no few if any cameras will rate it at exactly 100. At least with a 160T/notchless cartridge, SMPTE cameras would rate it properly.

The problem with all of this is that 100D is a wierd film when it comes to the SMPTE standard. It doesn't fit in anywhere, and trying to wedge it in to the marketplace would give Kodak more headaches than 64T. All any manager looking for an excuse to say 'no' needs to do is just take into consideration the general compatibility issues here.

Post by **super8man** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 4:49 am

Post by **T-Scan** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:37 am

But in the case of 100D, all cameras will be overexposing it if the speed notch is for ASA 100T. I'm not sure that's much of an advantage.

It's not, thats why everyone carting it is using the plusX setup... and it works perfectly. All is well.

Post by **VideoFred** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:46 am

Juergen wrote:
Wittnerchrome 100 D (Ektachrome 100D) is similar: ASA/ISO 100 notch, no fiter notch.

It is pushing the daylight filter away on my Canon 814 XL-S. I have shoot my first Wittnerchrome 100D cartridge yesterday.... Everythink looks fine so far. Nice sound, too.. It looks and sounds like the film has been transported fine.

Fred.

Post by **Jim Carlile** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:12 am

T-Scan wrote:
But in the case of 100D, all cameras will be overexposing it if the speed notch is for ASA 100T. I'm not sure that's much of an advantage.
It's not, thats why everyone carting it is using the plusX setup... and it works perfectly. All is well.

Someone said 100D was notched at the ASA 100T distance? Plus-X is the 160T/notchless method. Whatever- but it means that the 40/160 cameras can't run it correctly, which goes back to the original point

Kodak has to think about everybody, and there are a tremendous number of 40/160 XL cameras out there, especially the last few years of manufacture.

The big problem here is the XL cameras. When Kodak came out with a notchless, daylight/tungsten color film at ASA 160, and promoted the hell out of it, the only solution for most camera manufacturers was to drop the SMPTE notchless method of rating daylight film speeds. Easier that than uprating their speed-notch detectors. (Like Tri-X, 'G' film was speed-notched at ASA 250 so that SMPTE cameras could rate it correctly. But who went that far? It was cheaper to go non-SMPTE.)

So Kodak's stuck with the incompatibility problem, and we are too...

Post by **Lunar07** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 3:46 pm

Jim Carlile wrote: The problem with all of this is that 100D is a wierd film when it comes to the SMPTE standard. It doesn't fit in anywhere, and trying to wedge it in to the marketplace would give Kodak more headaches than 64T. All any manager looking for an excuse to say 'no' needs to do is just take into consideration the general compatibility issues here.

You totally lost me here. 100D/160T has the 0.5 notch. No filter notch for 100D. How does that NOT fit into the SMPTE standard. While this fits fine into the standard, it works with ALL smpte D Type cameras. As explained before, MOST 40/160 G Type cameras will read this as 160. Thus underexposing by 2/3 stop. Most of these cameras have +1 correction thus removing the problem. Am I missing something here? Actually the problems encountered using 100D are LESS severe than issues encountered with E64T using 40/160 cameras. I simply do not understand your line of thinking here.

Post by **Juergen** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm

Lunar07, yes, yes, I do not understand the problems either, oh yes

it's sooo unnecessary

Post by **Angus** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:31 pm

100D is certainly compatible with more cameras than 64T.

All but one of the cameras I now own is 64T compatible, and in any case I could use manual exposure...but I think 100D would be more compatible.

The carts I have shot have been gorgeous, shot in a Nizo S560 (possible some under-exposure but looks lovely on projection)...and Elmo Super 110.

Post by **Mitch Perkins** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:00 pm

Jim Carlile wrote: Kodak has to think about everybody[...]

In the case of Super 8, Kodak has only to think about those people ordering from the professional catalogue; there is no Super 8 in the consumer catalogue.

Mitch

Post by **Angus** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 10:49 pm

Kodak thinks about which product will sell the best.

Post by **Will2** » Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:41 pm

Mitch Perkins wrote:Maybe the smart corporate move is to view the little gauge as an added point in the main argument, to professionals, for shooting film. A "trickle up" effect for 16/35mm...
Mitch

That's the way it worked for me... Super 8 to 16mm... now considering 35mm for fun. Of course I doubt my little orders make a difference to them when they're used to people doing features in 35mm and 100's of 1000's of feet.

Post by **Mitch Perkins** » Tue Aug 21, 2007 4:39 am

Will2 wrote:
Mitch Perkins wrote:Maybe the smart corporate move is to view the little gauge as an added point in the main argument, to professionals, for shooting film. A "trickle up" effect for 16/35mm...
Mitch
That's the way it worked for me... Super 8 to 16mm... now considering 35mm for fun. Of course I doubt my little orders make a difference to them when they're used to people doing features in 35mm and 100's of 1000's of feet.

And occasionally over 4 million feet! ~:?)

But your little order stands not alone, and if any of these little orders should become big, it is hoped they will be for film, if best suited to the project. Perhaps you have a film-project story to send to In Camera?

Mitch