S8 filmstocks compared

Post by **mattias** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 9:31 am

yes, the super f-series have a strange grain pattern which looks weird on a still but gets less prominent in motion. there was a lot of talk when it came out of how it made edges sharper, and i guess it does. i haven't shot the new stocks yet, even though i've seen some results, but i'm looking forward to it since i always liked fuji stocks better except for the grain which is really visible even in 16mm and at video resolution.

/matt

Post by **S8 Booster** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 9:41 am

yeah, that edge sharpness is something that puzzles me too. if you look at the film spec it seemingly offers less resolution than the Kodak 500 but at motion it looks as sharp as (ability to define edge sharpness) or "sharper" than the 500 Kodaks i have shot in S8.

"organic pixel shift interlacing?"

if you look closer at the images Andreas posted and examine the license plate on the car the Fuji looks as sharp as or possibly sharper than the Kodak - on my machine though.

s/hoot

Post by **freddiesykes** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:03 am

The 200T will definitely be something I wish to shoot in the future. One problem I foresee is that no local lab or shop offers the film or processing. I was doing some searching earlier on Spectra's site and noticed that the film plus processing is $30.95. I'm assuming that that price is without delivery charges. Can anyone tell me if I am correct? Also, won't the undeveloped film be damaged in the mail? Hmm..

I wish to extend my complete and sincere gratitude to Andreas for posting these excellent examples! This site has a donation section right? Ah, I see it, at the left. Cheers!

Post by **Carlos 8mm** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:32 am

Nice work, Andreas!

I like the colors of Ekta 64T. Grainy than K-40, but sharper.

The granularity of Ekta 64T is close to Ekta VNF 125T (to my eyes). Hope that some day Kodak releases a new very fine grain color reversal filmstock.

Post by **Scotness** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 11:51 am

Couldn't resist - you cans till do a bit with the Fuji - here's before and after - the grain is still hard to overcome - do you think some of it could be noise from the transfer Andreas?

Scot

Post by **S8 Booster** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:03 pm

i think grain can only be properly supressed at the time of shooting by overexposing by at least 1 stop which it handles fine.

this filmstock has kind of 2 lives in S8:

frame grabs: Grainiy.
on the run: Not too grainy, looks very sharp.

however, proper grain control is only possible at shoot.

s/hoot

YouTube · Post by **Andreas Wideroe** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 12:20 pm

Scot,
There shouldn't be any interference during transfer, but I did NOT use the grain reducer which I have. I wanted to have it as sharp as possible.

I can tell you that 500 film looks better in 16mm and when the blacks are crushed a little, but overexposing a small stop when shooting is a good rule.

Andreas

Post by **kentbulza** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:21 pm

I've used the Reala 500T in Super 8 and had it transferred on a Rank and the grain looks similar.

YouTube · Post by **Andreas Wideroe** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:25 pm

I got some 500T transferred too on a Cintel MkIII - same grain.

Post by **S8 Booster** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:34 pm

kentbulza wrote:I've used the Reala 500T in Super 8 and had it transferred on a Rank and the grain looks similar.

did you give it a little extra exposure?

big difference on the f500 with my cams.

s/hoot

Post by **paul** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 5:35 pm

awand wrote: When I saw these films on my TV at home I think the 500 films looked much better than on my studio and computer monitors. The grain dissapeared a little.

Perhaps I crunched the blacks a little too much some places.

Andreas

Thanks for the good work Andreas,

Just wondering.. did the 200t and 64T look as grainy at your TV at home as it does on the stills you uploaded?

Thanks,

Paul

YouTube · Post by **Andreas Wideroe** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 6:15 pm

No, the images don't look as grainy as these samples when they are in motion. Still images can be horrible, but motion looks good.

Post by **steve hyde** » Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:27 pm

Andreas,

Thanks for posting the results of your tests. I agree that the 200T is the best all-around super 8 film available. I also agree with John Pytlak (Kodak rep and member of this forum) who suggests shooting 7217 at E.I 100 and 7218 at E.I. 250 for tighter grain. I have not tried 7218 at E.I. 250, but I have been shooting my 7217 at E.I 100 have posted a couple stills from that test.

Here they are again for reference:

and a couple black and white for reference:

As soon as I learn how to compress .mov files for optimal streaming I will post some of these tests as moving images.

Cheers,

Steve

Post by **ccortez** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:57 am

awand wrote:
ccortez wrote:I need to look at the full size pics, but... the Fuji looks awful to me. Anyone else?
I now see that I may have made the Fuji film a little too green during telecine.

Yep, I think that's it.

Post by **kentbulza** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 5:47 am

S8 Booster wrote:
kentbulza wrote:I've used the Reala 500T in Super 8 and had it transferred on a Rank and the grain looks similar.
did you give it a little extra exposure?

big difference on the f500 with my cams.

s/hoot

I actually didn't because I was already at 1.8....it was for an outdoor nightime birthday party and I didn't have any choice -- the only light was from club-style lights. I'll shoot some at 400 when I have some more light and see how it looks. Of course it'll look better, but the Vision 2 looks better to me overall. But I haven't yet tried the Eterna stock. I'm not aware of any availability for this in bulk loads.