Jump to content


Photo

super 8 100d vs 64t


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 08 January 2006 - 08:40 AM

Hi, firstly here is the link to Wittners site http://www.wittner-k...mm/s8_filmm.php I see the said company are offering 100d in the super 8 cartridge. Has anyone used any super 8 100d??. How would 100d results compare to 64t, will there be less grain, will the image be sharper. Can i expect unsteady images like 64t.

Edited by k25rip, 08 January 2006 - 08:41 AM.

  • 0

#2 Erdwolf_TVL

Erdwolf_TVL
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 08 January 2006 - 09:24 AM

Hi, firstly here is the link to Wittners site http://www.wittner-k...mm/s8_filmm.php I see the said company are offering 100d in the super 8 cartridge. Has anyone used any super 8 100d??. How would 100d results compare to 64t, will there be less grain, will the image be sharper. Can i expect unsteady images like 64t.


Not to steer the conversation off topic, but curious none the less...

I see their 40T "Chrome" film is for the K14 process. Presuming this is cut down Kodachrome?

Where would one get this processed when Kodak close their doors?

Dwaynes in the US?
  • 0

#3 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 08 January 2006 - 11:13 AM

Not to steer the conversation off topic, but curious none the less...
I see their 40T "Chrome" film is for the K14 process. Presuming this is cut down Kodachrome?
Where would one get this processed when Kodak close their doors?
Dwaynes in the US?

Dwayne's will keep processing k14 for a while, there are still alot of Kodachrome Super 8 and 16mm left out there. They have contracts with so many major players (Walmart, Target and Kodak) that they'll have to continue for a while, even after Kodak stops in Switzerland. Plus all the 35mm slide film is processed k-14 and Dwaynes handles that too.

Speaking about Kodachrome, I noticed the 35mm slide version comes in 200 speed and 64 speed. I'm sure speeds don't translate directly to movie film, but I would think there could be a faster Kodakchrome available to cut down... is that possible?

Another interesting point on that 100D is how much an 80A brings down the ISO. From 100 to 25... seems like a big jump.
  • 0

#4 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 08 January 2006 - 11:48 AM

How long before kodak pulls the plug on 35mm kodachrome? Have two rolls of k64 dated 12/2006. As for k200, it has very high resolving power, but probably to grainy for super 8 usage. K64 in the super 8 cassette and 16mm roll would be fantastic. Though we will never see that happen, if kodak were committed to kodachrome that would of happened when they axed k25. Kodachrome is on the way out. 16mm k40 will be axed by the summer.
  • 0

#5 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2420 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 08 January 2006 - 12:04 PM

Crumbs. Those super-8 prices are starting to make 16mm. look reasonable. Think I'll carry on collecting old 16mm. kit.
  • 0

#6 Erdwolf_TVL

Erdwolf_TVL
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 08 January 2006 - 12:23 PM

Crumbs. Those super-8 prices are starting to make 16mm. look reasonable. Think I'll carry on collecting old 16mm. kit.


I'm waiting for my EBAY K3 to arrive ;)
  • 0

#7 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 08 January 2006 - 04:59 PM

I'm waiting for my EBAY K3 to arrive ;)

Good luck with that. Mine turned out fine, but I've heard its luck of the draw. Had it modfied to S-16 by Du-All in NYC and its great going to hi-def; but I have to save for a while to afford an hour of hd transfer.

I've got several M42 lenses for it, the Peleng 8mm, Zenitar 16mm and a beautiful 28mm Pentax. All cover the S16 frame great. The stock zoom lens is really good too, but it doesn cover the S16 frame under 24mm or so.

Start working out if you're doing a big shoot, I get indentations in my palm after winding that thing for 2 or 3 100ft reels.
  • 0

#8 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 08 January 2006 - 06:38 PM

How would 100d results compare to 64t, will there be less grain, will the image be sharper.


I tested some in S8 a few times. the grain is about the same as K40, maybe a little better. If the stock is fresh, the colors are real similar to 64T. probably the best potential S8 reversal film to date.
  • 0

#9 Mark Dunn

Mark Dunn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2420 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 09 January 2006 - 04:47 AM

Never mind video transfer, I'm staying on film. Steenbeck, pic-sync, K3- but CIR splicers go on Ebay for more than Steenbecks! Can't figure that one out, except maybe they're a bit easier to wrap.
  • 0

#10 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 09 January 2006 - 10:03 AM

I've used both of them in still format.

Judging by modern E6 standards, both are a bit grainy for their speed.

Ektachrome 64T is probably my favorite surviving film (if we consider Kodachrome to be "dead"),
even though it should be a lot finer grained for its speed and its name compared to modern Ektachrome E100G/GX films, but this is an older film, so I don't blaim it.
64T is actually from the same time as EXR movie filmstocks came from (late 80's...'90, '91) but its technology is even older than that (it's mid 80's technology) and it still carries a bit of magic from the old times. In other words, it looks a bit more "classic" or "retro".
That is what I love about it.
It also has a nice smooth contrast compared to Ektachrome 100D. 100D is very harsh and punchy, whereas 64T is simply "normal", or moderate in contrast (for an E6 film) and color saturation. It has nice natural colors when exposed at 3200K, and has a soft beautiful blue cast at 3400K.

In one sentance I'd describe 64T as "the best of 80's" :D

One big difference that I've observed is in underexposure. 100D has less underexposure latitude, and is VERY dense and black when underexposed. 64T loses contrast with underexposure for some reason, and the image turns quite flat, with cyan cast, but quite transperent and gentle. So 64T doesn't "eat" the shadows like 100D does. In fact 64T when underexposed looks more like negative film (low contrast, with a color cast).

64T is PERFECT for product photography and such things, because it makes everything look smooth and shiny. Scans like a charm, much easier than 100D, even on cheap flatbeds.
I know this has nothing to do with super8 photography, and I don't know how much of these observations are true when you are dealing with such magnifications as with super8 film, but I'm just saying what comes to mind about this film, it could be useful in some way..
  • 0

#11 Mike Crane

Mike Crane
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 141 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 09 January 2006 - 06:09 PM

I am still interested in the rumors I have heard of Velvia 50D being released here in the states. That film should blow all other super 8 films (to date) out of the water.
  • 0

#12 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 10 January 2006 - 01:21 AM

I am still interested in the rumors I have heard of Velvia 50D being released here in the states. That film should blow all other super 8 films (to date) out of the water.


In grain yes, but it would provide same transfer problems as 100D (Velvia is dark and dense), and the skintones are worse than with 100D and much worse than 64T.

It would make a fine national georgraphic film documentary though

You can get same grain (RMS 8) from other films, so for the sake of shooting a wider range of subjects (like people), Provia, Ektachrome E100G and Astia in motion picture version would perform much better than Velvia

Velvia is a cult film, and it has its irreplacable qualities, but it is not good for everything.
  • 0

#13 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 10 January 2006 - 03:23 AM

In grain yes, but it would provide same transfer problems as 100D (Velvia is dark and dense), and the skintones are worse than with 100D and much worse than 64T.

It would make a fine national georgraphic film documentary though

You can get same grain (RMS 8) from other films, so for the sake of shooting a wider range of subjects (like people), Provia, Ektachrome E100G and Astia in motion picture version would perform much better than Velvia

Velvia is a cult film, and it has its irreplacable qualities, but it is not good for everything.

Like you say, not good for everything.
Not good for long term storage or being a true 50asa. Understand you need to expose the stock as 32 or 40asa, any truth? Also i beleive fuji are about to axe the film?. I think the film has the greatest resolving power of any slide film, so in theory, we should acheive the sharpest super 8 images ever?
Theres no doubt, as long as there are no transport thru the cartridge issues with the stock, and as we are almost in a kodachrome free world, then the fuji 50 has to be the no.1 choice for sharp,grain free images. I doubt kodak will ever give us a descent super 8 reversal again. In terms of resolving power, how does 100G compare to k40?
  • 0

#14 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 10 January 2006 - 07:33 AM

Fuji is replacing Velvia 50 with the new Velvia 100 (not 100F). The early tests show that Velvia 100 is as sharp as and and has even finer grain than old Velvia 50, which figures because Velvia 50 is an older generation of technology. I haven't used the new Velvia, but they say it has a little less contrast than Velvia, which is good I think, while the saturation is the same.

Velvia 100 will continue the leagacy of Velvia 50. Well some Velvia purists might have some objections because the film is not IDENTICAL, but the differences are esthetic, the image quality is true to old Velvia 50, possibly better.

Well, Velvia 50 does produce a bit denser images, which you might call "not true 50ISO", but you could also call it "true 50ISO with denser shadows", I think it's a bit subjective.
But exposed at 50ISO Velvia gives that great saturation and deep 3D greens. If you rate it at lower ISO, the image might seem more transperent (which some people might call "right exposure"), but it is the slight underexposure that punches colors in slide films anyway.

I think it's all about preferences. Velvia is a very dense film (thus hard to scan), so some people prefer rating it at lower ISO to get it thiner, so it scans easier. I don't think a drum scanner would have problems with Velvia at 50ISO though.

Regarding Kodachrome grain vs. E6 grain.
Kodachrome films (even K25) actually show higher RMS than E6 films relative to film speed.
For example K25 has RMS of 8, K64 has K200 has RMS of 17

For comparison E100G/GX, Provia, Velvia 100F all have RMS 8, just like K25, but they are TWO stops faster than K25

E100VS (100D) has RMS 11, while a little less than a stop slower K64 has even higher RMS (12)
Provia 400F, a stop faster than K200 and almost 3 stops faster than k64 has grain RMS similar to k64 (has 13)

Movie Kodachrome has RMS 9, which is quite good compared to K64.

So why does Kodachrome appear to have fine grain then? Well Kodachrome somehow hides its grain, probably has to do with its unique phisical structure, I'm not sure. And RMS measure actually shows how much do grain particles differ in size. So if all are of similar shape and size, rms will be low, and if there are all kinds from small to big, RMS will be high.
So RMS doesn't really say how big is the grain, but there is a corelation between visual size of grain and the diversity of particle sizes, so RMS can be taken as a measure of how fine the grain is.
It's just that in some films like Kodachrome, the connection between RMS and grain size seems to be lower for some reason.


Well, anyway, regarding the new Ektachrome E100G/GX films. They are actually finer grained than Velvia 50, but slightly, and they are quite sharp, and compared to K40, I'd say they are similar in resolving power, but that's just a judgement without tests and evidence, so one should test to see.
  • 0

#15 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 12 January 2006 - 07:40 PM

Here are a couple of bad scans of 64T

These are old images, back from my first test rolls, back when I was testing discovering this great film

As you can see, this one is a bit cropped (5 perfs only), well this is now it would look like in 35mm motion picture format (minus one perf)
Posted Image

And here is one with full frame.

Posted Image

This is from a flatbed, so it doesn't really come in its full glory, but it is a nice aproximation of the original tone scale and contrast.

Exposed with 3400K, the first one is more or less corrected to have color balance of the original, while the second is about how it looks like with 3200K
  • 0

#16 Sam Wells

Sam Wells
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1751 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 13 January 2006 - 10:17 AM

You can get same grain (RMS 8) from other films, so for the sake of shooting a wider range of subjects (like people), Provia, Ektachrome E100G and Astia in motion picture version would perform much better than Velvia


I agree, these would make more interesting reversal stocks for motion pics than Velvia.

-Sam
  • 0

#17 Daniel Madsen

Daniel Madsen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 201 posts
  • Student
  • Boston

Posted 13 January 2006 - 04:46 PM

You guys are talking about grain shape a lot- do you know a reference I could use to find the pros and cons of each type?
  • 0

#18 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 14 January 2006 - 07:29 AM

Well, you don't have much choice

All negative films, still and motion picture us T-grain technology

And as for reversals, Kodachrome and 64T are exeptions.

Edited by Filip Plesha, 14 January 2006 - 07:30 AM.

  • 0

#19 Robert Hughes

Robert Hughes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Sound Department
  • Minneapolis

Posted 16 January 2006 - 12:14 AM

All negative films, still and motion picture us T-grain technology


I don't think that's the case with Plus-X or Double-X negative, IIRC they are traditional, pre T-grain stocks. Kodak considered putting out TMax as a motion picture b&w camera stock, but found it was no better than the old stocks for projection, so dropped it.
  • 0

#20 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 16 January 2006 - 01:13 AM

I don't think that's the case with Plus-X or Double-X negative, IIRC they are traditional, pre T-grain stocks. Kodak considered putting out TMax as a motion picture b&w camera stock, but found it was no better than the old stocks for projection, so dropped it.



I forgot BW

Edited by Filip Plesha, 16 January 2006 - 01:15 AM.

  • 0


Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Opal

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

CineTape

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks