What is the difference between motion picture 35mm film and still photography 35mm film ?
Posted 24 February 2006 - 01:12 AM
Posted 24 February 2006 - 07:38 AM
But basically the difference between MP film and still film is this:
1. Colour still film is designed for the C-41 chemistry processing, whereas MP film is designed for ECN-2 proccessing. The two processes are similar, but still significantly different as to not be interchangeable. You can process film experimentally in each, but there will be color shifts and other strange things happening.
2. MP film has a so called anti-halation rem-jet backing designed to block light to bounce off the pressure plate. Still film doesn't have this (although it has a backing designed to reduce friction and scratches). This rem-jet backing must be removed before developing and this is accomplished in a pre-bath to the ECN-2 developing.
3. The perforations are slightly different. On MP film they're barrel shaped and of the Bell and Howell standard. On still film they're square. Still works to use MP film in still cameras because the spacing is the same - you just might get slightly less stability and registration (which is academic since the image is still already).
Posted 24 February 2006 - 08:16 AM
And why use 400 speed film, you can use longer exposures
Posted 24 February 2006 - 09:55 AM
Posted 24 February 2006 - 10:03 AM
As mentioned (somewhat obliquely) above, you can't do that.
Motion picture frames are four perfs (sprockets) tall. Stills frames are eight perfs wide. There is actually a specialist motion picture format called Vistavision that does expose eight perfs horizontally, but handling it would be a bit of an adventure.
Also, your stills camera does not have sufficiently good registration to do this, that is the repeatability of the way it positions the film is not good enough. You'd get a huge amount of jitter and weave in the image.
And yes, the perfs are the wrong shape.
Do it on a DSLR.
Posted 24 February 2006 - 10:23 AM
There is one more problem with what you have suggested you would do. You said you would process the film in a darkroom. Well, if you shot in 24 rolls, every individual second of your film would end up having some variations in contrast or even grain.
Now if you scanned the film, you could make it all match, and stabilize the image too.
Using a DSLR would solve a lot of problems, but if you are going for a Ilford BW look, you won't be able to
get it with a digital camera, or even with color negative film desaturated, not without making complex profiles or photoshop techniques based on a lot of reasearch that you just can't come up with in one month.
Posted 24 February 2006 - 10:48 AM
Most 35mm still film is perforated long pitch, KS-1870 (the perforations normally used for motion picture prints).
NEVER try to process a camera negative film intended for the ECN-2 process in a commercial C-41 still film process. The rem-jet will come off in the developer, and contaminate the machine and any other film being processed.
Posted 24 February 2006 - 01:04 PM
Edited by mike kaminski, 24 February 2006 - 01:07 PM.
Posted 25 February 2006 - 01:51 AM
Another thing you should be aware of is the aspect ratio difference between still and motion picture film. Still film has an aspect ratio of 1.5:1, where 35mm academy is 1.37:1, soft-matted to 1.85:1 (typically, anyway). So, if you use the DSLR, make sure you are framing within a 1.85:1 space and keep in mind the action safe area for television.
Posted 27 February 2006 - 10:29 PM
Yoi Camera Corner Thailand