I;ll be shooting a short film that has two distinct looks to it: a softer, lower con pastel aesthetic at the begining, and a harder edged, more contrasty, and saturated look (i.e. reversal), for the end. I;m definitely interested in trying the new vivid 160 for the second look, however, for the softer, lower con scenes, I feel a different stock is appropriate. I want to stick to fuji, so I;m wondering if anyone has any opinions on the grain structure of the 160 vs the eterna 250D (the short is all day ext.) I;d like the lower con stuff to be finer grained, but Fuji doesn;t offer it;s eterna line below EI 250. I;m thinking about pushing the 160 a stop and pulling the 250 a stop.
We;re finishing digital, so I;ll obviously be able to tweak it in post (spirit 2K transfer to digibeta), but when it comes to film grain, you can;t really recreate the feeling you get from the emulsion itself. If anyone has seen tests of the 160 vs. the eterna stocks, particularly the 250 D, and has any advice, opinions, etc., that;d be great. By the way, I;m shooting super 16. Thanks.
fuji vivid 160 vs. 250, grain structure
No replies to this topic