Jump to content


Photo

Putting cine stock in a stills camera?


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 04 February 2009 - 08:23 AM

1) Can I put Kodak film stock in my Pentax SLR? Anyone know something about this? and

2) any tips on getting the result into a PC? It could be a very laborious job scanning in every frame...

Cheers! Posted Image
  • 0

#2 Ian Cooper

Ian Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Other
  • England

Posted 04 February 2009 - 10:44 AM

1) Can I put Kodak film stock in my Pentax SLR? Anyone know something about this? and


Yes, but best to check with the motion picture labs whether they would be prepared to process a strip a couple of ft long, and how much they'll charge before you actually do it! Motion picture film is processed in different chemicals to 'normal' C41 film, which can be processed on the high street.

2) any tips on getting the result into a PC? It could be a very laborious job scanning in every frame...


If you don't fancy scanning x36 frames yourself then you could take the film to a local minilab who could probably pass it through their machine - if you get the processing lab to return it to you uncut (as a motion picture lab probably would) then you might be able to persuade a highstreet minilab to scan it for you at their normal 'process & scan' rate, as they wouldn't be feeding in individual strips of 4 or 5 negs. I doubt a minilab would have the correct film profiles for motion picture film stock, so the colour balance might be a bit 'off' if they've used a generic profile - oh, and the quality/size of the scan might not be up to what you could acheive with your own scanner either!
  • 0

#3 Ian Cooper

Ian Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Other
  • England

Posted 04 February 2009 - 10:47 AM

I assumed you meant colour movie film, if you meant B&W movie film then you can process that the same as regular 35mm stills B&W film.
  • 0

#4 Ira Ratner

Ira Ratner
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 558 posts
  • Other
  • Coral Springs, Florida

Posted 04 February 2009 - 07:21 PM

May I ask why you want to do this? Because you already have 35 cine film?

If not, I'm lost:

Although your SLR may adequately take film not loaded into a canister, it still will only take a limited number of feet. Plus all still film processors still need to develop it from a canister. Plus again, just about ALL still film processors can give you excellent and cheap digital files at the same time they process your film.

What's your end game here? What are you trying to accomplish?
  • 0

#5 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 04 February 2009 - 09:23 PM

Get a bulk loader off eBay, get some empty canisters from B&H or your local photo supply, then get to work loading that MP film into those canisters.

I did it not long ago and have shot about 15 rolls of 5279...now I gotta figure out a way to process it. I shot a few just as tests so I could experiment with home processing with C41 or ECN2 chemicals.

Once they're processed, scanning should be a cinch if you have a negative scanner.
  • 0

#6 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 04 February 2009 - 11:52 PM

Although your SLR may adequately take film not loaded into a canister, it still will only take a limited number of feet. Plus all still film processors still need to develop it from a canister.

As others have said, you would need to load the film into a cassette, which is normaly done with a bulk loader which you can get from someone like BH or Freestyle. they also sell empty cassettes

The BIG GOTCHA is that Movie film cannot be processed by the folks who handle still film. Movie film has a black backing which is removed in the ECN-2 Process. if that gets into a still (C-41) processor, it will RUIN all the chemicals, and probaly damage everone elses film that is being processed at the time.

Only place I know that used to do movie film as stills that is still arround is Dale Labs.

B&W film is not a problem, but of course must be proceed as black and white.
  • 0

#7 Serge Teulon

Serge Teulon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London UK

Posted 05 February 2009 - 06:49 AM

I phoned Kodak a couple of years ago and they sent me some still cans with cine stock in them.

For one reason or another they sat in my fridge for 2 years and still worked fine for testing.
As mentioned find out how much it costs locally as here in London I was getting quoted £50 per 24 exposures!! Needless to say it went on the back of a shoot.... :ph34r:


Jonathan,

Here in the UK you can only buy industrial sized barrels of the chemicals needed to do an ECN2 process......can you get it in small quantities in the US?
  • 0

#8 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 05 February 2009 - 07:23 AM

Thanks everyone.

Serge, did you get the impression that Kodak keep those in stock here? Or was that a one off?I know that supplying them on request used to be common in the US. But if they did, I wouldn't be surprised if they'd discontinued it by now...

Ira, I'm interested in shooting some tests to see whether it's possible to do some level of HDR processing with moving film. I've posted another thread on it here. Unfortunately I don't have a 35mm movie camera, nor free access to a DI to play with, so I'd thought I'd dust off my old Pentax and see what I could achieve with some time-lapse (and with some rapid swapping out of rolls!). Actually a stills photographer friend has a camera that loads 35mm and shoots the images in moving image format (sideways) thus getting 72 frames from a roll, so I'll have a look at that.

But, from what you guys say, it looks like getting hold of, and then processing movie film in small cans is going to be a little difficult. So...

If I did this with regular C41 stills film - does anyone know how well this compares in performance, particularly latitude, with movie film stock? Would a test on that be a valid starting point? Or a waste of time? :(
  • 0

#9 Ian Cooper

Ian Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Other
  • England

Posted 05 February 2009 - 07:35 AM

Thanks everyone.

Serge, did you get the impression that Kodak keep those in stock here? Or was that a one off?I know that supplying them on request used to be common in the US. But if they did, I wouldn't be surprised if they'd discontinued it by now...

Ira, I'm interested in shooting some tests to see whether it's possible to do some level of HDR processing with moving film. I've posted another thread on it here. Unfortunately I don't have a 35mm movie camera, nor free access to a DI to play with, so I'd thought I'd dust off my old Pentax and see what I could achieve with some time-lapse (and with some rapid swapping out of rolls!). Actually a stills photographer friend has a camera that loads 35mm and shoots the images in moving image format (sideways) thus getting 72 frames from a roll, so I'll have a look at that.

But, from what you guys say, it looks like getting hold of, and then processing movie film in small cans is going to be a little difficult. So...

If I did this with regular C41 stills film - does anyone know how well this compares in performance, particularly latitude, with movie film stock? Would a test on that be a valid starting point? Or a waste of time? :(



Ah, if that's what you're after then just use normal C41 film. If you choose something like Kodak Porta 160NC then that has huge latitude (but low colour saturation) as it is designed as a pro. portrait film (catch detail in both the Bride's white frock and the groom's black suit!).
  • 0

#10 Ian Cooper

Ian Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Other
  • England

Posted 05 February 2009 - 07:44 AM

Ah, if that's what you're after then just use normal C41 film. If you choose something like Kodak Porta 160NC then that has huge latitude (but low colour saturation) as it is designed as a pro. portrait film (catch detail in both the Bride's white frock and the groom's black suit!).


...Your down side might be getting a lab to scan the same film two or three times giving emphasis to first the shadows, then the normal 'mid' range, finally the highlights. You could do with finding a tame local lab who you can talk to and explain what you want to do. Alternatively, you're back to scanning the film yourself to extract as much info as possible off the negative! (time consuming)
  • 0

#11 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 05 February 2009 - 07:54 AM

Thanks. Any idea how that compares with cine film?

I guess I should do a search for the data sheets... :huh:
  • 0

#12 Ian Cooper

Ian Cooper
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 469 posts
  • Other
  • England

Posted 05 February 2009 - 08:28 AM

Thanks. Any idea how that compares with cine film?

I guess I should do a search for the data sheets... :huh:


'fraid I don't, but I do know first hand that the Portra range is very forgiving: Photos can be a two or three stops over exposed and still get reasonable prints from them. Scanning the film yourself is the easiest way to reach into the depths of density on the neg - but not all that practical if you're building a timelapse! ;)

It'd probably be worth your while just testing the film on a couple of 'still' subjects to see if you can achieve what you're after, before then burning through a pile of it on a timelapse... 10 seconds screen time will be 250 frames = x7 36 exposure films @ £3.86/roll = £27.02 of film.... that's almost the price of 100ft of 16mm movie stock!
  • 0

#13 Serge Teulon

Serge Teulon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London UK

Posted 05 February 2009 - 09:33 AM

Serge, did you get the impression that Kodak keep those in stock here?



They arrived in the post 3 days after my request. So, I would presume that the rolls came from here.

I must also say that I think you are wasting time and money by trying to do a comparison test with c-41 film stock........

Edited by Serge Teulon, 05 February 2009 - 09:35 AM.

  • 0

#14 Karel Bata

Karel Bata
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts
  • Director
  • London - a rather posh bit

Posted 05 February 2009 - 10:23 AM

Gut feeling? Or you know from experience that they just behave too differently for a comparison to be meaningful?

I know that with a stills camera loaded with a stock which has similar characteristics (particularly latitude) to 5212 all it will be is a 'proof of concept'. But if that works I can take it a step further using a 35mm Mitchell. But if it doesn't, that's the end of it.

I've looked at the Kodak data sheets, but they don't tell me much. :(

Edited by Karel Bata, 05 February 2009 - 10:24 AM.

  • 0

#15 Serge Teulon

Serge Teulon
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 757 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London UK

Posted 05 February 2009 - 12:21 PM

Karel, If I want to use, lets say, kodak 5217 to shoot a film, I won't and never would go out to snappy snaps and get a 200T asa kodak C-41 roll to test.

No matter how close some boffin would tell me that in the curves they match, it's just too much of a risk for me to take.
You can if you want to but surely the costs involved in shooting, whatever you are shooting, should not be compromised.

If you do that, you might shoot digital stills, account for 1/3 of your exposure and then add the characteristics of the film you intend to use, in photoshop.

If i want to eat meat, I'll eat meat and not quorn!
  • 0

#16 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 05 February 2009 - 02:44 PM

If you find a place to process it, you can send it to a good local professional lab for scanning. When you're there, talk directly to the person who will be scanning and ask them to balance the greycard in the frames to 127-127-127, middle grey in 0-255 RGB parlance. Leave the negative uncut. As long as you don't want massive files, the cost should be fairly reasonable.

Edited by Chris Keth, 05 February 2009 - 02:45 PM.

  • 0


Broadcast Solutions Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Metropolis Post

Opal

The Slider

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Opal

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks