8mm Forum: E64 result, a review...

This is topic E64 result, a review... in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=003911

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 05, 2008, 10:55 PM:

Hi all,

This is a review from an amateur of amateur in 8mm shooting (this is the reason I don't want to post it in filmshooting forum).

I have just received my first 2 carts Ektachrome 64 processed by Dwayne (Kansas, USA). The result I have is:

1. Color tends to blueish in daylight shoot
2. Very much grainer compared to K40.

For no. 1, I thought the camera into indoor (filter off) set-up. But when I checked the camera I used, they were switched on outdoor set-up. So, how come the colors become so blueish during strong daylight?

So, do I need to compensate it with another filter?

For no. 2, the picture is really rubbish. Everything with long-shot was seen blurry due to the grains. I couldn't almost recognize any face that was shot from distance.

Why, K40 look better in this side. K40 is not that grain.

And finally, how come then E64 is considered as a professional stocks if the result like this.

People say the 8mm is better (in terms of lines/resolution) compared to DVD, but if the result is grainy like this..... hmmmmm.... garbage in garbage out. If this is the nature of E64, I think I have to say good bye in shooting 8mm.
[Frown]

Your view please.

Posted by Joerg Polzfusz (Member # 602) on August 06, 2008, 03:49 AM:

Hi,

1. Kodak recommends a Wratten 85B for all versions of the Ektachrome 64T except for the Super8-version. The 85B is a little bit warmer than the 85 used in Super8-cameras.
2. The first versions of the e64t have been grainer than nearly all other films. Now that the labs have more experience with e6-prcessing, the film is still grainer than the K40, but last reports on filmshooting.com have sounded more like "it's now close to the K40".

I haven't projected my first e64t (processed by Andec) yet, as it only arrived yesterday...

Jörg

Posted by Simon McConway (Member # 219) on August 06, 2008, 03:58 AM:

Yes, the earlier cartridges were grainier, but the last few I've shot have been fine. I use a Canon 1014 which I find adds less grain than lower-end cameras. I also tried different processors; Andec had less grain than Dwaynes, but in recent days the two companies are pretty much alike in processing quality.

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on August 06, 2008, 04:28 AM:

Winbert, I love the 64T, great colour and good resolution; in many ways it is similar to the old K40.

What camera are you using? A good camera will give good results if it is used correctly. I use a Canon 814 XLS. In fact I shot a sound K40 yesterday kept in my fridge since 1997.

I still have some other sound cartridges, but they are dated back in the late 1980's and even though refrigerated will show some fade.

David

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 06, 2008, 04:36 AM:

Joerg,

quote:
1. Kodak recommends a Wratten 85B for all versions of the Ektachrome 64T except for the Super8-version. The 85B is a little bit warmer than the 85 used in Super8-cameras.

Can you translate this into laymen' words, as I don't really understand all terms. Simple question, do I need to use the filter during daylight shooting with E64?

Second question, can I shoot E64 to get the outdoor scenery during dusk/dawn time without any light?

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on August 06, 2008, 05:08 AM:

Winbert, almost every super 8 camera has a sun symbol and lamp symbol to denote where to have the filter switched to. If you are outside, switch it to sun, indoors with a lamp or light other than outdoor, switch it to the lamp position. This will be perfect in 99% of shooting conditions for the amateur.

You can shoot E64 in many differnt light conditions depending on your camera. If it is an XL model it will capture shots with less light.

David

Posted by Maurice Leakey (Member # 916) on August 06, 2008, 05:59 AM:

Winbert says he was using outdoor set-up mode with filter in place. His question was, did he need a second filter.

Perhaps the built-in filter has jammed and does not switch in when set to daylight mode.

Posted by Knut Nordahl (Member # 518) on August 06, 2008, 07:19 AM:

Winbert, check out this clip. http://vimeo.com/1203434
It shows you what E64t can look like. I think it awesome.

Whenever I use E64T I just pop it in the camera and shoot. It really is no hassel. The film E64T (Tungsten) is meant to be used with artificial light. It's a typical "in-doors"-kind of film. That's why you need the daylight filter when you use it outside.

If your film is blue it sounds like there's been some filming without filter going on. You can check that your daylight-filter enables/disables when you push the filter switch. Also look inside the filmcompartment. There is (normally) a peg that will enable/disable the filter depending on what kind of film cartridge you put inside the compartment. To verify that the filter enebles/disables, look through the lens, Zoom in and push the button slowly until you see it move out of the filmpath.

The filter in your camera is a 85 Wratten filter. Wratten is just a nomenclature. The filter may actually be worn out, and some, depending on the camera, recommend to remove the default filter, and use an external one. Most likely the filter is fine and there is no reason you can not use it. You do not necessarily need any additional filters.

quote:
For no. 2, the picture is really rubbish. Everything with long-shot was seen blurry due to the grains. I couldn't almost recognize any face that was shot from distance.

That should not be.
Just some thing to check: Are you doing the traditional "Zoom in - Focus - Zoom out to frame picture - FILM!"
Is your viewfinder 100% in focus?

Regards,

Posted by Joerg Polzfusz (Member # 602) on August 06, 2008, 01:24 PM:

Hi,

when the film is really, really, much too blue, then you've most likely forgotten to enable the integrated filter or the integrated filter wasn't engaged due to some technical problems with the camera.

When the film is only a little bit too cold, you might want to read this:
The e64t is a Tungsten-balanced film. This means that you'll need a filter when shooting outdoors. So far all Tungsten-balanced films for Super8 (that I know of) required a "Wratten 85"-filter for this. Hence nearly all Super8-cameras come with an integrated "Wratten 85"-filter. (It's named "CCA" in Canon-cameras as "Wratten" is one of Kodak's registered trademarks, other manufacturers normally only call it "filter 85". But it's nevertheless the same filter in all cameras.) This filter is enabled on the camera when switching the filter-knob to "on" or "sun".
So why is the e64t still a little bit too blue when exposed with the integrated "Wratten 85"-filter? Because it requires a "Wratten 85B" according to all non-super8-related docs by Kodak, e.g.:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/e130/e130.jhtml# exposureindexnumbers
And this "Wratten 85B" will result in warmer colours than the "Wratten 85".
So far there's no way (at least that I know of) to fix this other than disabling the integrated filter ("off" or "bulb"-symbol - or by entering the filter-key) and using an external "Wratten 85B"-filter.
But why didn't Kodak said "Wratten 85B" on the Super8-film's package? Good question... maybe because the difference between 85 and 85B isn't that noticeable? Or maybe they've thought that everyone will transfer their films to video (and correct the colours in the video-version)?

Jörg
This is how the "wratten 85" would look like as a square filter:
http://www.samys.com/product_detail.php?item=5640
This is how the "wratten 85B" would look like as a square filter:
http://www.samys.com/product_detail.php?item=5618
As you can see from the technical data on those pages the results differ by 200K. (3200K vs. 3400K)

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 07, 2008, 12:40 AM:

Thanks guys.

Joerg your explanation is vlear to me now. I will try to shoot another one cart that I have.

Knut, regarding blurry picture this is not zoom-in or zoom out issue becuase everything was OK. This is more grainier stock. But since Joerh has mentioned about "first versions of the e64t have been grainer than nearly all other films", I can take this explanation.

The stocks that I have came from UK. And since there was no any production date or expire date, I don't know when it was made (so I posted in this forum asking about the E64 codes, but no one can translate it).

I believe my carts came from the first versions. I just purchased from Dwyane another cart and want to see what is the result next.

Anyway, Joerg or other if you can explain about "the first versions of the e64t have been grainer ...", Q: isn't that Ektachrome has been used many years in 16mm? How come it becomes grainier in 8mm. Don't they just slit the 16mm into two?

thanks,

Posted by Joerg Polzfusz (Member # 602) on August 07, 2008, 03:48 AM:

Hi,

quote:
Joerg or other if you can explain about "the first versions of the e64t have been grainer ...

no I can't, sorry. That's only an observation posted by different users on filmshooting.com who compared their first test-shots of the e64t with the ones shot recently. Nobody seem to know the reason for this: Some think that Kodak has changed something with the emulsion, while others guess that the labs only optimized their processing.

As for "grainer than" 16mm, 35mm, ...: 16mm has got an image-size of approx. 10,3 x 7,5 mm while Super8's image-size is only approx. 5,36 × 4,01 mm. So when you'll project the film onto the same screen, you'll have to enlarge the super8's image nearly twice as much as the 16mm-image. But this also causes the Super8-grain to appear twice as large on the screen.

Jörg

Posted by James E. Stubbs (Member # 817) on August 07, 2008, 07:49 PM:

The first E-64T carts were grainer becase no one new how to process E-6 film properly. I process mine by hand at home in a LOMO tank and got far better results than sending it to a lab. But after the last couple of years the labs have gotten into the swing of the E-6 process for Super 8 and have had great luck making it look fantastic. I like E64T quite a bit. It's a very versitle film and very affordabel to buy and process. I actually project all of my films and they usually look great.
Cheers,

Posted by James N. Savage 3 (Member # 83) on August 09, 2008, 06:49 AM:

I shot some E-64 last summer on my Yashica 60-E and compared it with some old K-40 on the same camera, on the same shot. While I do prefer the K-40, I was very impressed with the E-64. There wasn't a very big difference.

I had it processed at Dwayne's.

James.

Posted by Joerg Polzfusz (Member # 602) on August 12, 2008, 12:12 PM:

Hi,

I finally managed to watch my own e64t-testfilm (shot with a Nizo 4056 in sunlight with the internal filter) on my editor: Even though the colours could have been warmer, the results are good enough not to use an external "85B"-filter (which I already own) instead of the integrated "85"-filter.
In other words: Winbert: When your daylight-shots are too blue, you've either forgotten to enable the internal filter, or I fear that your camera is broken. (To test this: Do you have got another tungsten-balanced film? When you enter the cart, enabling the filter should result in less light reaching the film = should result in the exposure-meter to open the iris a little bit wider. Another test is to look into the empty film-chamber while "filming": The light reaching the film-chamber should be more on the orange side with the filter enabled.)

Jörg
P.S.: When testing the camera without any film, always use the slowest speed (single frame, 18fps or less).

Posted by Winbert Hutahaean (Member # 58) on August 12, 2008, 10:27 PM:

Joerg,

Good news for your result. Re my result, I believe the blueish issues was resulted from over-exposure on the film due to my "auto" set-up. I believe that my camera was designed only to take K40s and during my shooting the camera read E64 as K40.

Therefore, I have dropped another thread re this issue in this post hopefully you can also contribute to anser.

thanks

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2