Eastman Double - X? What can it bring to the table?
After reading the post http://www.apug.org/forums/viewpost.php?p=1364621 by Mustafa, I have to admit, I am a tad bit curious about Eastman 5222 Double-X 35mm film.
What I really would like to know is exactly what does it bring to the table? If I use this, will all my shots look like they come from Schindler's List? Who uses it here and is it worth the hassle obtaining and shooting through the relatively long lengths of the film?
It has an old timey look and feel too it. The tones are quite nice shot at 100-200 speed. I personally like it best in rodinal and d76. I do not like the look of it pushed, even slightly to 400, but there are many who shoot it at this speed.
For a student photographer, you just cannot beat the price if you bulk load plus the 30% off kodak educational discount if you are in the USA (must be student and fax order with school purchasing order).
Its good stuff, a bit of a pain with the long rolls, but it is unique because of this, and the history behind it aswell. Also since its cine film, I have no worries cranking it through a trigger winder, or powerful motordrive. It also dries flat.
I have been working through about 1000ft of this myself. I have given away a number of these rolls to friends for them to try. Maybe if you can find someone where you are, you can shoot a roll and see if your up to taking that path. 400ft = ~80 rolls, which is very manageable and not that much actually. 1000ft = ~200 rolls which will keep you in stock for a bit.
I am probably going to take a break from it for awhile, and switch back to my last rolls of agfapan 250, which is just an awesome cine film stock. but after my last 30 rolls i have left, that will be the end of that. =[
Also there is a very long and continually running thread on it on the rff.
Cheers for that - I have to admit that from the few examples I have seen on the net, it does have a certain feel and look to it.
Any Aussies shooting it? I'd be curious to try out a roll.
I was given five rolls of this and I have just used the last roll. It has taken all five rolls to work out the development. Using the times stated on the Project Double X website for Microphen, I got very dense negatives initially when using it at EI 400.
I have since reduced the development time until I got it how I liked it. I am now considering if I should buy a bulk roll. unfortunately, I gave away my film loader last year!
I too am curious about this film. Can't say I am wild about it from the examples I have seen elsewhere. Anyone have any shots with XX to post here? [EI and dev info would be useful]
Last edited by mhanc; 07-10-2012 at 05:52 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Hello again and I am happy one of my posts is useful.
Movie films ... What can I say more , do you think a director invests 250 million dollars to a movie leaves his movie to a chance ? Movie films might be most heavily researched films on earth. If it is good for Cinema , it must be good for your photography , thats basic.
There are too many old timers used these films and post their positive opinions somewhere lost in the 1 million posts.
My neighbor is a military aerial photographer and he had been used movie films many years ago. He says , sometimes, some indian attacking the white guys shots comes off from the developer
If you are lucky , you can learn from a couple indian moves , we call it kamasutra , google it
6 dollar for tri x , 7 dollar for cigarette or you select the best tobacco and buy it from some folks and your roll cost 50 cent. Same happens at film business.
Intelligent people makes intelligent moves and protects their families money.
Eastman Double-X Examples
Double-X is a cinema negative film that is expected to be printed through several generations before it goes to the final theater print. It has lower inherent contrast than still films to offset the higher contrast of the release print positive film as well as the contrast gained by each printing generation. In my experience, it captures more shadow detail with exceptional mid-tones. It is an older style film that has a different grain appearance when compared with modern films like NeoPan 400, Tri-X, or HP-5.
Most of the time I rate it at EI 250 and use Microdol 1+1 or 1+3. It also produces fine results at EI 400 in Ilford DD-X.
Here are some examples:
EI 250 in Microdol 1+1
EI 400 in Ilford DD-X 1+4
EI 250 in Microdol 1+1
EI 250 in Microdol 1+3
EI 250 in Microdol 1+1
All the images in the Naples gallery are Double-X in Microdol
All the B&W images in the Pompei gallery are Double-X in Microdol 1+1
Microdol 1+1 softens the grain and makes for better scans with my equipment. DD-X provides a bit more speed, but the grain becomes more prominent.
Double-X is may favorite general-purpose film. It captures a beautiful grey scale and retains detail in both the shadows and highlights, even with scenes that contain a wide brightness range.
Thank you sharing very critical information , this will work for all others and myself.
First picture is the greatest one , I prefer the microdol 1+1. First picture tones have excellent dark grey space and is the best . What was your lens for that picture ?
Redwoods , best tone wood for bass guitars with poplar and mahagony. For last 30 years , they banned for use these old thick diameter redwoods in US and Fender is growing his own woods and cut when they are younger. I saw they assemble a Fender Mexico Jazz Bass body out of 8 thin sections of that wood , not solid. Thats why solid ones are super expensive.
I've shot a little XX and agree that it is a low contrast film. It renders mid tones nicely, though
EI 250, developed in HC110 1:31 for 6:00 at 68F.
Shot at EI 250, developed in Rodinal 1:50 for 10-11 minutes or so:
In hindsight, I over developed. I'd go for around 9 minutes if I was doing it again.