Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,955   Posts: 1,522,808   Online: 979
      
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Chattanooga TN
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    496
    Images
    11

    Pushing Kodak Vision 2 500T

    I have a 1,000ft roll of Kodak Vision 2 500T film that is in good condition. I am experienced in developing ECN-2 film with great results, but I have never pushed or pulled it.

    I would like to experiment with this film by pushing it 1, 2, and 3 stops. Can anyone tell me how much I need to alter the development time by in each case? The normal development time is 3 min at 106 deg F. I'm guessing about 8 percent per stop, but that is just a guess.

    I've seen incredible results with Vision 3 500T pushed to 3200ASA, and I want to see what the Vision 2 stock can do. In addition, an up-and-coming NYC photographer is coming to my daughter's wedding in June; he specializes in film and grainy, artistic shots, and I would love to offer him a camera loaded with this stuff with a big push if it would suit his genre.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    You might get better responses on cinematography.com (if doing ECN-2). Try the film sub forum.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Chattanooga TN
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    496
    Images
    11
    Thanks for the tip - I'll give it a try. But I am also hopeful for some help here, there have been some great ECN-2 posts here in the past.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    983
    Images
    1
    Kodak says 3:40 and 4:30 for 1 and 2 stop push.

    http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Suppo...ation/push.htm

    Duncan

  5. #5
    holmburgers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Rochester NY (native KS)
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,412
    Images
    2
    Would love to see results if you get around to doing it and feel like sharing. I've shot 500T but still haven't seen the results... the lab I sent to is taking their "sweet time", to say the least... :-/

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    983
    Images
    1
    I have a couple of thousand feet of 800T if someone really wants to get extreme :-)

    I've basically been collecting film stock types faster than I can shoot test rolls and want to send them all off to Double Exposure Ltd at once, so I still have no results yet either... If the weather warms up a bit maybe I can shoot a few more rolls and then just do it.

    Duncan

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Chattanooga TN
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    496
    Images
    11
    Thanks Duncan. I'll post results here (if they are worth posting) but it will take me a while to actually do the test. I also have some 800T, I took some natural light test shots one evening at home. It didn't scan too well - the scans were grainy, but until I do an analog print I just can't tell if the film is really as grainy as it looks on the scan. If I did it right, a sample should be attached to this e-mail. This was shot at 800 speed, no push or pull.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Techno Girl.jpg 
Views:	63 
Size:	157.5 KB 
ID:	45780
    Last edited by newcan1; 02-06-2012 at 12:53 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Chattanooga TN
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    496
    Images
    11
    And by the way, the Kodak literature you linked to states, somewhat disappointingly, that "push 2" only gains 1/2 a stop in speed. So there really isn't a possibility to push it two or three stops. I saw an article somewhere by a guy who pushed Vision 3 500T by 3 stops or at least to 3200 ASA. I guess you just end up eating into the exposure latitude of the film and get a thinner negative, but maybe still usable.

    I'm going to take my Vision 2 500T and shoot it at 3200, develop with "push 2" and see what comes out.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Mundelein, IL
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    983
    Images
    1
    Yeah, that article, like most discussions of cinematic film exposures, used a lot of ambiguous weasel words. Basically it's all just rough guidelines and everyone is expected to work out their exact specs for themselves. 'Cause it's not just how the negative was exposed, it's also how the release print is timed, and there's a whole ton of latitude between those two, and color correction that comes along with it.

    That scan looks pretty grainy for 800T, but it may as you say be scanning-artifacts. Also I'm not sure scanning the negative is the right way to go - I think better results would probably be obtained by printing it to release film and scanning that. Everything about ECN-2 negatives is a little whacked compared to C-41, because they are expected to be printed onto release film, and I'm not sure anyone has any scanner presets that take that into account.

    Has anyone tried these folks?

    http://www.ecn-2.com/

    I sent them a message asking for pricing if I supply my own film - all they offer on their website is 5-packs of film with processing included, but I already have piles of film, I just need it processed.

    Duncan

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Chattanooga TN
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    496
    Images
    11
    Rather than print to release film, I will probably just make analog prints of pictures that I really like. Adding 10cc of hydrogen peroxide per liter of print developer seems in my experience to give enough contrast boost to make ECN-2 (lower contrast) film print normally on RA4 paper. It does, however, tend to slightly increase the yellowness of base for on the paper, if there is any base fog. (I learned of this contrast control technique from another thread here on APUG).

    I find that many types of film that were not designed specifically to be scanned, look grainier in a scan than in an analog print. I shot some old expired Ferrania 200 C-41 film, and the scans looked horrid. The analog prints looked quite a bit better. The best films for scanning, I have found, are the Vision 3 ECN-2 films.

    I don't know anything about the outfit you linked to. How about getting yourself a changing bag, a developing tank, and some raw chemicals and doing it yourself?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin