First go with Cinestil 50D

tikkathreebarrel

tikkathreebarrel

Messages
2,088
Edit My Images
Yes
I don't home develop; I'd rather pay someone with experience and concentrate on trying to get it right through the lens and into the camera! We try, we try.
I'm afraid that post-covid we seem not to travel as far as we used to so more often my photos seem to feature the same local haunts.
Camera is a FED4 with a Jupiter 8 lens. My first experience of Cinestil 50D: I need to think about things before using my second roll.
003-88445.JPG
0010-2e6ef.JPG
0023-66a0f.JPG

009-f316f.JPG
 
It's years since I used film but these look good to me. Well done, and a nice looking camera too :D
 
woof woof said:
It's years since I used film but these look good to me. Well done, and a nice looking camera too :D
Click to expand...
Thank you sir. I'm uneasy about the brightness of the yellow tractory parts in the 4th photo and to a lesser degree the fringing in the 2nd one.
 
I’m working my way through bulk rolls of both Kodak Vision 50d and Vision 250d - the original from which Cinestiil derive their versions after removing the remjet layer. I find 50d to show very fine detail and effectively grain free. 250d shows hardly any more grain.
I know that the version geared towards tungsten lighting - Cinestill 800t - shows fringing around highlights (such as street lights) because of the lack of a remjet layer. I wonder if the daylight variants have the same issue, leading to the fringing you refer to?
The bright yellow could easily be dialled down in Lightroom or a similar program.
 
After many years of Darkroom Colour Printing i have given up to 'scan' colour negs and slides and the 'scans' are never 'perfect Colour' -- you have to adjust in Software as Mr Allan above has said. I use the FREE FastStone Image Viewer but also have the Older Discontinued PhotoShop 7
 
Nice photos but I do have to wonder without sounding rude, Why on earth take photos with a film camera only to have them digitised to put on the interweb?. Makes no sense to me so hopefully someone can explain, me being a bit thick. Surely it is easier just to use a digital camera
 
Last edited:
YES -- much 'EASIER' but how are we all going to use up our FILM STOCKS and play with our Beloved FILM Cameras ? Ha Ha !
 
realspeed said:
Nice photos but I do have to wonder without sounding rude, Why on earth take photos with a film camera only to have them digitised to put on the interweb?. Makes no sense to me so hopefully someone can explain, me being a bit thick. Surely it is easier just to use a digital camera
Click to expand...
That isn't the point. You get the film look, digitised or not. That's what people like. You just have the added advantage of being able to manipulate a TIFF file. It's not just so that you can stick them on the internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top