Quick question about ASA

Kell

Kell

Messages
4,348
Name
Kell
Edit My Images
Yes
Long story short.

I have Ricoh FF3 which I inherited.

I was going to run a roll of CineStill 800T through it.

However.

The camera can’t be set to expose for 800.

The two nearest options are 400 or 1000.

As I’ve never pushed film before, what would be the recommendation?

I would be using it mostly indoors - restaurants etc. while I’m away.

Also, whichever way I go with the film, what do I say to the developers about it afterwards to ensure they develop it correctly?

Thanks in advance.
 
Push it to 1000. Tell your developer that's what you have done and it shouldn't be a problem. As I understand it the only effect will be a slight increase in contrast, which is not necessarily a bad thing. A grown up will be along to advise you shortly. :D
 
Personally I would just take the view that 1000 was really close to 800 and not worry about it. Negative film generally has a huge latitude (not that I have ever used that particular one).
 
The difference between 800 and 1000 is less than the difference you may find with marked versus actual shutter speeds. I usually fear underexposure more than overexposure for negative films, so I personally would probably go for 400 accepting that using 1000 would actually be closer to the correct exposure.
 
most impractical and in-elegant hack I can think of is -

set to 1000 and use a 0.5 stop nd, that'll get you to 750 if my maths ain't wonky, which it might....lol

:)
 
joxby said:
most impractical and in-elegant hack I can think of is -

set to 1000 and use a 0.5 stop nd, that'll get you to 750 if my maths ain't wonky, which it might....lol

:)
Click to expand...

Your maths may or may not be wonky, but there isn’t really an option to add filters as it’s a Point-and-shoot.

Thanks for the answers. I think I might go with 1000 and just add a note when it gets developed.
 
You might find this interesting

www.talkphotography.co.uk

Lessons learned with Cinestill 800t

I had a couple of rolls of Cinestill 800t that I bought from here back in Nov 2020 hoping to use in East Asia. The rolls expired in Nov 2020, but I kept them in the freezer (trips to Asia kept getting postponed with lockdowns, plus life stuff etc.). I eventually made it out this year, and was a...
www.talkphotography.co.uk www.talkphotography.co.uk
 
From the Cinestill website:

https://cinestillfilm.com/pages/frequently-asked-questions#q12

Q: How do I rate CineStill 800Tungsten?
A: This film has LATITUDE! The ISO that one chooses to rate this film is dependent on what the permissible light available is. If you overexpose it (100 or 200) it will still retain highlight detail and fine grain. If you underexpose (up to 2000) you will still retain most shadow detail. So long as the shadow detail is preserved, the negative may be scanned to retain the good color and dynamics. Remember, grain separation becomes more severe with less exposure, and less prevalent/smoother the more exposure a color negative film receives (due to overlapping of T-grain technology and the tonal blending of the dye cloud).


From our tests and user feedback, CineStill 800T best rated at EI (Exposure Index) 800 in tungsten light when processed in standard C-41 chemistry. Though the original stock (Kodak 500T 5219) is recommended to be rated at EI 500 in tungsten light, many cinematographers and filmmakers regularly rate this film at 1000 speed with no push, due to this film's amazing shadow latitude, but the ideal ISO/EI to rate this film at will always be somewhere between 400 and 800 without push processing. CineStill 800T is designed C-41 processing though, which causes a slight push in development, resulting in a more dense negative so we have found 800 to be right in the middle of the ideal Exposure Index range.
Click to expand...
:)

Personally, I think I'd shoot it at 400asa and develop it normally (no push).
 
Last edited:
I'd treat the first roll as an experiment and shoot a series of shots at both settings either side of the "correct" one to see which gives the result you prefer.

My guess is that the differences between the shots will be hard to see in prints, especially to a "normal" (rather than a photographer!) viewer.
 
StephenM said:
The difference between 800 and 1000 is less than the difference you may find with marked versus actual shutter speeds. I usually fear underexposure more than overexposure for negative films, so I personally would probably go for 400 accepting that using 1000 would actually be closer to the correct exposure.
Click to expand...
I'd do the same if I'm honest.
 
Kell said:
I sent an email to FilmDev before I send my rolls off. They said even though I shot it at 400, it will be fine to process as normal.

So that's what I'll end up doing.
Click to expand...

I think that's how it works. A slower development time brings out the shadows because there is less information there as a result of being shot quicker. Mind you, I could be talking b*****ks. I often do. :oops: :$:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top