Cinestill 800 FIlm?

Has anyone used Cinestill film? I shoot mainly B&W film but like to use color film on occasion. SO farI like Portra for its muted color tones, and was going to buy some Portra 160- but then saw an article on facebook about Cinestill film... which is, I guess, created from cinematography (or motion pictures) and not originally for photography?

Also, I thought typical films were finer grained in lower ISOs but t looks like Cinestill starts at 800 and goes up to something like 3200.

Can someone explain, please? Why shoot Cinestill VS something else, and why does that brand start at 800 ISO? Aren't typical film stocks finer at lower ISO levels?

Thanks!

Tom

Hey so I've done a little reading and see that the Cinestill 800 is a tungsten balanced film made primarily for low light, indoor shooting but they do (or did) make a daylight film, Cinestill 50D color film... It is available on eBay, I might try it out.

Any commentary or information, experience etc though, would be welcome.

Thanks.

I can tell you that it would be very wise to use a colour correction filter if you're shooting outdoors or with white light. You could be forgiven for thinking that you can correct white balance in a RAW converter or something, but it's not that simple. ;-)

The primary reason for shooting Cinestill is its flexibility and its balance for tungsten light. However, some people like the way it looks without correcting it. IMHO, it is not worth the premium price. The only reason that I would shoot movie film (and I intend to) is the lower cost per roll. What a lot of people do is buy 100' reels or so, and put them into a bulk loader. The problem is that you cannot have this film developed at most photo labs, because of the Remjet backing. The advantage is that each roll is quite cheap, and you'll get a high quality, professional film for that price.

Hi Karim,

Thanks for the reply. I'm shooting medium format, so it does appear that the long rolls aren't available in 120, at least as far as I now from looking about a wee. bit.

Cinestill has had the remote backing removed and is currently optimized for C-41 developing, according to their website- as opposed, to say the Kodak Vision3- which I believe still has that special remote backer applied.

I did more reading and there are numerous comparisons between Cinestill 50D (daylight balanced) and Kodak Portra- seems most folks seem to prefer Portra for most situations, although I found one or two reviews from people who liked Cinestill 50D for portraiture under optimal lighting conditions, perhaps using filters, or perhaps not.

Some folks did end up with a bit of a greenish hue or tint to some of their images- so yeah. Filters, I get it. I liked at a bunch. of Cinestill photos on Lomography's website and this was apparent whether. in portraiture or landscapes- so no, not. ideal... but it did seem to be greatly affected by the lighting conditions.....

I might try some out but I do like Portra quite a bit so will no doubt end up sticking with that fr the most part.....

Thanks for the reply. I'm shooting medium format, so it does appear that the long rolls aren't available in 120, at least as far as I now from looking about a wee. bit.

Cinestill has had the remote backing removed and is currently optimized for C-41 developing, according to their website- as opposed, to say the Kodak Vision3- which I believe still has that special remote backer applied.

Well in that case it certainly makes sense to at least try it, if you're using medium format. You're correct that Cinestill has no Remjet. And 50D may have finer grain than Portra 160 which could be very useful.

I have not shot it myself but coincidentally, in the last 1-2 years i have run into several people that were.

They were all indoors at a few different Parties/Receptions.

I never saw the outcome, but the photographers said they got "Good Results"

Like a lot of things, i suppose you will simply have to try a few rolls yourself.

good luck

Years ago, there were companies selling respooled movie film, such as 5247, and then processing for it.

One of the more popular was Seattle Film Works. I believe that they ignored the tungsten balance problem,

but really, you can't completely fix color balance later.

SFW liked to advertise prints and slides from the same roll, which meant that they made slides from

the negatives.

Some people do it just to do something different, which is fine, and sometimes I

do like doing that. There used to be VPL as the tungsten balanced C41 film.

I am not sure that there is now.