syd Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 Well, I know there has been a bit of interest from others about the new GX films and I have just got some back in 35mm. The subjects were some grey steps under overcast lighting and the rest were of waterfalls in mixed sunny lighting. On first observations with a low-grade home made light box I can say without a doubt, outstanding. I had heard from some that this film might be more of an 80 than 100 so I had the lab push it a third to see whats up. It didn't seem that rating it 100 was off base and I feel that this film will be a 100 rate for me in future. As to the grain, I couldn't detect any at all, except maybe where the white cotton waterfalls might have been. So this might say something about the whites but I feel that this was more to do with the blurring of the water than anything else at this point. The bias is definately warm as I noticed a shot that included sky with a polariser there was a slightly noticeable magenta cast to the clouds. I only shot one image that had full blown sky and this is what I found based on one image, so at this point the jury is out on that one. I would have thought that white water would have been treated the same way as white clouds, and this wasn't the case with the waterfalls. The film is sharp, beautifully so, and even the lab guy commented on it. It was the first roll he had run of the stuff and the first I had shot so we were both curious to see what was what. Everything else in the palette of this film is right on as far as I can see, the greens are gorgeous and the browns are nutty. From what I call tell this film is a neutral film with a warm bias, extremely sharp with fine grain. The whites are clean as stated in the specs and I just bought three bricks of the stuff in 120. Time for some more testing, but I am very happy with the look of this film overall at this early stage. I don't have any scans just yet but I'll post back at this thread when I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted March 29, 2003 Author Share Posted March 29, 2003 Something I forgot to add, as I have been going over the images again, is that the shadow detail of this film is superb, way better than VS in that dpt. The same subjects with VS would be all but lost in blocked up blacks. The more I study the trannies the more I am impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_levine Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 >>>>I had the lab push it a third <<<<< HUH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted March 29, 2003 Author Share Posted March 29, 2003 *Doh* Quite right Steven, remind me to type these things *not* before bed time. I should have said pulled the film by a 1/3... Zzzzzzzzz... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cg Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 If you rated the film at ISO 80 then you would process it Normal. If you rated it at 100 then you would have processed it +1/3? I usually rate the old E100S at 80. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_levine Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 Thank you hiflex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted March 29, 2003 Author Share Posted March 29, 2003 No, I rated it at 100 but got the lab to pull it a third of a stop, I felt vindicated when I got my results back and feel this to be a true 100 not an 80, is that better? Thankyou Steve and Hiflex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted March 29, 2003 Author Share Posted March 29, 2003 Geez, One slip of the tongue and people think it's time to run you through Photo 101 again. I usually rate Velvia 40 and the lab runs it straight, I usually rate all other E100's at their standard rating and have always been happy with that. I have pushed 50 to 100 and didn't mind the results so much but won't make a habit of it. Now we have established I might know my ar*e from my elbow, Steve, would you like to discuss the film? *Yawn* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan_bundick Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 Simon, I am very interested in finding out how you would compair the color rendition of E100GX to E100SW or E100S. I use 100S extensively and am thinking about making a large order while supplies last if Kodak has messed around with the color palet a great deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_levine Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 I have never heard of a lab that can prolong or shorten processing times in less than whole F stop increments?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_hughes4 Posted March 29, 2003 Share Posted March 29, 2003 I've never heard of one that couldn't.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted March 29, 2003 Author Share Posted March 29, 2003 Cheers Jonathan! "I am very interested in finding out how you would compair the color rendition of E100GX to E100SW or E100S." I'll certainly do so after I shoot some 120, I shot 100S in 120 mostly and although it might sound strange I would prefer to compare 120 to 120 rather than 120 to 35mm. I have two rolls of S in the fridge, so what I might do is try and shoot the same subjects and see what happens. Problem right now is that I bought bricks of GX and not G. From what I have been led to believe so far, and what I have observed, you are getting the same films in G-S and GX-SW only sharper, finer grain, brighter whites and a smoother tonal range. Looking at what I shot so far it's just like the specs for the film have been reported. I don't think you'd be dissapointed, better still buy a roll and shoot your usual subjects, maybe something you've shot with S before and compare. I only say this because my eye for colour may well be different to your own. Best, Simon ------------------ Steve, oh dear "I have never heard of a lab that can prolong or shorten processing times in less than whole F stop increments??" Then you need to get out more... ------------------- Ken, "I've never heard of one that couldn't...." Thankyou! Regards, Simon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syd Posted March 31, 2003 Author Share Posted March 31, 2003 Ok I just shot some 120-GX today in similar circumstances to the 35mm so we shall see in a couple of days what the score is. I nearly broke my neck, by the way, sliding down the face of a waterfall trying to get to the bottom, missing going straight off the edge into the pool below. I had the whole Rb kit on my back plus tripod and my shoes might as well have been made of ice for all the grip they gave me. I wound up sliding right to the edge just before the whole shebang went off into the water below. I got 4 shots out of this location before I had to scale back up the face of the waterfall with everything on my back again. Never has one man dug his fingers so hard into insignificant nooks in slimy rocks. The other 6 shots were taken in far friendlier and less treacherous surrounds. While I am at it, whats the most dangerous position you have put yourself in, in order to get a photograph, and did it turn out/was it worth it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gary voth Posted April 1, 2003 Share Posted April 1, 2003 For what it's worth, I shot a test roll of E100G last week in 35mm and am about to drop off another roll at the lab today. Initial results are *very* encouraging. Beautiful tonalities, almost no grain. Lovely skin tones. Given the wholesale shift to digital already underway, I wish we'd had this film years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now