Superia 1600, Portra 800 & Cinestill 800 | High ISO Color Films 

I know you told me not to buy all those expired rolls but I really really want to.

In motion picture, the old trick of making the scene look like it was shot at night, was shooting in daylight with a tungsten balanced film. It was then underexposed when printing from these negatives.

For the vibes got me. I saw that video and was wondering why the hell they were shooting in direct sun.

I loved shooting high speed film....Konica 3200 and Kodak 1000 but Fuji 1600 was my favorite. I remember shooting fireworks handheld with these films and Fuji produced the best images.

The cinestill results may very well be because, at the end of the day, it’s a 500 ISO film: Kodak Vision3 500T. Then cinestill “guesses” that removing the remjet + cross processing the film accounts for that higher ISO value of 800, but let’s just say it’s… arguable

I appreciated the in memorandum. Here’s what you could’ve had, kids. I will shoot that Natura 1600 one day (or night). I remember briefly shooting a Venus 800 from Fuji too. I liked that. Probably shot it in full sun just for the vibes. Great to see you again!

I personally use Cinestill 800T and a flash for concerts and honestly, it's gotta be my favorite stock bar none. Punchy colours, predictable results, and when people use brightly coloured instruments or clothes it looks so fun on negative. The day Cinestill gives us a 1600 ISO film so I can play more with DOF is the day I die happy

3:22 just straight vibes baby 😆

My chooise of High Iso film is Sanatacolor 100 pushed to 800 still giving wonderful colours an being markedly cheaper.

Totally agree regarding just embracing the low ISO options available. I would even say that learning how to shoot 100-200 ISO films has improved my digital shooting as well. Where before I might just crank the ISO to get a shot quickly, I'll either take more time or try to recompose the shot in a way that gets more light in. ISO isn't really a substitute for good light. A shot being "properly" exposed doesn't mean much if the light was ugly to begin with.

The HP5+ pushed pictures look so much better than any of the CineStill 800T pictures. I've used it twice, once in 35 and another in 120 and I hated the results so much that I actually threw away my 35mm negatives. Just shoot black and white in the low light situations and for color shoot in digital like you've stated. Great video. Rest in pieces Fujifilm and Superia 1600, I hardly knew ye.

When the kids were still kids Fuji 800 Press was my go to film for high school & college baseball

it is nice to see your new video, hope things are going well

Considering the relatively recent developments in the digital realm I'd say we are very lucky those 800 ISO films. As someone who took up photography as a kid in the 70s (at a time when fully mechanical manual cameras ruled the world), I discovered my first 400ASA color film probably around or after the late 70s and my first 800ASA film around the late 80s or later. Hell, I remember when HP5 first made it's mark as a push-able 400 (or even 800? B&W film) my photography-nerd friends and I were ecstatic! Life was good and photography was satisfying then, so there is no reason IMO that it shouldn't be now. I agree with your take on this and always appreciate your optimism and passion.

Thanks for not letting life get in the way of you continuing to give us these videos. Every single time I feel like I need to smile, laugh out loud a little and learn your take on film “stuff”, all I need to do is watch one of your RU-vid lessons on how to just accept that film is changing and that we should just “push it to hell and back” if we want our grain gratification. Now I just need to go hunt for more expired Superia Reala 100.. like that’s gonna happen 🙄.

A good review and summary. You do make some great videos here and I liked the end with showing all the dead films! haha

This video just taught me that a 1600 provia existed and now I’m devastated that I won’t be able to try it 😢

An earlier loss for Film is Kodak Kodacolor VR 1000. 1983-86

love the shots you show from superia 800

Nice! Agreed on your thoughts on shooting 800t without a filter. In my case I shot a roll of 800t on a very sunny fall day and exposed it as 400, i liked the results even when I completely failed and didn't expose my shadows so they got crushed on some frames! Keep up the good work!

1600 iso, what is this magical roll of film 😂 I don’t expect 1600 to come back but I hope we get more consumer films options at 400. Fuji xtra 400 disappearing off shelves recently is such a bummer. In the summer it ain’t as big of a deal but I really love having it for that extra stop during the fall here

Super inspiring video for this long weekend 😊👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

One of my favorite channels. I hope all is well.

Natura 1600 and Superia 1600 were the same film. And I really loved it a lot. Good thing about Portra 800 can be exposed at 1600 without pushing it no problem. And for low light/night work I don’t recommend metering for it when shooting handheld. Just shoot wide open at the longest speed you can hand hold. If you do that you can get a decent shot in very low light even with 400 speed film. The issue is that most people don’t know how to meter in low light creating results like the one in your CineStill roll. You can definitely get better exposures in this light with 800T.

Great video man, I love your channel

Me and a friend bought 4 rolls of Natura 1600 the year they stopped selling the, shot one roll and have a roll that's been sitting in the freezer since then. I really was amazed by the color rendition at low light by the film. When I find a worthwhile shoot I'll bust out my last roll

Loved the Konica 3200 film. It was fun to shoot at night.

I shoot a bunch of concerts and for black & white there’s always ilford and Kodak 3200 but for color I just usually go with Vision3 500T and shoot it at 1600 and then push it 1 stop in the tank. The math on that doesn’t really work out but the results with that are fantastic. And because it’s home spooled cinema film it’s dirt cheap compared to the other 800 iso options

I recently shot Cinestill 800T at 1250 and pushed one stop. I hear it’s a 500 iso film so shooting it at 3200 and pushing 2 stop is perhaps over the limit of what it can do

I love the conclusion "it's got to be digital baby!" 😂😂😂

Nice images, even the dark ones. I think for low light, people can spend a little bit on some LED lights and shoot portraits in low light or find well lit and ambient places

You must realize these Kodak made Fuji color negative films are for American market only. At present, no Fuji films (except for the Ilford made AcrosII) are sold in Europe, except for old stocks. Fuji has not announced, contrary to some claims made by some youtubers, it would discontinue making film altogether. Instead, they have apologized for their inability to fulfill the orders. American-made Kodak Gold sold as Fuji 200 was sold very shortly in the beginning of this year in Europe, but has now disappeared from the market. For shooters of slide film, the only option in Europe is repackaged (or repackaging) movie stock of Ektachrome, which is also not widely available. There is the Canadian rolled Flicfilm, which is Ektachrome. Kodak slide film sold by Alaris has all but disappeared from the EU market, and seems to be a US only product at the moment.

E6 color reversal films were *made* to be pushed, unlike C41 color negative films. If Kodak (or Fuji) could bring back a ISO 400 or ISO 1600 color reversal film, I would be so happy because we could finally shoot in low light again and push without concern.

I do think that 1600 ISO slide film would be really fun.

I totally paused all these films at the end just to look up examples on RU-vid and elsewhere 😂😂

Cinestill 800t is not a very versitile film. I think it does best in terms of long exposures but even then gas stations and neon signs have been instagrammed to death. Most high speed films just arent worth the extra couple bucks unless you experience niche scenarios where you do need it.

I'll need to try some of the superia 400 at 1600 or 3200 for the hell of it....

Hi, I've been watching your videos for a while and I got to ask how did you make that intro? It looks so cool just like from the film era from the 70's reminds me of my childhood.

You have the most engaging channel for vintage photography I’ve found on youtube. I’ve watched a lot of your videos and commented on a few. I first learned about photography and film developing at a Boys’ Club in the 1970s. I’ve noticed a couple differences in the way analog photography is promoted, then vs now. At the Boys’ Club they never taught us how to process the negatives, but they did have a printing room, with an enlarger and two different red lights. One was bright enough you could see what you were doing fairly easily, but you could only use it with b&w. The other was of a narrower wavelength, so it was dimmer and less helpful but was all you could safely use when making color prints. I remember learning how to use construction paper or pieces of cardboard to intermittently block the light of the enlarger to certain areas of the print, in order to improve under-developed parts of the image without making other parts look washed out. The serious film hobbyists I knew back then were MUCH more likely to have their own darkroom for printing rather than developing. I don’t remember the strong focus on choice of film stock back then, maybe because there were so many it was hard for an amateur to know them all. I do remember a much stronger focus on what you could do with lenses. When autofocus became common, it took away what most people considered the most daunting barrier to using an SLR instead of a point-and-shoot, and a lot of people bought SLRs, or at least the cheaper bridge cameras, simply because they accommodated filters. No matter what color film stock you use for outdoor shooting in daylight, a polarizing filter will give you clearer and more saturated colors. No matter what b&w stock you choose for outdoor daylight shooting, a yellow filter will always increase contrast and mprove the look of clouds in the sky, which often don’t render at all without a filter. Filters can allow you to use tungsten film in daylight, or daylight film indoors. It was never as good as using the correct film to begin with, but it did give you more flexibility on how to, say, finish a roll of tungsten you used at a dinner party but never finished, and now you want to go to the park and get some pics of the kids playing. You’d lose speed is all. Filters block light, so you’d have to adjust as though you were using slower film than what you were actually using.

Imagine the day when stuff like ultramax becomes this rare…. Probably in a year

4:01 Cobs makes the best bread on planet earth. I know im late, but please god get some of their gourmet buns.

Just vibes baybeeeee

I grew up with ASA 80 Kodacolor-X, which drove me to ASA 160 High Speed Ektachrome or ASA 400+ Tri-X Pan when consumer electronic flash units were weak and might not cover a 35mm lens. I left film photography due to a job change that cut me off from the likes of Kodacolor 400 and Kodachrome 200. By the turn of the century, I could return to film photography, but Digital was the name of the game. So, ISO 1600 and 3200 color negative films were a thing of the past, along with Kodachrome. As for "nothing but shadows" digital movies of today, I say: "Stupid Director, Take The Lens Cap Off!"

Now, this is extremely epic, BUT. WHERE IS THE SUPER 8 CAMERA KODAK? WHERE IS IT?

can you do a review on the new fuji film 35mm film that no one is talking about

I wish these colour film can still have 1600 ISO

My parents just gave me two rolls of expired film they found while cleaning their house. Fujifilm Superia T_MAX 400 and 800, both expired in September 2004. I just finished shooting the 400 speed today, in daylight, metering for shadows at ISO 100. How would you suggest me shooting the 800 speed film? I was using the one stop per decade rule and was planning on shooting it metered at 200 ISO, also exposing for the shadows.

also R.I.P. Agfachrome RS1000

I'm curious if anyone's opinions on CineStill have changed given the recent controversy.

could you do a video about rangefinder cameras

I remember that Natura video, I was team roast his ass on the comment section. 1600iso, daylight, point and shoots, photos of a random LA neighborhood lol

Have you heard of 1600 midnight ?

Every time i hear this I expect to see something in Welsh

I would love to see Natura 1600 and Ektar 1000 come back. sigh..

I still have six rolls of superia Venus 800...

To be fair, I don't think the majority of your 800T photos would do any film stock justice. A shot of a path or street lit only by streetlights isn't ever going to look good unless you do a long exposure. Your dusk photos of the oval look like you exposed for the sky as opposed to the shadows. The shot at 5:58 is the best shot in the entire video IMO. I think a better comparison that I would genuinely enjoy seeing is taking two cameras out and shoot the exact same shots with the different stocks, because you can't really compare a shot like 5:08 with the one at a 4:43. A snow scene will give you way more ambient light and is obviously going to look better than a shot of a cityscape in the middle of the night with no ambient light, or the following portrait at 5:13 with your subjects standing under the light source instead of behind it, so they don't have racoon eyes.

1600 ISO film was not suitable for most of the point & shoot cameras reading DX-codes in the 1980´s and early 1990´s. Those cameras would have exposed any film they could not read the ISO, as ISO 100, which would mean overexposing by 4 stops. 400 and 800 ISO film was most suitable for many cameras meant for the general public, because the lenses were often not the best ones. This is true especially with pocket cameras with zoom lenses. Using 100 ASA film in a camera with a f 4.8-10.4 zoom lens would have its limitations. This means the 1600 ASA color film was never a product with a very large market share. Same was true with films like Ektar 25. By the way, modern Ektar is also only a 25 ISO film in tungsten light. The Cinestill "800 ISO" film is actually an ECN-2 film, with a sensitivity on 500 ISO (Kodak Vision3 500T). Cross processing ECN-2 films in C-41 will produce quite dense negatives, and this may be interpreted by salesmen as about 800 ISO film. Cross processing this film will inevitably lead to problems in color balance. Of course, modern digital post production can correct these failures, but this can be sometimes very hard. In traditional RA-ė printing, it is often impossible to correct this, as there are visible crossovers. It should also be noticed that ECN-č film, even if developed in proper process, is not fully compatible with RA-4 papers. This leaves Portra 800 the only widely available. reliable quality high speed C-41 film in the market. There is also the Lomography 800, but its availability has not been stable. It is probably based on older Kodak emulsions.

I'm pretty certain natura 1600 is superia 1600, just that natura is not the westernized release

I would only add that cinestill being film stock converted for still photography use, has the anti-halation layer removed. So while we all may love the film look of blooming neon and led lights, cinestill has that out-of-control, meaning there's nothing there to prevent the light to scatter around the film surface. I actually don't particularly like the effect myself but in my opinion that film stock makes it almost unbearable to watch. it really makes it look like something went wrong during development

I really like your intro animation..can you please drop a tutorial for that.

Portra* In the video title

Si la pellicule est faite pour la pousser au développement, et que les couleurs soient justes comme dans le film vidéo, sans les inconvénients que l'on sait, vous avez une bonne ambiance, même avec un très faible éclairage, même par temps gris. Un négatif couleur on garde uniquement sa sensibilité inscrite sur le film, sous peine d'avoir des couleurs déformées. Avec la diapositive, on peut pousser au développement sans problèmes ( exclure E k t a c h r o m e 64 jusqu'à 8oo i s o où vous avez une dominante sur votre photo. Si vous poussez avec une pellicule lente,les couleurs vont devenir plus ternes,mais avec un film rapide,les couleurs vont êtres plus saturées,avec le grain et le contraste qui vient.

Why no Lomo 800?

Kodak should produce a Portra 1600 for us wedding photographers

Damn Fuji cancels a lot film.

LMAO, when the guy and that other guy shoot natura 1600

I hear superia 400 is also all done :( no more superia film

Lulz the way you mentioned those "Two Other Guys" sounded so jelly

There aren't even 200 iso films in stock, man. And even so- a 4 pack of Colorplus is already pushing 70$ it's crayzayy ..

I've seen al many pictures of 800t that look good but every time i shoot It It kind of looks pretty damm bad

How expired can high ISO film get before its unusable? That Superia 1600 in this video looks good, but it should be about several years expired, right?

Gawd, I hate the way so many low-light movie scenes look these days. Pure mud.

Analog for photography is not correct designation, because as "Digital" is electronic signal, Analog in contrast is electronic signal, too. But why chemical process we name as Analog? Many years before digital era I work with photography and don't know that I work with "analog" photography. It's strange, and non correct!

I disagree. Your CineStill images have way more vibe and art than the the Superia 1600 and Portra 800. I would love to be able to reproduce that digitally

800T needs a 3 stop push for 3200. CineStill even says so themselves. This is because it's actually a 500 film, so it makes sense. It looks a lot better that way, but it ain't no Natura 1600. I sure do miss that film.

Feels unprofessional to speak poorly about other RU-vid channels.

back in 1990 I photographed rock band, Scorpions, in Germany using Kodak Ektapress 1600. I've been out of the film loop but I'm guessing that film is no longer around. Shame. I shoot mostly music in a small club and I could sure use a high speed color negative film. Anyone remember Scotch 640T?