Comments on: Cinestill BwXX Medium Format Film Review

By: philh

philh — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 20:29:26 +0000

It definitely has a very narrow latitude – it isn’t HP5. It is a movie film, designed to be shot with controlled lighting, not wide latitude outdoors situations. As long as you are aware of the limitations, it can be used to advantage. I tend to spot meter to get accurate exposure on my subject, then decide to leave the shadows or highlights to blow out, and it can help to isolate the subject. It’s not bad, just different. If you want wide latitude, retaining detail when shooting outdoors/contrasty scenes, I agree, this is not the film for you.

By: roger1507

roger1507 — Thu, 07 Apr 2022 07:12:45 +0000

I really am hesitant to blow everyone’s bubble with this film, but it seems to have very very limited latitude. There is extreme darkness in the shadows and the highlights are totally blown-out. Also the figures don’t have a crispness or sharpness, maybe that’s caused by the camera’s lens? Although, it might be an inconvenience in using a tripod, burning through a roll having the camera steady on a tripod and using the sweet spot of your lens (f/ 5.6, 8) may give you a better understanding of the good and bad characteristics of the film. But one thing is sure, when looking at the business court picture, to the left the tree has a nice shadow tone, the mid-shadows everywhere are good, but the high intensity of highlights on the tops the the trees are blown-out beyond recognition. It would be HELL to try to print those down to reveal any tone in the leaves. I don’t think it’s possible. On a bright day maybe developing the film with something like Rodinal or another developer using “stand-development; to try to hold down those highlights.I would suggest if you do attempt this developing technique, invert the tank after pouring in the developer, slowly for thirty seconds, tap the tank on the surface to displace any bubbles on the film. After the film is slowly developing for thirty minutes, rotate the tank very slowly twice or three times to prevent bromide drag; which could cause light streaks running down the film. Then leave the tank alone for thirty minutes more to complete development. Of cause rinse the film with water the same temp as the developer temp (20 deg), you don’t need stop bath because the developer is a 1+100 working solution. Fix, and wash to get rid of the fixer out of the film. Maybe after washing the film, put a drop of PHOTO-FLO in tank with water, agitate and let stand for two minutes than pour out and pull the film off the spool and let the film dry. This last step breaks down the water tension, to avoid water spots on the dried film. Good luck!

By: Aidan Bell

Aidan Bell — Fri, 18 Mar 2022 16:17:55 +0000

In reply to philh. Thanks for the words, Phil! I’ve always wanted to try bulk roll shooting, you may have inspired me to finally stop being scared. Seems like loading myself would, ultimately, make the process more rewarding. And, yep, not altering the dev times! The fact that I developed my rolls with Cinestill’s monobath definitely changed what could have been different development times. Their own advice recommendeds only changing the dev time with use or temperature. Now, I use Sprint Standard. Unfortunately, I have not shot Cinestill BwXX AND developed with that; but, I would definitely err on the side of changing time based on the ISO shot at. Although, I can’t see it effecting it much based on the successful results of the monobath. The histogram was delightfully balanced, extremely gritty yet satisfying grain structure, and, my favorite, the impressive details in the shadows.

By: Aidan Bell

Aidan Bell — Fri, 18 Mar 2022 15:28:41 +0000

In reply to eric. Thanks so much, Eric!

By: Sroyon

Sroyon — Tue, 08 Mar 2022 12:41:11 +0000

Nice review, and more importantly nice photos! How did you develop it? Apologies if it’s already mentioned somewhere in the article, I may have missed it…

By: philh

philh — Tue, 08 Mar 2022 11:54:28 +0000

In reply to ftwolf. I think I must have read the same review about a ‘base ISO’ of the film. I would definitely recommend shooting it at 400 and developing it at a 1 stop push. I use Kodak HC-110 at 6’30” for 400 ISO and 5’00” for 200 ISO. Both seem fine, although my negatives shot at 200 ISO definitely seem a little overexposed at times. I get more consistent results at 400 ISO and pushed one stop in dev. Will definitely try 800 ISO too after reading this, but will try pushing two stops in dev I think.