>>2802598
>he fell for the memestill meme

ive found it too ugly grained. i think portra 400 with good color toning (highlights to cyan, so you get it to be "T") might be a better bet.

>>2802606
Do you have any stills you can share showing off the grain?

>>2802828
Looks like a sony jpeg

>>2802598
>I'm doing a photoshoot inspired by a film

Tell us more.

It's on the FAQ page, OP

http://cinestillfilm.com/pages/frequently-asked-questions

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 recomended 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.

>>2802910
Carol and the associated influences (Leiter, Bubley, Orkin) is the main influence of the piece since the photoshoot goal thematically is melancholy so we're infusing a 50s aesthetic that is less Hollywood and more life-like in the sense that the time period was full of suppressed feelings and impulses. Visually I felt shooting on film was the way to go and using actual 500T stock is appropriate considering Lachman used it on the film. I'm a bit bummed out that Cinestill's grain is far from stellar as it doesn't really look great printed on a magazine to begin with

>>2804637
>more life-like in the sense that the time period was full of suppressed feelings and impulses

wow just wow.

use 50D.

>>2804637
Are you matching the light, the set, the wardrobe, and the styling? Because using cine film isn't going to look anything like the source unless you are doing all of that much more important stuff first. Just throwing that out there.

>>2804668
>>2804678
It's a studio environment for half of the shoot and exterior for the other half. Despite bring up life-life it's still stylized in the sense that Carol's grain structure was very defined to create that barrier between subject and spectator so I'm staying clear of super fine grain also considering lighting that indoors would be a nightmare.

And yeah I'm matching it, I've done my research into building a consistent color palette with wardrobe, set design. The film won't go unedited but I'm still on the fence with the super pronounced grain. In the video world that works but I'm concerned how it'll print. I've been considering the Portra 800 off what the first poster suggested. Will post results when it's all said and done regardless!

>>2804668
I hope I didn't sound too pretentious haha

>>2804706
>I've been considering the Portra 800 off what the first poster suggested

first poster is absolutely right you know?

t. first poster.

>>2804717
I wanted more green in my image anyway so that's a plus. Will shoot tests regardless