Ektachrome 160G vs. 7240.

[Konton]

Has anyone been using any Ektachrome these days? I want to use it for an indoor night shoot, but I don't know what would be best. I thought 160G would be better because of the higher rating, but I'm not sure. Also, where can it be developed? The 7240 is sent by my local place to Ford for development. But they don't send out 160G. Any idea where it can be sent and for what costs?

[Alex]

My friends used to kid that type-G stands for Grainy!

I think the 7240 is vastly superior.

What is Ford?

-Alex

[Konton]

Yeah. I think I will use the 7240. I meant Forde Lab. Sorry. The one in Seattle. They aparrently develop Ektachrome 7240.

[Nigel]

I don't mind 7240 anymore. I used to hate it but once I shot it with the right filter I thought it held up well. Good Luck

[ekoe]

are you referring to an 812 warm filter, nigel? i picked one up specifically for use with 7240.
one lab i located that processed 160g was Yale. but, they only process it the third wednesday of every month.
160G is general use, right? from what i read, this film is designed for mixed lighting without filtration. and even flourescent lighting.
is 160G still available?

[#Pedro]

I used it without filter and tungsen light (halogen) and did not like the result anyway. The contrast is much to flat, it seems like video picture reproduction. Even if correctly focused, nothing seems to be sharp nor crisp. The color are grey. Overall, a very very bad impression, only for really "emergency" shooting. Cannot be combined with K40 on the same reel, as the caracter is too different. The old 160 ASA film was much better, well it was grainier than the K40 but it was contrasty, colorful and sharp. And the VNF don?t is better in grain than the 160 ASA was.
As there is nomore 160 ASA available, the only choice is the K40 and more lamps.
Pedro

[Konton]

Well there is a girl I know in the bay area that has a bunch of 160G for sale (with and without sound stripe I think). She's been trying to unload them for about six months now, so I thought I could get some for cheap from her. They've been kept cold for the last few years and had an expiration date of 12/1997 because she bought them right before they stopped making it. But processing is an issue.

The main reason I wanted to use 160G was because I'm doing indoor flashbacks in my movie and I wanted to have a different look for the flashback (so weird coloration and is not an issue). I thought the higher speed would be better since we'll be under tungsten lights the entire time and I wasn't sure the 125 ASA rating of 7240 was enough. I thought 160 ASA would be better just to be safe. I'll have to call Yale and see how much they change for development! But from the response I have heard so far I'm still not sure which is better.

[#Pedro]

I?m shure that the 160 film is better. If it was stored cold, there will be no problem with the colors. Otherwise, the colors tend to go a little bit warmer.
Here in Germany I wouldn?t have any problems developing the film. Here are at least two labs, who develop anything, Andec in Berlin and Kahl Media.
Pedro

[Konton]

I guess Yale is it in the United States. They told me "we can process E160G only if it's labeled "PROCESS EM-26" and we only process it on the last Wednesday of every month @ $12 each roll." It's the only reasonable price I have seen to process E160. I'll let you all know how much she sells it for.

[Nigel]

I have shot the 7240 with an 85B outside and thought it was decent. I was shooting some of the Wildfires that were devastating the Western USA last summer. I have never shot it under tungsten but I could see where Pedro would get his concerns. I would have rather shot K40 and to tell you the truth I haven't had any 7240 since last summer. But, I will use it if need be or the light calls for it.