Remember me...? ;)

[Bill DiPietra]

Hello all! I used to be an active poster here but I've been out of the loop for a while. David, Mitch...glad to see you guys are still here...

 

Anyway, over the past year and a half, I've been busy as an FDNY EMT (great job and I love it.) But I am looking to get back into filmmaking purely as a hobby. Yep...it's an expensive one, I know...but since I can still afford it, I figure what the hell..?

 

I've found a 16mm camera and editing package for less than $5,000 from a reputable retailer and I am considering making the purchase. My intention is to use the equipment for short films.

 

I know that digital is what most people are using these days, but the people who have known me in this forum also know that film has always been my format of choice. My question is this: in your professional opinions, how much longer do you believe Kodak and other film manufacturers will continue to sell 16mm NEGATIVE stocks? I really don't know how far digital has progressed, but I still have a feeling that film is not going anywhere for a while. However, I am asking about 16mm stocks, which, as we all know is not the industry standard.

 

Anyway, glad to be back and I hope everyone is doing well. Please post your opinions on this topic freely.

 

Talk to you all soon.

[David W Scott]

John P. from Kodak would suggest that motion picture film is bigger than ever (more sold last year than ever before.)

 

As to the specific question of 16mm, the best answer comes from ARRI:

 

ARRI's new 416 Super-16 camera

 

I can't imagine how much R&D and tooling costs on a project like this. ARRI must see a healthy lifespan if they made the investment.

 

I think 16mm (and Super 8 for that matter) have actually been reinvigorated by the rise of digital production and post production. Non-linear editing and Digital Intermediates have made all film and video formats essentially interchangeable. Whether you are shooting Fisher Price PXL-Vision or 65mm is now simply a question of esthetics. Any format can be cut with any other format, and be delivered on 35mm, or DVD, or HD, or 2K projection...

Edited July 12, 2006 by David W Scott

[Michael Collier]

I think more and more HD content will further push 16mm (it already is). there are tons of sitcoms, dramas and docs shot on 16, and for most shoots 16mm can be cheaper than renting an HD camera (and even though various HD channels require different things, I think they all will accept super16 scanned in HD.) I think both will work side by side for some time to come. The distant future is harder to predict, but John will attest that film is doing quite well (and because of that, I am finding short ends at amazing deals!)

[David Mullen ASC]

The future of 16mm / Super-16 is secure for at least a decade if not many more, so shoot to your heart's (and wallet's) content... Right now, it's bigger than ever.

[Douglas Hunter]

here here, shooting in super 16 and finishing in HD is pretty common these days on TV. I for one think this is a great way to do projects, provides the best of both worlds and gives a lot of control. My VER rep was teasing me for saying this yesterday but I think its a really great time to be shooting film.

[Michael Most]

I think more and more HD content will further push 16mm (it already is). there are tons of sitcoms, dramas and docs shot on 16,

 

Define "tons."

 

Facts, at least by my count:

Sitcoms: 1 (Scrubs). 2 if you count "Malcolm In The Middle" (cancelled).

Dramas: 4 (Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars, One Tree Hill, and The OC). 6 if you count Monk and The Shield (which air on cable networks).

 

The "rise of 16mm" in network television is highly over-hyped. The reality is that the vast, vast majority of sitcoms are now shot on 24p HD video, and the vast majority of dramas are shot on 35mm film. Anything else is the exception to the rule. Even in cable production, the most common production mediums are 35mm film (Nip/Tuck, The Closer, The Sopranos, Deadwood, Entourage, Big Love) and 24p HD video (almost everything on Showtime, almost everything on the SciFi network).

[Daniel Stigler]

Define "tons."

 

Facts, at least by my count:

Sitcoms: 1 (Scrubs). 2 if you count "Malcolm In The Middle" (cancelled).

Dramas: 4 (Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars, One Tree Hill, and The OC). 6 if you count Monk and The Shield (which air on cable networks).

 

 

In Germany S16 is the standard for TV series and TV movies. Nearly all of it is shot in that format.

A couple of years ago when the HD craze was on the rise producers were really crazy about it believing all this nonsense like you don't have to light HD and it's all a lot cheaper, blablabla. Now they learned their lessons and it's all back to film. In commercial work, which i do mostly these days, it's 90% 35mm.

[Rachel Oliver]

Hi;

 

In the UK 16mm is probably the favourite music video format.

 

Olly

[Michael Most]

In Germany S16 is the standard for TV series and TV movies.

 

Yes, that's true. My post was indeed very North America-centric. In this part of the world (which is where the original post in this thread came from), 16mm is "healthy," but not particularly popular, for television series use. It is, however, becoming more common in independent features (as an alternative to 35mm, primarily when the picture is finished via a digital intermediate) and, to some degree, television movies and miniseries, although there are very few of these being made today. In the independent feature world, it is often a better "lower-cost-than-35mm" alternative than HD video due to its wider latitude, allowing more flexibility and arguably better results when shooting day exteriors and other locations.

[David W Scott]

Define "tons."

 

Facts, at least by my count:

Sitcoms: 1 (Scrubs). 2 if you count "Malcolm In The Middle" (cancelled).

Dramas: 4 (Gilmore Girls, Veronica Mars, One Tree Hill, and The OC). 6 if you count Monk and The Shield (which air on cable networks).

 

ARRI's white paper ("The Beauty of 16") lists a few more from around the world. In North America, that includes "Sex and the City" and "Godiva's".

[Michael Most]

ARRI's white paper ("The Beauty of 16") lists a few more from around the world. In North America, that includes "Sex and the City" and "Godiva's".

 

"Sex and the City" has been out of production for almost 3 years, and was never a network show (it was on HBO). I've never heard of "Godiva's."

[Keneu Luca]

Hello all! I used to be an active poster here but I've been out of the loop for a while. David, Mitch...glad to see you guys are still here...

 

Anyway, over the past year and a half, I've been busy as an FDNY EMT (great job and I love it.) But I am looking to get back into filmmaking purely as a hobby. Yep...it's an expensive one, I know...but since I can still afford it, I figure what the hell..?

 

I've found a 16mm camera and editing package for less than $5,000 from a reputable retailer and I am considering making the purchase. My intention is to use the equipment for short films.

 

I know that digital is what most people are using these days, but the people who have known me in this forum also know that film has always been my format of choice. My question is this: in your professional opinions, how much longer do you believe Kodak and other film manufacturers will continue to sell 16mm NEGATIVE stocks? I really don't know how far digital has progressed, but I still have a feeling that film is not going anywhere for a while. However, I am asking about 16mm stocks, which, as we all know is not the industry standard.

 

Anyway, glad to be back and I hope everyone is doing well. Please post your opinions on this topic freely.

 

Talk to you all soon.

 

Hello Bill

 

I'm relatively new here, so I wouldn't know you from when you used to post here. But you did catch my attention nonetheless. I am in preproduction for a short that I'll be making with a fellow filmmaker/FDNY firefighter who works in Brooklyn. The film is about a firefighter. We will be using my Arri S.

 

If you're interested, let me know. Respond here or send me an email.

keneul@yahoo.com