Thoughts on 5277

[Stephen Whitehead]

I was just given a few thousand feet of 5277 this morning. I want to use it for my next project, does anyone have any comments on the stock? Will it intercut well with 5218? how does it look overall. Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[John Holland]

5277 is a low contrast stock i think will cut well into 5218 , better test it first make sure its been kept cold , might have lost of speed , but i think it was a great stock .

[John Pytlak RIP]

I was just given a few thousand feet of 5277 this morning. I want to use it for my next project, does anyone have any comments on the stock? Will it intercut well with 5218? how does it look overall. Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

 

5277 definitely gives a "softer" look than 5218. Since the film you have is likely several years old, you should definitely do a "clip" test, or better yet, shoot a few representative scenes to look at tone scale and graininess.

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...tive/5277.jhtml

 

A Look That's Softer, Different, From a Film That's Very Flexible.

 

This is a film that lets you create a very different look. Softer. More pastel. But still picking up all the detail you want to capture in the scene. For projection prints, the recommended exposure gives a good balance between blacks and shadow detail. Overexpose it a bit and maintain the shadow detail, but the blacks get blacker. For best telecine performance, shoot it at the recommended exposure. KODAK VISION 320T Color Negative Film has very wide latitude that lets you see deep, deep into the shadow s without losing the highlights. And reproduce a very wide variety of colors. All with fine grain and high sharpness you'll find unbelievable in a film of this speed.

 

KODAK VISION 320T Color Negative Film has all the color and performance you're currently receiving from Kodak color negative products. Clean white highlights. Accurate fleshtone reproduction. But with softer colors. It cuts seamlessly with other Kodak color negative motion picture films.

 

Because it's made in the most advanced Kodak sensitizing complex in the world, this 320-speed tungsten-balanced film sets new standards for consistency--emulsion to emulsion, roll to roll, batch to batch. And new, more useful packaging, including scanable bar codes, peelable labels, and golden cans make this new film easy to identify.

[Matthew Buick]

5277 is a neg stock, isn't it ?

[Jonathan Benny]

I was just given a few thousand feet of 5277 this morning. I want to use it for my next project, does anyone have any comments on the stock? Will it intercut well with 5218? how does it look overall. Any insights would be greatly appreciated.

 

I've never cut the two together, but personally I feel from my experience with both stocks that they would not cut together well if you are going to print. You would have better results for intercutability with a transfer I feel - but even then, 77 was unique and I would only do this between scenes rather than between shots in the same scene. And commit to using a particular stock for particular scene set/location/theme etc.

 

I too liked 77, but it was a very specific look - soft, low-con - I used to like to fight against its tendancy by building "too much" contrast into the scene and allowing the stock to smooth it out.

 

Do clip tests of each roll before shooting.

 

AJB

 

 

5277 is a neg stock, isn't it ?

 

Yes it is.

 

AJB

[Stephen Whitehead]

You would have better results for intercutability with a transfer I feel - but even then, 77 was unique and I would only do this between scenes rather than between shots in the same scene. And commit to using a particular stock for particular scene set/location/theme etc.

 

I too liked 77, but it was a very specific look - soft, low-con - I used to like to fight against its tendancy by building "too much" contrast into the scene and allowing the stock to smooth it out.

 

I intend to create a bleach bypass look in transfer. Could you up the contrast of the stock and get good results?

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

[Matthew Buick]

Yes it is.

 

That's good. :) Unless it's a bad stock.

[Michael Nash]

Unless it's a bad stock.

 

No, just a discontinued one...

[Dan Goulder]

If you're looking to intercut with 5277, the closest you'll get is probably 5229 (500T). It's always best to avoid intercutting stocks within the same scene...unless of course you're doing it for the effect.

[Robert Houllahan]

I intend to create a bleach bypass look in transfer. Could you up the contrast of the stock and get good results?

 

Cheers,

 

Steve

 

 

I shot my first paying 35mm job on 5277, I think I still have a few 400' rolls in the fridge. I chose the stock for it's lo-con soft and specific color pallate. You could work the image over in Telecine to give it a more contrasty look (Sink the blacks play with gamma, etc.) but you are not starting out with the "best" raw material for that look. Did you consider having the lab do a Bleach-Bypass when you process?

 

-Rob-

[Jonathan Benny]

I intend to create a bleach bypass look in transfer. Could you up the contrast of the stock and get good results?

 

Yes, you can. A good colorist will be able to pull interesting and desirable crushed blacks, lower-saturation results from a normally processed negative like 77 (ie: not bleach bypassed). And there are more options available in terms of how radical you want the effect to be from scene to scene. You also get very desirable results from transferring a bleach-bypassed negative, but you don't have as much control in terms of "working" the look (but on the other hand, even a very elaborate session doesn't quite get you to the same place a bbneg gets you).

 

The key is to anticipate how your colors, shadow-detail and highlites will be affected by this post-process by discussion with your colorist and having him/her run a test through a basic setup of the look. You can then approach your lighting with the understanding of what you are going to be doing with the look down the road rather than just shooting "normally" and applying an effect. ie: you don't want to blow your look because you've placed, or underlit an important element in a part of the frame which would otherwise want to be crushed into nothingness.

 

So if you're not experienced with shooting bleach-bypassed neg or creating the look in post, when it comes to doing affected transfers like the one you are describing, nothing beats discussing the look with a colorist beforehand and taking that information onto the set.

 

AJB