Freya Black Posted September 3, 2012 Share Posted September 3, 2012 New Complete16 promo made by Ben Hecking & our own Andy Alderslade! vimeo.com/48584506 Looking very nice indeed! Strangely I think this does a really great job of showing you different kinds of stocks and how they might be used. I never feel the Kodak promos never give me a real feel for the film itself, more just how fabulous their chosen cinematographer is, which isn't that helpful. This would probably be better in the news section but I don't have permission to post there so what the hey! :) Anyway I think this is another big win for Fuji! love Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted September 4, 2012 Share Posted September 4, 2012 Thanks for the kind words (and the publicity) Freya! Glad you enjoyed it and got something out of it. It was actually a really fun project to work on. Hope you're well. Cheers Andy New Complete16 promo made by Ben Hecking & our own Andy Alderslade! Looking very nice indeed! Strangely I think this does a really great job of showing you different kinds of stocks and how they might be used. I never feel the Kodak promos never give me a real feel for the film itself, more just how fabulous their chosen cinematographer is, which isn't that helpful. This would probably be better in the news section but I don't have permission to post there so what the hey! :) Anyway I think this is another big win for Fuji! love Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavan Deep Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 This video really shows the versitilty of Super 16 and the Complete b16 package is so good, I think everyone should try it. Probably another point but are broadcasters still accepting material on Super 16, I remember them being a bit funny about it for HD. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted September 5, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted September 5, 2012 Here's my honest (and possibly friend-losing) opinion, based on Vimeo HD viewing (which is probably better than most of the HD that people actually get to see in the UK): The really slow stuff looks great. The 250 is OKish, possibly appropriate for the georgian lovers scene. The 500 is not really HD. To modern eyes it looks retro, slightly 70s, and I'm not just talking about the production design. You can see why the BBC decided to eschew 16 for HD on the basis that you really can't get clean results with some stocks. That said it's all very pretty. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted September 5, 2012 Share Posted September 5, 2012 But Phil it has feeling nice . Not super clinical HD sharpness . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted September 6, 2012 Share Posted September 6, 2012 Here's my honest (and possibly friend-losing) opinion, based on Vimeo HD viewing (which is probably better than most of the HD that people actually get to see in the UK): The really slow stuff looks great. The 250 is OKish, possibly appropriate for the georgian lovers scene. The 500 is not really HD. To modern eyes it looks retro, slightly 70s, and I'm not just talking about the production design. You can see why the BBC decided to eschew 16 for HD on the basis that you really can't get clean results with some stocks. That said it's all very pretty. P Ha! God bless you Phil! Did you think the 500 Vivid was not HD? I felt that was pretty snappy - but to be honest it was so high-contrast it sort of had to be. John has a point, does everything have to be sharp and clean - it feels like for the sake of good digital compression we are losing an element of creativity - for instance can a TV documentary shoot super 8 or deliberately grainy 16 for B-Roll/dramatization? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Steven Beverly Posted September 6, 2012 Share Posted September 6, 2012 New Complete16 promo made by Ben Hecking & our own Andy Alderslade! vimeo.com/48584506 Looking very nice indeed! Strangely I think this does a really great job of showing you different kinds of stocks and how they might be used. I never feel the Kodak promos never give me a real feel for the film itself, more just how fabulous their chosen cinematographer is, which isn't that helpful. This would probably be better in the news section but I don't have permission to post there so what the hey! :) Anyway I think this is another big win for Fuji! love Freya AAAAAHHHHH, my eyes have been raped!! LOL! What the Hell WAS that??!! That first "model" looked like Groucho Marx on acid! I did like the "Blade Runner"-esque sequence. That model got her painted on eyebrows down to a reasonable 1 inch width. (I will NEVER understand the Europeans) The time travel modern breaking up/turn of the century in love couple was at least palatable(last century lest someone bring it up). You would figure Fuji could afford to hire better looking models....and better writers. The stocks worked fine but still nowhere NEAR Kodak quality. (My own personal opinion.) B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Kieran Scannell Posted September 6, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted September 6, 2012 Nice job Andy Looks great! The pink and blue is a different approach a bit "Murphyesque" Really liked it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted September 6, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted September 6, 2012 Did you think the 500 Vivid was not HD? It's a bit visibly mushy. Far from unwatchable, of course. But then the 64D turns up and it's so clean by comparison that it's hard to overlook the difference. The Vivid does have a slightly odd look to the highlights, I'm thinking particularly of the centre of the china globes. The whole thing looks like the whites have been pushed down to about 75%. Does it just have incredibly flat highlight handling, or something? P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Kieran Scannell Posted September 6, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted September 6, 2012 That first "model" looked like Groucho Marx on acid! The actors were the same throughout the film weren't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Lewis Posted September 6, 2012 Share Posted September 6, 2012 I have used Fuji filmstock for quite some time now, and I think Fuji's initiative in introducing "Complete 16" and developing it in the way they have is to be commended. However, not all of us wish to finish up with a digitised version of the imagery we have shot on 16mm film. It would be great if Fuji would therefore develop a spin off which involves shooting 16mm film and getting a film print. They could call the further initiative "Complete Complete 16". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Burke Posted September 6, 2012 Share Posted September 6, 2012 Here's my honest (and possibly friend-losing) opinion, based on Vimeo HD viewing (which is probably better than most of the HD that people actually get to see in the UK): The really slow stuff looks great. The 250 is OKish, possibly appropriate for the georgian lovers scene. The 500 is not really HD. To modern eyes it looks retro, slightly 70s, and I'm not just talking about the production design. You can see why the BBC decided to eschew 16 for HD on the basis that you really can't get clean results with some stocks. That said it's all very pretty. P I used to think the same thing about the 500iso film in 16mm, but after shooting a pilot and using plenty of Fuji stock, all kinds, I found the 500T Eterna to be plenty sharp and not that soft at all. I shot wides at night, thinking that the shot might not get used because of the assumption of grain et al, but i was very surprised at how tight the grain was and how sharp. Sometimes underexposed 250T looked worse than the 500T. There are many factors that go into how it will look, so to right off all of a certain speed of film or make a blanket statement isn't always accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Steven Beverly Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 The actors were the same throughout the film weren't they? Could be. I was transfixed on those 5 inch wide stripes above her eyes. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavan Deep Posted September 7, 2012 Share Posted September 7, 2012 I think the promo looks great, it does show that has a lot more colours, depth and texture, unfortunately there is a preferrnce these days for ultra clean - 'perefct' but soulless imagery. I use Kodak Super 8 a lot and love their stocks. But I think Fuji are more supportive to their customers than Kodak are, in my experience. Their stocks work particularly well with the natural light we have in England, I know that a lot of DP’s here say that Fuji stocks work much better here. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted September 7, 2012 Author Share Posted September 7, 2012 The 500 is not really HD. To modern eyes it looks retro, slightly 70s, and I'm not just talking about the production design. You can see why the BBC decided to eschew 16 for HD on the basis that you really can't get clean results with some stocks. That said it's all very pretty. P Except that isn't why the BBC are doing it. You give them too much credit! In fact the BBC don't allow 500ASA stocks in 35mm! It's hardly suprising that 16mm stocks are grainy at 500ASA. I think this has been known for a loooooong time and is often what draws people to shooting in that format in the first place ironically! :) I don't think it looks retro but then I don't have modern eyes. I realised that one of the actresses on the last video I completed is younger than one of the laptops I use! (Yikes!) love Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member George Ebersole Posted September 9, 2012 Premium Member Share Posted September 9, 2012 Wow, pretty impressive stuff for 16mm. That looks like 35mm stock of old to me. Good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 [/size][/color] It's a bit visibly mushy. Far from unwatchable, of course. But then the 64D turns up and it's so clean by comparison that it's hard to overlook the difference. The Vivid does have a slightly odd look to the highlights, I'm thinking particularly of the centre of the china globes. The whole thing looks like the whites have been pushed down to about 75%. Does it just have incredibly flat highlight handling, or something? P That's actually what I really like about film, highlights aren't razor sharp but that's a personal taste I suppose. Grain, noise and mush, I'm not so keen on - but sometimes when I watch a film that is grainy which works well I kick myself for being close-minded. I've seen it on a few cinema screens now, it blows up pretty well, but as you pointed out the slower stuff has more kick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Thanks for all the kind words about this, it was a really creative projects so its wonderful to have great feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now