New 12/17 stocks.

[Fredrik Backar FSF]

Hi! saw the demo for 5212/17 yesterday. I found the skintones as opposed to the 18 to be alot more green... What are your thoughts on this??

Anyone else saw this too??

Just a matter of the grading?? :)

[John Pytlak RIP]

Probably mostly an issue of the timing/grading in the particular demos, which have been commented on by others. The VISION2 films are very close for color, with the Kodak VISION2 Expression 5229 offering a lower contrast "look". Overall, the VISION2 films offer a more linear tone scale and very slightly lower contrast and color saturation than their older VISION counterparts:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...0.1.4.4.4&lc=en

[Filip Plesha]

Is it now a general policy of Kodak to make

low color saturation films?

 

I supose lower contrast films are better for digital scaning,

but what about color?Will there be any choices for

people that want high color saturation?

Maybe Kodak could release a filmstock that would be a motion picture

equivalent to films like the old portra 400UC or the new "ultra color"

series.

 

I think there will be still a lot of people in the future that

will use conventional postproduction,and will rely only on the color

timing and choice of origination and print stocks.

[David Mullen ASC]

For now, Kodak still has their regular Vision line which will probably be kept around for people who want more contrast than the Vision-2 line. Plus you can always print on Vision Premier for more saturation (for telecine, you can add more color or contrast.)

 

Although personally in this day and age of designer stocks, I think a super contrasty and saturated color neg stock would be a nice alternative.

[Tenolian Bell]

Will there be any choices for

people that want high color saturation?

We still have the original Vision stocks which have more color saturation and contrast. But there is nothing to fear from the Vision 2 stocks. I've shot several music video's on 18. Color saturation still boils down to production design, wardrobe, lighting, and timing. Actually I think with 18 I get a smoother more brilliant reproduction to the color than with 79 ,because of less of grain.

[Jarin Blaschke]

You can always push the stock 1/2 to a stop for more zing as well. But I also think that a super fine grain, high contrast/saturated stock would be geat. Atleast one. Like '45 but faster.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Keep those "wish list" ideas coming! :)

[Filip Plesha]

I know that vision line offers more contrast and color saturation.

but what i really ment was,some kind of super saturation film stock.

 

In still photography there are films like agfa ultra 50 or ultra 100,or kodak ultra color,that bring saturation to a very high level,more than natural.

for example,you can shoot on an overcast day and get really strong colors,

exagerated colors. This kind of films are really not very usable on a wide array of

aplications,but sometimes they can be just what you want.

 

I never saw a color negative film for motion picture industry with such character,

reversal films are better if you want that.

Even 5245 stays in the limits of natural eye vision (from what i have

seen,i never saw dailies of it)

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

If I were Kodak, I'd probably be making all these low-con, great-for-DI stocks as well. I have no idea what it costs them to develop a new stock, but I imagine it's six or seven figures, and it therefore has to be something they can sell for many years. With DI prices reaching parity with those for photochemical finish right now and with Moore's law dragging them ever downward, it would seem reasonable to expect the trend to continue. This can only increase the usefulness of low-con, capture-everything-then-modify-later stocks.

 

In my underexperienced opinion, that is.

 

Phil

[Filip Plesha]

Yes but, why would the price of developing a new

motion picture stock be bigger than that for the developing

a new still film? It is a similar technology,the only major

difference is the quantity of it.

But high color films are still made and improoved in still image

bussines.

 

Same as with SFX200

It is not as often used as vision 500t ,but still they make it.

I mean out of thousand films,independent or studio films,how much

of them are going to use green or blue screen? And i don't mean

just the big films you see in cinemas all over the world.

I mean every little movie that uses kodak film,thee will be less than 20%

of them using these effects,and even if they use it,there is a chance

they wont use sfx200 film stock,they could use the new vision2 ASA100 or 200 films for even more sharpness.

But kodak still makes this stock.

 

And about DI, i don't think EVERYONE will us it.

 

It is even easier to do digital manipulation with still photography,

cheaper,even on the consumer level.And yet there are all kinds of different

films to shoot on,low color,low contrast,high color high contrast etc.

I'm talking about professional films,not consumer films.

(i don't think consumers manipulate much of their image,unless they

are doing it for art as advanced amateurs,but serious amateurs allso use

pro films sometimes)

[John Pytlak RIP]

Kodak VISION2 200T Color Negative Film 5217 is replacing Kodak SFX 200T Color Negative Film:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en...PCN031104_Q.pdf

 

Here's a link to all the Kodak EI Product Change Notices:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/newslett...=0.1.4.17&lc=en

 

Kodak will continue to offer a wide variety of camera films, having a variety of "looks", color balance, and exposure index:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...d=0.1.4.4&lc=en

[Fredrik Backar FSF]

Back to thought though.... I found that the colour in mid range was the same in all vision2 stocks, but, in lower tones all except the 18 turned greenish...

In wide shots the 100 asa for

instance, made faces afar look completely green I thought...

Is this only me???

 

Didn´t like digi intermediate on material..... Should have been printed regularly.... Some things just looked 2:d.

[David Mullen ASC]

I didn't see any greeness problem in the demo.

[Fredrik Backar FSF]

OK. Maybe something in projection then... :)

[Sam Wells]

You can always push the stock 1/2 to a stop for more zing as well. But I also think that a super fine grain, high contrast/saturated stock would be geat. Atleast one. Like '45 but faster.

A faster version of '45 ? I'd love it. For print, 46 is boring. (altho Spirits w/ davinci or Pogle seem to love it). Actually 74 filtered is better, and they both look better pushed one, but then they're getting too fast for most daylight.

 

-Sam Wells

[David Mullen ASC]

'46 seems as contrasty as '45 from my tests. I think if you made a faster version of '45, you'd end up with '46, you know what I mean?

 

Anyway, there's nothing really wrong with '45 that needs fixing, if you want a fine-grained, low-speed snappy stock. And I don't think that '46 needs to be any more contrasty -- it's already more contrasty than '74, for example. It could be a little finer-grained and saturated to intercut better with '45 though.

 

I'm happy that we finally have something lower-contrast and fine-grained for filming in bright sunlight when we don't want too much contrast -- '12 is a much better option than using Vision 320T, for example (320T is too grainy for daytime work unless you want that texture). And when we want more contrast and saturation, there's '45.

 

I think what we're missing now is a more saturated higher-speed stock, something even a little snappier than '79. Maybe pushed '74 covers that, I don't know.

 

I know Sam is fond of contrasty stocks, but for me, it really is a show-by-show decision whether to use a higher-con or lower-con stock. For example, on "Northfork" I really could have used a low-con slow-speed stock outdoors to work better with the skip-bleach processing I was doing to the print. Fuji F-125, which is what I used, is actually a rather snappy stock like '48.

[Tony Brown]

Hi! saw the demo for 5212/17 yesterday. I found the skintones as opposed to the 18 to be alot more green... What are your thoughts on this??

Anyone else saw this too??

Just a matter of the grading?? :)

I would be stunned if the 'Demo' was flawed - more likely the method of viewing I would think.

 

I'm in Turkey this week - seems they are running down the 48 (they say its a slow burner here which I find odd....) Couldn't get it and it seems that 5 days wasn't enough time to get it sent...Hmmmm

 

Buenos Aries next week..... would you believe same problem. This is getting a little tedious.

 

Thanks for your help on the Turkey crisis John - had to shoot on 45 & 46 in the end, not ideal but...... I was contacted by Kodak UK and Switzerland, sorry to say I heard nothing from Semar in Turkey but sadly I wasn't suprised. I worked out I shot 750,000 feet of 35mm Kodak neg last year (whats that in $ ???). You'd think they'd make a bit of an effort.

 

PLEASE keep the 5248 going........ I can't get on with this linear color / low con stuff, sends me to sleep.....

[Fredrik Backar FSF]

A counter action man!! :D Nice that someone opposes too....

I still Think that it´s all in the context of what u are doing from time to time.. I will for sure use the12 and17 but not stop using the 48 and 72... they are great in their own ways...

 

Tony!!! Your home page has some damn good stuff on it!! Very good work :)

[Tony Brown]

I still Think that it´s all in the context of what u are doing from time to time..

 

Tony!!! Your home page has some damn good stuff on it!! Very good work :)

I agree - the vision2 is nice for beauty / hard light (Cape Town), but i still prefer the contrast/color depth of the 48/79 combination.

 

Re website - thank you, i've not touched it for over a year, will get around to it sometime...

[Mitch Gross]

I re-screened the Kodak demo at Kodak's NY office the other day. With proper projection I could see the improvements in the new stocks. I also found it very interesting that (at least in NY) Kodak stopped showing the effects-laden 100T & 200T demo that went through a DI. Now they're just screening some raw footage clipped from the camera originals from that same demo. We coaxed them into showing us the old DI demo to compare and it really proved how worthless it was--all the detail gone to nothing and the colors dead and the contrast flat. They may as well have shot everything on the old stocks from what one could see. But the new stocks do shine bright in the raw footage. I'll be testing them myself in the next few weeks.

 

The Vision2 200T '17 stock is replacing the old '93 stock which is being phased out. It resembles it's color and contrast more than that of the Vision 200T '74, which is partly why so many DPs preferred te '93 to the '74. There currently are no official plans to replace the '48 with the Vision2 '12 but I must say that the toe performance of the '12 appears to be a great improvement off the fast falloff of the '48. The 200T Special Effects stock will be phased out as well since the red layer is so greatly improved in the '17 stock that the expensive F/X stock is no longer necessary.

 

Kodak also announced that they plan to have the 7217 200T available in Super-8 around May, replacing the current "Surveilance" 7274 200T S-8 stock. They will also release 7218 (but not 7229) 500T in Super-8.

[Tenolian Bell]

My prediction is that the lower contrast stocks will become more popular. At first glance you would like a more saturated/ contrasty film. But as Vision 2 becomses more widely used and we will see the advantages of wider latitude and neutral color reproduction. The fact that blacks can be crushed, whites can always be blown, and colors saturated, we will appreciate the freedom to choose which we want.

[Sam Wells]

'46 seems as contrasty as '45 from my tests. I think if you made a faster version of '45, you'd end up with '46, you know what I mean?

 

Anyway, there's nothing really wrong with '45 that needs fixing, if you want a fine-grained, low-speed snappy stock. And I don't think that '46 needs to be any more contrasty -- it's already more contrasty than '74, for example. It could be a little finer-grained and saturated to intercut better with '45 though.

 

I'm happy that we finally have something lower-contrast and fine-grained for filming in bright sunlight when we don't want too much contrast -- '12 is a much better option than using Vision 320T, for example (320T is too grainy for daytime work unless you want that texture). And when we want more contrast and saturation, there's '45.

 

I think what we're missing now is a more saturated higher-speed stock, something even a little snappier than '79. Maybe pushed '74 covers that, I don't know.

 

I know Sam is fond of contrasty stocks, but for me, it really is a show-by-show decision whether to use a higher-con or lower-con stock. For example, on "Northfork" I really could have used a low-con slow-speed stock outdoors to work better with the skip-bleach processing I was doing to the print. Fuji F-125, which is what I used, is actually a rather snappy stock like '48.

David I think it really is the kind of saturation you get with 45 which is why I don't think my 'ideal faster 45' would be 46. Yes the contrast is there in 46. Actually what I've done is shoot 74 w/ a filter & push. That helps, but to really get someting that looks like fast 45, it's better

to not compensate for the push. But, then it's not much faster, especially because I like to push the 45 (rating it "80", I can end up back where I started :(

 

But 45 has a unique quality, and the pushed 74 trick esp. with a high # printer light (which seems to help) will not hold like, blue in the sky the way 45 will......

 

Of cousre it's a film by film call. And the look of "Northfork" was a world of its own !

 

-Sam Wells

[Tony Brown]

I must say that the toe performance of the '12 appears to be a great improvement off the fast falloff of the '48.

But thats exactly why I like 48 :) I dislike the way vision 2 sees everything, flattens out the highs and lows, its as if Kodak are making an idiot proof stock.

[David Mullen ASC]

Let's bring back 3-strip Technicolor -- THAT will separate the men from the boys!

[Filip Plesha]

I see it the other way around.

 

I find film stocks that capture everything,and give a flat look and linear tone curve

more professional because they alow more work to be done on the image,

more manupulation.

On the other hand,other film stocks impose their own look

giving you less room for making your own look.