3 perf 35mm

Leon Rodriguez · April 24, 2005

I'm still shopping my 35mm deal. I have a dilemma about deviating from the norm. If I was to find a camera with 3 perf movement , I'm not clear as to how that is going to effect my lab availablity for printing. Any idea where I can go on the web to get a full overview?

My gut tells me that money saved on filmstock in production will end up getting used in specialty shops for printing.( and what about projection?) I can't imagine any reason to print a 3 perf print. Any insight? Thanx in advance for any imparted wisdom.

David Mullen ASC · April 24, 2005

Anyone can contact-print a 3-perf negative -- it's projecting the print that's hard. Not many labs have 3-perf projectors. I heard a rumor that the portable Arri Loc-Pro projector can do it.

3-perf is really designed for telecine and scanning only, so if you're talking about using it for a feature, you really are talking about doing a digital intermediate to get a release print (although you can also blow it up to 4-perf the old-fashioned way, with an optical printer, which is how Storaro released his 3-perf Univisium films like "Tango" and "Goya in Bordeux", optically blown-up to 4-perf 35mm anamorphic.)

3-perf is also Full Aperture (Super-35) so besides being non-standard for projection, it doesn't support a soundtrack anyway. So the only prints you'll want to screen off of the negative are for tests probably.

Think of 3-perf like you would Super-16...

Leon Rodriguez · April 24, 2005

David,

Wonderful information! you're a gift to us all, bro. That's just what I need to make my decisions. Thx 1M.

Max Jacoby · April 24, 2005

The Arri LocPro can do 3 Perf. This is a standard feature, switching from 4 perf to 3 perf is no big deal at all.

As for shooting 3 perf, there are labs who support 3 perf for optical release printing. In Europe I know for sure that Arri Lab in Munich offer the whole optical post production route and I think Color by Dejonghe do as well. I have never looked into the prices, but even if they charge just a bit exta, you still have a lot of savings from shooting 3 perf. I think it's certainly worth asking around and comparing prices.

Michael Most · April 24, 2005

The Arri LocPro can do 3 Perf. This is a standard feature, switching from 4 perf to 3 perf is no big deal at all.

As for shooting 3 perf, there are labs who support 3 perf for optical release printing. In Europe I know for sure that Arri Lab in Munich offer the whole optical post production route and I think Color by Dejonghe do as well. I have never looked into the prices, but even if they charge just a bit exta, you still have a lot of savings from shooting 3 perf. I think it's certainly worth asking around and comparing prices.

Technicolor Rome is also well set up to do this (it's been Vittorio Storaro's way of working for a few years now).

Christian Appelt · April 24, 2005

At Munich, Germany, there is a small lab that handles 3-perf conversions (and all types of optical printing on an Oxberry, including Super 8 to 35).

BLOW UP Filmtechnik

phone 0049 89/ 702012

fax 0049 89/ 7004821

e-mail: blowupfilm@aol.com

Leon Rodriguez · April 24, 2005

Great info.

David Mullen ASC · April 24, 2005

I believe the German film "Downfall" about Hitler was shot in 3-perf and optically converted to 4-perf, according to the DP.

But you have to figure that shooting 3-perf saves you about 25% of your stock and processing over 4-perf, but if you weren't planning on shooting much to begin with, you may just break even once you factor in the costs of the optical printer blow-up. Sometimes it's ultimately cheaper to use a standard format that allows a simple contact print, like 4-perf 35mm 1.85 or anamorphic 2.39.

John Sprung · April 25, 2005

Three perf originated circa 1987 as a money saver for TV shows. Unless you have to shoot a very high ratio, the stock and processing savings are unlikely to overbalance the cost of the optical or DI blowup plus the hassle of posting with nothing to look at but video.

You might do a test blowup of a few hundred feet, but other than that, you don't see film until the answer print.... surprises? The neg cut is a royal pain because you have 21.33333 frames per foot, and you're cutting to a paper list and video tape, not a contact print. Edge numbers and key code were designed for four perf. We use three perf all the time, but never on an MOW that has some chance for theatrical release.

-- J.S.

Edited April 25, 2005 by John Sprung

John Pytlak RIP · April 25, 2005

If you anticipate ANY chance of theatrical release, 4-perf is almost always the best choice. Any stock and lab process savings will likly be eaten up by the required conversion (optical printing or DI) from 3-perf to 4-perf. It is a great option for television production.

Leon Rodriguez · April 25, 2005

You guys make my job easy. I owe you a cold one.

Christian Appelt · April 25, 2005

I believe the German film "Downfall" about Hitler was shot in 3-perf and optically converted to 4-perf, according to the DP.

The release print I saw was so lousy that I first suspected bad DI work, but of course, one can do optical printing wrong, too. :(

BTW, two weeks ago I attended a 70mm screening of the Russian 5-part movie LIBERATION (1969) which shows the last days of Hitler in Part 4&5 (The Battle of Berlin).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0151852/

Some setups are so similar that I wouldn't call it "inspiration" but rather plain "stealing" - and the older film has much better acting than "Downfall" (Der Untergang).

Michael Most · April 26, 2005

Three perf originated circa 1987 as a money saver for TV shows.

In the US.

It actually originated in Sweden, created by Rune Ericson - the same cameraman who came up with Super 16. His original intent for the format was as a more economical shooting format for 1.66 and 1.85 release, since much of the additional area on 4 perf is wasted in those aspect ratios. When the program "Max Headroom" began in (as I recall) 1986, we (Lorimar) were looking for a way to shoot at 30 fps (for the enormous amount of video playback required) but use the same amount of film stock we would use at 24fps in our "standard" (4 perf) shooting format. 3 perf provided that, and it was later adopted for 24 fps shows as well, by both Lorimar and, about a year later, Viacom (John would remember that very well...).

I recall taking Rune on a tour of the MGM Lab during one of his first visits here, and because he was unaware of lab security, having to tell him he couldn't take pictures (either still or video) in the negative cutting department, where we were already cutting 3 perf negative for one or two shows. He gave me a baseball cap with "Suomi" (I think) on it that I still have. Interesting guy.

Max Jacoby · April 26, 2005

The release print I saw was so lousy that I first suspected bad DI work, but of course, one can do optical printing wrong, too. :(

But that problem would have still been there if they had shot 4 perf, as I am sure you know.

David Mullen ASC · April 26, 2005

This is some history of 3-perf that I gave to Mark Mueller at Arri that they used on their website:

http://www.arri.com/news/nab/3-perf.htm

For more information about 3 perf and a historical perspective, here are some articles (Thanks to David Mullen, a Cinematographer from LA, for sharing his research):

* In the Sept. 1973 issue of the SMPTE Journal, pg. 742, is an article titled "A Universal Format for Film Production" by Bernstein, Wysotsky, and Konoplev. It is a translated reprint of an article in Tekhnika i Kino Televideniya of January1973. It recommends shooting in 3-perf full-aperture as a way of generating either 1.85, 2.35 anamorphic, or 4:3 TV versions from the same negative.

* In the March 1975 American Cinematographer magazine is an article by Kenn Davis proposing a new lens system with a 25% anamorphic squeeze, in order to get a 1.85:1 image onto a regular 16mm frame, and a 2.35:1 image onto a 3 perf 35mm frame. He then goes on to explain other advantages of a 3 perf system, including for 1.85 production.

* In the June 1976 American Cinematographer magazine is an article by Miklos Lente, proposing a 3 perf format called "Trilent-35". It used the Academy width but the 3-perf height.

* In the July 1986 American Cinematographer magazine is an article by Rune Ericson titled "3-Perf in the Future".

* In the February 1998 issue of "International Photographer", Vittorio Storaro proposed his "Univision" 3 perf Super35 format.

Christian Appelt · April 26, 2005

QUOTE(Christian Appelt @ Apr 25 2005, 10:16 PM)
The release print I saw was so lousy that I first suspected bad DI work, but of course, one can do optical printing wrong, too. sad.gif

But that problem would have still been there if they had shot 4 perf, as I am sure you know.

Right you are! B) Had nothing to do with 3-perf at all!