neg vs inter

[rmshkarthik]

hello.

could i know. what is the different between intermediate and negative film?

another one is. when we go to take reading for, up to artist hip level may be it has a medium long shot .we are using hide the light (top)which is falling on meter.just i am going to little wider shot up to artist knee level or more, then little pictorial session

it needs hide the light which is falling on lens (top).

 

advanced thaks for all your reply

 

rmsh

[Mitch]

The difference between neg and positive film is a positive film is a complete image. You can put it up to the light and see all the colours in the frame. A negative has all of the colours stripped out, but can be added later with some procedure using coloured lights (I'm not too good at all of this as you can tell). 99% of films are shot on negative because it is cheaper and you get the nice crisp look. You CAN shoot positive film (which is called Reversal shooting) and what that does actually is give you an almost aged look (what they did with the Aviator).

[John Pytlak RIP]

hello.

could i know. what is the different  between  intermediate and negative film?

another one is. when we go to take reading for, up to artist hip level may be it has a medium long shot .we are using hide the light  (top)which is falling on meter.just i am going to little wider shot up to artist knee level or more, then little pictorial session

it needs hide the light which is falling on lens (top).

 

advanced thaks for all your reply

 

rmsh

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Camera negative films are usually low contrast (gamma of about 0.6), and balanced for either daylight or tungsten lighting. They produce a negative image, that can either be printed directly to a print film, transferred/scanned, or printed to an intermediate film to make a master positive.

 

Kodak VISION Color Intermediate Film has a gamma of about 1.0, so that when a color negative is printed onto it, it forms a positive image having the same contrast as the original negative. The film is quite slow, and balanced for printing from a color negative. When this "master positive" is printed onto the intermediate film again, you get a "duplicate negative". The duplicate negative can be printed onto print film to make release prints:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...1.4.6.4.4&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/....4.11.8.6&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/h1/printing.shtml

 

http://www.acvl.org/handbook/4a.htm#35mm%2...5mm%20Materials

[Louis]

The difference between neg and positive film is a positive film is a complete image. You can put it up to the light and see all the colours in the frame. A negative has all of the colours stripped out, but can be added later with some procedure using coloured lights (I'm not too good at all of this as you can tell). 99% of films are shot on negative because it is cheaper and you get the nice crisp look. You CAN shoot positive film (which is called Reversal shooting) and what that does actually is give you an almost aged look (what they did with the Aviator).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Negative is actually more expensive than reversal, both when it comes to raw stock and processing, because you only have to pay for the print, whereas with negative you have to pay for processing the negative AND making prints. Also, reversal film actually gives you a contrastier image with more heavily saturated colors, and its latitude isn't as good as negative. The Aviator didn't shoot on reversal film at all, but a few movies recently have shot on reversal film that was cross-processed and treated like negative film, like the 1st raid sequence in Three Kings and most of Oliver Stone's U-Turn.

 

All this information is kind of moot, however, because he didn't ask about the difference between negative and reversal, but rather about the difference between negative and intermediate film.

 

This kind of post is impossible to do without coming across like a jerk, but I just wanted to let you know.

[Dominic Case]

(I'm not too good at all of this as you can tell).

Sorry Mitch - welcome to the website - but if you aren't too good at it, it's probably best to stay out of it, and see what other people have to say. Frankly I'm struggling to find anything in your answer that adds to anybody's understanding of anything.

 

The Aviator was shot on negative film, and the section you are referring to was treated digitally to make it look like the old Technicolor two-strip process of the early 1920s.

 

Positive film is not the same as intermediate, nor as reversal film.

 

Colour negative, colour positive, intermediate AND reversal film all have all the colours of the image in them, and you can see them if you hold them up to the light. But neg and intermediate have much lower contrast (expressed as gamma) and also have integral masking (the pink/orange effect) which makes it harder to recognise the colours (which, in negative are also reversed, so yellows appear blue etc).

 

John Pytlak's answer clarifies the differences between neg and intermediate film (the original question) about as well as is possible in an email.