Jump to content

HBO's "Euphoria" on Ektachrome 100D 35mm


Recommended Posts


Wow. I didn't know that a TV show could be so bold. Usually they'd play it safe with 500T negative or digital. I just went and looked at the trailer for season 2. It's not a show for me but damn it's beautifully shot.

E100D seems to be bit grainier than VISION3 but hey whatever. It might have been pushed?

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

Definitely looks like nothing else and kind of makes everything else look like boring vanilla.

Vanilla isn't boring. It's absolutely delicious. But, yeah, a lot of DPs today are thinking either, "Damn, I wanted to do this but I wasn't allowed," or "I'm going to do this next time."

Even armchair DPs like me were thinking why this hasn't been done much. I have no interest in the objections or limitations - I know them already.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Tim Tyler changed the title to HBO's "Euphoria" on Ektachrome 100D 35mm
22 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

OOOOOOOOO hahah, so they didn't even get a positive out of it. 

They serious made kodak construct an entire new assembly line just to cross process the ektachromes? The trailer looks good but honestly feels like it's entirely achievable with digital with a print film lut tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
6 minutes ago, Jack Jin said:

They serious made kodak construct an entire new assembly line just to cross process the ektachromes? The trailer looks good but honestly feels like it's entirely achievable with digital with a print film lut tbh.

Na, film cutting and perforating have nothing to do with the stock itself. They just pushed Ektachrome through the same standard cutting and perforating process they use for all 35mm negative. 

The lab simply used one of their negative processes to cross process, super straight forward. 

Edited by Tyler Purcell
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
56 minutes ago, Jon O'Brien said:

If they shoot a season of it on Super 16 it would look more obviously shot on film (presumably that's the look they're going for). 35mm can look so close to digital.

Yea I don't understand why they feel 16mm isn't enough quality for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2022 at 7:27 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

OOOOOOOOO hahah, so they didn't even get a positive out of it. 

what is the difference in the resulting image compared to traditional processing as reversal?

The show looks great regardless of how much that has to do with the ektachrome

Edited by Albion Hockney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Yea I don't understand why they feel 16mm isn't enough quality for them. 

Especially with how fine grained ektachrome is, honestly on hbo with it's compressed bandwith it looks just like any other 2k finished alexa project, since 35mm ektachrome don't even have that much halation, feels like a bit of a waste imo, to not even get a proper positive out of it. Love the ektachrome positive look, don't know why they cross processed it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
4 hours ago, Albion Hockney said:

what is the difference in the resulting image compared to traditional processing as reversal?

The show looks great regardless of how much that has to do with the ektachrome

Probably greater dynamic range. The stock as processed normal, is pretty limited in its dynamic range. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, Jack Jin said:

Especially with how fine grained ektachrome is, honestly on hbo with it's compressed bandwith it looks just like any other 2k finished alexa project, since 35mm ektachrome don't even have that much halation, feels like a bit of a waste imo, to not even get a proper positive out of it. Love the ektachrome positive look, don't know why they cross processed it.

I've shot quite a bit of the new Ektachrome, I don't really care for it. You'd think that 100 ISO that it wouldn't be grainy, but it's HORRIBLY grainy, looks like 500T in the grain department. I shot my entire vacation film on super 8 with the stuff and a bunch of 16 before I left on our trip. I've not been impressed with it compared to negative. It does have an interesting look when projected, but when scanned, it doesn't do much for me. It's "meh", I'd rather shoot 50D or 200T. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
13 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

I've shot quite a bit of the new Ektachrome, I don't really care for it. You'd think that 100 ISO that it wouldn't be grainy, but it's HORRIBLY grainy, looks like 500T in the grain department. I shot my entire vacation film on super 8 with the stuff and a bunch of 16 before I left on our trip. I've not been impressed with it compared to negative. It does have an interesting look when projected, but when scanned, it doesn't do much for me. It's "meh", I'd rather shoot 50D or 200T. 

Maybe it was badly processed? I don't find it to be particularly grainy...

We did this in 2020 and just ran another job recently for NFL and I thought the 16mm Ekta (run as color reversal by us) looked pretty nice and not grainy:

 

https://www.nfl.com/videos/who-are-we-nate-burleson-narrates-the-stories-behind-the-2020-season

The very first shots are Ekta and it was a mix of Ekta 100D Tri-X and 7219 plus Alexa.

 

Also here is some E100D and Tri-X S8mm I shot a few years ago:

 

Edited by Robert Houllahan
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's some 35mm 7285 (Old Ektachrome) processed as reversal:

Shot in an Arri 235, which is pin-registered. There were some pretty significant registration issues, and they got worse and worse as the supply side closed in on the core. I sort of imagine the stock was just misbhaving because it had been stored frozen for more than 10 years. I should have used fresh (1/2013) stock. 

Edited by Dennis Toeppen
embed the clip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
16 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

Maybe it was badly processed? I don't find it to be particularly grainy...

We did this in 2020 and just ran another job recently for NFL and I thought the 16mm Ekta (run as color reversal by us) looked pretty nice and not grainy:

 

https://www.nfl.com/videos/who-are-we-nate-burleson-narrates-the-stories-behind-the-2020-season

The very first shots are Ekta and it was a mix of Ekta 100D Tri-X and 7219 plus Alexa.

 

Also here is some E100D and Tri-X S8mm I shot a few years ago:

 

The spot looks absolutely fantastic! 
Love the nights in the stadium and the exterior days. 

Who colour graded it if you don't mind me asking? 😊 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
23 hours ago, Robert Houllahan said:

Maybe it was badly processed? I don't find it to be particularly grainy...

Maybe? I'll post my 16mm sample in a bit. IDK why I haven't uploaded it yet. 

The super 8 stuff I shot wasn't horrible, we had a camera malfunction, so hopefully now that it's fixed, I'll be able to shoot super 8 ok. 

Edited by Tyler Purcell
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Sponsor
8 hours ago, Miguel Angel said:

The spot looks absolutely fantastic! 
Love the nights in the stadium and the exterior days. 

Who colour graded it if you don't mind me asking? 😊 

I think they graded it at NFL Films in New Jersey we did the processing and scans for them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...