Scott Pickering

David. Apparently Fuji stopped making motion picture film in 2013, long after the movie was released.

Just watched this film for the first time on Blu Ray. I haven't seen this film before, but I've been wanting to since before it was released. I have seen Ron Fricke's other features like Kooyaniqatsi and Baraka. I haven't seen Chronos yet. Technically a very well done film as per usual for Ron Fricke. I wondered how he got some of the shots he did, as I can't imagine a crane being allowed in some of the locations. Theme of birth, death, and rebirth were evident. This film really exploited the degradation of human society. Looking at the transfer, I wondered- was this filmed on Fuji stock? It seemed to have Fuji colors all over it. It was a very cool toned film with excellent greens and blues. After watching, I still think Baraka was his best work, though the imagery in this one was excellent. The tracking shots during time-lapse were great. Anyone know the technical info on this film?

Actually I believe Ron Fricke did shoot a film in IMAX. Late 80s. Chronos.

If this film was a digital intermediate and filmed out via film digital printer, I wonder if this was because of the problems with Dunkirk with 5 perf looking so different then 15 perf? I wonder if that is why they went this route this time? I wonder what rez they did the film outs? I know they can print out to 8K with their 70mm unit, but it is expensive. It would certainly add cost to the film budget doing this, but at least they will have a decent file for the 4K disc when it comes out.

My IMAX theater here that still has its 15/70 projector (unless they removed it recently), isn't showing it on film this time around. They have the movie listed for release on the 27th here in Canada, and the IMAX is only showing it on digital. Shame because I was really hoping they'd use that projector again.

I asked Fotokem once a few years back about shooting 65mm B&W. They said they have a machine that can do it, but its not in operation. They considered it and came back and said they won't use it as it wasn't worth their effort to put it in operation. I'd love to see an old Western in 65mm IMAX in B&W though.

Just wondering which Sekonic light meter do I need to get, that works for both motion picture film and still photography film? I'd like it to have the spot meter capability as well if possible. Available to input shutter angles and EI/ ISO speeds. Or is there a meter that works for both types of photography? Someone suggested the 758, but I don't see motion picture options on that meter. Any suggestions?

The one place in the USA that has the Director 10k is charging $4 a foot for 16mm 10k scans with HDR for DPX files. That's 400 bucks for a 100 foot reel. That's way too high in price.

I know at one time they tested Tmax for motion picture use, but since they already had Plus X- they never bothered with it. Now that Kodak is missing a fine grained b&w film for motion picture use, I wonder if either Tmax films could be used if made up on a special order? First off, what results would you get in D96? Secondly if a positive print was made, would contrast be acceptable? Thirdly could Kodak even do a special order of Tmax in lengths for reels and punched with proper sprocket holes? What would a minimum order look like?

I think color is slowly getting better on digital. The color I see from Panasonic's S series cameras is the best Ive seen from digital yet. Very pure clean color. That said film has its own look.

I worked in a family video store back in the mid 90s that was known to have the largest porn collection in North America. We had around 100,000 VHS tapes (that number is a bit fuzzy- could be more or less). We also had family movies, etc. to rent. You could either buy or rent the tapes we had. Place was open 24 hours. Toms Video.

No because no one currently offers scans over 5k for Super 8. I already have a 5k scan done.

I recently found this out. I shot a roll of Plus X a few months back and the scan they did came out extremely hot or brighter then it should be. I used my 35mm film camera for the meter and I thought the EI was the same as ISO, so I exposed for 80 ISO. Since the film was B&W, should I have set the film camera to 160? Its funny as the still film is 125.

Should mention prefer to keep sale to North America. Don't want to have to ship overseas due to cost of shipping, insurance with tracking issues, and time involved getting there.

Plus X in reversal comes up for sale once in a while. Could look for that. Im selling some, but won't ship overseas.

Im used to placing orders from Kodak, being I used to work in a Photolab which got their supplies and film from them. Don't see a need to add in a middle man.

I saw that webpage. It mentioned no website page for Canada. So it looks like I call it in. If they take credit card, that should be simple enough. I take it they courier it in? What courier? And anyone know if it comes from the States for Canada, or if Kodak Canada stock it there, so no crossing the border? Just trying to see if I'd have to pay a broker fee or not.

I bought these films a few years ago because I wanted some Plus X stock. I ended up selling my regular 16mm Arri camera and only have the Super 16 Bolex left. Since these are all double perf 2R films, I can't use these in my current camera. These films were bought from a previous owner, so I can't vouch for their condition. I've always had them in my freezer since I received them. What Im selling is: 11 7231 Plus X Negative 2R films of various ages- 100 foot reels 6 7276 Plus X Reversal 2R films of various ages- 100 foot reels The going rate seems to be $30 or so US dollars each, but I will accept $35 Canadian for each roll of these, plus shipping on top. I'd sell them in chunks, but prefer to sell as one lot. Payment would be by PayPal in Canadian dollars. These will be shipped by postal. Shipping cost is extra based on where you are located. Send me a private message if interested.

In the past, I've always bought film from outlets that stock it (like a store). But Im debating this time to order direct from Kodak (by calling them here in Canada). I have the pdf file for film types and CAT numbers. Thing is what is the process on how to pay for your order? Do they accept credit cards or does one have to have an account, whether a business account, or whatever? It will be shipped direct to my home. I know some transfer houses stock film, but I'd rather get the freshest stock I can get (since Im ordering new film).

Im not scanning at 10K because I expect it to look high rez. Im scanning it to get the cleanest looking image when shown at 8K. As Perry mentioned, if you want to show on an 8K TV, you are best to have an 8K scan for it. Not only that, but if you look at my 4.6K scan, you still don't easily see the grain in the image. Going higher will show the grain more defined and result in a cleaner image. I don't scan at 5K for all of my films. Only the important ones. My 16mm reels I've been getting 2K scans just to have something. One day I might get a better scan for those, but its not high on my list to do. That said Im really curious what a 10K scan would look like off small gauge films.

Here is one of the 5K DPX scans that was cropped for the frame and corrected from the flat scan (added contrast). The resulting file ended up being 4600x3400dpi, so a 4.6K image. First image is the full Super 8 frame and second shows a portion at 100 percent viewing.

Im thinking future proof. 8K is supposed to come on scene to replace 4K as the high standard by 2023. Im also thinking of getting an 8K tv when they've been out for a few years and like to play my material in native format. I know it looks lofty, but if its possible, I'm considering it. Even if not mastered in 8K, downrezzing to 4K should help, since I have to crop the scan anyway (throwing out rez).

My reasoning for 5k and above is I may want a finished 8k file once done. 5k on Super 8 looks quite good, if a bit soft because of the lens used, though with K40, I still don't see the grain in some shots. To me that means you can go higher even if the detail doesn't improve. I am currently using the 5k file cropped which ends up being 3.3k. For UHD that is still acceptable because once dropped into a 16:9 frame for UHD, you still have more dpi then needed since the image portion is almost square.

SO would this not affect the Scanstation as well? Meaning if you get a 5K scan off Super 8, your more likely only getting around 3K once cropped?

Ok. Let me know. I find it strange the website I mentioned says 10K for all formats.