Paul Bartok

Hi I thought I would share this in case there's any people out there interested in using 35mm Kodak Vision 3 Stock in a SLR. The test photo's were taken under fairly low light. Rated at: ASA:500 T:1/4 F:5.6 taken at: 4 sec, 2 sec, 1 sec, 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/15 I used ILFORD ILFOSOL 3 for 10:30 at 20 degrees. It's easier then people make it out to be the only problem is the remjet backing, i use bicarbonate powder in water around 27 degrees for a minute to remove the remjet. Also please not that I locked the exposure for a overall scan, but I played around with the RAW files of the over exposed images and was surprised how much detail I could still retain.

I'm actually so surprised atm, its real you just have to keep scrolling till it goes into fps, the exposure is based on 180degree shutter angle and for non cine meters just change your ISO sensitivity to -1/3 for 160 degrees and +1/3 220. Nice find.

I wasn't aware that it could either, can some one confirm this

Funny thing I just bought mine, I couldn't afford/not really wanting to fork out that much, I'm a Cinematographer and Photographer so I went for L-758D I find that It's best for both worlds, if you can afford the Cine then by all means get it, but you can defiantly be ahead by using the D or DR. I apologize if this isn't what your asking but It sounds like you want to convert Shutter degree to shutter speed. 1/32 = 270 1/48 = 180 1/50 = 172.8 1/60 = 144 1/96 = 90 1/120 = 72 "(24 x 360) / Shutter Angle (i.e 8640 / xx where xx is xx degrees). So the shutter speed for 144 degrees: 8640 / 144 = 60 (i.e 1/60th sec)"

Totally agree with all of that, I think you cant go wrong with 5219 and 5207, Depending of your budget I recommend buying short ends and recans to save lots of money, you should usually be able to locate a dealer somewhere in your city or country. http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Production/Color_Negative_Films/5207.htm http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Production/Color_Negative_Films/5219.htm

Well don't quote me on this because it's a 'friend of a friend' thing but some monitors produced this year have 4K built into them and require a firmware update to unlock 4k. But cnet has confirmed 4K will be released on monitors for cheaper prices. Personally I think 4K will be good for massive size monitors, I hate 54"+ monitors they all look really stretched out you'd have to sit 15 meters away for it to look good imho. I think 44" is ideal for HD.

I think there referring to 35mm Cinema distributions will be fully cut off by studios at the end of this year.

As long as people keep interested, but that's not to say prices won't continue to rise.

I ques if cost doesn't matter get a RED scarlet, if that's too much, the Blackmagic camera looks very good for price and 2.5k sensor other wise the Canon 5D MKIII is much cleaner than the 7D and MKII.

thanks guys, got some good info to think about, I Also think i should report the feature to email you when people respond stopped working on this forum after the first response, a bit weird just thought id inform someone.

Just read this the other day (below) and find it interesting. Does anyone know anything else about this like how you actually expose it to the light and how long etc. Has this been done before or elsewhere To create the "golden" look of the campus scenes early in the film, the filmmakers took a low-contrast stock (Fuji F-400 8582) and exposed it to an orange light before loading it into the camera for shooting.

Hi guys just looking for a general consensus of what people think is best. Just to be clear this isn't a FILM VS DIGITAL debate or which camera is best it's just which is most suited for this situation. If you had a $200,000 budget and were making a independent feature film, Which camera would you go with I would say the RED EPIC but my concern is the bulk of the film will be at night and some scene near total darkness, I keep hearing that RED isn't too good in low light condition's also there will be lots of VFX. Allot will be run and gun style Allot of real lighting condition's as real as possible. I love film and I think (correct me if im wrong) but it could be done on a budget around that but there not to versatile with things like small spaces etc. So im thinking either: -RED EPIC or - Panavision millennium xl2 - ARRI 235 (for versatile scenes) Love to hear thoughts on best camera for this situation

What kind of material would you recomend for wiping it off without damaging it?

Thats correct nolan and wally dislike 3d and digital cameras.

I read somewhere that if you leave vision film in a tub of distilled water and %4 sodium carbonate it can remove the remjet backing after a minute anyone can vouch for this, or know of easy methods would be great?

Thanks for clearing it up David

Apparently that's what my friend who works there said, its possible he could be mistaken, but considering i live in a fairly small town, i wouldn't surprised if my Imax just used a normal 4k projector instead of there projectors they usually use. There defiantly was a noticeable difference between regular cinemas and the IMAX

Just came from the 4k Imax dark knight rises. First Imax experience it was mind blowing so many Imax sequences. A great job done by wally pfister. I try to keep in mind dk was one of those one off amazing films so tryin to top that was incredibly hard. But I think they did the best any team could do. I really like the realism approach they took to the filming. Love to hear other ppl thoughts on the cinematography

Very interesting. Thanks heaps Brian.

Whoops, I was under the assumption that it was, does anybody know what cameras they used then, It was developed by Technicolor: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047396/technical This is what Wikipedia said: "The film was shot entirely at Paramount studios, including an enormous set on one of the soundstages, and filmed in Technicolor." ???

I remember hearing about those Technicolor days, I heard they had to use so much lighting, that make up would melt.

great! :/ meme are starting on here now

I loved the first one thanks for that, started watching the intro, whats with that its a camera test not a emotional journey just saying lol? felt like the doco "cinematography style 2006" which by the way David Mullen was on. Still loking forward to it tho :)

I second that haha No but in all seriousness I would have to say a very real approach not that obvious fake tv style. Really well shot, They use a color pallet allot for the lighting etc.

Which camera are you shooting on? If it's a Canon you'll want to look into Technicolor's camera profile called cine style.