chris hoag

So I just got off the phone with Vince at Fotokem and he says they can indeed bi-pack the two camera rolls together in the contact printer (yes, tri-pack if you include the unexposed print film) and it used to be done quite often for adding subtitles according to him. He said the camera roll with the image on it would be emulsion to emulsion with the unexposed roll of print film and the camera roll with the text on it would be the one with its emulsion separated by the thickness of the other roll's base. I asked him if that would mean the text would look blurry but he seemed to think the loss of focus would be minimal to the extent that you wouldn't notice it. I was sorta surprised to hear that, does that sound right to you guys? I guess my follow on question now is can I get away with just shooting the titles (off a backlit kodolith) on vision3 or will I have to try to find some 7363 or 7302 to get enough contrast. I want to make sure that the black around the text on the kodolith registers as perfectly clear in the negative so it can be bi-packed, that is the most important thing right? Can I achieve the same Dmin with vision3 as with 7363 or 7302? And for the parts on the text roll where there isn't any text, would clear leader be clear enough to use as a spacer? Thanks again guys! -Chris

Thank you all for your help & feedback! I definitely need both the text and image to be in sharp focus. I did think about just double exposing in camera to get the titles but the timing would need to be extremely precise given what I need the text to do and I couldn't achieve that in camera. The IP route is an option I've contemplated but the drawback is it involves an extra 2 print generations which isn't ideal given that the film is to be shot and printed on 16mm which is grainy enough as it is. So that's why I proposed the bi-packed optical printing method. I only need one print so I figured just printing directly from the camera negatives would save me some image quality loss and possibly even money. Of course this would all be much easier if only could get my hands on some Ektachrome!

I was just wondering if a few of the great minds on cinematography.com would be kind enough to double check what I think is a process to create white titles burned into an image when shooting on color neg. (I want to make prints directly from the camera originals- no IP. The film will only be 2min and have text over the image pretty much the whole time.) So first I shoot the image on one roll of neg (vision3). Then I shoot the titles on another roll of neg (vision3 or hi-con 7363 if I can find it) by shooting white (or clear backlit) letters against a black background. So now I have a negative of both the image and the titles (which now appear as black text on a clear background) and I then have the lab bi-pack them together and print them onto print film resulting in an image with white titles burned into it. Is this the way to go? I assume when bi-packing I would want the 2 strips from the camera (the image neg & the titles neg) to be emulsion to emulsion so that they're are both in focus, right? Does this mean I need to shoot the text reversed so the strip can be flipped when bi-packing so the sprockets line up on the same side? Also, does this mean it can only be bi-packed in the optical printer and not the contact printer (because the strip of print stock has to be emaulsion to emulsion with the camera stock and this can only be done with one strip of camera stock at a time)? I guess some of these are questions for the lab but the more feedback I get, the better. Thanks! -Chris

I wish I could but the optical printer I have access to is 16mm only and getting 35mm prints made at a lab is probably too costly. I guess I'm asking which is grainier: a first generation print made from double-x or a second generation print made from tri-x reversal? you're right though, I should probably just do some tests.

I was wondering what would give better end results in general: shooting on double-x and making prints from the camera negative or shooting tri-x reversal (or plus-x reversal if I can find some) and making an interneg with 7234 and then making release prints from that. How would the end prints of these two workflows differ? I understand that the reversal-interneg-release print route has an additional print generation which would add grain but I would be able to avoid using double-x which I hear is a very grainy stock. thanks, chris

arri s

i just shot some double 8mm plus-x reversal (that i broke down from a 400ft) roll in a 16mm camera and the image looks a bit jittery. should double 8 perf film not be used in 16mm camera? will it cause registration problems? thanx, chris

i just shot some unsplit double 8mm plus x (that i broke down from a 400ft) roll in a 16mm camera and the image looks a bit jittery. can double 8 perf film be used in 16mm camera? will it cause registration problems? thanx, chris

Yeah I guess I was asking if the d-min and d-max were equal between the two types of stocks for example if you projected a totally black image (d-max) in both types of stocks side by side which would be darker? but this was helpful.

oops, that should say "reversal stocks OR negative stocks"

Hi, in general which (if either) has a greater tonal range as in blacker blacks (d max?) and whiter whites (d min?) between reversal stocks of negative stocks? Thanks!

so i understand that pushing b&w neg. gives you more contrast and pulling it gives you less contrast but i think i once read that this is the opposite for reversal b&w- pushing lowers contrast and pulling increases contrast. is this true? what happens to grain when reversal b&w is pushed/pulled? what about minimum and maximum densities? i also understand that b&w neg. has more latitude than b&w reversal. does this mean that neg. has a higher d max and lower d min meaning darker blacks and lighter whites and thus can fit a wider range of tones in between these more distant poles or does it just mean that the tones in neg. don't "fall off" towards the shoulder and toe of the curve as much as in reversal (having nothing to do with d-min/max)? thanks, chris

when it comes to intermediate print stocks (im talking black and white) whats the difference between duplicating negative (for ex. 7234) and duplicating positive film (for ex. 7366)? im trying to print an internegative from reversal camera original and then from that internegative make release prints. what would happen if I used a positive film to make the internegative? I also have a bunch of 7302 left over from another project. what would happen if I used that to make the internegative?

i understand kodak stopped making it a couple years ago but i was wondering if anyone knew if theres anywhere you can still get it. if not does anyone know if there is another stock thats a suitable replacement? I shot my film on reversal and edited the camera original so now i have a positive that i need to print. thanks.

instead of starting a new topic im just gonna tag this question on here. after you have loaded the magazine for an arri s in total darkness can you then attach it to the camera and thread it past the gate and all that in the light or does it still need to be in total darkness?