Giray Izcan

Congratulations Gregory... I hope you enjoy the next chapter of your life. 

Super 8 is already a very grainy format.. pushing it will make it even more grainy for a negligible gain. I like to shoot each format as sharp and clean as possible within any format's limitations.

3 hours ago, Dennis Toeppen said:

I'd push it one stop in processing. I've pushed this stock two stops and not been dissatisfied.

I wouldn't push s8.. even s16 gets dicey with push.

Good to know. I thought they did for Euphoria. Good luck 

Try the Kodak labs as well.

Fotokem

If you work with professional assistants, the unfortunate problems Tyler faced could be avoided - though there is still always a chance something wrong could go down.. film jams and such. Proper prep and testing is a must when shooting on film. I agree with Tyler that digital is safer for sure though. With digital, you can playback with the look baked in if you like and have a peace of mind and move on, or reshoot right there and then.  

I love and prefer film, but came to really love digital as well. I shoot on f55 with r5 raw recorder and rate it 1 stop slower to get some digital grain, which I've come to enjoy. The reason I rate it one stop slower is for some added grain, 1 more stop of information in the highlights and 1 less in the shadows, which aligns with film negative. I always put the internal n9 and bring the 2500 to 320 ASA, which allows me to do the exact same lighting as I would with the 19 stock. As for post, I like to put a print lut on after converting the footage to cineon log to mimic the color reproduction and contrast of a film print. I don't do any power windows and stuff, and only use the offset wheels to balance the colors to the gray card much like when shooting on film and striking a one light print. This workflow gives me a very film/analog like quality. 

I just think it is a horrible idea to shoot on film unless you have a proper budget. Getting all the coverages while shooting dialog and complex scenes will require more film unless you want to let go of the story and cut corners just to shoot on film and end up with an incomplete product.

I am itching to test out getting digital to be transferred on 16mm film negative(7213) - low con print - 4k scan from low con print at Cinelab to find a happy medium. 

Shooting on 35 for instance will easily cost you 1200- 2k per page depending on the page - purchasing brand new stock, developing, 4k scan. Especially when shooting dialog, you will easily be in the 20:1 ratio. 10:1 ratio sounds a lot for narrative, but it is really a bare minimum. 20:1 is more ideal if you want all the coverage needed and get the best performances from your talent without having to cut corners or without having to be a slave to the camera. 

2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Nope, it was Steve Yedlin's process of camera color science prep in camera and then post. They didn't have the money to do a film out. Where it's absolutely very complex and burdensome, I feel it worked well. Most people would never know and if there was a 35mm film out for theatrical projection, it would be even better. 

https://filmmakermagazine.com/124994-film-look-35mm-holdovers-emulation/

Great read.. thanks for sharing 

2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Nope, it was Steve Yedlin's process of camera color science prep in camera and then post. They didn't have the money to do a film out. Where it's absolutely very complex and burdensome, I feel it worked well. Most people would never know and if there was a 35mm film out for theatrical projection, it would be even better. 

https://filmmakermagazine.com/124994-film-look-35mm-holdovers-emulation/

I watched the Holdovers at the New Bev. 

The Holdovers did the film out I am pretty sure. I remember listening to a podcast with the dp. You can shoot natural looking pictures with 200t and lights.. you just have to know how to work in high light levels and maintain a natural and consistent or logical contrast ratio. I just don't get the hype with using 7219 as it is too grainy and soft..

Floian, I bet you won't regret your decision.

On 4/11/2025 at 8:13 PM, Sebastian Bock said:

Thank you for your sharing your thoughts, Giray. 

I am still thankful for a new film stock. It is about half the price of Kodak films with an equal quality and offers people with lower budgets to shoot private films on their Beaulieu, music videos on their Arriflex ST, experimental stuff on their Bolex and much more on 100ft daylight spools. If you can only shoot "serious" stuff on 400ft rolls, just go with your Double XX. That's ok, but it has nothing to do with this thread.
 

Or it could be offered in 400ft, maybe more serious productions would/could use it. Otherwise, yes it is exciting and awesome to have the new stock that I would like to test out myself

If I were to shoot a thetarical release film on s16, I would shoot it on 7213 and only use the 19 stock in situations where I had to.  In my opinion, though a beautiful stock, 19 is too grainy for narrative work on s16. 16mm is a grainy format as it is, so one doesn't have to shoot it "dirty" to make it stand out as it already does due its inherent qualities. Of course, this only goes for while shooting on 16.. not 35.

Really great work. It really shows how super 16 looks the best on 7213 as opposed to 19. 

The shutter belt has to be replaced.. last time I got one from Arri in LA for my 4s, it cost around 900.. sorry I know a rubber ring that's the size of a quarter costing that much sounds insane but yea... good luck.

Sr 1 and 2 cameras are not whisper quiet cameras like an Aaton XTR Prod or an sr3, so a barney is a must in small places...

That's a shame...

I wonder if Portra will be priced normal or at a higher price like Ektachrome. I think Portra rssembles v2 stocks a bit. What do you think?

All of the Portra line? When is it supposed to hit the market do you know by any chance? I wonder if it's going to be an expensive item like the Ektachrome or just the regular negative price..

4 hours ago, John Rizzo said:

Will do, We shot 7219 today non remjet getting processed tonight. Once we scan the footage I will post it for all interested parties to check out. 100 feet on the 416 and 100 feet with a Aaton xtr. Lens and f stops will be on he slate for each setup.

 

we also shot 450 feet of 35mm Portra.   

I didn't know you could buy Portra in bulk like that. Can you get and shoot Portra in 1000ft in any 35 camera? Stills film perfs cause problems with motion picture film cameras as far as I know.

You could shoot 7219 or 7213 and overexpose and desaturate in post instead of dealing with 50ASA.

If you find 7213's grain too distracting, then you should re-evaluate your decision on shooting on 16.. 

It only comes in 100ft rolls... that cancels out any serious shoot, if there is one, destined to shoot on black and white 16mm, it will be double x.

Cooke 9-50 or Zeiss 10-100 with T coating, preferably the mark 2 or 3 version.

The lens comes in different mounts and I believe they have an interchangeable mount sonyou can swap it to different mount if needed or desired. I have never used the lens, merely based on my research. You can get this lens for 15-1800 dollars(pl mount version) or 2500 or so for a brand new. For professional, sharp s16 lenses such as Angenieux(7-81 for example.. not the old vintage Angenieux), Canon, Cooke or a Zeiss s16 lenses you will have to pay 4-8k..  

I have my eyes on the Tokina 11-20 pl for my real estate shoots when i get them and also, it is wide enough for s16.. This way you can have a new, modern and a sharp lens that you could use on 35 to get some cool super wide angle shots or just a wide- normal focal lengths.. one stone, two birds.