Joseph OMalley

Damn. I really liked how it was used in KILLING THEM SOFTLY. I'll be using Fuji stocks but I had thought about using this stock for my up-coming project. A shame.

Stephen, you said you used the last of Kodak UK's 5230 stock. Has this stock been discontinued?

So for steadicam I'd really have to go Arricam then. Okay. Will have to talk to DP about that. I'm told arriraw can cost more than film. But I don't think anyone here is using it apart from bigger productions that have come in from the UK or USA. This film is less than a million euro.

Has anyone got advice regarding costs of 2 perf vs Alexa Prores. I have heard that there's not much difference in the price. I have a good idea on how much the 2 perf might cost. But I've never shot Alexa Prores and I'm not sure what kind of storage costs we would be talking about. Thanks to a great deal at a lab and getting Fuji stock from Frame24 - I know the 2 perf format can be quite cheap. I was told by a DP who shot both that if I shot Kodak stock the Alexa would be slightly cheaper...but I wonder if the 2 perf will work out cheaper since our stock will only cost around 10k Euro vs 25-30k Euro with Kodak. It would be nice to show the producer we can do 2 perf cheaper...if that's the case. We're talking about a shooting ratio of about 12:1. Stephen, you said the platinum is not good for steadicam. But you can use it for that, right? It's just a bit heavy? I'm thinking of going for panavision because it's a good bit cheaper...but the Arricam package is expensive...and happens to be about the same as the Alexa package (which I don't want). The cost of the Arricam might push us towards digital to help with savings. But if the platinum can be used for (some) steadicam then that would be best. Is there anything I can look at regards the cost of Alexa to help me show the producer film would be the better option. I keep hearing about the post production costs of digital vs film. Will shooting 2 perf save money in the DI? Because with Alexa you're shooting a flat image and I'm told the grade will be two-to-three times longer than a grade on film. Any info anyone can share would be great. Thanks.

Just got in touch with Arri Munich, Germany. They have the 2 perf body I'll need. I'll have a quote soon and we'll do the deal through a rental company in Dublin. All worked out the end :)

Thanks - will have to look into that.

Thanks. Yeah, turns out both s5i and master primes are out of our reach. But we can get a good deal on Ultra Primes. If I still shoot on the Arricam these are what I'll use. Can't find a 2 perf anywhere. Only 3 perf.

It's interesting to note that no one can locate a 2 perf Arricam. Only 3 perf. There must be a rise in 2 perf production with not enough bodies to meet demand.

I'll be shooting on 2 perf (most likely an Arricam) and both I and the DoP have agreed that we'll need high speed lenses for the shoot. Master Primes seem to be the go to lenses when high speed is needed. But they are so damn expensive! It would hurt our budget to go for them. I'm wondering has anyone used the s5i lenses. Are they cheaper on rental? I know they can look great. I seen them in HUGO and I seen them used on 2 perf for the OLD BOY remake. If you have used them please share your thoughts - pros and cons. Thanks in advance.

This is all very good info guys. Thanks. Thanks Greg for pointing me towards the AH board. Interesting stuff about those lenses...and that video you put up was just scary! I think I'd rather stick to Master Primes like on The Fighter. I do feel that film had more clarity to the image. Well done on your work on both. Sounds like AH was tricky...but you pulled it off!

Gregory thanks for this. So how did you deal with the hairs...? (In post I assume) I've watched both of these films within the last couple of weeks to see how the format has been used. Both look great. Were the Canon k35s used for much of the shoot? As older lenses...how did they hold up?

Thanks guys.

Thanks Stephen. When you say you didn't get anymore mag jams with 2 perf than you did with 3/4 perf...does that mean you got none at all? How often did you get mag jams, if any? Most of the film will be on a tripod. But there are a few key moments that need handheld and steadicam. The last dramatic moments requires steadicam work - it's a number of scenes in a row that build to a climax. So while most of the film is well composed...this section has to let lose a bit. I'm not sure our budget could handle a second camera package. The XL2 would handle handheld, steadicam, etc. no problem, right? So it's either go 3 perf on that. Or take the risk on 2 perf with the Arricam LT - and hope there's no mag jams.

I'm directing a film in Ireland in the summer. I'm looking at using 2 perf because our budget will be tight and I don't think digital is right for the story. I've spoken to a few rental houses and I've been warned to stay away from the 2 perf format because of mag jams. Also, I'm told the Arricam LTs 2 perf are hard to locate. I was adviced to shoot 3 perf because it doesn't give trouble like 2 perf. Is there any truth to this? Also, it seems it's easier to get my hands on the Panavision 2 perf systems. But since we're shooting in tight locations I'm wondering will the size be a problem - the Gold and Platinum are quite a bit bigger than the Arricam LT. Has anyone used Panavision's 2 perf? Have you had problems with mag jams? Has the camera size been a problem? Are they small enough to work handheld and steadicam? If you've worked with 2 perf please let me know if you've had these problems.

Has anyone used Fuji's 400t? I seen a film shot with it and it was grainy (in a nice way), but I'm not sure if the stock was pushed for that look or if that's part of the stocks look. Would it be wise to use 400t or 500t with 2 perf if I'm looking for a (not clean as such but) smooth look? One reason I'm thinking about 400t is because it's low con and can produce nice creamy skin tones. I want a more natural look for my upcoming project. I've also heard of people pulling high con stocks and using the push/pull printing process to bring more cream into the skin. Would this bring out grain, or keep it smooth? (I'm the director, not DoP)

I remember Roger Deakins saying that when he first tested the Alexa he added some grain and couldn't tell it apart from film. Has anyone seen this footage? He clearly didn't add any grain to Skyfall because that had a very clean digital look. Has anyone tried adding grain to Alexa footage? Are there any samples around the net. Can't seem to find any.

Good to know.

Have you had footage come back out of focus or damaged? Yeah, I think there's quite a few producers here that couldn't care less what it looks like. I've heard it said quite a few times that because of the large file size the arri codex actually costs more to shoot than film. When you consider the deals that Panavision, Kodak and labs are willing to give you. I've spoken to a few rental houses...none of them will give you a deal on Alexa. Full price or nothing.

But has anyone seen Hunger projected? How did that hold up grain wise?

Do you just use the viewfinder...no monitor?

For cost reasons I'm looking at 2 perf and 3 perf 35mm for my feature. Also, for cost reasons I'm looking at using the last Fuji stock from the UK (I'm in Ireland). I've heard that Fuji stocks feel a little grainy compared to Kodak. Is this true? Would the 3 perf or 2 perf feel grainy as a result? I don't mind texture, but for this project I'd like to keep the image a bit cleaner if I can. I know Hunger used Fuji stock for 2 perf and it looked good - I never saw it projected.

I know Arri has a HD video assist and monitor. But does Panavision have their own HD system? Has anyone used it?

Okay, since I'm a first time director I don't know the ins and outs of these formats in terms of cost. So if any of you DoPs who have shot both Alexa and 3 Perf, 2 perf can help out that would be great. My producer is now pushing Alexa as the main format for the film. I don't want to shoot any digital format. I've been there and have only nightmare stories about cameras over heating, losing files for no reason etc. I'm told Alexa is more stable but I've seen a number of big movies shot on it lately and felt like I was watching TV. Don't mean to offend anyone who likes the format. But right now I'd even shoot super 16mm rather than digital if I had to. So the main issue is there is a 7 year old child in the film, a scene with a horse and the child later falls into water. This happens at dusk. Child + animal + water + nightwork = worried producer Is it just me or since there's been all this hype about digital working great in low light people seem to believe film can't handle the dark? Anyway, since I'll be shooting in Ireland we have to take into account the fact that we have to ship the film to London to print and scan. So I'm being pushed towards Alexa because 'there's no money rolling through the camera'. And 'you'll only be able to shoot x amount of coverage...and will that be enough?' 'You have to wait a couple of days to see what you've got...it could come back out of focus or damaged by the lab'. So I wonder how 3 perf and 2 perf holds up against the Alexa cost wise. I have heard some say that 2 perf is actually cheaper. I know there are alot of factors to be taken into account. We will do a DI. Will shooting film lessen the time needed in a DI? I know camera wise an XL2 or Arricam LT will be half the rental cost of the Alexa. I know that I can get a great deal on Fuji Film stock because there's a company in the UK called Frame 24 who are selling off the last 2 million feet of Fuji film - at great prices - as cheap as Kodaks 16mm in fact. But if you have shot 3 perf, or 2 perf did you find it was easy to do that cheaper than Alexa? Or did you have to lose alot to gain the chance to shoot film?

Good point. And our budget is quite a bit more than that. So it should be possible.

I guess the best thing to do is work out a deal that makes everyone happy. The guy at Panavision that I spoke to seemed happy to work out a deal would would work with our budget. I remember hearing that Jeff Nichols shot Shotgun Stories on 4 perf anamorphic. The films entire budget was 68k. So if he can pull it off...there's no excuse for anybody!