John Pytlak RIP

Any good filmmaking program will teach and use both film and digital technology.

The effect of a two stop pull can vary with the lab. Simply speeding up the processing machine may give borderline tail-end and wash times.

It's not a matter of torque. If the gelatin emulsion gets soft and sticky due to moisture, it may stick in the gate if the tensions/clearances are too tight.

The areas of the scene lit by tunsten lighting will be considerably warmer (more orange-yellow) than the areas lit by daylight. ECN-2 "Bleach bypass" leaves silver in the highlight areas of the negative, which will tend to desaturate colors but not change their hue.

United States Occupational Safety and Health (OSHA) guidelines for generator use: http://www.osha.gov/OshDoc/data_Hurricane_...t_generator.pdf Other guidelines: http://www.orfa.com/facilityalert/Portable%20Generators.pdf http://www.ecmweb.com/nec/code-basics-40423/ http://www.nyseg.com/nysegweb/webcontent.n...le/EmergGen.pdf

Color negative films use support that has rem-jet, B&W films do not. So the frictional properties may be enough different that some cameras need to have gate clearances/tensions optimized. Yes, very high humidity can cause the gelatin emulsion to become softer and slightly more sticky. I assume you let the film warm up before you opened the can to load it to avoid any condensation on the roll? If problems persist, involve your local Kodak engineering representative.

A timed IP should be pretty close to the "look" of your answer print. A supervised transfer session should go pretty quickly, with only a few "tweaks" required. But without a supervised transfer session, you don't get to "tweak" the final look, which is important to get the "look" you want in the video release.

Super-16: http://www.kodak.com/go/16mm http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en...per16_intro.pdf (courtesy of Arriflex) http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/16mm/why...1.4.3&lc=en

An LCD display is unlikely to have the optimum tone scale or contrast ratio for really high quality transfers. Almost all commercial filmouts are done with laser recorders, or some form of CRT recording. Electron beam recording onto B&W stock has also been used in the past. You ask for help from a Kodak engineer, and then decide to use another brand of film? :rolleyes:

Much of the loss of potential sharpness in release prints is a result of practices driven by production deadlines and labs not being given enough time for "Film Done Right". All labs know that there is printer slippage when you are forced to print a short pitch original to a short pitch raw stock on a continous contact printer, and that a pin-registered step printer SHOULD be used for optimum steadiness and sharpness in making duplicate negatives. Yet, when a lab has to turn out a dozen or so duplicate negatives for worldwide release, and is only given a week or so to do it, the faster continuous contact printers are usually used --- hundreds of feet per minute rather than a few frames per second. Ironically, the very high speed printers used for release printing are usually very good for maintaining sharp and steady images, as they are printing a short pitch duplicate negative onto a long pitch print film, as the printers were designed to do. Modern lenses and projectors are perfectly capable of projecting 35mm images with over 80 line pairs per millimeter of resolution, as measured by the SMPTE 35-PA (RP40) test film.

Keep your eyes open for screenings of a new documentary, featuring over 100 noted cinematographers, including Mr. Mullen. It's called "Cinematographer Style", and was produced by Jon Fauer: http://www.icommag.com/july-page-9.html http://www.uemedia.net/CPC/cinematographer...cle_14985.shtml Kodak supplied the film, Arriflex provided funding and equipment, Technicolor provided the lab work, and 110 cinematographers provided the talent. B) I saw "Cinematographer Style" at a special June 27 35mm screening for Kodak people in Rochester. Very well done, and really shows the creative process followed by noted cinematographers.

Again, as has been posted before, use non-standard formats at your own risk, as they may have very limited support in post-production. For every "success story" (e.g., Super-16, Super-35), there are many obsolete "mayfly" formats: http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/mayflies.htm

In daylight, I would favor using the 7201, as it has the finest granularity of any motion picture negative film on the market. The "VFX capabilities" simply means the films work well with green screen and blue screen.

Any color "bias" varies with the processing conditions --- "cross processing" is not standard procedure, and the results are therefore somewhat unpredictable. But if film from your lab routinely is biased in a green direction compared to "normal", a magenta colored filter should help.

With a relatively "niche" product like Super-8 films, I sense the issue is more of having so many films in inventory that the "slow runners" end up being discarded for old age. For good images, 7217 with a bit of overexposure and a Wratten 85 should come pretty close to 7201.

"Filmouts" from a laser recorder (e.g. Arrilaser Recorder) are often made onto Kodak VISION Color Intermediate Film 2242: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...6.4.4&lc=en When the recording device has less light output (e.g., CRT recorders), a low speed camera stock like 5201 or 5212 may be used. Although some have recorded both picture and analog soundtrack onto a single printing negative, much better results are obtained when a separate picture negative (e.g., 2242) and sound negative (e.g., 2374) are used: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...0.4.4&lc=en A reversal film like 5285 would not normally be used for a filmout, as it is not the optimum choice as a printing master.

Not yet. Getting some pushback on not having two reversal films, so it may boil down to an either/or between 7280 (E64T) and 7285 (E100D).

I'm very pleased that you really like the look of 7218 and 7217 for Super-8 origination. :) As you know, Kodak has been considering Kodak VISION2 50D Color Negative Film 7201 for Super-8 as well. Unfortunately, I am hearing that the business case for offering 7201 is not very strong and may not get approved. :( As you may know, the 200T 7217 is a very sharp film, and you can get even finer grain structure by overexposing by a stop or two. For example, if you use 7217 in daylight with a Wratten 85 filter and one stop of overexposure, you get a very useful 64D exposure rating, along with a significant reduction in graininess from using the finer grained mid and slow emulsions in 7217. I am a strong proponent of offering 7201 for Super-8, but I also know how good 7217 can look with a "rich" exposure to reduce graininess.

If you are shooting in daylight, 7201 would have finer grain than 7212. I recall that 7212 would be slightly sharper than 7201. 7212 with a Wratten 85 would be rated EI 64 in daylight.

When 35mm VNF was used for a feature, it was "Special Order", and had to be slit especially for the project. Today's 5285 is catalog listed: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...4.6.4&lc=en

Your results are as expected. If you want the "gritty" grain look of silver-image B&W negative, shoot 7222. 7231 has finer grain. 7217, 7212, or 7201 should be very fine grain and sharp, with very "smooth" texture. Faster color negative films will have more graininess, but of the "smooth" variety.

Unlikely to happen. Sorry.

2374 Data: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...0.4.4&lc=en 5369 is also sometimes used as a high contrast alternative: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...6.6.8&lc=en

"Hybrid" technology is using digital technology to improve the use of film. Everything from improved scanners for telecines like the Spirit, to films specifically designed for scanning like 7299, to tools like Look Manager and Display Manager and Digital ICE: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...4.4.6&lc=en http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....4.22&lc=en http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....4.24&lc=en http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....4.26&lc=en http://www.theasc.com/magazine/oct98/emmy/sidebar/pg1.htm

Kodak continues to spend millions of dollars annually on motion-picture film R&D. Kodak is also investing in "hybrid" and digital technology for motion pictures. 2005 set a record for Kodak motion-picture film volumes, but you don't "rest on your laurels".