Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'black & white'.
Found 4 results
Speculating just how long Kodak will produce Tri-X for... ?
Bill Rodgers posted a topic in Super-8...I've been shooting Tri-X since my student days in 1992. I love it's qualities and nothing quite compares to it. I'm beginning to wonder just how long Kodak will continue to produce this B&W reversal stock. Should I be bulk buying it or am I just a bit paranoid after 'losing' K40, 64T and 100D ???
Question about (S) 16mm B&W stocks
Christian Schonberger posted a topic in Film Stocks & ProcessingHello Group, Planning on a short film in Super 16mm B&W. Did some first B-Roll shots as a test with Kodak Tri-X 7226 reversal, waiting for the scan to return. I happened to have two 100ft rolls (one still in the freezer). The idea is to evoke a 1940s-50s period feel. Not sure about excessive film grain in S 16mm though. I have seen a lot of recent footage (excellent digital scans) of Tri-X reversal, Double-X neg, Orwo UN 54 and FomaPan R 100. The latter seems to suffer from unpleasant round white spots (like air or gas bubbles during processing) frequently. Other than that I really can't tell the difference, since it heavily depends on grain management during scanning and grading. The Tri-X reversal is actually the most expensive, but I have seen Double-X and even Orwo UN 54 with about the same amount of grain - all looking very good. Sharpness seems great on all film stocks. Seen Vision 3 de-saturated. Doesn't work for me: it's somehow too milky and the gray values seem off. IMHO a Black&White film should be shot (if possible) on genuine B&W stock. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I am asking because if the Tri-X reversal turns out too grainy in the scan (will have it scanned with a 2K Muller scanner, it's used by the most inexpensive lab I can find where I am located (EU) and the results are always great) - I might switch to Double-X neg and if it works, mixed with the Orwo (when I don't need 200/160 ISO/ASA). I am not after the "near grainless" 35mm look from the late 1940s and '50s. A little grain is just fine as long as there are no digital artifacts (I have seen Tri-X reversal scans in 16mm/S 16mm ranging from "unusable, gritty and very grainy" to excellent with fine detail in the highlights (one wouldn't expect with reversal). I guess some labs apply sharpening with the wrong settings that brings out the grain (especially in darker areas) way too much. Any input and tips very much appreciated, Cheers, Christian
Just completed post on my first feature, "The Eastsider" (www.theeastsidermovie.com), a comedy/drama set in suburban Detroit. Shot it on Kodak 7222 with the Arri SR3, an amazing camera. Nothing will ever beat the look of celluloid. Here is the trailer (contains coarse language): I'm putting this thread in the "in production" section, since I don't even have a festival premiere date yet (not sure if this thread belongs elsewhere).
"Manhattan" - Gordon Willis again
Bill DiPietra posted a topic in On Screen / Reviews & ObservationsI just finished watching Manhattan again. Once again floored by Gordon Willis' photography, does anyone know what lenses he used for the exterior shots with only ambient light? There are quit a few...not just the famous one by the bridge. Even better would be any articles I might be able to get my hands on. Thanks!