Search the Community

Hi all, I've recently finished shooting a music video on 4-perf 35mm, 5219. I'm about to send the film off for processing/transfer and I'm sort of stuck as to whether I should get an HD telecine or a 2k scan. The price difference given the amount of film I'm working with is not that large of a concern. My lab of choice (the wonderful Video and Film Solutions in Maryland) uses a Spirit for both. Now obviously, as it's a music video, it'll only ever be viewed on computer screens, so I'm sure the difference won't be too drastic between the two, but there are still some factors to consider. First off, a solid amount of the video is shot in a city (Richmond, VA) at night, with only available light, meaning I was basically consistently rating the film at around 2000 ASA, sometimes higher. So grain will definitely be an issue, and on top of that, I plan on pushing a few of the rolls 1 stop. From my previous experience with 2k scans, it seems as if the higher resolution relative to HD makes grain seem even more apparent in scans than it does in telecine, so would the combination of the thin negative, the push, and the 2k scan make the grain way too intense? I understand that "way too intense" is a vague quantifier, so I guess to put it a bit better, would I be better off in terms of keeping the grain at a manageable level (given the negative that I'll be working with) with an HD telecine or a 2k scan? And I guess in a more general sense, what would be the advantages (or disadvantages) of going with 2k in this situation? Also, this may be a stupid question, but just to clarify my understanding, it's definitely possible to maintain the 1:33 aspect ratio with an HD telecine, right? Any time I've previously had HD telecine of 35mm it's been automatically cropped by the lab to conform to a 1920x1080 frame. But theoretically wouldn't it be possible to maintain the full 4-perf frame with no cropping if I specifically instructed the lab and just have bars on the left and right of the frame? The film was framed for and always intended to be presented in that format. Any help is greatly appreciated! Thanks, Dylan

The Cambridge SUPER 8 Group is running a workshop to shoot and develop a roll of Tri-X black&white movie film as negative Week-end of the 25/26thJanuary 2014/Cambridge, maximum of 6 participants Starts at 10:00 am to 5pm both days This include one cartridge of Tri-X Super 8 film (runs 3 minutes), development chemistry, loan of camera, and telecine transfer to DVD ● Join us in a two-day DIY workshop in which you learn the basics of using a Super 8 movie camera, see some monochrome masterpieces from our worldwide archive to inspire you, devise a shooting plan, then take the leap of irrevocably filling those 3500 tiny frames with rich monochrome Kodak magic. We loan the camera, you provide the imagination! ● The next day, we’ll hit the darkroom – a real one. Using a special spiral (a challenge in itself!), each film is loaded into a developing tank to be soused with chemistry, stopwatch in hand, washed, unrolled and hung up to dry, as you see your efforts appear in full effect like a hatching dragonfly. ● Each film will be run through a vintage projector to shine your unique and permanent image on a screen for the first time. Later you’ll get a positive-image telecine digital file to edit as you please - plus your original 50’ of unique film to last for… 50 years? 100 years? Longer than your digital media will ever survive? Something for your grandchildren, as the legacy of real film already is in our own time? To register interest contact us via the website http://www.cambridge-super8.org/2013/12/10/super-8-workshop-in-january-2014/

Great news for film enthusiasts in Australiasia! Archives New Zealand has reached a deal with Park Road Post Production to take ownership of all film laboratory equipment and set up a new film processing laboratory here in Wellington, New Zealand! This has been approved by the NZ government and is to serve Archives in finishing all their restoration needs in the coming years, but also to provide processing for public use. The Archives are taking the ECN and both B+W Neg and Pos machines (No ECP), a number of printers, cleaners etc. This will be a full service laboratory, employing most of the same people from Park Road. Slated to open around the end of October/start of December 2013. If you have any questions, I'll be glad to try and answer. Cheers, Chris. http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/film/8851876/Lab-deal-gives-rare-Kiwi-films-new-life

Hi all, I'm a film student in Ireland D.O.P.ing on a Super 16mm short in a few months time and am looking for advice on processing and transfer. At the moment I have an assortment of short ends of various stocks (At the moment, almost 200ft of Vision 2 500T, 30ft Eterna 500T and a few more short ends on the way) I am wondering if labs out are willing to develop short ends of different stocks, even very low amounts, and count them all as the one total in regards to pricing. I don't know anything about developing pricing as the last time we shot S16, the college organised stock, processing and telecine. I am also looking for labs in Ireland/UK/Europe that develop 16mm at competitive rates for a student, the budget is low but I am willing to spend to get the look as I believe it is essential for the film. Thanks all.

Because the demise of Kodak B&W Plus-X emulsion (31), shooting B&W film outside is challenging. 5222/7222 is the only Kodak B&W camera stock. Outside it is has an exposure index of 250. In the test described below the daylight was metered at 8,000 foot-candles. At 24fps this would require a f stop setting of around f64, or a very dark ND filter. Most lenses are sharpest at about 2 stops from open, this is impossible for 22 outside without using an ND15 or ND18 to get f5.6 or below. The contrast of direct sunlight & shadows is a struggle for any photographic medium. 5234 B&W duplicate negative is an intermediate film and is quite slow. 34 has a gamma less than one making it suitable to shoot and print. It is also panchromatic and available in acetate 16mm or 35mm. For the test it was rated at EI 6 for D96 processing. Test Information Film Information 5222 Kodak B&W 35mm DOUBLE-X Negative $0.444 per foot Exposure Index: EI 200(Tungsten) 250(Daylight) 5234 Kodak Panchromatic B&W Duplicate Negative $0.391 per foot Exposure Index: Rated EI 6 for test. Lighting Direct mid day sunlight - Metered @ 8000 fc Camera Setup Mitchell Super 35mm High Speed 4 perf 75mm prime lens 5222: f11 ND9 @ 24fps 1/48sec 5234: f5.6 @24fps 1/48sec Processing Kodak D96 B&W Negative Process Transfer Spirit 2K HD 1080P 23.98 1.78 extraction da vinci 2K+ DVNR2K Settings constant for both transfers. The results of the test were the following: The grain structure and response of 5234 is clearly finer. It is a very smooth image and out performs the 5222 outside. It is availible from Kodak in both 35mm and 16mm. We will do a test of 16mm soon, I am sure the diffrence will be even more dramatic. While this stock would be hard to shoot indoors, outside it is beautiful. If processed D97 is would have an exposure index of about 18 allowing for less direct sunlight. It is also cheaper 5222 $0.444 vs 5234 $0.391 per foot. Please right click and save as to see the test video. Youtube upload didnt show a good comparison.

Looking for some advise - I am a producer creating a budget for a feature narrative but with ten minutes of 16mm or 35mm film and I just have no where to start in creating this category. In addition, I need some solid advice on who to go to in Chicago or surrounding areas who is talented with editing. Help? Thank You!