Jump to content
Daniel Madsen

cost differences between 16 and 35

Recommended Posts

What is the difference in cost (stock, scanning, lab) between the two formats? Does it take longer to shoot a scene in 35mm than in 16mm? A friend of mine wants to shoot a project on 35mm so it can be handed into the festivals on a DVD. Is it worth it or is he better off spending his money somewhere else?

 

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What is the difference in cost (stock, scanning, lab) between the two formats? "

 

I would say that it will be 3 times more or less.

 

"Does it take longer to shoot a scene in 35mm than in 16mm?"

 

Recently I watched the film "Distant" by Turkish director Nuri bilge Ceylan on a DVD, in the extra staff on the DVD you can see that the director him self is also the cinematographer and that they are a crew of 5-6 people on the set!! It's amazing to see how this director works (I see more films form him) so you see it's really depend on what you are shooting and how you decide to work.

 

"A friend of mine wants to shoot a project on 35mm so it can be handed into the festivals on a DVD. Is it worth it or is he better off spending his money somewhere else?"

 

Personally I think it's stupid to shoot 35mm and ending up with a DVD, if the director wants to experience shooting on film he can start with super16mm, or re-consider and go for HD master from his 35mm footage (HDcam SR or something).

But hey maybe is very rich and have the money shoot films on 35mm and ending up with a DVD?

Edited by Oron Cohen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Availability is another factor. In many countries your only choices are 35mm or HD, so that puts 16mm out of the running from the start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Danny,

 

Please change your forum name to your real name under the 'My Controls' link to the top and to the left.

 

It's a requirement of membership to the forum.

 

-nate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Super 16 looks great when going straight to video. If you have no intentions of projecting, S16 would be a great way to go, both for budgetary purposes and for the look. You could always do a quick test and shoot a roll of each to see which you prefer, but I think it's safe to say you'll be happy with S16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is the difference in cost (stock, scanning, lab) between the two formats? Does it take longer to shoot a scene in 35mm than in 16mm? A friend of mine wants to shoot a project on 35mm so it can be handed into the festivals on a DVD. Is it worth it or is he better off spending his money somewhere else?

Thanks

 

S16 is a great format to shoot particular if you're doing indie and guerrilla stuff

You can shoot guerilla in 35mm also but it's easier in S16 and cheaper.

 

As for going to a DVD S16 looks great

The only thing you would wantfrom 35mm is the shorter depth of field

But S16mm is still a great format if you know how to use it.

 

Good Luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shooting 3 Perf 35mm costs about 8% more total over a shoot budgeted for 16mm. This is in terms of stock and transfer only and not a big difference. As an owner/op of both formats I'm not sure about rental cost comparisons - probally not that much different.

 

For DVD release I have to agree with the rest of the posts - S16 looks brilliant when transferred properly - like on a Spirit with a skilled op. When S16 is shot on low ASA stock like Fuji 64 or Eastman 50D with proper craft, optimized F stops and transferred to tape or through the DI route it can be hard to tell 16mm origination from 35. Good photography is good photography, like most things in the end it comes down to the cash at hand. For DVD release (or tape ? HD or SD IMHO) S16 is a wonderful format.

 

cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One difference is being able to say "I shot it in 35mm". That'll open up few doors that otherwise may not open for "I shot it in Super 16". There are plenty of old school producers and distributors who to this day think of 16mm as high class home movies.

 

I personally agree with the opinion that S16 well shot and transferred looks great on DVD - but 35mm still has that "Hollywood" cache to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One difference is being able to say "I shot it in 35mm". That'll open up few doors that otherwise may not open for "I shot it in Super 16". There are plenty of old school producers and distributors who to this day think of 16mm as high class home movies.

You think so? I'd think that saying "I shot in on film" would have the same effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw an article that compared some film costs from American Cinematographer. The article is about the DVX, but they compare the cost of 16mm, 35mm, and video with a film out release.

 

Their estimates for 16mm:

 

-Quote-

 

· 100 x 400' foot rolls of raw stock @ $140 per roll = $14,000

· 40,000' x $0.14 per foot for processing = $5,600

· Video dailies = $18,000

· 35mm Optical Blowup with titles & opticals = $43,000

 

-Quote-

 

that would be $37,000 without the blow up to 35 and $80,000 with it.

 

I'm sure this is not accurate for all stocks and processing, and it would definitely all depend on how much film you shoot.

 

Here is the article

 

http://www.theasc.com/magazine/product.htm

Edited by Patrick S. McGowan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16mm sells cheaper. But I guess the lab work costs the same.

 

When the lab work is charged "per foot" of film shot (like for processing), then 16mm still works out cheaper because the footage count is lower compared to 35mm for the same running time. When the work is charged by running time (like for telecine work), then it costs the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's just going to DVD for festival showing, then S16 would definitely be my ideal choice. Mostly for budgetary reasons. But if you're ademant about shooting on 35 for once, then go for it, it'll be good experience plus you'll get some raised eyebrows at festivals when you say it was shot on 35.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

for each short prep i'm doing this study :

 

for a 20min long film 35 print my lab cost was :

5500? in 35 (developing, color timing, neg cuting, print 0 and print 1)

in S16 i had to do in another lab an optical blow up but it was less expensive

in HD the transfer to neg, developing and print was around 9000?

 

the cost of the cam package for 8 days was 2000? in 35 (arri bl4S) against 4000? for a 750p sony.

 

that's the figures i had to deal with. its prices for short films

 

my tow cents (of euro)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally agree with the opinion that S16 well shot and transferred looks great on DVD - but 35mm still has that "Hollywood" cache to it.

 

It also looks considerably richer and better if shot by the same cameraman under the same production conditions. S16mm is a nice alternative, but let's not go too far with the praise. 35mm is a much larger frame, and a much better product. If one wants to be on film and goes to S16 for monetary reasons, that's fine. But as with anything, you do get what you pay for. It's better than it used to be, and quite feasible for many projects, but S16mm is not equivalent to 35mm on any level other than the fact that they're both celluloid, regardless of what emulsion you're using and what post path you follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Tai Audio



    Paralinx LLC



    Glidecam



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Ritter Battery



    Serious Gear



    Wooden Camera



    Abel Cine



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Visual Products



    Metropolis Post



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    FJS International



    Just Cinema Gear



    G-Force Grips



    CineLab



    Rig Wheels Passport


×
×
  • Create New...