new Kodak Vision3 500T demo

[David Mullen ASC]

I now know that if I were shooting on 35mm I would opt for Fuji, but would you say that in Super 8 Fuji would be too soft?

 

Well, some people don't shoot Super-8 for the sharpness... the Fuji Velvia reversal film is sharp & high-contrast, and if they put the Fuji Vivid 160T out in Super-8, it would probably be as sharp as any Kodak color neg stock in Super-8. But if you're trying to eke maximum sharpness out of color neg in Super-8, I'd use the Kodak rather than the normal Fuji Eterna color neg stocks.

[Eric Steelberg ASC]

I was at this demo with David. In my opinion, there is not enough of a visual improvement to warrant going from Vision 2 to Vision 3.

 

Yes there were the improvements already mentioned. But for me, someone who has to sell the more expensive stock to a director and producers, usually with tests, I don't think there is enough to show. Also, what we were seeing was a print made from a 4k DO (digital original) neg lensed with the insanely sharp Master Primes (the technical best of everything, not exactly real world scenario), so when the stock goes through IP/IN the benefits will be even less attractive. This is the business side of being a DP which can't be ignored.

 

However...

I'm going to be shooting the 2nd Unit on Rodrigo Prieto's upcoming film and have seen the tests he has done with the 19 (which we'll use a lot of) with the stock pushed a stop, and it looks spectacular (the tests were also in anamorphic). In my mind, Kodak should be selling it as an 800 speed Vision 2 stock.

 

Personally I would like to see a new print stock from Kodak.

 

They made the 5218 so good, that I think improvements from here on out may become smaller and smaller.

[Matthew Buick]

Well, some people don't shoot Super-8 for the sharpness... the Fuji Velvia reversal film is sharp & high-contrast, and if they put the Fuji Vivid 160T out in Super-8, it would probably be as sharp as any Kodak color neg stock in Super-8. But if you're trying to eke maximum sharpness out of color neg in Super-8, I'd use the Kodak rather than the normal Fuji Eterna color neg stocks.

 

Yeah, that was my basic assumption. I'm not really a sharpness nut, but I do want as much detail as possible without getting too radical. I don't think I'll go above 250 ASA whatever I do.

[Anthony Schilling]

I've always been a big fan of 7218 in S8 since it was released in 2004. Especially after only having the older ektachrome reversals, there was no comparison. I think a lot of people have a bit of fear factor when it comes to 500T in S8... not just because of the speed/frame size factor. People who go ahead and shoot it are usually limited to transfers that don't reach the full potential of the stock. I've been lucky enough to have a Shadow with S8 gate close by (I've only heard of one other in Europe), where the black backgrounds come out very rich and pretty noise free. I have seen the white speccy noise in the black backgrounds on transfers from other machines. Might I dare to say 500T on a Shadow can come out cleaner than 200T on a rank. The 35mm guys might not have too much to sing about with the 7219 improvements... but it sounds like the improvements may resolve some of the major hang ups with S8 500T. Ranks and DIYers should have an easier time handling noise. And even if there is a slight reduction in over all grain, it will still be a modest improvement for S8.

 

Here's a still of S8 7218. I think it was f4 with a 220 shutter, hand held 814xls. It is punched up a bit for the look I wanted, leaning to the yellow. I can't wait to try the new stuff.

[Tony Brown]

I saw the Kodak presentation in London today and was a little underwhelmed. The increased saturation was (IMO) quite unpleasant. Everytime the stocks 'improve' they seem to get more saturated, sharper, more latitude.... everything I hate :) Couple this with the newer lenses and its all looking too much like a digital source. I suspect that 5212 with lifted light levels would look very similar to the new '19

 

I'm going back to Mk III Cookes..... they at least give results that look like film...... I love being grumpy

[David Mullen ASC]

I saw the Kodak presentation in London today and was a little underwhelmed. The increased saturation was (IMO) quite unpleasant. Everytime the stocks 'improve' they seem to get more saturated, sharper, more latitude.... everything I hate :)

 

Actually the EXR stocks were more saturated that Vision-1 -- some people complained about the flatter colors of Vision-1 compared to EXR. Vision-3 seems a step back to the EXR look in terms of red saturation.

 

I'm not sure it matters that much though for something bound for the telecine or scanner where you can dial saturation up or down more radically than any inherent difference between EXR, Vision, Vision-3, or Fuji...

[Max Jacoby]

I saw the same presentation as Tony. I for one was pleased by what I saw, the colors were a tad more saturated, but also cleaner, which I thought made the image look more natural and more three-dimensional.

[Tony Brown]

If only projection were always that good Max.....

 

Wonder why they printed onto Vision and not Premiere? Does Premiere deepen the blacks too much?

[Dan Goulder]

I saw the Kodak presentation in London today and was a little underwhelmed. The increased saturation was (IMO) quite unpleasant. Everytime the stocks 'improve' they seem to get more saturated, sharper, more latitude.... everything I hate :) Couple this with the newer lenses and its all looking too much like a digital source. I suspect that 5212 with lifted light levels would look very similar to the new '19

 

I'm going back to Mk III Cookes..... they at least give results that look like film...... I love being grumpy

The only kind of film tests you can really trust are the ones you shoot yourself. Having done just that, I've found the 5219 to have a very pleasant look, if anything even more set apart from the video look, with the kind of natural, light-to-dark gradations that video has yet to approach.

[David Mullen ASC]

The only kind of film tests you can really trust are the ones you shoot yourself. Having done just that, I've found the 5219 to have a very pleasant look, if anything even more set apart from the video look, with the kind of natural, light-to-dark gradations that video has yet to approach.

 

That's sort of the whole challenge -- since film has a wider latitude than digital, do we really want to lower the latitude of film, and thus make it more like digital?

 

On the other hand, there's nothing like a rich high-contrast image... though Tony seems to prefer a higher contrast stock combined with lower contrast lenses rather than the other way around.

 

With digital grading, you have more flexibility to alter contrast and saturation than you do grain (unless you want to get into efx work to add it) so it's understandable that these new stocks are all being optimized for scanning if they want to compete with ever-improving digital.

 

Of course, that's also producing the counter-reaction, which is a desire to get back to the roughness, the texture of older stocks. When video sucked more, everyone ignored it for high-end work and were demanding that film get better. Now that digital is getting better, some people want film to go back the other way and be more "like film", embracing all the traditional artifacts, particularly grain and let digital be the new slick high-end imaging system. Fuji has kept the grainy 500D Reala stock around partly because some DP's (like Kaminski) don't want to see the grainiest 500 ASA stock currently available go away.

 

5279 is still available, by the way, though I don't know for how much longer. "Diving Bell and the Butterfly" used that stock for the interior scenes.

 

I really like '19 by the way, can't see much reason to use '18 anymore. I'd almost rather go the other way and use Fuji Eterna 500T if I couldn't use '19.

[Tony Brown]

... though Tony seems to prefer a higher contrast stock combined with lower contrast lenses rather than the other way around.

 

Precisely. I'm always trying to get rid of shadow detail, blow out the light source. I do feel the craft is being eroded, the stock (lighting aside) is becoming more and more point and shoot, the majority of stuff I see is down the middle, what you see is what you get. It's like a golf club being developed that doesn't hook or slice, great for the hacker, but so much more difficult for a good golfer to shape the shots (I don't play golf by the way)

 

But then I spouted all this nonsense when 5212 whacked 5247 so King Knute springs to mind

[Liam Hall]

Hi Guys/Girls, my first post on here...

 

Did any of you see the 7219 demo? I ask, because I wrote and directed it and I'm looking for some real-world feedback.

 

Any comments welcome - I'm thick skinned!

 

Thanks,

 

Liam.

[Pax Martins]

Has anyone seen any unlit images of faces with the '19?

I found that the '18 needed light....unlike the '29.

[Tim Terner]

Seen some testing here of the _219 http://www.pachacinema.com/portal1/index.p...7&Itemid=31

[David Mullen ASC]

Hi Guys/Girls, my first post on here...

 

Did any of you see the 7219 demo? I ask, because I wrote and directed it and I'm looking for some real-world feedback.

 

If that was the South Africa runner one, it was interesting to test '19 in bright sunlight but the HDCAM-SR D.I. had some problems -- there was an electronic "sizzle" to some of the whites, like on the beach. Kodak tells me that they are going to repost it in 2K.

[Liam Hall]

If that was the South Africa runner one, it was interesting to test '19 in bright sunlight but the HDCAM-SR D.I. had some problems -- there was an electronic "sizzle" to some of the whites, like on the beach. Kodak tells me that they are going to repost it in 2K.

 

Yes it was the South Africa one. I heard about the problem with the DI, though I didn't see that as I've only seen the D5.

[Max Jacoby]

Actually I don't understand why Kodak did only a 2K DI on the 35mm stuff, rather than 4K.

[John Holland]

All i can say thats Kodak for you now . They seem to have a death wish thats why i am a Fuji person .

[Max Jacoby]

Well Fuji doesn't make 65mm stock at all and Kodak doesn't want to do 65mm b&w stock, although they could...

[Pax Martins]

Seen some testing here of the _219 http://www.pachacinema.com/portal1/index.p...7&Itemid=31

 

 

Thanks tim....nice to see some images.

[Pax Martins]

All i can say thats Kodak for you now . They seem to have a death wish thats why i am a Fuji person .

 

 

John,

 

Don't you find the fuji stock noisier as it is thinner than kodak's?

Also, the pastels..... :blink:

[Vincenzo Condorelli AIC]

so is it wise to rate the 19 at 320 like the 18 or what?

[Tony Brown]

so is it wise to rate the 19 at 320 like the 18 or what?

 

Definitely not (though all relative to the way you take readings and your meter I guess). I always rated 18 at 500 and often rate 19 at 1000. I prefer to give heavy exposures and dig in TK if necessary

[Vincenzo Condorelli AIC]

Definitely not (though all relative to the way you take readings and your meter I guess). I always rated 18 at 500 and often rate 19 at 1000. I prefer to give heavy exposures and dig in TK if necessary

 

i see...the problem is that we might go for a 35 mm blow up in the future...

[David Rakoczy]

I always rated 18 at 500 and often rate 19 at 1000. I prefer to give heavy exposures and dig in TK if necessary - Tony

 

 

 

hmmm.. rating 19 higher (1000EI) will render a thinner Neg... why would you call that a 'heavy exposure? Rating 19 at 250EI would render a 'heavy exposure'... (a Thicker Neg).. rating it at 1000EI will deliver a thinner Neg... seems like you prefer 'thinner' exposures if you like to dig in TK...