5260, Kodak

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Hey All,

I'm about to shoot a short on the new 5260 from Kodak. And, while I'm used to '18/'19 pretty well I was just curious to all of your thoughts/advice on the '60. I am going with '60 this time to get a little bit more saturation, and just for something different. I know I should test the film out, first, and have put in to ask Kodak for a sample roll (should be here soon), I wanted to get some of the thoughts of other forum members on 'er. So any thoughts/advice/observations?

 

(tech spec for those interested, Arri BL4, Ultra Primes, 5260, all night INT in a Laundromat with white brick and peeling walls/bad Formica, and later a small convenience store, floro tubes (cool white and going for a cyan pallet in there. The overall look is a bit more saturated and harder light, I'm going for a red/orange/yellow look in the laundromat and a cyan/green/white look for our one night ext waking shot as well as the store. short film, maybe 5-10 min max, and we'll be doing an "indie, low budget I wish I could afford a scan post path" HDCamSR master uncorrected to an HDCamSR Color Corrected master of all the footage, from which we'll do ProResHQ for editing and our downconverts and hopefully enough money to do a proper shot to shot correction eventually (Hence the HDCamSR Uncorrected master).

[Saul Rodgar]

Oh, sweet Adrian! You mean to tell me people out there still can afford / are commited to shoot on film?? :P I am shooting a short feature on 16 mm so, I am totally kidding. Still, it is great to shoot a short on 35mm, I am jealous.

 

Seriously, now. No chance to shoot a test I take it?

 

What 35mm format are you using? 3, 2 perf, 2.35, 1.85, 16x9, etc. Ultra Primes cover S35, so I am assuming that at least. Too bad you aren't using some Master Primes or similar fast(er) lenses. Production can't afford them? What is your lighting package? If I could get faster lenses and a smaller light package I probably would consider that, personally.

 

Haven't shot on the new 60 stock. Kodak's lit says it is "finer grain," but K & F say that about their stock, even the ones that are super grainy. I imagine you will rate it 320 ASA? That is what I would do. But, personally and at that point, I would probably shoot 5217 going with older, faster lenses if I couldn't afford the Master Primes. Much better grain structure, even creatively underexposed 2 1/2 stops. Again, that is just me.

 

Still, it is great to get to take the old reliable BL4s out for a spin, hey?

Edited September 13, 2009 by Saul Rodgar

[Saul Rodgar]

Much better grain structure, even creatively underexposed 2 1/2 stops. Again, that is just me.

 

Than the faster stocks I have tried, I mean. Haven't used 5260, so I am totally going by what I have encountered in the past only.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

It'll be my first time on the BL4, but we're going full 4-perf. I wanted anamorphic, but the lenses were slightly out of budget, so we'll do an extraction for 2.39:1. I know, sucks, but, so it goes. I'm excited to use a BL as it reminds me a lot of the 535 (which came out of it) and my own SR3, with Co-ax mags and the like. You'd be surprised, there are a lot of people here in Philadelphia, even on the lowest budget, who are pushing to shoot on film. In cases like that, I'm almost happy to take a bit of a hit on my day rate, just to make sure we can budget for time with my favorite colorist.

I didn't want too fast of lenses, so as to keep it easier for the 1st, so I'm going to try to keep everything to a T2.8/4.

I was thinking about doing 320, but I'm not sure. I'm not super bothered by grain, all in all, so I might keep it at 500, maybe 400 for a little bit over-exposure, aside from in the all white rooms, where I'll go to 320 to try to hide the grain on those whites. Of course I'm the guy who was happy with the '18 grain shooting it at 500 on S16mm ;). Though I learned on S16mm 500 really means something like 320 or 250. I had considered '17 stock and I really do think it's the most versatile of the emulsions out there, but I'm never happy shooting her at night as I feel I'm a bit compromised for stop, and on 35mm I know I'll need more to have a change to keep focus on occasion. I had also considered the Fuji Vivid 160 for this project, but didn't like the notion of pushing 1 stop for that night ext.

 

Lighting is a bit, well lite ;). Biggest heads are 2K solar spots, 1K fresnels and some open face 1K Dps/nooks and assorted smaller units as well as my big box-o-bulbs. Thankfully, most of the locations don't call for huge sweeping shots and we're 99% int night. It's an all T lighting package as I just like the way T fixtures treats skin. That and I want to have some "white" against the cyan of overhead floros in one location which I'll up with some gels (forget the number off hand). For our EXT night shot I'm hoping to utilize an avenue in my neighborhood which has sodium vapor lights, a lot of lights on storefronts at night, and these Christmas light letters suspended from the lamp-posts. Last time I had my meter out there, It was 'round a T2 overall, so I'll probably open up for a T1.9 on the ultra primes and augment with some back-lighting as we track along-side the character (going to pick up a PAR64 with a NS just to have and bang her with that as a hot rim). P.s. I really wish kodak packaged the '60 into S16mm, hell then I'd buy 400 ft and just go nuts shooting something for a day.

This'll be my 2nd outing on 35 this year, the next is a feature I got through cine.com which will be, well, interesting, on a Konvas 2m. That's the challenge shoot I'm quite looking forward to.

 

I also kinda wanted to go with Cooke S4/i but, at the same time, I felt Ziess is a bit more clinical looking which felt to fit more for this short ('bout a woman feeling out of place because she doesn't speak English).

 

That is my master plan ;)

[Edward Goldner]

Hi Adrian,

 

You mentioned that you considered shooting on Vivid 160T, not sure if you are already aware of this but Fuji recently brought out Vivid 500T, according to specs, it has the same characteristics and grain rating as 160T so it may be a suitable candidate for your shoot.

 

All the best,

Ed

[Freya Black]

Thats really interesting as it is such a minority stock!

 

I'd love to hear more about 5260 and also "Kodak Vision2 HD Colo(u)r scan film" which I've never heard of anyone shooting.

 

Lastly whatever happened with Kodak Expression film? It seemed quite the thing for a while but now nobody seems to shoot it?

I guess people might be more inclined to Fuji for that kind of thing nowadays?

 

Well I guess if you are shooting 35 then it's nice to try out 5260 as you wont get the opportunity in 16mm.

 

Great to have a discussion about film on here again! ;)

 

love

 

Freya

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Hey Ed,

I had heard of the Fuji Vivid 500 and while I love Fuji film (and I really did enjoy my time with their Eterna 500) I gotta stick with big K for the job as I'm getting a good deal on stock overall and supplementing with some long-ends for safety. Were it not for that I'd've probably gone Fuji for the duration.

 

Expression is still 'round Freya, I belive even for 16mm on their 500T ('29) and looking at the kodak page right now it seems they may even still be offering '74 and '79 in 35mm. I did notice, now that you bring it up, that it's feels to have fallen off of the map when '19 came out. Might just be due to people wanting to roll on the newer stock and take advantage of it's very fine grain (surprisingly fine to my eye on the 7219) and low light capabilities, which also astounded me (rendering x mas lights as "too bright" despite being so dim as to give my meter an EU). Hopefully they stick 'round long enough for me to get my grubby little mits on 'em.

I've also always been interested in the '99 stock, but from what I know of it, you need specialty software in the telecine to work with it and I've honestly never called up my preferred post house (Shooters here in Phila) to ask 'em if they have it.

 

 

I know, I miss all the film talk; it died out out a bit after the forum's big loss of John, who I wish I had a chance to bombard with questions and the whole digital debates raging 'cross the industry. I suppose we'll have to wait for Vision4 stock before we all rage over new offerings ;)

[Saul Rodgar]

I suppose we'll have to wait for Vision4 stock before we all rage over new offerings ;)

 

If it ever gets there. Here is hoping it does.

 

It is great that peeps in Philly are still willing to use film stock for projects. Here in NM, most everyone is going gaga over the RED, HDSLR, HD "revolution." Wild West mentality I suppose. :)

 

Good luck with the project, sounds like you have a good plan of attack.

[Adrian Sierkowski]

I think, or at least I have been lucky enough to expereince, that here in Phila, most people are pretty devoted to right format for the right film. Could I shoot this on the RED? Of course I could, or even a DVX, but it doesn't fit with it (pitty I had to forgo anamorphic; next time :/ ) Thanks Saul, I hope I don't screw up too badly; but just in case, well let's not plan for that.

I'll let you all know how it goes and when i get some time ill post up some scout shots.

[Chris Burke]

am I seeing things or is Kodak offering 5274 and 5279 again? It was taken from the website and I assume, replaced with the 5260. The 60 sort of filling the need of a higher contrast stock. Now both of the older Vision stocks are back on the website along with the 5260. I would recommend the 74 when ever you can get away with it.

[Mike Williamson]

Given the size of your lighting package, I would suggest testing a one stop push on 5260 (maybe rated around 640 or 800 ASA) in case you find yourself underpowered, specifically in night exterior situations.

 

I have not tested that stock, although I saw tests and a resulting contact print of a friend's short film shot anamorphic that used 5279 pushed one stop to 800 ASA that looked very good with minimal grain. If 5260 is as close to 5279 as I've heard, it would be helpful for you to know whether you're willing to push or not. Good luck with the shoot, post some info when you're further along with it!

[Marco Cordero]

I shot a short with 5279 and 5260 and they matched very well. 5260 has finer grain, but otherwise looks almost identical to me. Compared to 5218/19, there is more contrast and saturation, but it is not overbearing. I ended up digitally increasing the contrast after telecine, but the uncorrected look was definitely more exciting than 5218/19.

 

 

Marco

Edited September 14, 2009 by Marco Cordero

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Hey Mike,

I'm certainly not against going a push, @ 640/800 if need be, but I don't think I'll need to given the location I'm pushing for the one night ext shot. It's pretty bright with lots of shop lights outside. But, we'll see. Marco, thanks for the info on it's similarity to the '79. I had shot some short end '79 before just for fun, so it's nice to have that as a baseline.

[Saul Rodgar]

am I seeing things or is Kodak offering 5274 and 5279 again? It was taken from the website and I assume, replaced with the 5260. The 60 sort of filling the need of a higher contrast stock. Now both of the older Vision stocks are back on the website along with the 5260. I would recommend the 74 when ever you can get away with it.

 

Interesting, they are not offering 16mm that I can see, for a reason. I have some 7274 short ends still in my freezer, and some 7279 left over as well. I think the 35mm image holds up more, I mostly shoot 16mm, but I've never been a fan of these stocks. A bit too much grain for my taste (in the smaller format).

Edited September 14, 2009 by Saul Rodgar

[John Hoffler]

Hey Adrian,

 

I recently shot on 5260 and I have the same to say as those above. Similar to 5279 but with a boost in contrast and saturation. I rated it at 320 and it looked great!

 

Here is a still if it'll help:

 

 

[Adrian Sierkowski]

Awesome John; thank you. Nice looking still; I'm looking forward to the shoot. I'll let all of you know how it goes.

[Satsuki Murashige]

Sounds like an awesome project, Adrian! Keep us updated, I'd like to hear more about your thought process on finding the look and how you prep a film.

 

Lastly whatever happened with Kodak Expression film? It seemed quite the thing for a while but now nobody seems to shoot it?

I shot a short on 5229 Expression in January. It's a low saturation, low-contrast stock, similar to Fuji 400T Eterna but slightly different in color rendering and less grainy. 5260 is basically the opposite look, high saturation, high contrast. I guess a lot of DPs got bored of the low-con look...

[Freya Black]

I shot a short on 5229 Expression in January. It's a low saturation, low-contrast stock, similar to Fuji 400T Eterna but slightly different in color rendering and less grainy. 5260 is basically the opposite look, high saturation, high contrast. I guess a lot of DPs got bored of the low-con look...

 

I have to say I'm drawn more to the idea of a more contrasty stock myself.

 

I just noticed that Kodak have dropped 5218 from their catalogue now and 5260 has pride of place as the Vision2 500T stock!

Maybe it will lead to more interest in 5260.

 

5260 seems like an interesting stock, and to be honest this is the first time it's really come to my attention.

 

How did you like the expression Satsuki?

 

love

 

Freya

[Freya Black]

Hey Adrian,

 

I recently shot on 5260 and I have the same to say as those above. Similar to 5279 but with a boost in contrast and saturation. I rated it at 320 and it looked great!

 

Here is a still if it'll help:

 

 

 

I note theres a load more stills from this film here:

 

http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?sh...227&hl=5260

 

...and it looks preety beautiful! :)

[John Hoffler]

thanks, Freya!

 

Hope that post helps...

[Saul Rodgar]

5260 is basically the opposite look, high saturation, high contrast. I guess a lot of DPs got bored of the low-con look...

 

Little wonder. I like low contrast if it fits the project. Generally, I would prefer higher contrast stocks over low con. Then again, a lot of "dialing in the contrast" can be easily be done in post, particularly if the project goes to digital.

[Satsuki Murashige]

How did you like the expression Satsuki?

It was fine. Now I wish I had shot 5260 instead!

[Adrian Sierkowski]

John, it certainly helped A lot. thank you!

 

And Saul, for me it depends on how much control I know I'll have in terms of lighting/time. When I have less control on set, I want to capture as wide range of luminance as possible so we can dial it in a bit more in the color correction. I find myself in this situation a lot when it comes to practical locations, which often don't have all the room (or more often) all the power I need, or all the time I'd need to really nail the look 100% on the day. I really like the new '19 stock for that.

When, as I think I will on this project, I have the time to do things (2 days to shoot a 5 page script), well then I might as well take some chances ;) (such as 35mm.... as opposed to the more familiar to me S16mm, which would've been cheaper as I own that damned camera). I almost went 100D reversal for this particular shoot; misbalanced to get everything golden... but alas, couldn't quite convince the director of that one ;)