Guest kalkarman Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 Curious: Could one shoot directly on Kodak Intermediate or Print films? If so, what effects does it give you? What latitude does one have? What tips and tricks do you know? Many Thanks, Kal Karman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted March 28, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 28, 2005 Curious: Could one shoot directly on Kodak Intermediate or Print films? If so, what effects does it give you? What latitude does one have? What tips and tricks do you know? Many Thanks, Kal Karman <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Sure, you can use them -- they are a different perf & pitch, so steadiness might not be great, and they are like some incredibly low ASA (4 ASA? that level...) and color reproduction would be strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbie Land Posted March 28, 2005 Share Posted March 28, 2005 David is correct. ive shot a lot of thesse stocks through my h-16 w/o any problems of registration so the 100' spool-downs have worked luck so far. live action shooting without filters does provide oddish color shift. i used to do the same with the 35mm still stock kodak varicolor slide film, which i beleive maybe similiar to 16mm color print stocks. so, i would experiment with lighting ssituations and filters/gels. Sure, you can use them -- they are a different perf & pitch, so steadiness might not be great, and they are like some incredibly low ASA (4 ASA? that level...) and color reproduction would be strange. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeSelinsky Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 ive shot a lot of thesse stocks through my h-16 w/o any problems of registration so the 100' spool-downs have worked luck so far.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, but unlike with 35mm, in 16mm there is only one perf shape. There is some kind of 16mm "reduced tolerance perforation" but that is very close to the standard 16 perf, and I don't know if that's used for printer/intermediate stocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adam Frisch FSF Posted March 29, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 29, 2005 Did some tests a couple of years ago that i posted here - maybe you can find it in the archives? Anyway, the color IM stock turned out to be around 1-2 ASA in speed!! Very sharp, but since it didn't have an orange color mask, we used double 85 filters to compensate. No problem to color correct later in telecine, although it was a little bit off straight out of the machine. Ran very loudly in the 435 due to the other BH perfs, but with some light tweaking on the pitch adjustment knob it settled down. Film lacks rem-jet backing and therefore is presumably prone to halation, but we didn't notice anything even with sources pointed straight into the lens. We also tested some B/W sound stock. Can't remember what speed we bracketed it to, but it wasn't too bad. Very contrasty and silky in look! Gorgeous! I'd like to shoot some more of it someday for the right project. Both films were from Agfa who still produces intermediate- and sound stocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeSelinsky Posted March 29, 2005 Share Posted March 29, 2005 Anyway, the color IM stock turned out to be around 1-2 ASA in speed!! Very sharp, but since it didn't have an orange color mask, we used double 85 filters to compensate. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> 1-2 asa, very practical asa - perhaps when you have a nuclear explosion to film! :D Just curious, is this the speed with the double 85's? - G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adam Frisch FSF Posted March 29, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 29, 2005 George, I honestly don't recall. There were no film speeds published anywhere for the IM film, so it was trial and error. We stacked 4 blondie's around the camera and aimed it - me and the other DP who did the test took turns burning up in front of the camera - it was horrendously hot. poop, I think it was closer to 10ASA now that I think of it. Anyway, not fast film, but enough on a bright, sunny day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted March 29, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted March 29, 2005 Film perforations: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/...esP.shtml#perfs Camera films are normally "short" pitch, 0.1866 inches for 35mm film, 0.2994 inches for 16mm film. Print films are normally "long" pitch, 0.1870 inches (KS-1870) for 35mm prints, 0.3000 inches (1R-3000) for 16mm prints. 35mm films used with pin registration use either BH or DH perforations with a perf height of 0.073 inches. The KS perf is larger, with a height of 0.078 inches. Intermediate films and print films are normally printed from an orange-masked color negative film on a printer using a tungsten lamp run at low color temperature for extended life. So the blue sensitive layer is MUCH faster than the red or green, and considerable orange colored filtration is needed to get a somewhat "neutral" exposure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Carter Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 7363 High Contrast Print film processed as reversal looks great shot in a Bolex H16 with 1/35 shutter. I use 10 asa and send a note to the processor about it. Not much latitude but really sharp. Looks great even if a little light. Who would process it in the States? Who would process other print films reversed? in the States that is. Michael Carter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted April 11, 2005 Share Posted April 11, 2005 7363 High Contrast Print film processed as reversal looks great shot in a Bolex H16 with 1/35 shutter. I use 10 asa and send a note to the processor about it. Not much latitude but really sharp. Looks great even if a little light. Who would process it in the States? Michael Carter <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Foto-Kem in LA and probably Forde in Seattle off hand. -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Carter Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 (edited) Gottem. Thanks Sam. It is fun to experiment with different stocks like that and nice to know who would process them. The look of High Contrast is appealing to me because, most likely, the old movies I've seen have more contrast than reversal first generation film. After internegatives, masters and release prints, contrast increases; a soft, first generation film ends up looking much better! Print film gets there in one go. High Contrast film, if overexposed some, makes me want to hand color the frames directly on film. 16mm is large enough for tight work like that, but possible. Clear areas, that still have some lines left in them, filled with marker color scribbled on would look really cool. There are little 3 bottle sets of film tinting colors used for photo retouch work. Would they work on High Contrast print stock for hand tinting different areas? What brand of inks or markers are used for hand coloring films? Michael Carter Edited April 12, 2005 by Michael Carter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael Carter Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 "nice to know who would process them. The look of High Contrast is appealing to me " Hey, here is a place that says on line that they process Hi-Con film as reversal or as negative. Cinelab Looks like I'll be shooting more of it. Michael Carter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted April 12, 2005 Share Posted April 12, 2005 The look of High Contrast is appealing to me because, most likely, the old movies I've seen have more contrast than reversal first generation film. After internegatives, masters and release prints, contrast increases; a soft, first generation film ends up looking much better! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I like the look also, but don't assume "old movies" were neccesarly very high contrast. What you're often seeing is too-many-generations of duping. Boycott all theaters not showing nitrate prints made directly off the camera neg :D -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted April 12, 2005 Premium Member Share Posted April 12, 2005 7363 High Contrast Print film processed as reversal looks great shot in a Bolex H16 with 1/35 shutter. I use 10 asa and send a note to the processor about it. Not much latitude but really sharp. Looks great even if a little light. Who would process it in the States? Who would process other print films reversed? in the States that is. Michael Carter <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Some of the B&W films designed for the D-96 and D-97 (negative) processes will not do well in the new B&W reversal process, as the new B&W reversal films were specifically designed for the new permanganate bleach used in the reversal process. You run the risk of a "soft" emulsion unless the lab has modified the process to better "harden" films not designed for that process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Vanpotter Posted November 13, 2013 Share Posted November 13, 2013 wow,,great info on this film,,i purchased 8000 ft of kodak 7244 film and want to shoot our desert scenes with it,thnx for info of using double wratten 85s.that was very helpfull.i love this site for information.ill post our tests on this film...these types of kodak film are being sold on ebay for 150 at 4000 feet.if i can manage to pull out a flat color image i can telecine and color grade in post edit,that would make me a happy film director.great information gentlemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Will Montgomery Posted November 15, 2013 Premium Member Share Posted November 15, 2013 This summer I shot 5234 Kodak Panchromatic B&W Duplicate Negative as an alternative to Double-X with Tommy from Videofilmsolutions.com's help. Just sent it in for processing and looking forward to what shows up. Good idea to use 7244 for desert scenes with such a low ASA. Test, test, test then test again though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Gladstone Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Oh I'm interested in that 5234 test. That sounds great. Can't wait to see your results! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now