LONG LIVE FILM!!!

[Anthony Schilling]

VNF was used by the mile for high-speed analysis. I must have personally got through 50,000'/year on classified trials and we were just one of half-a-dozen establishments in the UK- the US must have had many more. We processed on-site for security and often pushed the 400ISO stocks 2 stops. It was difficult to get consistent control strips even with that sort of throughput, but fortunately colour fidelity wasn't paramount for our customers. Running at up to 10,000 pps was.

When VNF was discontinued, before high-speed video was mature, users here had to go to b/w neg and video transfer.

Yes, Detroit used it for filming crash tests and the film schools had it going up until the end. I only got to shoot the 7240 125T and I think it was the same emulsion from at least the early 70's. It really had a newsy film feel from 1970. It did transfer a bit better than K40 and E100D, and that's something I'd like to see as a focus point if they will be putting some R&D into reversal. Problem is their full capacity roller was the R&D roller, so now they need another even smaller one?

[cole t parzenn]

When the required end product is a print it's much easier to start with neg. Straight reversal copies are very contrasty and you have to go through an extra intermediate stage to avoid that.

Exposure is much more critical as well.

 

With digital post-production and exhibition, is reversal still a hindrance? What if Ferrania's Scotch Chrome looks great and is made available in cine 35? Would it get used?

[David Mullen ASC]

Reversal has almost no latitude for misexposure, making it more of a challenge for shooting than is necessary with the existence of color negative. The only reason for shooting color reversal would be for that color reversal look, and you were feeling bold enough to work without a safety net.

[John E Clark]

When I began transitioning into using DSLRs rather than Film based SLRs, there was this sage advice 'shoot as if you were using revesal (slide film...)', which is to say watch the highlights, and limited latititude.

 

Given that Film film has declined... the advice would work the other way for someone thinking about shooting with reversal film... 'think like you are using a DSLR'...

 

The saving grace with learning to expose reasonably well for a DSLR is... one could look at the LCD display and histogram to get a quick look of how far off one was...

 

These days with labs disappearing, what would it be for reversal film to get that warm fuzzy feeling... a week... and the worry that the FedEx truck crashed and your film is now destroyed or sitting in an impound area... (when the Wife was doing her wedding business I'd hand carry the film to the lab... so if it was destroyed, it was at least at the lab, or I was dead... Some of the organizations she belonged to did have insurance to 'recreate' some shots, such as the bridal party, if the film was lost/destroyed by either the fault of the photographer, or the processing workflow.).

Edited October 14, 2014 by John E Clark

[Keith Walters]

Is there any particular reason why stills film couldn't be used for shooting movies?

I know it's optimized for producing paper prints instead of transparencies, but that would be less of an issue with a Digital Intermediate.

I know the processing chemistry is different too, but you would imagine that stills chemicals would be more readily available than those for movie film.

It would also mean that pensioned-off minilabs might be able to be modified to handle longer strips of negative.

[David Mullen ASC]

No remjet backing on C41 films so static might be a problem now & then. Perfs have to be punched with more accuracy and precision -- supposedly when the perf punchers got worn out in the motion picture line, they got sent over to be used in the still film line.

[dan kessler]

Along that same line, no anti-halation backing also means that
cameras with polished chrome pressure pads can cause, well, halation.

Also, pretty sure the perfs in 35mm still film are Kodak Standard, rather
than Bell & Howell, which is the standard for 35mm motion picture neg.
Shape and height of the perfs do not match. This is only a problem,

of course, for cameras with registration pins, but the best ones have them.

Edited October 15, 2014 by dan kessler

[Phil Rhodes]

I suspect modern scanning could probably make up for a lot of misalignment in perfs. Track the corner of the gate, etc. Just so long as it's within the county, should be fine!

 

P

[Mark Dunn]

I think the concern is that KS and BH perfs are a different shape and that BH register pin just wouldn't go into a KS perf.

Looking at the specs, though, I think it would, but there would be some space around it. Perhaps it wouldn't do such a good job of locating the film laterally.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Mark Dunn

[Keith Walters]

Well obviously you can't just directly use stills film; the take time would be severely limited if nothing else :rolleyes:

But assuming the blank stock is still being made, could that be cut to standard MP lengths and punched with MP type perfs?

And as far as Remjet goes, could the anti-halation problem be attacked with low-reflectivity pressure plates?

 

But anyway, Polaroid film lives on after it was abandoned by Polaroid; I don't see why something similar can't be done for movie film.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hasn't it always been possible to buy 100ft bulk loads of stills film, and haven't they been used for MP work before?

[Kenny N Suleimanagich]

Godard shot “Alphaville” on Ilford HP-5 and went to great lengths to do so. Although, there are mixed claims about Ilford making MP film at that time and one anecdote goes that he had his crew stitch together several bulk loads. Does the Cameflex have a registration pin?

[James Compton]

 

Why not shoot MP (theatrical or television) on reversal? It's been done.

 

 

Check out DOMINO(2005), directed by Tony Scott and shot by Dan Mindel, ASC. That movie is a good example of 100D EKTACHROME being pushed to its limits. They used it for 85% of the production. The rest is 5245 50D, 5212 100T and 5218 500T for a couple night scenes.

[Mark Dunn]

Godard shot “Alphaville” on Ilford HP-5 and went to great lengths to do so. Although, there are mixed claims about Ilford making MP film at that time and one anecdote goes that he had his crew stitch together several bulk loads. Does the Cameflex have a registration pin?

HPS, not HP5, was a 400ASA MP stock.

HP5 is the updated HP4 stills film introduced in about 1976 IIRC.

[John E Clark]

 

Check out DOMINO(2005), directed by Tony Scott and shot by Dan Mindel, ASC. That movie is a good example of 100D EKTACHROME being pushed to its limits. They used it for 85% of the production. The rest is 5245 50D, 5212 100T and 5218 500T for a couple night scenes.

 

Unfortunately "Domino"(2005) is one of the few films I stopped watching in the middle and never resumed...

 

Part of it was that the cinematic technique did 'irratate' me... and I don't think it was due to 'story choices'... it just was irratating... the other reason was more due to the lead actress, Keira Knightley, just doesn't have the 'action actress' presence... even her "Saint Cripsen's Day" Speech in the installment of "Pirates of the Carabbean: At World's End"(2007) was... uh... sort of limp...

[Mark Dunn]

Kenny N Suleimanagich, on 15 Oct 2014 - 3:17 PM, said:

Godard shot “Alphaville” on Ilford HP-5 and went to great lengths to do so. Although, there are mixed claims about Ilford making MP film at that time and one anecdote goes that he had his crew stitch together several bulk loads. Does the Cameflex have a registration pin?

They didn't use bulk rolls, they used short ends.

Ilford had been making MP stock since the 20s.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Mark Dunn

[dan kessler]

Well obviously you can't just directly use stills film; the take time would be severely limited if nothing else :rolleyes:

But assuming the blank stock is still being made, could that be cut to standard MP lengths and punched with MP type perfs?

And as far as Remjet goes, could the anti-halation problem be attacked with low-reflectivity pressure plates?

 

But anyway, Polaroid film lives on after it was abandoned by Polaroid; I don't see why something similar can't be done for movie film.

I would think it possible to get the right perfs, if the demand was there. And yes, pressure plates can be modified.

Take a look inside any 35mm still camera -- the pressure plates are black.

Edited October 15, 2014 by dan kessler

[Kenny N Suleimanagich]

Regarding Alphaville: Some more information can be found here.

Edited October 15, 2014 by Kenny N Suleimanagich