Film is not dead, long live film

victor huey · August 24, 2015

hi, Filmmakers make film. Digital peeps make Video! I am too old school to change, when the digital age came, I was in the process of converting my Kinor 35 to two perf at Aranda, when the digital tsunami hit. Projects shot on film began to fade away, to the sorry state it is now. Only those with studio support could afford to shoot film. Although 2 perf was a cheaper way to shoot film for indie projects, the lack of cameras and support doomed it before the 2 perf movement could begin.

I have slowly aquired a number of 2 perf Camera's, and would like to start a 2 perf workshop in New York City. So few of todays generation have never touched a film camera, so training sessions would be necessary. Since most of the gear is russian, I will approach this group first, to see if there is any interest in a workshop.

Victor Huey

Kenny N Suleimanagich · August 24, 2015

I’d love to toy around with some 2-perf cameras in NYC.

Jay Young · August 24, 2015

If I was close, or next time I'm in the city, for sure!

I'd love to shoot 2-perf with you.

James Compton · August 24, 2015

Vic,

Great idea. Please keep us posted as the curriculum and calendar develops. I can send a few people your way.

Bill DiPietra · August 24, 2015

I've actually wanted to set up a one or two-day 16mm workshop for a long while, now, but just haven't been able to figure out where I could hold it.

Either way, I'd definitely be interested in shooting 2-perf. Especially since I've never shot 35mm.

Josh Gladstone · August 24, 2015

What about at Mono No Aware? http://mononoawarefilm.com/

Tyler Purcell · August 25, 2015

Actually, film isn't very costly to shoot. I will most likely be shooting my next feature in super 16. Even at a 10:1 ratio, including all lab costs 2k scan of all the negative, it's only around $50 grand. Kodak's deals on 16mm are excellent, you just need to call them up and work out the pricing. Smaller labs are willing to work deals as well for bulk pricing on low-budget features to keep them busy. Super 16 @ 50ASA (daylight) and 250ASA (interiors) has very little grain with Vision 3 stock. It blows up very nicely to 35mm for theatrical and makes a great scan to 2k for DCP.

Personally, I think this is the best time to shoot film because equipment hasn't been so cheap to rent, Kodak hasn't been so motivated to sell stock (in order to keep the format alive) and labs have been willing to negotiate in order to keep their employees working.

Still, $50k JUST for film expenses is a lot when you think if I shoot the same movie on my Blackmagic cameras, that cost goes down to maybe 2k for some new cards and a bunch of hard drives.

In my opinion, 35mm is cost-prohibitive for most low-budget productions. When you do the math it's not 3x, but more like 5x more then super 16mm when you include rental and support. The cameras are heavier/bulkier and require expensive lenses to work. I've always thought about buying a 35mm film camera, but when you look at the cost to run the damn thing and you look at the extra quality which nobody will ever see, it just doesn't make sense. I have the same feeling about digital cinema with all this 4k and 6k nonsense, nobody watching your low-budget production is ever going to see that quality. So the only point of shooting something on an ultra-low budget show in greater then 2k, is to brag about it.

Sure, if your plan is to shoot in 35mm and only use a film process, that's great. However, 2 perf is pretty much incompatible with everything else. You can't view it on a bench editor or moviola without seeing one frame blurred on top of another frame. You can't print it without going through an optical process to anamorphic for theatrical. So the cost of dealing with 2 perf in post, outweighs the advantage of shooting the format to begin with. It's far better to shoot academy 4 perf anamorphic, which is a one-to-one camera to print format.

I just feel more people who want to experiment with film, should really look at the current 16mm options because you'd be shocked just how cheap it is. Building a class around modern S16 would be awesome. Have a bunch of SR3's, teach the telecine process and editing in Avid, to then cut your negative and learn how blow up's to 35mm work. This way students can get the best of both worlds, they will learn how to shoot on film AND get a 35mm academy ratio print of their final product. If I had money, this is something I would heavily invest in. Our youth really is interested in film and offering them that kind of opportunity for success within the modern film workflow, would be great. It saddens me greatly to see schools ditching film for digital cinema cameras, which are practically point and shoot compared to film. In my opinion, when you can run the camera for an infinite amount of time without incurring a hefty financial penalty, there isn't any incentive for the students to really learn things. Once there is a financial burden, you really focus on making the product good.

victor huey · August 25, 2015

Yes, you have very valid points, i had an arri sr3, and sold it for less than 2k lol. I am in the industry so i had access to short ends, and two perf allows me to shoot cheaply. It's not for everyone, as the cameras are indeed heavy by todays standard, but the generation before me had cameras that were over 100 lbs. lol. I am not trying to run a school, but would like to gather people who still want to shoot film, and work on each others projects. Very retro, but some people pefer vinly over mp3. I perfer 2 perf over super 16, just a matter of access, as no one in my world shoots 16mm anymore and 35mm is getting rare.

Victor

Michael LaVoie · August 25, 2015

What about at Mono No Aware? http://mononoawarefilm.com/

Funny you mention that as I just met a director who's in that group. We're shooting a trailer for his feature soon on S16mm. He was going to use a bolex but I think I talked him into at least an Arri 416 plus. Since there are scenes with dialogue and sync sound is necessary as is a relatively quiet package.

I'm not too keen on Super16mm myself but yeah, Shooting 35mm for a trailer was not in the cards. Perhaps if the funding for the feature comes in we'll get to shoot 35.

Edited August 25, 2015 by Michael LaVoie

John Steven Lasher · September 27, 2015

Film is not dead; it's expensive – and worth every cent. Kodak is, unfortunately, the only game in town after Fuji (my film stock of choice) pulled the plug. Wouldn't it be great if, say, Agfa (or the former East German ORWO) were to return. A 'pipe dream', surely.

Kenny N Suleimanagich · September 27, 2015

Orwo is around and still going strong producing film stocks, UN54, N74

Carl Looper · September 27, 2015

Kodak hasn't pulled the plug. They've obviously had to wind it down a bit. But they haven't closed shop.

And other players, such as Ferrania, are slowly getting up to speed. There remains a market for film, just not as big as it once was.

EDIT - oh wait, I misread the post.

Edited September 27, 2015 by Carl Looper

JD Hartman · September 27, 2015

Film is not dead; it's expensive – and worth every cent. Kodak is, unfortunately, the only game in town after Fuji (my film stock of choice) pulled the plug. Wouldn't it be great if, say, Agfa (or the former East German ORWO) were to return. A 'pipe dream', surely.

Obviously I'm not up to date on current events.... What happened to Fuji support and manufacture of film?. At one time they had multi page ads about their filmstock and the projects it was being used on?