Jump to content


Photo

5251


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Milo Sekulovich

Milo Sekulovich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 22 January 2007 - 04:29 AM

Hi,

Every movie I view that was shot with that stock amazes me with the "look" it gave.

That stock had a "signature " look in the same way 5247 did.

The fleshtones on '51 were always superb.

Look at the exteriors of The Good,the Bad and the Ugly and Easy Rider.

Beautiful.


Regards,
Milo Sekulovich
  • 0

#2 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2273 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 23 January 2007 - 07:12 AM

i agree, but 5254 which replaced it looked the same and it was 100asa instead of 50asa. John Holland.
  • 0

#3 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 January 2007 - 12:07 PM

i agree, but 5254 which replaced it looked the same and it was 100asa instead of 50asa. John Holland.

I respectfully disagree. These two stocks have distinctly different looks. The lighting requirements alone may have a lot to do with the different looks, as the footcandles required to get a decent image were considerably higher with 5251. It was not uncommon to see large carbon-arc fired HMIs used outdoors in daylight with 5251, a practice which subsided in the move to faster stocks such as 5254 and beyond.
  • 0

#4 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2273 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 23 January 2007 - 12:12 PM

Well i have shot with both stocks ,have you ? and Carbon Arcs have nothing to do with HMIs and arcs were used for many years with 5254 , before HMIs arrived in the 80s. :) John Holland. London.
  • 0

#5 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 January 2007 - 12:30 PM

Well i have shot with both stocks ,have you ?

I've shot '54. You're entitled to your opinion, as I am mine. However, your implication that the two stocks looked exactly the same doesn't appear to be shared by many. The style and intensity of lighting did change considerably during the transition between those two stocks, and there is a readily apparent difference in gamma between films made on those two stocks.
  • 0

#6 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2273 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 23 January 2007 - 12:44 PM

We will have to agree to disagree . john :)
  • 0

#7 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 January 2007 - 12:48 PM

We will have to agree to disagree . john :)

:)
  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

The Slider

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Glidecam

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Technodolly

The Slider

Tai Audio

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab