Jump to content


Photo

best way to shoot S16 for 2.35


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 jijhh

jijhh
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  • Student

Posted 07 March 2007 - 03:46 PM

if the final output is completely up in the air, could be print, could be DVD, could be anything. what is the best way to do it?
  • 0

#2 Nathan Milford

Nathan Milford
  • Sustaining Members
  • 692 posts
  • Director
  • New York, NY

Posted 07 March 2007 - 03:53 PM

Crop the S16 frame or shoot 2-perf 35mm. Costs are similar if you can get your hands on a 2-perf camera.

You can play the 'anamorphic on 16mm' game, but if you do a quick search you will see the dozen or so conversations about what fun that is.
  • 0

#3 Jonathan Bowerbank

Jonathan Bowerbank
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2815 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 07 March 2007 - 04:46 PM

Crop the S16 frame or shoot 2-perf 35mm. Costs are similar if you can get your hands on a 2-perf camera.


You're throwing away so much information when you crop and blow up to 35, you should try and shoot on the slowest stock you can. Or, if you have the means and access to a 2-perf 35mm cam, follow Nathan's advice.

If it's going to a 35mm blow up print for theatre projection, you might as well shoot 2perf. But if you're just going to DVD, I would recommend you don't even play with the 2.35:1 ratio in S16 and shoot for 1.77:1 (aka 16:9) for HDTV's. It'll show up much better on screen, and digital projection of it in festivals or what have you won't be awkward.

Edited by Jonathan Bowerbank, 07 March 2007 - 04:47 PM.

  • 0

#4 Michael Nash

Michael Nash
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3330 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 07 March 2007 - 06:40 PM

How long is your film? Budgets are always relative to the run time of the project.

You could shoot Super16 framed for 2.35:1, and transfer letterboxed to 24P HD. That would give you a good master/intermediate for multiple release formats, but the filmout would definitely drive the total price higher than an optical route.

The "could be anything" release format is the big question, though. You can't nail down the method that's least problematic and least expensive until you know for certain what release format(s) you'll need.
  • 0

#5 Kenny N Suleimanagich

Kenny N Suleimanagich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 900 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 07 March 2007 - 07:50 PM

35mm 3-perf spherical with a 2.35:1 gate, that's what i recently worked with on an Arri 35-III
  • 0

#6 Michael Nash

Michael Nash
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3330 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 08 March 2007 - 05:50 PM

35mm 3-perf spherical with a 2.35:1 gate, that's what i recently worked with on an Arri 35-III


3-perf 35mm is really designed for scanning or telecine, since you can't do a straight contact-print and end up with a 4-perf anamorphic print. I honestly don't know if you could do an optical blowup and and end up 4-perf in one step, but any non-standard process reduces the number of labs that can do it for you.

You would still have 35mm film costs, which even at 3-perf adds up quickly over Super16. 2-perf brings the price down more, but you still have to deal with the 2-perf/4-perf change in the lab.
  • 0


Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Opal

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Opal

Glidecam

CineTape

Technodolly

CineLab

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery