Jump to content


Photo

5366 vs 5234 for interneg...


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 john price

john price
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 19 March 2008 - 09:56 AM

I have been asked to make a b+w s-16 to 35mm blow up for a colleague and he's trying to do it as cheaply as possible (what else is new). I know kodak recommends 5366 for the interpos and 5234 for the interneg but I am wondering what the effect of using 5366 for both would be - in the interest of buying one roll of intermediate stock instead of 2. A little extra contrast would be okay as the director wants a snappy final print. Before we buy the stock I wonder if anyone has gone through this process. I have access to an oxberry 1700 with a s-16 gate to do the work... of course we will be testing but any wisdom would be appreciated.

thanks


john price, toronto ia667 1st a.c., experimental filmmaker.
  • 0

#2 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 19 March 2008 - 05:15 PM

using 5366 for both would be

Won't work.

5366 is a clear-based stock with gamma around 1.40. (You can get it lower with reduced development, but not enough for what you suggest).

5234 is a grey-based stock with gamma around 0.65 - 0.70. (Variable a little with dev time).

Used together, the overall gamma is 1.40 x 0.65 = 0.91 - 0.98. As you are using an optical printer for to blow up to 35mm, you will get a significantt increase in contrast because of the printer (black and white stocks have a higher specular contrast than diffuse contrast because of the silver image). SO you would go with the lower range of 5234 gamma (0.65) to get a perfect dupe.

Using 5366 twice would give you a gamma of around 1.40 x 1.40 = about 2 - then you have the extra specular contrast.

Another point is that the grey base of the 5234, as with any negative stock, helps to reduce flare and halation. 5366 doesn't have it.

A "snappy" final print might have contrast up by a few per cent - as well as the maximum sharpness and cleanness. Double the contrast and excess flare won't satisfy!
  • 0

#3 Brian Pritchard

Brian Pritchard
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 328 posts
  • Other
  • Stoke-on-Trent, UK

Posted 19 March 2008 - 05:25 PM

I have been asked to make a b+w s-16 to 35mm blow up for a colleague and he's trying to do it as cheaply as possible (what else is new). I know kodak recommends 5366 for the interpos and 5234 for the interneg but I am wondering what the effect of using 5366 for both would be - in the interest of buying one roll of intermediate stock instead of 2. A little extra contrast would be okay as the director wants a snappy final print. Before we buy the stock I wonder if anyone has gone through this process. I have access to an oxberry 1700 with a s-16 gate to do the work... of course we will be testing but any wisdom would be appreciated.

thanks


john price, toronto ia667 1st a.c., experimental filmmaker.

John
You could try 2238 Pan Separation Film and process to a gamma of 1.0, or a bit less if you are using an Oxberry, for the dupe pos and dupe neg. 1.0 x 1.0 gives an overall gamma of 1.0 which is what you require. I have used this method and the result is quite usable.


Brian
  • 0

#4 john price

john price
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 19 March 2008 - 08:14 PM

thank you both very much for your input. I just looked at the info page for 2238 and it seems like this is also a clear based stock though able to hit a gamma of 1.0 in D-96. In D-97 however, the curve starts out at 1.2 or thereabouts. The black and white lab situation in Toronto is not ideal for tight control - we have 2 'artists labs' that run 35mm neg and pos but I have found that 'normal' process for them runs a 1/2 to a full stop more density than material I self process at home in D-19.

Anyhow, it seems like the options are to go with 5234 and try to up the gamma in processing or to use 2238 and live with a potentially higher contrast situation... the filmmaker does not want a low contrast final print so I am leaning in the direction of 2238.

The next challenge will be trying to order a single can of that stuff in Canada...

john.
  • 0

#5 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 20 March 2008 - 02:49 AM

Brian is correct (of course) about 2238. In a neg process (such as D96, you should have no trouble hitting a gamma of 1.0 (or a bit under).

Certainly that would be better than trying to push 5234 up to 1.0. You'd be lucky to reach 0.90, and that in two generations, would be too flat, even with an optical printer.

Note that 2238 is a polyester-based stock.

Have you considered calling the labs in Toronto to see if they would consider selling you the amount of stock you would require. (If they still use it at all, of course.) If they do, they might well have part rolls sitting in their cold store that would give you the right amount of film at the right price.
  • 0

#6 john price

john price
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 21 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 20 March 2008 - 01:24 PM

thank you Dominic,

the big labs up here - technicolor and deluxe - used to be a lot more flexible in terms of selling ends of printer/lab stock. Now many of the more generous managers have retired and the sales staff are impenetrable. The guys in the back are friendly but their hands are tied as control over the short ends has been tightened... I am pretty sure that technicolor toronto sends all of the oddball optical jobs to montreal where they still maintain a machine of two. My colleague lives there so I will get him to ask around. We will need at least a 2000 foot can for the job so I am hoping the Kodak minimum is reasonable - like 1x2000 foot can!

The polyester runs fine through our camera and the 2238 is perfed B+H which is ideal. I have made positives onto the KS 2302 from 16mm b+w neg originals and there is light weaving that is noticeable on the freeze frames... other than that for a cheap blow up, the copies look excellent... and cost me about 1/100th of a D/I.

take care,

john.
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Metropolis Post

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Glidecam

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Visual Products

Willys Widgets