Jump to content


Photo

Stocks of the 80s and early 90s


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Carl Hed

Carl Hed

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Digital Image Technician

Posted 17 November 2009 - 03:29 PM

Hello!

I have watched a lot of great looking movies from the 80s and early 90s but cannot find out what stocks were used. Also I would like to know which stocks today would produce the most similar colors and contrast in comparison to the 80s and early 90s stocks?

A few examples of movies are:

*In the Name of the Rose
*Young Sherlock Holmes (I think its the same stock as the above movie?)
*Home Alone
*Raiders of the Lost Ark - Indiana Jones
*Blade Runner
*Alien


I had no luck finding which stocks were used for any of the movies.
The day light in "the Name of the Rose" & "Young Sherlock Holmes" shows a hint of blue almost a violett hue while the skin tones are red, brown-red which I have not seen in any of todays footage.

Does anyone know about these old stocks, names and which new ones get similar result?

Thank you

/Hed
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 November 2009 - 03:46 PM

See:
http://motion.kodak....ilm/chrono4.htm

"Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Alien", and "Blade Runner" were all shot on the only 35mm Kodak color negative made at the time, 5247 (100T, later re-rated by Kodak at 125T). The first high-speed Kodak color negative stock, 5293 (not to be confused with a later 5293) came out in 1982, too late for any of these productions though "Blade Runner" came close. These three movies were also shot in 35mm anamorphic (Panavision.)

"In the Name of the Rose" was shot in standard 35mm 1.85 using Kodak 5294 (400T).

"Home Alone" was also shot in standard 35mm 1.85 using the new Kodak 5296 (EXR 500T).

I don't know about "Young Sherlock Holmes" but since it was shot in 1984, it probably used Kodak 5294 (400T). Again, standard 35mm 1.85 I believe.

Though it was commonplace back then, even after high-speed film was introduced, to still use Kodak 5247 (100T) for day exterior work and any bluescreen work. Though 5295 (400T) was intended as a high-speed stock optimized for bluescreen work.

Also, you saw the use of Fuji and Agfa stocks for some major Hollywood movies in the 1980's but not on those you listed.




Hello!

I have watched a lot of great looking movies from the 80s and early 90s but cannot find out what stocks were used. Also I would like to know which stocks today would produce the most similar colors and contrast in comparison to the 80s and early 90s stocks?

A few examples of movies are:

*In the Name of the Rose
*Young Sherlock Holmes (I think its the same stock as the above movie?)
*Home Alone
*Raiders of the Lost Ark - Indiana Jones
*Blade Runner
*Alien


I had no luck finding which stocks were used for any of the movies.
The day light in "the Name of the Rose" & "Young Sherlock Holmes" shows a hint of blue almost a violett hue while the skin tones are red, brown-red which I have not seen in any of todays footage.

Does anyone know about these old stocks, names and which new ones get similar result?

Thank you

/Hed


  • 0

#3 Carl Hed

Carl Hed

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Digital Image Technician

Posted 17 November 2009 - 06:25 PM

Thank you David!

Your answer is very appreciated!
I would guess that I should go with Kodaks Vision2 5260 500T to get a similar look of 5294 400T and Kodak Vision2 5212 100T for Kodak 5247 100T?
Seems the colorimetry of the stocks has changed alot since the 1980s, am I right?



See:
http://motion.kodak....ilm/chrono4.htm

"Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Alien", and "Blade Runner" were all shot on the only 35mm Kodak color negative made at the time, 5247 (100T, later re-rated by Kodak at 125T). The first high-speed Kodak color negative stock, 5293 (not to be confused with a later 5293) came out in 1982, too late for any of these productions though "Blade Runner" came close. These three movies were also shot in 35mm anamorphic (Panavision.)

"In the Name of the Rose" was shot in standard 35mm 1.85 using Kodak 5294 (400T).

"Home Alone" was also shot in standard 35mm 1.85 using the new Kodak 5296 (EXR 500T).

I don't know about "Young Sherlock Holmes" but since it was shot in 1984, it probably used Kodak 5294 (400T). Again, standard 35mm 1.85 I believe.

Though it was commonplace back then, even after high-speed film was introduced, to still use Kodak 5247 (100T) for day exterior work and any bluescreen work. Though 5295 (400T) was intended as a high-speed stock optimized for bluescreen work.

Also, you saw the use of Fuji and Agfa stocks for some major Hollywood movies in the 1980's but not on those you listed.


  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 November 2009 - 07:27 PM

Thank you David!

Your answer is very appreciated!
I would guess that I should go with Kodaks Vision2 5260 500T to get a similar look of 5294 400T and Kodak Vision2 5212 100T for Kodak 5247 100T?
Seems the colorimetry of the stocks has changed alot since the 1980s, am I right?


First of all, are you shooting in 35mm as these films did? Second, are you making a 35mm print, no D.I.?
  • 0

#5 Carl Hed

Carl Hed

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Digital Image Technician

Posted 17 November 2009 - 07:35 PM

I would scan the 35mm film and color grade before printing. Do you mean lighting the same way they did back then?


First of all, are you shooting in 35mm as these films did? Second, are you making a 35mm print, no D.I.?


  • 0

#6 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 November 2009 - 07:55 PM

I would scan the 35mm film and color grade before printing. Do you mean lighting the same way they did back then?


Those stocks were a bit contrastier and grainier than what we have today (except for 5247, which was not too grainy, but it was a bit softer than modern stock.) I'd almost consider pushing 200T one-stop to get that look, or trying Fuji Vivid 160T and 500T. But if you are doing an electronic grade, you can monkey around with the image.
  • 0

#7 Carl Hed

Carl Hed

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Digital Image Technician

Posted 18 November 2009 - 05:58 AM

Thanks again!

I will have a look and see if I can find some pushed 200T footage then maybe I will use in-camera pushed film meeting DI half way, or something.
Cheers!

Those stocks were a bit contrastier and grainier than what we have today (except for 5247, which was not too grainy, but it was a bit softer than modern stock.) I'd almost consider pushing 200T one-stop to get that look, or trying Fuji Vivid 160T and 500T. But if you are doing an electronic grade, you can monkey around with the image.


  • 0


Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

CineLab

Visual Products

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Aerial Filmworks

Glidecam

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc