Jump to content


Photo

Pushing 35 vs 16 vs 8


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Doug Frerichs

Doug Frerichs
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 18 December 2011 - 11:02 PM

A friend of mine has a belief that you get better results pushing 35mm than you do with 16 (and 16 better than 8, for which he says you don't get much results at all) because 35 has more image area/surface area. To me, this did not make sense, since it is the same stock, just a smaller portion of it, so why would that make a difference? Anyhow, if he is in fact right, could someone explain more in depth why? Thanks
  • 0

#2 Chris Burke

Chris Burke
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1675 posts
  • Boston, MA

Posted 18 December 2011 - 11:31 PM

A friend of mine has a belief that you get better results pushing 35mm than you do with 16 (and 16 better than 8, for which he says you don't get much results at all) because 35 has more image area/surface area. To me, this did not make sense, since it is the same stock, just a smaller portion of it, so why would that make a difference? Anyhow, if he is in fact right, could someone explain more in depth why? Thanks

with the latest kodak stocks, you get great results in all formats. I have pushed 7219 in super 8 and have been amazed by the results, with a push one, I could really dig into the shadows. True you get better results with 16 or 35, but with super 8, believe it or not, the results are great.
  • 0

#3 Doug Frerichs

Doug Frerichs
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 19 December 2011 - 12:17 AM

with the latest kodak stocks, you get great results in all formats. I have pushed 7219 in super 8 and have been amazed by the results, with a push one, I could really dig into the shadows. True you get better results with 16 or 35, but with super 8, believe it or not, the results are great.


Why do you get better results with 16 and 35? Is it because they are better at recording detail, so the results are better since there is more detail there to be had?
  • 0

#4 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 19 December 2011 - 12:16 PM

It's about the amount of enlargement relative to the final image size.
Think of this; on 35mm film, you got a good sized neg, going onto a big screen. The grain is a certain size relative to that (pushed or not). With S16mm, you have the same sized screen but a smaller neg in relation to that screen, hence it's more enlarged. This enlargement makes the grain bigger in relation to the screen and thereby more noticeable. So when you push and the image gets grainer, a 16mm neg will have "more grain," than a 35mm neg because it's more enlarged-- grain and all-- to get to the larger screen.

That being said, you can push any film you want and get results. Whether the added grain is a problem or not is up to you.
  • 0


Visual Products

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

CineTape

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Glidecam

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Opal

FJS International, LLC

CineLab