I thought about shooting s16 with anamorphic, but from what I hear its more effort than its worth. Unreliable frame stretching, expensive (and hard to acquire) lenses. Furthermore dev costs & lab time is a pain.
I then contemplated using some grain removal on the wides, I contacted a few post houses to get quotes - but its quite hap-hazard as to whether or not I will get flame time. Students come second to fully paying clients, something that I completely sympathise with; but its still a pain!
Therefore I figured, why not try shoot 35mm. I have been looking in to it and I can get stock at .19p a ft and dev + HD tele for .26p a foot (which is pretty close to 16mm). Furthermore I have been offered a free 35mm 2 perf camera (originally used for effects because of its 2 pin system), but its old and possibly unreliable, so I have been contacting rental companies to try and find a good deal on a 35mm kit. However quotes are coming through, and they are rather substantial.
Furthermore someone of DVX user said:
Small correction on my part. You'll get 32 frames per foot with 2 perf. So you will have 25% more feet to shoot if you shot 2 perf compared to 16mm. So depending on how much you are looking at shooting, and the price of each package that might save you money.
This doesn't sound right! Since the vertical negative space of s16mm is 7.41mm and the vertical negative space of 35mm 2 perf is 9.47mm; surely there are no savings to be had per foot?
Essentially fellow comrades - I am looking for some wise advice. I only want to shoot 35mm since I feel it really suites the script; I haven’t ruled out 16mm, as I am still waiting on some quotes.