Jump to content




Photo

Kodak 65mm 1000 ASA Stock


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2197 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 12 March 2016 - 08:27 AM

 It seems that Kodak are going to make a 1000 asa 65mm stock for Chris Nolan for use on his next film "Dunkirk".


  • 1




#2 Kenny N Suleimanagich

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

Posted 12 March 2016 - 11:26 AM

Where did you read?
  • 0

#3 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2197 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 12 March 2016 - 01:58 PM

 David Keighley of IMAX  at the GSCA Expo in L.A. told the audience on 9th March . This was passed on by Tim Sassoon who was at this event .


  • 0

#4 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 12 March 2016 - 02:11 PM

Why couldn't one just push 5219 1 stop?


  • 0

#5 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2268 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 12 March 2016 - 02:43 PM

Why couldn't one just push 5219 1 stop?

 

I was thinking the same thing...


  • 0

#6 Kenny N Suleimanagich

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

Posted 12 March 2016 - 05:19 PM

Matching other stocks photochemically with a push might be tricky?
  • 1

#7 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 12 March 2016 - 05:25 PM

Matching to what though? we've often changed stockes sequence to sequence based on needs, for example, going from 50D to 500T for an ext to into transition, plus, I would think that a whole new, unheard of stock, formulated for the first time (as Kodak only ever really went up to 800T in MP stocks, if memory serves) is probably substantially more jarring than pushing 500T, which, when the '19 was marketed in the first place, was touted in their own videos as withstanding a 2 stop push without too much of a trade-off in look.

All in all; this just doesn't really seem to make too much sense. Cool and all, but I honestly question the validity of the statement.

Seems much more likely that one would just push the film 1 stop (which in 65mm probably wouldn't even result in too much of grain craziness as you'd get on 8 or 16mm, obviously) and the statement is a mis-quote or a misunderstanding of them rating the film at 1000, or pushing the film to 1000.


  • 0

#8 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2197 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 12 March 2016 - 06:01 PM

Who knows 1000 asa pushed a stop = 2000 asa .


  • 0

#9 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11236 posts
  • Other

Posted 12 March 2016 - 07:01 PM

Strikes me that this may end up in diminishing returns. Large negative demands a smaller stop for acceptable depth of field for a given field of view, so more light is required to create an otherwise equivalent situation. Given the increased speed of the stock, will resolution and grain be similar to 35mm a stop slower?

 

Will the results end up being similar, in any case?

 

P


  • 0

#10 Tyler Purcell

Tyler Purcell
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2373 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 March 2016 - 07:43 PM

Can you imagine pushing 19' two stops on 15/70 and cropping down to 2.20:1 for standard 5/70? It would probably look friggen amazing still. Get crazy sensitivity without the crazy grain. I personally think that's their intention.

Still, it would be cool for Kodak to formulate a 1000 or even 1200 ASA stock that had smaller grain then 19'. Imagine that much sensitivity with the same grain level of 19'.
  • 0

#11 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11236 posts
  • Other

Posted 12 March 2016 - 08:00 PM

I do wonder why they never did.

 

Sadly, right now, it would be a bit much to expect the development of new stocks, given the massively shrunken market, but it really did seem to stall at 500 or so. Yes, there was the 800, but I never heard good things about it. Perhaps they simply hit a natural limit on what that particular approach to recording light could do.

 

P


  • 0

#12 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3081 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 12 March 2016 - 09:01 PM

Sounds like a useful development. Being able to close down one more stop for increased depth of field in large format, or being able to eek out a little more shadow detail in natural light situations would be great. Hope it trickles down to 35mm and 16mm for the rest of us.
  • 0

#13 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2576 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 March 2016 - 10:17 PM

Hope it trickles down to 35mm and 16mm for the rest of us.

 

I would imagine that the increased neg area in 65mm allows for an increase in grain that might prove objectionable in 35mm, and almost certainly would in 16mm


  • 0

#14 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3081 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 12 March 2016 - 11:54 PM

 
I would imagine that the increased neg area in 65mm allows for an increase in grain that might prove objectionable in 35mm, and almost certainly would in 16mm


Maybe, though as others have pointed out there must have been some room for improvement over 5219 Push1, otherwise why do it? Let's wait and see :)
  • 0

#15 Kenny N Suleimanagich

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

Posted 13 March 2016 - 01:26 AM

Matching to what though? we've often changed stockes sequence to sequence based on needs, for example, going from 50D to 500T for an ext to into transition, plus, I would think that a whole new, unheard of stock, formulated for the first time (as Kodak only ever really went up to 800T in MP stocks, if memory serves) is probably substantially more jarring than pushing 500T, which, when the '19 was marketed in the first place, was touted in their own videos as withstanding a 2 stop push without too much of a trade-off in look.
All in all; this just doesn't really seem to make too much sense. Cool and all, but I honestly question the validity of the statement.
Seems much more likely that one would just push the film 1 stop (which in 65mm probably wouldn't even result in too much of grain craziness as you'd get on 8 or 16mm, obviously) and the statement is a mis-quote or a misunderstanding of them rating the film at 1000, or pushing the film to 1000.

Just pure speculation. Can't really speak to what or why, but it's all I could come up with. '19 pushed 1 stop is almost the same, but maybe it prints differently enough for Nolan to notice? Nolan is one of the few who has the weight to do this kind of thing.

Edited by Kenny N Suleimanagich, 13 March 2016 - 01:27 AM.

  • 0

#16 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 6771 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 March 2016 - 12:43 PM

That's actually a good point-- the print-- something I forgot about, in this case, as one can assume a photochemical finish-- the print is very important and in that case I could see making it a "natural" 1000 -v- a '19 push and then a DI.


  • 0

#17 Giray Izcan

Giray Izcan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 March 2016 - 03:05 PM

Are they going to be offering that stock for 35mm as well? I'm assuming Kodak will be manufacturing that particular film stock for only that movie instead of making it readily available for others in other formats besides 65mm. I looked at Kodak's website, and did not see anything regarding the 1000 asa film stock. I'm not going to get my hopes up much.


  • 0

#18 Peter Phillips

Peter Phillips

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 13 March 2016 - 03:08 PM

From how I understand the process, pushing only raises your midtones, so the shadows still fall off where they would on 500T. Having a truly faster stock would be a nice advantage, considering. Although pre-flashing the might lift the shadows, I'm not sure. 


  • 0

#19 Giray Izcan

Giray Izcan
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 March 2016 - 03:12 PM

Yes it would be nice. I haven't seen anything regarding the 1000 asa stock on Kodak's website. I'm guessing they will manufacture however many Nolan needs and that's it - hopefully I'm wrong though.


  • 0

#20 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2576 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 March 2016 - 04:44 PM

It seems unlikely that Kodak would create a completely new emulsion just for Chris Nolan. I'd take a guess and say that the emulsion for a 1000asa stock is something that Kodak already have ready to use, perhaps developed for 35mm stock and then shelved, maybe because of grain issues in these days of ultra clean images. Applying that emulsion to the larger neg area of 65mm would mitigate the grain, and make a 1000asa a realistic choice. 


  • 0


Technodolly

Zylight

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Tai Audio

Pro 8mm

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Technodolly

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

CineTape

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Zylight

Pro 8mm

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine