Is that correct original The Texas Chain Saw Massacre was shot on Ektachrome 25T 7252?
I mean how can they achieve the lighting with 16mm 25 ASA, grain level of the movie doesn't high that much for a 16mm especially for 25T speed stock maybe night scenes look a bit dark and grainy but totally movie look great. Also photos from the set seems they don't use big lights,carbon arc or hmi because of the low budget...
Edited by fatih yıkar, 19 November 2017 - 11:36 AM.
It was the first stock I had to use when started at the doco. company I worked for. So as David said it was a lowish stock that was then printed onto a Kodachome release print stock . One of the first films I had to shoot was a Medical training film a hip replacement to hold the depth of field I need a stop of about 5.6 I used so much light that blood in the wound started steaming ! Not a great time .
I think the original TCSM is a masterpiece. As well as a time-capsule like so many movies from the 1970's are. Real locations. Gunther Hansen who played "Leatherface" wrote a pretty great book about the making of TCSM. Fans of the film or low budget filmmaking should read it.
Yes, there was a time when some 16mm filmmakers were shooting ECO and printing it onto Kodachrome, which had the result of the prints being more archival in terms of color than the original.
Some ECO from 1977 I have still looks reasonable for colour.
As Mark says, maybe saving one generation was the motive in TCSM. Also ECO was very fine grain, perhaps finer than the neg stocks then. Would be nice to see another slow, low contrast version of Ektachrome.
Daniel Pearl is on the DVD commentary for the film, it's very informative. He said his biggest lights were a Nine-light and a 10K, which he used for the night sequences. IDK if he gelled them blue for the night effect or whether that was in the printing, though.
I remember articles from American Cinematographer in the 70's, and other publications, asking why Europe had already embraced 16mm color negative once 100T 7254 came out in 1968 while in the U.S., color reversal was still preferred until the late 1970's, and the answer was dirt, the general feeling was that 16mm processing in the U.S. wasn't clean enough... and white specks in 16mm negative was more distracting than black specks in 16mm reversal. But it might have also been that 16mm filmmakers preferred the reversal workflow in the U.S. and those with a budget for lighting preferred the cleaner look of 25T Ektrachrome Commercial over 100T Eastmancolor, especially for industrials.