Jump to content


Photo

The Terminator (1984) lenses and film stock


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 29 January 2018 - 05:08 PM

Does anyone know what lenses and film stock were used on the original Terminator (1984) shot by  Adam Greenberg?

 

I have heard that Adam Greenberg may have used low contrast filters on the shoot.

 

There is an article in American Cinematographer 1984 vol 66, No 4 April, but I don't have access to issues going back that far.

 

Any information would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

Thanks


Edited by Harry Lime, 29 January 2018 - 05:10 PM.

  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20175 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 January 2018 - 07:32 PM

It was the April 1985 issue but the article does not mention stocks nor filters.

 

It probably was shot on Kodak 250T 5293 just before it got replaced by 400T 5294, and the use of low-con filters is fairly obvious by the halos around light sources.


  • 0

#3 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 29 January 2018 - 09:16 PM

Thank you, David. 

 

Would you care to hedge a bet on lenses? Maybe Super Speeds mk III or even Super Baltars? Could have also been older Primo...

 

 

thx


  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20175 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 January 2018 - 09:26 PM

It wasn't a Panavision shoot so it wouldn't have been Primos -- most likely it was Zeiss Super-Speeds since those were the most common lenses at non-Panavision rental houses.  Could have used Canon K35's...  Also, Primos weren't introduced until the very late 1980's.


  • 0

#5 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1199 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 29 January 2018 - 10:01 PM

I wonder if we've reached a point in time where the only way to match the grain of 1980s 35mm is to shoot in 2-perf cropped to 1.85:1?

 

Anyway, IMDB does list the negative as 250T 5293. I'd be curious as to which types of low-con filters were used as well. They must have been very popular filters.


  • 0

#6 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 29 January 2018 - 10:03 PM

Super Speeds makes a lot of sense and feels about right. I want to say that a long time ago I saw a picture of what may have been a BL-3 on set.

 

Is there anything more you information you can add about the low contrast filter? Would this have been a very weak fog filter by someone like Tiffen or Harrison&Harrison? 

 

Adam Greenberg really outdid himself on this film. It's hands down one of the best color noir out there in my opinion. It feels very raw and gritty, which is something you don't see a lot of these days. Love the grain. The lighting is so straight forward and doesn't look 'over-polished'

 

I watched the Blu Ray recently. Some scenes that I remember being more 'Cameron blue' are a little greener than I recall them being, but aside from that it looks really great.

 

thx


Edited by Harry Lime, 29 January 2018 - 10:09 PM.

  • 0

#7 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 29 January 2018 - 10:07 PM

I wonder if we've reached a point in time where the only way to match the grain of 1980s 35mm is to shoot in 2-perf cropped to 1.85:1?

 

Anyway, IMDB does list the negative as 250T 5293. I'd be curious as to which types of low-con filters were used as well. They must have been very popular filters.

 

Or push s16...


  • 0

#8 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20175 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 January 2018 - 10:10 PM

Well, movies shot on 100T in 35mm anamorphic weren't that grainy back then... In terms of matching the look though of 5294, I think you'd have to push Vision3 500T by a stop, maybe 2-stops, to get something closer to that grain and contrast.  Keep in mind that one reason that movies looked grainy back then was that a lot of people were underexposing high-speed stock.  

 

Looking at the April 1984 AC issue, before I realized the article was in the April 1985 issue, I was re-reading Fraker talking about "Wargames" and how he rated 250T 5293 at 800 ASA for the control room scenes, shot at f/2 because of all the projection screens.  That's underexposing almost 2-stops.  On the other hand, you read Deschanel talking about using more and more 100T 5247 on "The Right Stuff" because he found that 5293 could get too grainy.  A number of DP's started to go back to slower stocks by the end of the 80's.


  • 0

#9 Samuel Berger

Samuel Berger
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1199 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Seattle

Posted 29 January 2018 - 10:10 PM

 

Or push s16...

 

I can't tell you but, I doubt that Insane is your real name.
Per the forum rules, please change your moniker to your real name.


  • 0

#10 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20175 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 January 2018 - 10:13 PM

I think Greenberg probably used Tiffen Low-Cons.  "Barry Lyndon" was shot with Tiffen Low-Cons. Harrison and Harrison also made Low-Cons.  They were similar to Fogs but less foggy.  Haskell Wexler alternated between Low-Cons and Fogs on "Bound for Glory".

 

https://tiffen.com/contrast-filters/


  • 0

#11 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 29 January 2018 - 11:06 PM

I think Greenberg probably used Tiffen Low-Cons.  "Barry Lyndon" was shot with Tiffen Low-Cons. Harrison and Harrison also made Low-Cons.  They were similar to Fogs but less foggy.  Haskell Wexler alternated between Low-Cons and Fogs on "Bound for Glory".

 

https://tiffen.com/contrast-filters/

 

 

 

Thank you, David. I appreciate all the information.


  • 0

#12 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20175 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 January 2018 - 11:47 PM

I did just now look at the AC article on T2, and Greenberg said that he shot the original on 5293, which wasn't as good as the 5296 he was using for low-light work on the sequel.

 

Also, I have a theory that in the early 1980's, a lot of cinematographers were using the fog and low-con filters that they were used to using on 5247, only to discover that the lifting of the blacks with those filters tended to make the grain more visible in those early high-speed stocks, so those older filters began to be used less and less (also, the trend was towards more sharpness.)


  • 0

#13 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 30 January 2018 - 03:27 AM

I did just now look at the AC article on T2, and Greenberg said that he shot the original on 5293, which wasn't as good as the 5296 he was using for low-light work on the sequel

 
5296. I remember working on a movie in the mid 90's trying to pull green screens shot on that stock and it had grain the size of golfballs...  
 
I have some vintage low cons and Harrison&Harrison fog filters buried in a box somewhere. I'm going to have to dig those out and do a little experimenting to see how that works on digital. I always loved the glow around lights in Terminator.

 

 

Attached Images

  • tumblr_nikjlb16pT1qetb0ho1_1280-1.jpg

  • 0

#14 Mark Kenfield

Mark Kenfield
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1195 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Australia/Wherever The Wind Takes Me

Posted 30 January 2018 - 04:22 AM

Terrific looking movie! I'll always love those wetted down streets.


  • 0

#15 Feli di Giorgio

Feli di Giorgio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 27 posts
  • Director
  • California, USA

Posted 30 January 2018 - 11:45 AM

Terrific looking movie! I'll always love those wetted down streets.

 

I wonder if he overexposed a touch and then printed it down. Or those keys could just be very hard with no diffusion.


Edited by Harry Lime, 30 January 2018 - 11:46 AM.

  • 0

#16 panagiotis agapitou

panagiotis agapitou
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 35 posts
  • Director
  • Greece

Posted 30 January 2018 - 09:25 PM

It's Zeiss super speed mk i .... i read it on an article ....


  • 0

#17 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20175 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 January 2018 - 09:50 PM

It's funny but last night I was watching Sidney Lumet's remake of "Gloria" (1999), shot by David Watkin, on some HD channel -- and noticed that it was shot with the Mk.1 Zeiss Super Speeds with the 9-bladed iris that created a triangular opening.  I know that Watkin liked Zeiss lenses for their quality but I'm surprised he didn't upgrade to the later generation.


  • 0

#18 Matthew Herbert

Matthew Herbert
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago Area

Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:09 AM

Is this information accurate?

http://www.imdb.com/...ref_=tt_ql_dt_6


  • 0

#19 Matthew Herbert

Matthew Herbert
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Other
  • Chicago Area

Posted 03 February 2018 - 08:29 AM

I've been wondering about the stock used in feature films -- did they generally stick to one iso throughout the entire film or was it common to use different isos depending on the shot?


  • 0

#20 Ignacio Aguilar

Ignacio Aguilar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 445 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Madrid, Spain

Posted 03 February 2018 - 09:20 AM

It was common to use the slowest stock for each scene, though a number of high-profile DPs (such as John Seale) preferred a 500T stock for everything (he shot the desert scenes of "English Patient" that way through a lot of NDs, when there more than enought exposure for 50D stock!). 

 

I haven't seen "The Terminator" in a while, but my notes indicate Zeiss Superspeed T1.3 lenses for most of the stuff, with a little use of the T1.4's (High Speeds, B Speeds, First Generation, whatever you like to call them). The T1.3s and T2.1 had just come out in 1983 when ARRI introduced the PL mount.


  • 0


CineLab

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Visual Products

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Visual Products