Jump to content


Photo

Baraka in 70mm


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 anamexis

anamexis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • Student

Posted 12 July 2005 - 08:16 PM

I was wondering, has anyone here had the opportunity to see Baraka projected in 70mm? As I understand it, there is no comparison to the 35mm print. Apparently, however, it was only shown in 70mm once, when it premiered at the Toronto Film Fesitval in 1992. Was anyone lucky enough to catch this?

I think this is one film that will benefit greatly from the upcoming HD DVD format.
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 12 July 2005 - 11:18 PM

I haven't seen it but the 70mm print shows up now & then at the 70mm screenings of the American Cinematheque.
  • 0

#3 Jeremy Montana

Jeremy Montana
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts
  • Student
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 13 July 2005 - 02:49 AM

I would very much like to experience the film in that format, please post if any screenings are scheduled.
  • 0

#4 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 13 July 2005 - 10:16 AM

Was it shot in 65mm, or blown up from 35? I really think that all 35mm-originated films would benefit from being released on 70mm, as it would greatly reduce generation loss blowing up to a larger format. Maybe they could even use the process used for Omnimax to scan them to eliminate optical degradation from the optical blowup process, as those films look tack sharp in the Imax format.

~Karl
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 July 2005 - 10:38 AM

It was shot in 5-perf 65mm.
  • 0

#6 Ignacio Aguilar

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

Posted 13 July 2005 - 12:42 PM

I saw it here in Madrid (Spain) back in september 2002. It was shown only in one theater. It was a 70mm print with a six track magnetic soundtrack and it was the sharpest presentation that I've ever seen in my life, with very rich colors and very deep blacks. It was shot in 5-perf 65mm with Todd-AO lenses on slow film stocks (I believe 5247 or even 5245). There was absolutely no grain.

Three days later I saw a dye transfer print of "Apocalypse Now Redux" and while the image was extremely good for 35mm, "Baraka" was superior in every way.

David, try to see a 70mm print if you can. The cinematography is just gorgeus.
  • 0

#7 Lombre

Lombre
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal

Posted 13 July 2005 - 01:18 PM

I saw it here in Madrid (Spain) back in september 2002. It was shown only in one theater. It was a 70mm print with a six track magnetic soundtrack and it was the sharpest presentation that I've ever seen in my life, with very rich colors and very deep blacks. It was shot in 5-perf 65mm with Todd-AO lenses on slow film stocks (I believe 5247 or even 5245). There was absolutely no grain.

Three days later I saw a dye transfer print of "Apocalypse Now Redux" and while the image was extremely good for 35mm, "Baraka" was superior in every way.

David, try to see a 70mm print if you can. The cinematography is just gorgeus.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I saw it when it when it came out (IMAX) a few years ago 92 or 93. Painstakingly shot on Todd AO-70mm film. The quality of the cinematography is outstanding. "Shots flip from solitary Monks to crowded streets from great temples to images of war firing a hundred and one thoughts in your mind that you never complete."
  • 0

#8 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 13 July 2005 - 02:39 PM

'92 huh? Was this the last non-Imax film shot on 65mm then? I have heard that I/Omnimax is the only thing keeping LF MP alive. I wish I could see films shot on 65mm in 70mm. I think there's a solitary 70mm here in Cleveland except for Omnimax, and it's at Cleveland Cinemas collecting dust as far as I know. I had heard it hasn't been used in quite a while. What a shame.

~Karl
  • 0

#9 Mike Williamson

Mike Williamson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 534 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 July 2005 - 02:54 PM

Parts of the forthcoming Malick film "The New World" were shot in 65mm, some was anamorphic 35mm, not sure what the balance is. Also I don't know whether they will be making 70mm prints or not, hope so.

I would guess that background plates and effects shots are/were a staple of 65mm usage, but maybe that's changing. What are people shooting in 65mm these days?
  • 0

#10 Ignacio Aguilar

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

Posted 13 July 2005 - 04:18 PM

Was this the last non-Imax film shot on 65mm then?


Only "Far and Away" (1992), some parts of "Little Budha" (1993) and "Hamlet" (1996) used 65mm since then for live action photography. I can't wait to see Malick's film, specially if they finish it photochemically and not via DI.

A 65mm film shot with the current film stocks and modern lenses should look stunning.

Edited by Ignacio Aguilar, 13 July 2005 - 04:22 PM.

  • 0

#11 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 13 July 2005 - 07:07 PM

I WANNA SHOOT 65MM!!!!

That being said, I am buying 3 35mm mechanisms I hope to build cameras out of. (thanks again for the suggestion George, wherever you are)
  • 0

#12 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 July 2005 - 07:26 PM

Only "Far and Away" (1992), some parts of "Little Budha" (1993) and "Hamlet" (1996) used 65mm since then for live action photography. I can't wait to see Malick's film, specially if they finish it photochemically and not via DI.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Actually, if it's a 35mm print, then a photochemical finish would mean duped 65mm-to-35mm shots intercut with original 35mm footage, so a D.I. would probably be better and more consistent-looking, rather than have 65mm reduction dupe shots of increased contrast and not particularly better grain. Or at least do a 4K D.I. for just the 65mm shots.

If it's a 70mm print and they create an original 65mm negative with 35mm-to-65mm dupes, then at least the 65mm footage would look pretty good. This is how the 70mm version of "Little Buddha" was created. They created a separate 35mm master using 65mm-to-35mm dupes.

But I don't think in this case it would make as much sense. In "Little Buddha" the 65mm sequences were very long and in big chunks, whereas in "A New World" it's more intercut with 35mm from what I hear. A D.I. makes the most sense for this project, especially if all-4K. Then from a 4K master, you could make 35mm, 65mm, and IMAX I.N.'s for release prints.

Or a D.I. for the 65mm shots.

Or even better, convert the 35mm footage to 65mm negative using a 4K D.I. and intercut that with the 65mm footage and ONLY release the movie in contact-printed 5-perf 70mm show prints! Too bad THAT'S never going to happen...

Anyway, a photo-chemical finish to 35mm anamorphic would probably not show off the 65mm shots to any great effect since those would be duped a few generations (and a few more if the release prints were made using an IP/IN). Those shots would probably look similar in quality just be lacking anamorphic lens artifacts.
  • 0

#13 Ignacio Aguilar

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

Posted 13 July 2005 - 08:44 PM

Thanks for the info David.

I'm reluctant to see this film finished with a D.I. cause I fear that they end up doing it at 2K. It doesn't make sense to shot portions of a film in 65mm and later down-res it to 2K, but we have seen that kind of things in the past.

Though I prefer contact printing and traditional methods over a D.I. for anamorphic films in terms of sharpness and flesh tones, I wouldn't mind if they create a 4K master, as you have said. But I doubt it too, since "The New World" is not such a high budget film (25m) and Malick seems to me like the kind of guy against digital techniques.
  • 0

#14 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19765 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 13 July 2005 - 08:51 PM

Well, his "problem" is that he's mixing two formats so something is going to get compromised because some sort of conversion is required for all or part of the movie, whether that conversion is digital or optical. It's just that a good D.I. has the potential of being more lossless than using dupes in an optical printer. A bad D.I. can be worse, of course.

If he's really going to intercut 65mm and 35mm back-and-forth in the same scene (that's just a rumor I've heard), the only approach that would help the material match each other is a D.I.

This is different than "Little Buddha" or "Brainstorm" where the 65mm footage was for unique-looking stand-alone sequences.
  • 0

#15 Lombre

Lombre
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Montreal

Posted 14 July 2005 - 01:04 PM

'92 huh?  Was this the last non-Imax film shot on 65mm then?  I have heard that I/Omnimax is the only thing keeping LF MP alive.  I wish I could see films shot on 65mm in 70mm.  I think there's a solitary 70mm here in Cleveland except for Omnimax, and it's at Cleveland Cinemas collecting dust as far as I know.  I had heard it hasn't been used in quite a while.  What a shame.

~Karl

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Here is what I found :

"Baraka is evidence of a huge global project fueled by a personal passion for the world and visual art. Working on a reported US$4 million budget, Ron Fricke and Mark Magidson, with a three-person crew, swept through 24 countries in 14 months to make this stunning film / movie.
One of the very last movies shot in the expensive TODD-AO 70mm format, Ron Fricke developed a computer-controlled camera for the incredible time-lapse shots, including New York's Park Avenue rush hour traffic and the crowded Tokyo subway platforms."
  • 0

#16 Manu Anand

Manu Anand
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 23 July 2005 - 11:07 PM

Ron Fricke has been working on the sequel to BARAKA called SAMSARA for the past few years, still in production its slated to eb released in 2005/2006
Shot in 70mm i have a feeling its going to be somethign special.
For more information

http://www.spiritofb...om/samsara.aspx

Manu Anand
New Delhi
  • 0

#17 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 24 July 2005 - 12:28 AM

Cool. Do you know what stock he's shooting on? What sort of distribution, if any has he been able to secure?

Regards.
~Karl
  • 0

#18 Manu Anand

Manu Anand
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 67 posts

Posted 27 July 2005 - 08:47 PM

Sorry Karl

All my googling skills have resulted in zero technical information about this film.

But i sure am looking forward to it

Manu Anand
Bombay
  • 0

#19 Benhope Vest

Benhope Vest
  • Guests

Posted 02 September 2005 - 05:46 PM

I was wondering, has anyone here had the opportunity to see Baraka projected in 70mm? As I understand it, there is no comparison to the 35mm print. Apparently, however, it was only shown in 70mm once, when it premiered at the Toronto Film Fesitval in 1992. Was anyone lucky enough to catch this?


It was shown in LA in 70mm for a few weeks. No one went. I drove over from the disney lot one rainy week night expecting a mob of film fanatics at the gate and ended up sitting in the theater with less than 20 other people...all of us talked in the lobby afterwards about how we were moved to tears at various moments in the film...and about how rediculous it was that people were not attending in droves...

I checked about a year ago and discovered that the movie made only
$1.25M or so in box office gross (initial run) with a life time box office gross of only $1.3M.

$http://www.boxoffice.../?id=baraka.htm

It was a labor of love financed by business man Mark Magidson (who also backed Chronos) with distribution by a company that isn't around anymore (the Samuel Goldwyn Co. - http://en.wikipedia....Goldwyn_Company ).

Good news is: Baraka has finally moved into the black via sustained popularity in DVD...

Fricke has added some wiz bang new features to his time-lapse motion control rig and fully recuperated from the seriously dangerous maladventures he lived through to make Baraka. With DVD as a revenue option he has been able to finance and embark on a equally ambitious new project called Samsara...

Go Ron! The world needs your movies.

ps: the soundtrack to this film, mostly by Michael Stearns, is spectacularly "visual" as well...
  • 0

#20 Saul Pincus

Saul Pincus
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts
  • Director

Posted 03 September 2005 - 01:28 AM

It was shown in LA in 70mm for a few weeks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A 70mm print ran for many weeks at the Imperial Theatre in Montreal.

Saul

Edited by Saul Pincus, 03 September 2005 - 01:28 AM.

  • 0


Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine

Ritter Battery

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Visual Products

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

CineLab

Broadcast Solutions Inc

rebotnix Technologies

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

Opal

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

CineLab

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS