Jump to content


Photo

35mm 3perf impact on super 16?


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1 Alain LeTourneau

Alain LeTourneau
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 355 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, Oregon USA

Posted 19 September 2005 - 03:41 PM

I'm not currently working in the industry so forgive my questions if they come across as naive or uninformed.

I'm uncertain how widely the 3perf format is being used, but with Arri and Aaton offering modifications of their cameras and in some cases pushing for the format, what is the impact going to be on super 16 production? Or will there really be any impact?


Alain LeTourneau
  • 0

#2 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1730 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 19 September 2005 - 04:08 PM

3-perf is used widely in the TV industry, and by some Motion Pictures, even big ones. The film "Panic Room" was shot in 3perf 35mm. Along with more recent "Big movies".

3perf 35mm is still more expensive than super 16mm.
  • 0

#3 Nate Downes

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

Posted 19 September 2005 - 04:18 PM

Reminds me tho, I was looking into modifying one of my cameras for 2perf.
  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 19 September 2005 - 04:25 PM

3-perf will have a bigger impact on 4-perf than Super-16. Generally a more expensive format does not cut into the usage of a cheaper format, and 3-perf is still more expensive than Super-16.
  • 0

#5 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 19 September 2005 - 04:37 PM

HD is much more of a threat to s16 than 3-perf.
  • 0

#6 Alain LeTourneau

Alain LeTourneau
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 355 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, Oregon USA

Posted 19 September 2005 - 05:52 PM

3-perf will have a bigger impact on 4-perf than Super-16. Generally a more expensive format does not cut into the usage of a cheaper format, and 3-perf is still more expensive than Super-16.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>




I was curious as to whether the cost of 3perf is close enough to super 16 to warrant an actual choice between the two formats in terms of stock and lab work?

If 4perf is around .50/ft for rawstock and s16 around .32/ft, what's the cost with 3perf?



Alain
  • 0

#7 Alain LeTourneau

Alain LeTourneau
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 355 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, Oregon USA

Posted 19 September 2005 - 05:55 PM

erf is around .50/ft for rawstock and s16 around .32/ft, what's the cost with 3perf?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>




Wait, 1000' is a 1000'. Rawstock costs are the same. Just getting more for what you pay for, but does this calculate into a savings with stock and lab work?


Alain
  • 0

#8 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 19 September 2005 - 06:27 PM

Wait, 1000' is a 1000'. Rawstock costs are the same. Just getting more for what you pay for, but does this calculate into a savings with stock and lab work?


Stock and lab processing & printing are per foot: so you pay the same per 1000 ft whether it's 3perf or 4perf. But you get almost 15 minutes of film instead of 11 minutes, so it's theoretically a 33% saving.

Telecine may be charged per foot but often is charged per hour on the machine. No saving there.

For TV projects, that's the end of the story. For cinema projects, you have the cost of the 3-perf to 4-perf blow-up to factor in. And costs thereafter (answer print, dupes etc, are all at normal 35mm cost.

What 3-perf doesn't offer is the convenience of smaller lighter cameras that you get with 16mm.
  • 0

#9 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1730 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 19 September 2005 - 08:13 PM

35mm 3-perf is not a film format, its a way of capturing more in a smaller space on the 35mm negative.

You still have to buy regular 35mm stock, which as said, is about $0.50/foot... It just takes it takes less stock in 3 perf to get as much as you would in 4 perf.

3-perf has more to do with Camera Movement than stock, the camera pulls less film through for each frame than in 4 perf, plus it uses the sound area on a regular negative. So you end up using more of the normally waisted real-estate on the stock. HOWEVER: you cant directly print 3-perf or 4 perf S35 (Note: the 3perf format always uses the "Super 35mm" standard). So this means the added expense of an optical step or a Digital Intermediate.

3 perf is really kind of like 16mm and Super 16mm, in super 16mm, you are just using the sound track area of the 16mm negative. However, 3 perf adds the twist that it pulls less film through before taking another frame, therein using more rela-estate than normal.

Make since? I think I confused myself :blink: ..... Oh well, you get the idea...

Edited by Landon D. Parks, 19 September 2005 - 08:20 PM.

  • 0

#10 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1730 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 19 September 2005 - 08:24 PM

You can go to Arri's website and read a complete page and even view an interactive demo of how 3 perf works and saves money, etc... Go here:
www.arri.com, click on "Products", Click "Cameras", again click "Cameras", Choose "Arricam Studio", Go down to the bottom of the page and click on "Camera Technology: 3 perf", then you can read about it, also on that page is a link in the first paragraph to an interactive demo..

Have fun!
  • 0

#11 Alain LeTourneau

Alain LeTourneau
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 355 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, Oregon USA

Posted 20 September 2005 - 02:19 AM

You can go to Arri's website and read a complete page and even view an interactive demo of how 3 perf works and saves money, etc... Go here:
www.arri.com, click on "Products", Click "Cameras", again click "Cameras", Choose "Arricam Studio", Go down to the bottom of the page and click on "Camera Technology: 3 perf", then you can read about it, also on that page is a link in the first paragraph to an interactive demo..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>




Thanks Landon, the demo helped tremendously.

Alain
  • 0

#12 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 20 September 2005 - 02:39 AM

(Note: the 3perf format always uses the "Super 35mm" standard). So this means the added expense of an optical step or a Digital Intermediate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Hi,

I don't know what you mean "always uses the Super 35 standard". If you mean the lenses are always centered for S35 thats not true. By recentering the lens, many lenses e.g Zeiss 16mm will hit the mirror or cause shaddow problems on cameras such as Arri III's. Other lenses e.g. older Cooke primes and older zoom lenses will vingnette when centered for S35. They were not desinged to cover S35.

3 perf can be 3 perf 35 or 3 perf Super 35. The point of 3 perf is to save money. When saving money the latest camera and lenses won't be an option.

Super 16, 2 perf, 3 Perf or any Super 35mm format will require the added expense of an optical step or digital Intermediate.

Stephen
  • 0

#13 Landon D. Parks

Landon D. Parks
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1730 posts
  • Producer
  • Cincinnati, Ohio

Posted 20 September 2005 - 03:40 AM

so your telling me you can use 3 perf in regulare 35mm as well as super 35mm? Thats news to me.
  • 0

#14 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 20 September 2005 - 04:58 AM

so your telling me you can use 3 perf in regulare 35mm as well as super 35mm? Thats news to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Hi,

The film is the same. You can expose and scan any area you want. If shooting 3 perf for 4x3 television you have to loose image from the sides in any case.

The standard eyepiece of an Arri II or III does not cover Super 35 but the film gate usually does. Its much cheaper to just modity the gate, ground glass and film advance to 2 or 3 perf. Moving the lens centre may well be possible and changing the viewing system just adds to the cost, and quite possibly limiting choice of lenses.

Arri Quotes over 30,000 euro to convert a 435/535.

Older cameras have been converted 2 or 3 perf for nearer USD 5000, giving a new lease of life to Ultracams, etc.

Stephen
  • 0

#15 Nate Downes

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

Posted 20 September 2005 - 06:25 AM

What 3-perf doesn't offer is the convenience of smaller lighter cameras that you get with 16mm.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My 35mm's are just a hair larger than my 16mm's.
  • 0

#16 Nate Downes

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

Posted 20 September 2005 - 06:27 AM

Older cameras have been converted 2 or 3 perf for nearer USD 5000, giving a new lease of life to Ultracams, etc.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


It shouldn't be too difficult to modify my DeVry's, the claw mechanism is fully exposed and easily modifyable.
  • 0

#17 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 20 September 2005 - 06:51 AM

It shouldn't be too difficult to modify my DeVry's, the claw mechanism is fully exposed and easily modifyable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Hi,

No spinning mirror to get in the way!

Stephen
  • 0

#18 Adam Frisch FSF

Adam Frisch FSF
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2009 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, USA

Posted 20 September 2005 - 07:32 AM

Basically, 35mm 4-perf is roughly 4 times more expensive than 16mm including developing costs.

3-perf is 3 times more expensive.

2-perf is 2 times more expensive.

So there is not going to be a 35mm format that's cheaper than 16mm, no matter how you count or do the math. We've all tried 'til we're blue in the face to get producers to rent 35mm gear instead of 16mm and the numbers never add up.
  • 0

#19 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 20 September 2005 - 07:40 AM

Basically, 35mm 4-perf is roughly 4 times more expensive than 16mm including developing costs.

3-perf is 3 times more expensive.

2-perf is 2 times more expensive.

So there is not going to be a 35mm format that's cheaper than 16mm, no matter how you count or do the math. We've all tried 'til we're blue in the face to get producers to rent 35mm gear instead of 16mm and the numbers never add up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Hi,

So I guess 1 perf 4.7:1 could be the way to go LOL!

Stephen
  • 0

#20 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 20 September 2005 - 08:20 AM

You can go to Arri's website and read a complete page and even view an interactive demo of how 3 perf works and saves money, etc... Go here:
www.arri.com, click on "Products", Click "Cameras", again click "Cameras", Choose "Arricam Studio", Go down to the bottom of the page and click on "Camera Technology: 3 perf", then you can read about it, also on that page is a link in the first paragraph to an interactive demo..

Have fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Landon,

If you read and understand the website above, then you will see that ground glasses are available in normal 35 3 perf & Super 35 3 perf. If the measurment is 22mm wide (0.866") its normal and if its 24.9mm wide (0.98") its Super!

Stephen
  • 0


Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

CineLab

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Glidecam

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Tai Audio

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

Glidecam

CineLab