XIXAX Film Forum

Creative Corner => Filmmakers' Workshop => Topic started by: md on April 04, 2004, 12:21:30 PM

Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: md on April 04, 2004, 12:21:30 PM
just curious as to what type of film you guys use.  Also if there are any filmmakers who shoot 16 or maybe even 35, just curious as to what film stock you use.  I only say this because i hail from rochester, the birthplace of eastman kodak, and well fuji just seems to be kicking our ass.  Kodak has been laying off so many people (and friends) and its sad to see a huge company at one time diminish so greatly.  I know this is kind of a obscure topic but i was just wondering if fuju just applied to more people than kodak.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: pete on April 04, 2004, 01:58:48 PM
kodak has been devouting most of its time now developing for more saturated, rich colors.  The whole vision and vision2 thing for example.  While Fuji is more faithful?  That's my impression anyways.  Oh yeah, and from the little experience I've had Fuji has finer grains.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: Pastor Parsley on April 06, 2004, 03:31:45 PM
Quote from: pete
Oh yeah, and from the little experience I've had Fuji has finer grains.


I've noticed that too.  I'm no expert, but have been really getting into photography for the last year.  Fuji is quite a bit cheaper than Kodak as well.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 06, 2004, 05:34:33 PM
Kodak is still the standard. Fuji has some nice looks, but generally Fuji was always known for richer colors, while Kodak was considered more natural. I'd stick with Kodak because their quality is excellent, and also it's more common. Kodak's Vision stocks have totally reinvented cinematography over the past decade. They pushed film speed while tightening grain. I think Fincher best exploited this (perfect timing), by using Vision 500T to achieve his dark, underexposed look.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: SoNowThen on April 06, 2004, 07:50:44 PM
Is it just me, or is Fuji more suited for purples and greens, while Kodak does the other colors better?

I know that's about as non-technical and uninformed a statement as they get, but I seemed to notice this...
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 06, 2004, 08:33:57 PM
It is you. But yes, you're correct.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: cowboykurtis on April 07, 2004, 01:07:15 PM
Quote from: mutinyco
by using Vision 500T to achieve his dark, underexposed look.


iwas actually trtying to find this info out recently -- where did you find this info -- is it a stock he "always" shoots on? or r u speaking about a specific project -- i think i read that seven was shot on 200t -- could be wrong -- any insight/knowledge would be most appreciated.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: kotte on April 07, 2004, 01:18:09 PM
╠'m unfortunately very (as I've said) unlearned when it comes to film stock.

But I shot Fuji for the finer grain...
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: SoNowThen on April 07, 2004, 01:21:30 PM
I read that Godard used Ilford stocks sometimes in his b&w movies because they were super fast. Anybody know if they're still available?

Does Europe have a larger selection of different stocks than the major two?
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: kotte on April 07, 2004, 01:25:26 PM
Quote from: SoNowThen
Does Europe have a larger selection of different stocks than the major two?


I think we have the same selection of stocks as everyone else...
I've only heard of Kodak and Fuji though.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 07, 2004, 01:33:52 PM
Ya know, I don't see anything wrong with Kodak's grain. Especially when I've seen the various processes its been put through lately. Good examples are 2 recent Coen films shot by Roger Deakins: O Brother Where Art Thou? and The Man Who Wasn't There. O Brother was the first entire feature to be digitally color timed. I think it was a mix between Vision 500T for the interiors and night, and (I think) 100 for the day exteriors. That film was so tight it looked like 3-D on the screen. And that's after it was shot on film, transfered entirely to a digital intermediary, then transfered back to film. Man, on the other hand, was shot using Vision 320 (color), then printed on B&W and it was LUMINOUS!

Fincher doesn't always use Vision 500T. He used it on The Game and Fight Club. Not sure if it was around yet when he did Se7en. I think he used 320 on Panic Room. But he also frequently uses the ENR process which hightens the contrast and desaturates the color. It was a process Technicolor Rome developed for Storaro. On Panic Room he went with a digital intermediary.

The 500T has really been the primo stock for the past half-dozen years. It's highly versatile. Even Elephant, a film you wouldn't think of, used it as its primary stock.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: kotte on April 07, 2004, 01:41:01 PM
I highly recommend Fuji┤s REALA 500D daylight stock...schwooosch...it's fast...
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: cowboykurtis on April 07, 2004, 01:41:07 PM
Quote from: mutinyco
But he also frequently uses the ENR process which hightens the contrast and desaturates the color. It was a process Technicolor.


thanks for the info -- im shooting some spec spots for a company right now and trying to soldify my plans -- do you know what ENR stands for and is it a process that is widely offered by labs. thanks again for the info.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 07, 2004, 01:46:34 PM
Well, are you going to be projecting these things on film, or are they going to shown on video? If video, you don't need ENR. It's a Technicolor process and it's VERY expensive. You can achieve a similar look while doing your video transfer in post-production.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 07, 2004, 01:49:45 PM
I should note that there are 2 different Kodak 500 stocks -- Vision 500T, which is newer and has an ultra fine grain, and also Eastman 500 EXR, which is older and grainier. Kubrick used the EXR on EWS because he wanted to push the grain.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: cowboykurtis on April 07, 2004, 02:15:09 PM
Quote from: mutinyco
Well, are you going to be projecting these things on film, or are they going to shown on video? If video, you don't need ENR. It's a Technicolor process and it's VERY expensive. You can achieve a similar look while doing your video transfer in post-production.


these will be commercials existing only on video -- here is some info that a got from a rep i know at technicolor -- some of you may find it interesting:

He shot "Seven" in Super35, mostly on 5293 pushed one stop; he also flashed the negative. Then the print was bleach-bypassed. I don't know if he rated the filmstock faster due to the push-developing, or if he left it at 200 ASA and just let the pushing add density. He said that the pushing increased saturation, while the flashing lowered it and the contrast, and the bleach-bypass added contrast and lowered saturation. He also used some 5287 for some night photography, and 5245 for the ending daylight scenes.
I think he might have used the Panaflasher for his flashing. (In "Evita", he used the Varicon; he did less pushing, used diffusion filters, shot in anamorphic, and used the ENR process.)
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: cowboykurtis on April 07, 2004, 02:16:12 PM
Quote from: mutinyco
Well, are you going to be projecting these things on film, or are they going to shown on video? If video, you don't need ENR. It's a Technicolor process and it's VERY expensive. You can achieve a similar look while doing your video transfer in post-production.


these will be commercials existing only on video -- here is some info that a got from a rep i know at technicolor -- some of you may find it interesting:

He shot "Seven" in Super35, mostly on 5293 pushed one stop; he also flashed the negative. Then the print was bleach-bypassed. I don't know if he rated the filmstock faster due to the push-developing, or if he left it at 200 ASA and just let the pushing add density. He said that the pushing increased saturation, while the flashing lowered it and the contrast, and the bleach-bypass added contrast and lowered saturation. He also used some 5287 for some night photography, and 5245 for the ending daylight scenes.
I think he might have used the Panaflasher for his flashing. (In "Evita", he used the Varicon; he did less pushing, used diffusion filters, shot in anamorphic, and used the ENR process.)
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 07, 2004, 03:20:59 PM
Interesting. I always liked the old 93 stock. I shot a short with it about a decade ago. It has pretty decent sensitivity and an interesting color palate. Both Memento and AI were shot with it, I believe. One thing though -- I'm almost certain they used ENR on Se7en, not a bleach bypass. I distinctly remember a lot of press about their use of ENR on it. We should point out that we're really talking about Darius Khondji, the DP.
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: SoNowThen on April 07, 2004, 03:25:18 PM
Didn't Darius get booted on that, and Cronenweth took over?
Title: photographers, filmmaker - kodak or fuji?
Post by: mutinyco on April 07, 2004, 03:32:51 PM
Nope. That was Panic Room.

ENR and bleach bypass are different. Bypass simply leaves the silver nitrate on the celluloid. ENR is a resilvering process where it's taken out as it normally would be, but then at varying percents, depending on the look, the film is run through a bath of the silver to reattach it.