I’m a boomer who did shoot 8 and 16 when I was young. Today I’m doing medium format and working up to large format photos. Doing some New55 Polaroid too. I hope your enthusiasm works a few young folks up to the investment and work film takes. I’m glad your trying. The deal the big producers are doing is rare today. We are one inch from the precipice that means the end of motion picture film in the US. I might do it again. I’m currently setting up a new dark room. It’s been 40 years since I had one. To the person who asked about developing 16, you can do it. Need the tank and the rest is chemistry.
Christopher Rasmussen Zoomer here. My first SLR was a 35mm Canon, and I’ve never been able to shake the feel of film since. It’s truly a timeless medium. The textures, color, and atmosphere is something I feel is far superior to digital. Even shying away from quality, the highly mechanical nature of shooting film is a fantastic way to learn. I’ve had so much fun learning and experimenting with film. Many older photographers are surprised when I tell them I shoot film. Film is far from dead, and I have a high hope that more young people will appreciate its versatility in the future.
Reuben Zuazua they came back for a little bit last fall. I got some then. It’s not too good. The sites are confusing as they have an old site , the Kickstarter page and the new site. The bad product up to a few weeks ago and seem to be going dark again.
Check out Bait - shot on 16mm film in 2019 and was nominated for a Bafta. It was shot mostly at my local harbour in Cornwall, UK and it was filmed using a vintage hand-cranked Bolex camera, using 16mm monochrome film that was hand processed!
I now develop my own photo film and shoot almost exclusively in film. I love the whole process. I wish i could home process and scan 16mm. I would be all in
For another example in my cinema school we shoot on Kodak Vision 16mm and super 16mm film the first 3 years of studies and 35mm film in master classes.
"Digital Resurgence," LOL! The post production workflow is the most important thing in creating the look of a finished film. That's why some projects, shot on RED, for example, look like they were shot on iPhone. If you compare equally, a digital camera, with the same sensor size and similar dynamic range to film, you may be looking at a very expensive camera & setup. Film has a look that in unparalleled; Arri & BlackMagic come close though. I think it's a scary concept for some ppl shooting on film and is expensive to learn. Although light meters... Many DP's, who shoot on digital, use poorly crafted lenses of a by-gone era, to create a "vintage look," when film already exists... Thanks for this video!
Film to me is like a fine analogue recording. Even the best digital cameras / video cameras cannot get as wide of a dynamic range as a nice film. They primarily get the blacks crushed. I find myself intrigued especially with larger negatives that I can get from film (good luck getting a 6x9 sensor in digital), and most importantly, there's something amazing about having the knowledge and ability to use something that most people would have thrown in the trash bin, as spares on eBay, or just "I don't know what this is... so I'm getting rid of it." Additionally, there's a more organic tonality to color films (I'm partial to Portra for that), and with Black and White, it's easier to set the tone. Do you want a digital-like palette (TMax, Delta, ADOX CMS), or a more vintage / brutal palette (Tri-X, HP5, etc.,). The camera is literally a box that exposes, and depending on how old (or simple) the camera is, does nothing much more. It's one of the reasons that I've reconnected with film, and got into the slight challenge that is 620. They're (usually) cheap to find (unless you wind up with Medalists, like me), they can easily deal with rerolled 120 onto 620 spools (so with some effort by the photographer, they're still relevant in 2020), and it's a blast for me knowing that the camera i'm shooting with, most would have just said "I can't get film for it" and called it a day. So long as there's film to shoot, I want to expose it, develop it, print it, and put it on Flickr!. Jason
Anders Lunatus maybe, but Fuji has certainly seemed eager to leave a few years ago. They’ve also showed a disregard for helping other companies keep FP-100C alive. But I feel like they may regret leaving motion picture film at the very least...
Fuji doesn’t really care. Film and cameras are such a small amount of their business they could end it all and it wouldn’t really matter. Given the popularity of instax it’s very likely they just turned the peel apart factory into something that produces more instax which has a wider appeal.
iNerdier it’s a bigger part of their business than people assume. Medicine and cosmetics are stables, but it’s a red water market. They could easily become pushed out of that with the right kind of competition. Digital cameras is a dwindling market. Even if they make some of the best. Hardly anyone is buying them. Instax and the close relative film, are a respectable niche market, uses patents and expertise of Fuji and is on the rise.
Although I currently use 16mm because of budget and plan to move up slowly to larger formats, my go to for narratives is 16mm and docu/brandwork is Alexa Mini. It's weird that Digital is killing film coz they actually have the potential to complement each other really well in today's scenario. Scanning film is easier than ever. Technology is well equipped to build equipments that can shoot multiple cans of films, scan in higher fidelity, unmatched color accuracy in illumination or have a digital feed that is far more accurate than the old days. False colors can be based off the feed to pinpoint the exposures and light the scene to perfection for film. Honestly, this is the best time to shoot film. Jump on the hype train and it might well and truly be back. And besides these, when you know what you are doing, you end up with footage that is the yummiest of em all. A look that no 4K film grain, luts or black pro mists can 'emulate'
Film has some very hard and fast technical advantages over the best digital equivalents. Several recent tests has shown as much. Dynamic range, colour resolution and depth and real resolution are where film shines. And that’s just 35mm. 70mm is even better of course. That’s both for a complete analog chain and for a hybrid approach. All the less tangible and hard to define aspects are fine and true too, but they would be very easy to sweep aside and forget if it wasn’t for the hard facts.
It's easy to assume that using film pushes up the cost of making features, but I recently heard of a cost comparison which established that a certain feature would cost £100,000 more to shoot on digital, largely due to the premium rates charged in relation to the hire of lenses. If the well-publicised new Kodak Super 8 finally appeared, and helped make shooting on Super 8 relatively affordable, that would also boost film usage and help draw in younger filmmakers.
Someone should look into doing new and better projectors too soon, for analog display and complete analog chain. It has long been known how to make far better projectors with a computer controlled rotating prism and continuously streaming film, instead of the traditional claw and Geneva cross mechanism. This would result in a far more stable image, with less flicker and it would also mean less maintenance and more reliability and an overall cheaper machine.
It would be cool to have a machine that could take the EDL ( edit decision list ) and chop up the negatives to make a optical print for release to theaters. ( optical prints theoretically would have the highest 35mm and 65mm resolution, no DI ( digital intermediate). ) I totally agree, there needs to be a new projector with cool, energy efficient LEDs and a quiet motor. Dolby needs to help whoever makes this projector by making something that allows Dolby Atmos to be synced to the film. 🎞 🍿 🎥
One aspect of film you didn't mention is archiving. A while back all the studios agreed to only use film stock to archive their movies, even those shot digitally. I'm not working in the movie world anymore so this may have recently changed, but I interviewed someone from Kodak's cinema division about five years ago and they told me that a big part of their film production was for archival purposes.
It's stuff like this that makes me want to support Kodak more. That's awesome that they're not gonna sever ties with those who hold onto the format. Ordering some!
I just bought a super-16 converted Krasnogorsk-3, partly thanks to yourself and Simon Cade. I've shot a number of narrative projects on digital, and am super excited to try a couple the celluloid way. That'll show those boomers who think I don't know how hard their job was back in the day.
Honestly, nothing beats shooting on film, NOTHING. The workflow, choosing film stock, the pressure of knowing you only have a limited amount of film to get it right, the anxiety of waiting for the film to get processed and whether you exposed correctly. The whole process is magic, MAGIC! It forces filmmakers to be more purposeful and meditative with their shots and composition, which is what art is all about. If you ever get the chance to shoot on film definitely do it!!!!!! I wish I was shooting on film right now.... sighhh
Last time i shot Super 8 was in about 2004. The difference now is, there's several places doing high quality "log" (I hate that word) 4k transfers at reasonable prices. That is a huge deal. I'm finally retrieving the boxes of Super 8 film I put in my parent's freezer 20 years ago.
Great video! Kodak should put some effort into getting film projection back into theaters. Just 1 screen in larger theaters show film and the rest stay digital. Movies shot on film should be able to be watched on film. This summer there will be back to back movies released on 70mm IMAX. And while we all wait for that, how about shooting some of that motion picture film in our SLR's and other cheap film cameras? Why don't more people shoot ENC-2? The remjet is rather easy to remove and there are a handful of labs that develop that type of film. Anyway, thanks for the video.
Thank you so much! It's thanks to your channel that a couple of years ago I took my grandpa's Eumig C3 and I used it. And despite it was a failure, because everything it was overexposed - too few settings on an old camera vs. a 100 ISO film, now I'm trying again to film using a Bolex B8. And once I'll get the hang of regular 8mm and with the small but semi-pro B8, my next step will be to purchase a 16mm camera and use it. Never give up, film (photos and motion picture) is not dead. We're not losers, we're just big dreamers with big aims! (Which in italian sounds more funny, 'cause sometime you can use the same word for say "aim" and "lens")
Digital Technology is a great compliment to film. Machines to bulk process, edit, cut, and project film. There has been so much progress in digital technology that we could have a new film projector made that can use its digital elements to automatically change over reels and sync Dolby Atmos with a 35mm or 65mm projector.
You know what I'd love to see, but will probably never come back, is the film composites they used to do back in the old days for film special effects. Like the stuff they used to do in Godzilla and a ton of other special effects-heavy stuff coming out of japan in the 50s~80s. It's fun to see the final image. I know that in the production of Ultraman they would film scenes that would have special effects (such as light rays, or composited images), they would use bigger film so that they could maintain the quality when they composited those shots. Really fun. At least it still lives on today, in digital composites, but man what I wouldn't give to see someone try all the stuff they used to do today :)
I'm definitely a fan of film (but not against digital), but I did not realize how many mainstream things are shot on 35mm/65mm motion picture film -- or the deals/money going on with all of it (Maybe Fuji regrets stopping production of their MP film?). What I find interesting is that the actual closest comparative megapixel resolution of say 100 ISO 35mm film (still) is about 16-20MP for one frame. So let's say that the motion picture film somehow eeks out a little more resolution (the fineness of the grain) at 24MP/frame -- that's interesting when compared to digital format resolutions. 4K is about 8.5MP, and 8K is about 33MP -- well I sort of out reasoned myself. I was going to argue that currently digital could provide higher resolution to the viewer (depending on where and how) -- but nope, 4K is definitely less than 35mm film. 8K looks to be somewhat beyond the resolution of 35mm film -- but definitely not 65mm film. And heck -- well made 35mm prints look great to me in the theater (huh -- I wonder how many theaters project film anymore?) and on 4K media. Well anyway -- even though film is a lot more work to shoot (the cameras, the mechanical aspects) and the DP/director cannot see what they shot until the dailies are run -- it definitely seems to have a lot of fans (ignore Tarantino's quote!).... Thanks!
Funnily enough yesterday I was given by a work colleague a whole load of Kodak motion picture film that had been re-rolled into canisters ! Love the look of Vision 3.
Definitely watch Uncut Gems! One of the top 5 best of last year in my opinion. Actually, the only one of my favorite 5 of 2019 that wasn’t shot on film was Parasite.
Just discovered your channel! It's awesome. Aly & Aj filmed the music videos for their Sanctuary project on film. The visual style was amazing. I'm seriously considering to shoot my music movie on film.
Didn't know No Time to Die was shot on film, now I'm super excited. As much as I loved the last 2 Bond movies, Bond doesn't belong on digital. Even if this movie sucks, it's nice to get back this piece of authenticity
Keep up the great posts.......long live film! By the way, Film Ferrania is coming to motion picture film......16mm P30 comes first.....it's gonna happen
Also- you bring up a lot of recent CG-heavy movies that were shot on film. It would be interesting to see a video discussing workflow differences between blending CG into film vs digital.
Good episode, Is Kodak making enough product to make 16mm and S8 in more of the same formulations or are the only interested in the 35mm and 70mm market?
so much stuff is being shot on 16mm rn, @kodak_shootfilm shows a lot of this. lot of fashion houses and indie stuff. also pro 8 in burbank (they develop and scan film) is hella busy rn
Somewhere out there, Georges Melies and the Luniere brothers are smiling. At the next table, Orson Welles, D.W. Griffith, and Andrei Tarkovsky are arguing over who had/has a better "film vision." At the Knight's table, Lawrence Olivier, "Richard Burton," and John Gielgud are ganging up on Alec Guinness. At the Founder's table, Thomas Edison is dueling with George Eastman and the Anthony Brothers over who did what first/better. At the Orphan's table, the two Leopolds, Godowsky Jr. and Mannes, lament the passing of Kodachrome, as George Gershwin plays his arrangement. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ZNWJPrQPlRo.html
Yes, Kodak is the only manufacturer making motion picture film. What's even a bigger bummer is that it produces exactly one black and white stock. The one which was used to make The Lighthouse. Yeah, that is the only available black and white motion picture film stock in existence today. Which I think is kind of a bummer, because black and white has such a lovely visual characteristic to it. In fact, the lack of colour actually adds an extra layer of emotional depth. And I wish I had a choice, because if I want to shoot on black and white, there's literally only one stock I can choose from.
Komal Shashank Actually, they make two Black and White motion picture film stocks. They make Double X negative and Tri-X reversal. Although you are right that only Tri-X exists for Super 8, but 16/35 has two options. So that’s something!
I’m no longer worried about film disappearing. Now I’m just hoping it doesn’t keep going up in price, and also that maintenance for film equipment will remain readily available. I think it’ll get harder and harder to own super 16 and 35mm motion picture cameras-all of the functional equipment will be concentrated at rental houses (and they’ll all be ARRI, with the occasional Aaton). Personally just bought an Eclair ACL; there are already only a few people who can do repairs around the world (maybe at one point I’ll be one of them).
Thanks for the great information for all of us who 'did not know that'. Love your channel. Just starting to shoot film again and collecting analog cameras.
Shooting on film is so much better imo. I watched ferris buellers day off which was shot on film and likely rescanned into HD, and looking at it, it was hard to believe how old the film is!
I'm really looking forward to shooting kodak vision3 50 or 250d rea-spooled as 120 on my old zeiss nectar 6x9 which is 70 year old 😃. And yes the new bond film was shot on it but that's what they the Imax films are shot on at basically 6x4.5 if it was a medium format camera so my old 6x9 could make one big ass print.
The nature of film technology is such that you can't produce filmstock independently of a major corporation like Kodak (e.g. you can't 3D print your own filmstock). Unless this changes, there will always be a critical mass problem with film which means it will be vulnerable to extinction (esp. if the engineering process can't economically bend around increasingly strict environmental regulations). That means maintaining a critical mass is absolutely necessary. It's also possible that Kodak may at some point decide to spin off its film manufacturing operations at which point a group of enthusiasts of the Tarantino caliber may have to take it off Kodak's hands to keep it alive. Time will tell. Either way it's fascinating that cameras made 50-100 years ago can still work. The beauty of mechanical technology...
There is a misconception that film technology stopped advancing since the advent of digital. But what a lot of people don't realize is that film technology is also advancing just as much alongside digital technology. The filmstock that is being manufactured today is not the same as that which was manufactured as recently as 20 years ago. Constant innovation is happening all the time. What disappoints me is that a lot of younger generation filmmakers don't even have the awareness of film as an option to shoot on. Instead, most opt for digital just because it's all that they know, or they think it's better because it's newer. But here's what I think. Whether they decide to shoot on film or digital is up to them, but they should at least be aware that they have a choice in front of them.
Bravo! You shouldn’t have gone back to I Love Lucy as a joke though. Someone is bound to take it seriously. Remember all those semi recent, pre streaming shows you love watching in HD or even 4K, when they originally aired in SD and 720? How it possible? Someone took the *film* and scanned it again.
Would love to shoot projects on motion picture film one day, but sadly doesn't make sense financially. The investment and dedication needed is literally a beast in it of itself and doesn't make sense for the majority of people. A lot of my passion projects I try to recreate the look of film, so I definitely want to shoot on it one day.
There are a lot of dead cinematic film formats that I wish were still around, primarily Technicolor and true black-and-white. Those two are the biggest losses cinematic formats have suffered in my lifetime, I think. I’m too young to remember the original 3-strip Technicolor, but I was a young teenager when ‘The Godfather, Part II’ was released. That film was the last to use the core component of the Technicolor look, imbibition printing. And I remember several true black-and-white movies that were oddballs of their time, like ‘The Last Picture Show’, ‘Young Frankenstein’, ‘Raging Bull’ and ‘Schindler’s List’. By the 2000s, on the rare occasion that a b&w feature would be produced (I remember one, not so great, that starred Billy Bob Thornton but I can’t remember the name of the pic), color film stock would be used, then the color removed for the final print. In my opinion, that doesn’t look as good. The prints aren’t terrible, but they seem a bit murky compared to my memory of true b&w films.
hey man I don't know if you already have a video about it but I would love to learn how to shoot motion picture film or 35 millimeter camera for photography. Using the bulk loader instead of buying individual rolls.
Well that felt like an episode of PMK (popular mechanics for kids) lolol but seriously love how general this one is ! So stoked on the new deal tho!!!!
Do you think that the new deal will see some of the motion picture film technology trickle down to their photography products? Portra is great but has been around in some form since the early 2000s - do you think they'll eventually adapt the Vision films to 35mm stills?
I don't expect it to, Kodak's still film and motion picture films are for the most part pretty separate. The stocks can share some similarities, but the Vision stuff is just designed a little differently.
Where oh where is the new Super8 camera! LOL They leave the page up with the new camera, but it's now been years in the making. It just can't cost $2000 for one... then I'm definitely out.
Eddie Actually, it’s the opposite - most TV shows were shot on film. Mainly, video TV shows were the really cheap ones like Soap Operas, or the ones like TV news. And even a lot of field reporting on TV news was shot on 16mm
@@martyjackson4166 I see. Might just be that a lot of it looked like it was shot on video because for example Cheers was shot on film but then edited on video, introducing the effects of that medium to it.
I love what you are doing and it inspired me to dust off my small collection of Super 8 cameras and run a film or two through one of them. Anyways, have you heard of the Straight 8 competitions, take a look at straight8.net they have some past winners for viewing on this site. A complete movie is shot on a single Super 8 cartridge with no post editing and matched to a pre recorded sound track. Amazing isn't the word for some of these short films. This would make a great vlog I think. A favour, do you or any of your viewers no the whereabouts of a straight 8 film called, I think, "High Spirits". Made some 10 years ago it was a straight 8 animation of a period house with poltergeist all done with paper animation. Great short film.
