Filmmaking - Shoot Real Film
by Sam Longoria
Peeved filmmakers ask, “How can I afford to shoot “Real Film?”
I shoot mostly 35mm four-perf, flat or scope, but I have shot VistaVision (8-perf 35mm going sideways) and 5, 8, and 15-perf 65mm. (Todd-AO, Dynavision, Imax). I have a 65mm camera I built that will pull those formats. I shoot 4×5 and 8×10 stills in negative and transparencies. So I know a little about it.
I love film, it’s the real deal, it just needs more guys on the crew to carry everything. Oh, and a truck.
I’ve shot a lot of Super 8mm and 16mm, but only for the grainy effect. I blow those up on my optical printer. I don’t shoot small-formats or video to make a movie on. My movies are 35mm, as God and Tom Edison intended, so I can show them in any theatre anywhere in the world.
Expensive? Not really, your customers pay for it. It’s only money. 35mm can be sold, so expense is deductible, the cost of doing business. I shoot video too, good luck selling it for a decent price.
Perception of value for film is very high, so you can ask a high price. Mention your production is digital to a distributor, you might as well say you are giving it away.
He’s read all the stupid articles, how it don’t cost nothin’ to make digital, so that’s what he figures you spent, and that’s what he offers you. (Never tell anybody your real budget, for the same reason.)
35mm stock is about half a buck per foot, retail. Processing is about .20/ft. You can buy short ends and recans for about half that, or make deals for lower prices. You can even buy chemicals and a processor and bypass the lab, there’s a whole used market.
I build cameras, so I buy cameras and hotrod them, but that’s just me. I’m restoring a reflexed early Mitchell BNC right now, and it’s delightful. All the high-tech stuff is on the film emulsion. Put new film in it, and you’re on a par with anybody, you just upgraded your 1938 camera to 2007. 10X resolution of HD.
I stay well-connected to raw stock people, and never pay retail. I pay about .09/foot. 50, 000′ for a feature’s worth costs me about $4500. You can find a raw stock source like that on IndyCine.
Lab costs can be cheaper than 16mm because they do so much more in 35mm than 16mm, and the lab treats you much better when you’re a 35mm customer.
That’s getting worse, too. Last couple of 16mm projects run through a lab (CFI, Hollywood and Alpha Cine, Seattle both used to be very good, how the mighty are fallen. Best are now DuArt, NY and Fotokem, Burbank.) had all kinds of dirt on them, and the lab “just couldn’t figure it out.” I can - use clean chemicals!
Here’s a great interview Audio CD on the subject.
I make a print and a window dub. I rough-cut on my mac FCP, then conform my print and do screenings, in theatres and my editing room. (My Cinemonta 8-plate flatbed table can project a big, bright image onto my white wall.)
Based on audience reaction, I do the fine-cut on film, and conform the negative. Video is tweaked, matched to my print.
Good luck!
Sam Longoria
© 2006 Sam Longoria, All rights reserved.
Filed Under
Movies , Teaching Film-making
Loading ...
5 Responses to “Filmmaking - Shoot Real Film”
Leave a Reply
(Ref smilies)
Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.
-
Advertisement
-
- Random thoughts on Yuv
- Dev.D- Emosional Aty
- An Interview With Oye Lucky Lucky Oye’s Dolly - Richa C
- SORRY
- The story of Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi Reve
- Ada Music Review
- Ajay TG- Man With A Camera.
- Maharathi: Murder is in the Details (Zero Spoiler Review)
- Mukhbiir Versus Chamku – A toss-up between two lone rangers
- Random thoughts on Yuvvraaj
-
Advertisement
Hottest Today:
Recent Posts:
- Amazing priceless information for the newbies… Thanks again Sam for sharing this with cine-enthusiasts…
Wow Sam …
Have always been a bit scared and apprehensive when it comes to the technical aspects of film making … must say this post took me into the ‘16 mm and the 35 mm’ mantra that everyone keeps chanting.
Was left waiting for more …
Additionally, what is ur view on shooting a film on DV ..and then blowing it up ??? I believe Tarantino and/or Rodriguez do the same ….
Wow…Have no clue why i was missing this article..It is so much Informative and clears a lot of Myth also gives insider’s Info about selling your product and making money too
Thanks a ton Sam!!!
I believe shooting on film is far more superior as compared to the digital medium currently.
There are basically 3 aspects which differentiates digital n film mediums:-
Quality of pics, which could be # of lines. Film 1200 to 3500. High end hollywood productions shoot digitally around 4000lines for eg. the forthcoming Superman, but the human eye can percieve only till 2000 lines.
Next would be depth of field:- Digitally it could be copied by using prime lenses.
The last one is progressive image:-The impression of the moving obeject on the negative when its exposed for a short time. Now there are cameras which shoot in progressive modes, but not sure if their images look like film.
Kartik:: The cameras used in Hollywood include Sony HDW900 which is used with prime lenses and hard drives r used to store the images. DVs are not used in major hollywood films. They r used in Indian TV shows and may be low budget bhojpuri films, even they r shot on 35mm.
Sam: I am so adamant about using film its a craft, which is so much fun. But digital camera in wrong hands could ruin everything. With the arrival of Arri D20 it looks like films would be less commonly used in the near future. May be we have 5 years more to use film majorly. But the directors who love film would continue to use them. Scorcesse, oliver stone to name a few.
Great post Sir!
:)>-