As for the 7218 - it is certainly worth it. The lattitude and grain
structure (for a 500 speed film) alone are worth the $'s - and since it
is a very new stock, you can get at least one can free from kodak to
throw into your project package - ask for a selection of the films for
testing and comparison purposes ( I did and got 6 different rolls for
this use - they are pretty liberal with the 16mm stocks - 35 seems to be
a bit more restrictive). the words to describe this stock are: true,
deep, forgiving, and tight. It also has a great degree of resistance to
temperature ( a truly undersold feature) and is extremely stable even
after initial exposure - making it great for "old timey" double exposure
special effects shots (note: I am not an advocate of digital special
effects - they generally annoy me more than "wowing" me - with rare
exception).
You should also take a look at Realla 500D stock, depending on what your
goals are with the shoot. Amazing transitionary characteristics - say
when going from indoor to outdoor to indoor flo lit conditions - check
out http://www.fujifilm.com/JSP/fuji/epartners/MPDemoReel.jsp for a good
example of this.
Also, the whites in 7218 are crisp and accurate, not creamy as with the
7277 ... but be carefull of the blacks - it really REACHES into the
shadows, something that most of us aren't used to - and it makes it all
too easy to accidentally leave offending grip equipment in the shot.
The greatest thing about this stock is the amount of tweaking you can do
in post - it holds color without spilling - even when pushing it an
extra stop or two - the "red bleed" associated with many Kodak stocks
after pushing two or more stops seems to be missing, or at the very
least minimalized, with the 7218.
Your phantom stock snob in residence,
Drew
www.promethean.tv
----- Original Message -----
From: <EclairACL@topica.com>
To: <EclairACL@topica.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 7:06 AM
Subject: Digest for EclairACL@topica.com, issue 362
-- Topica Digest --
7218?
By emotepix@artnet.net
Re: 7218?
By super16acl@aol.com
film
By chuckabo@msn.com
RE: 7218?
By emotepix@artnet.net
RE: film
By emotepix@artnet.net
Re: 7218?
By super16acl@aol.com
------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 00:47:35 +0000
From: Chris Leong <emotepix@artnet.net>
Subject: 7218?
Hello All
Anybody tested the new Vision2 7218 yet? I'm going to ACL a short
dramatic piece, and was wondering if the quality jump between 77 and 18
was worth the difference in price (basically between new A-Minima 200ft
loads of 18 vs. 100-199ft short ends of 7277, which is quite a
difference in price).
Thanks in advance
Cheers
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2003 22:09:39 EST
From: Super16ACL@aol.com
Subject: Re: Eclair Cameras: 7218?
--part1_172.1651b981.2b772073_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I've found that shooting a dramatic project (ie-dialog) on short ends
can be
problematic --- you load 125 feet and make a shot or two, and then it's
time
to change mags with 50 feet still left. One can spend twice as much time
changing mags (which adds up in general down-time), and then throw away
more
film than the savings. For what it's worth. Mark.
--part1_172.1651b981.2b772073_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
FACE="Arial" LANG="0">I've found that shooting a dramatic project
(ie-dialog) on short ends can be problematic --- you load 125 feet and
make a shot or two, and then it's time to change mags with 50 feet still
left. One can spend twice as much time changing mags (which adds up in
general down-time), and then throw away more film than the savings. For
what it's worth. Mark.</FONT>
</HTML>
--part1_172.1651b981.2b772073_boundary--
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2003 00:21:05 -0500
From: "Julian Renner" <chuckabo@msn.com>
Subject: film
Has anyone ever shot tungsten balanced film in the daylight? How blue is
it
and is the blue refinable when being transfered through the digital
telecine to give an early morning or late afternoon/evening color tone?
If
anyone knows and is willing to share I would be grateful.
Thanks
_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 07:51:56 +0000
From: Chris Leong <emotepix@artnet.net>
Subject: RE: 7218?
Hi Mark
Thanks for the suggestion. When shooting 35mm and using 400ft loads I
worked out a system whereby the longer takes were either good or all
thrown away, thereby saving on neg dev costs. I had eight 400ft mags
then, I have 4 200fters now, will rent another 2-4 for the shoot, and
will probably use them all.
But then again, I grew up shooting 3:1 and timing everything out before
and during rehearsals, and, silly me, I still shoot video tape that
way...
Thanks again!
Cheers
Chris
Mark wrote:
> I've found that shooting a dramatic project (ie-dialog) on short ends
> can be
> problematic --- you load 125 feet and make a shot or two, and then it's
> time
> to change mags with 50 feet still left. One can spend twice as much time
>
>
> changing mags (which adds up in general down-time), and then throw away
> more
> film than the savings. For what it's worth. Mark.
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 08:00:15 +0000
From: Chris Leong <emotepix@artnet.net>
Subject: RE: film
Hi Julian
I mostly shoot without (85) filtration and rebalance for daylight during
telecine. It's not 100% accurate, but it's more than 90% there - I'd say
around 95% accurate.
There's a special filter (I forget which number it is) that's specially
formulated for this use.
The main thing is that you have around a 2/3 stop extra of film speed to
use, which can get you out of a tough lighting spot or two.
Don't forget that after the inital telecine and color correction, you
usually get another go at tweaking the colors during the online or
printing stages. That's usually good enough for jazz, as my old mentor
used to say. Did over 300 television commercials and nary a complaint
from a client.
Of course, on occasion, I have been known to warm up an otherwise
unappetizing sunset with a double or triple 85...
HTH
Cheers
Chris
Julian Renner wrote:
>
> Has anyone ever shot tungsten balanced film in the daylight? How blue is
>
> it
> and is the blue refinable when being transfered through the digital
> telecine to give an early morning or late afternoon/evening color tone?
> If
> anyone knows and is willing to share I would be grateful.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2003 03:26:59 EST
From: Super16ACL@aol.com
Subject: Re: Eclair Cameras: 7218?
--part1_16d.18dd7373.2b776ad3_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Chris, Whew! Sort of reminds me of the early silent days, where
they'd
develop film by hand one shot at a time --- your method certainly sounds
efficient. Best of luck. Mark.
--part1_16d.18dd7373.2b776ad3_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"
FACE="Arial" LANG="0">Hi Chris, Whew! Sort of reminds me of the early
silent days, where they'd develop film by hand one shot at a time ---
your method certainly sounds efficient. Best of luck. Mark.</FONT>
</HTML>
--part1_16d.18dd7373.2b776ad3_boundary--
------------------------------
End of EclairACL@topica.com digest, issue 362