|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Once Upon a Time ... in Hollywood 70mm/35mm release?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Kornfeld
Film Handler
Posts: 24
From: Cambridge, MA/USA, USA
Registered: Apr 2017
|
posted 07-29-2019 01:00 PM
Anyone who claims that the colour in this movie resembles the look of IB Tech is either blind, mistaken, or stupid.
Perhaps all three.
Whats lacking? Well, the deep blacks, the high gamma, the gleaming whites, the bang-on flesh tones (one of the glories of the process), the controlled contrast, the absence of blown-out highlights, the trademark red, the saturated colour, & the shadow detail.
Other than those, sure, just like Tech. On a bad day. In 1982.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tyler Purcell
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 180
From: Van Nuys, CA
Registered: Dec 2015
|
posted 07-29-2019 05:36 PM
The DCP looked pretty good, but it looked like a modern movie. I didn't feel for a second it was shot in the 70's. Even the lensing was too damn crisp for the vintage.
Had it been MY movie, I would have shot the entire thing with 50D and 200T for night scenes. I would have used very vintage glass and never once resorted to modern cranes or jib's with stabilizers. No steadicam, no smooth shots, make it really rough and if ya have crane shots, make it possible to do with old school studio cranes, with the shake and everything.
Then in post, 100% photochemical finish. Cut the original negative and experiment with different coloring methods to get the look with printer lights. Then the colored IP would be used to make a 35mm IN and 70mm IN blowup.
Because there were so many digital shots in the film, cleanup work and such, it would be very difficult to do a photochemical finish at low cost. Laser-out's are way less money because you can get precice finishes without worrying about striking a bunch of answer prints and re-tweaking constantly. It's a no-brainer to do a digital finish these days, but there goes your "look" the moment you do so.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jean-Pierre Gutzeit
Film Handler
Posts: 43
From: Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Registered: Nov 2012
|
posted 07-30-2019 10:42 AM
It should be a matter of honour to preserve the cultural technique of film against the virus-like digitalisation of the living worlds as expertly supervised and appropriately endowed practice. The high potential of film does not have to be explained separately.
But what should we do if, in the last 15 years, there has been a reduction in the number of staff in all existing film laboratories without exception and the specialist knowledge is increasingly disappearing? The reason for this is, of course, today's lower order situation, but also further cost reductions in process flows or the additional answer prints required.
Despite the reference to the fact that the Kodak Image Process still exists, I experienced the premature termination of this process in Europe. Unfortunately, however, American film prints also show errors and deficits that would have prevented them from being accepted twenty years ago.
That is why I suspect that one of the biggest problems is the lack of active participation of the cinemas, other professionals, the film distributors and the filmmakers themselves, which led to this result.
There is no critical public on this subject because, as defenders of the film process, we fear that too harsh a criticism could lead to the suspension of all further film commissions.
In the last 15 years unfortunately almost without exception was the "trademark" of 70mm copies:
- unbalanced light determinations, lack of scene compensation, incorrectly filtered basic tuning of the printers
- false gradation, dropping or discolored shadows
- yellow-green colour cast
- disappointing sharpness and resolution of the 65mm Intermediates
- slight image uncleanliness and negative rainfall
"Hardly a difference to 35mm" was often heard.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic