Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: The Man Who Wasn't There

This is topic The Man Who Wasn't There - print defects? in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=002760

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-29-2001, 04:50 AM:

I saw this film yesterday and was really distracted by the colour cast, which seemed to vary from reel to reel. It started off with a greenish tinge, then became pink in reel 2, and so on right through the film. It totally ruined the crisp and contrasty b/w photography for me - film noir is not supposed to be tinted!

Is this like 'The General' (the John Boorman thiller, not the Buster Keaton film) - a case of a b/w production being printed onto colour release print stock without the labs taking care to process it properly? There must have been a serious quality control blunder somewhere for each reel to be so different from the last - like all the reel 1s being developed with the chemical mix slightly wrong or at the wrong temperature, then likewise for the reel 2s only slightly different.

If so, is it not possible for proper b/w release print stock to be used for b/w films? Admittedly the number of new b/w films being made is very small and probably not enough for manufacturing a special batch to be economic. Perhaps this problem could be solved by deep-freezing a large amount of raw stock and then thawing it out as needed? After all the silver emulsion is very stable and shrinkage is not a major problem with polyester base.

OK, rant over...

Posted by Phil Connolly (Member # 465) on 10-29-2001, 05:21 AM:

I'd heard that it was shot on colour stock and convered to B & W in the post production stage.

I can't remeber where I heard it, but it was something to do with the finer grain of colour stock.

Can anybody confirm this, one way or another?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 10-29-2001, 07:54 AM:

The making of the film is discussed in the October 2001 issue of "American Cinematographer":
http://www.cinematographer.com/magazine/0,1210,26264,00.html

It was shot on Kodak VISION 320T Color Negative Film. The article says they decided to print the film on EASTMAN High Contrast Panchromatic Film 5369, which is NOT normally used as a print film, but rather as an intermediate film for special effects:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/lab/5369.shtml#base

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: 716-477-5325 Cell: 716-781-4036 Fax: 716-722-7243
E-Mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion

Posted by Phil Connolly (Member # 465) on 10-29-2001, 08:06 AM:

Thought so.

Thanks for the links John.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 10-29-2001, 08:19 AM:

In that case, how could a colour cast be introduced in developing? It was definitely there on the print I saw yesterday. Could it be that the prints being used for high-profile city centre venues were struck on 5369 but then the labs ran out and had to finish the run on a more widely available release print stock?