Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Etymology of "EK print"?

This is topic Etymology of "EK print"? 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=008813

Posted by Waseem Daher (Member # 4357) on 07-07-2007, 11:26 AM:

Why is a print from the original camera negative called an EK print?

On learning that "EK"->"Eastman Kodak", I thought, "Well, it's not like normal release prints aren't on Kodak film". Any ideas?

Posted by Richard P. May (Member # 3598) on 07-07-2007, 12:02 PM:

Generally, EK print means a print made from the camera negative. It has nothing to do with the film stock used for the print itself.
The assumption, of course, is that the camera negative is of Kodak manufacture. That brings up what is correct when Fuji is used?
It's sort of like calling all polyester based film "Estar", when that is actually Kodak's trade name for this material.

DM

Posted by Mike Heenan (Member # 392) on 07-07-2007, 05:38 PM:

Here's what I'd like to know... since many if not all big budget films are made through DI's, is an EK print really that much sharper? Do they scan the cam neg to 2K DI, then output a negative from there, and then the interpositive... etc? Or do they just scan the parts that require CGI work, and output that to a negative, which is then combined with the original camera negative footage that didn't require CGI additions?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-07-2007, 07:20 PM:

An "EK Print" or direct print would be from the conformed (spliced to conform to the editing decisions) negative that is used to make the printing master positive, from which the duplicate negatives used to make release prints are made. The conformed negative likely contains any camera original that does not have effects work, although digital intermediate (DI) is making up a larger and larger percentage of what is in the conformed negative today.

Posted by John Hawkinson (Member # 1135) on 07-07-2007, 08:02 PM:

I'd still like to know the answer to Waseem's question -- why are they called "EK"?

--jhawk

Posted by Monte L Fullmer (Member # 2797) on 07-07-2007, 09:22 PM:

(I, once in a while, will find film cans with the moniker "EKC" embossed in the tin on the lid..figuring that it stood for "Eastman Kodak Company"....)

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 07-07-2007, 10:24 PM:

I'm noticing more and more the DI bottleneck in the EK prints. The most recent one I ran I actually spoke with someone at the studio to confirm it was an EK...it had all the ear marks (hand scribed cues, rock steady picture...better color...etc) but it really didn't have that EK look (incredible color saturation, really sharp detail, incredible depth). It is like they are continually lowering the bar on movie qualities (technically speaking).

I'm also totally fed up with Super-35...while I understand not wanting lens flares from anamorphics, I'm less concerned about astigmatism in far field objects...the Super-35s just look so lacking in detail and having extra grain. Its no wonder people aren't noticing too much difference between film and DCinema...the bar is so low even 16mm would resolve the images that are being put out.