Kodak rumors - new film stocks and hardware

[doug]

Interesting comments on Ektachrome 125. When I started shooting Standard 8 (in 2007), this film stock was the one I used on the first couple of rolls. I didn't think of it as terrible, although I agree that 100D was a lot better in pretty much every respect, such as colours, contrast and sharpness. Didn't realize until now that Etkachrome 125 was designed for TV screens.

Charlie

I always thought VNF 125T looked pretty good for colour and definition, in 16mm anyway. Maybe it was a bit magenta but that could be adjusted with filtration. Personally I prefer lower contrast reversal films most of the time, because they are so much easier to copy or scan.

[Tscan]

Interesting comments on Ektachrome 125. When I started shooting Standard 8 (in 2007), this film stock was the one I used on the first couple of rolls. I didn't think of it as terrible, although I agree that 100D was a lot better in pretty much every respect, such as colours, contrast and sharpness. Didn't realize until now that Etkachrome 125 was designed for TV screens.

Charlie

I always thought VNF 125T looked pretty good for colour and definition, in 16mm anyway. Maybe it was a bit magenta but that could be adjusted with filtration. Personally I prefer lower contrast reversal films most of the time, because they are so much easier to copy or scan.

I accidentally posted this on another thread, but here's an example of some VNF 125 I shot at a concert on early 2004
https://vimeo.com/70646413
Not that it was a bad stock, it just wasn't the best choice in most cases. K40 was usually a better day stock at the time, I started filming live shows on VNF in 2003/2004 and had a lot of under exposure issues. Vision 2 200 and 500T came out in S8 that year and I was finally able to get decent results with 500T. Reversal is finer grain than negative, so in theory a modern 500ASA tungton reversal could be a little tighter than V3 500T. The reversal stocks we've been shooting were formulated in 1973, 1989, and 1999 (TriX and PlusX were reformulated in 2004) So it would be real interesting to see what a newly formulated 25ASA or 500ASA reversal film would look like today, should Kodak go that route but won't hold my breath.

[Will2]

VNF reversal stocks were not made for traditional home projection, they were made for projection on a TV film chain which then pops the colors and the contrast and makes it look " normal" and great for TV broadcast. In home projection ,the film has low contrast/ low color saturation....VNF = Video News Film,...it was the film TV news cameramen used in their 16mm cameras before portable 3/4" video cameras became feasible in the late 70's.

Projected it was pretty bad, especially compared to the Kodachrome we had at the same time. Transferred on a Rank with a decent colorist it also looked pretty bad. I get the benefits and look of low contrast, but low saturation and what seemed like lower sharpness was what bothered me. That was in Super 8, never shot 16mm. This is all subjective of course and I would welcome it back as an option if we had 100D back in E6. These days we can make any stock look good with modern scanners and software.

[Will2]

I accidentally posted this on another thread, but here's an example of some VNF 125 I shot at a concert on early 2004
https://vimeo.com/70646413.

That actually looks good, I'm thinking that maybe there was some post processing to keep that grain so low. Like you said, the right stock for the right job. I should revisit what I have on that stock and see if a modern transfer would bring it more life.

[mr8mm]

I believe the first use of super 8 VNF was for surveillance cameras.

[David M. Leugers]

Nothing crappy about VNF 7240, just a completely different look which may or may not be to one's liking. Not the greatest in 8mm or S-8mm, but I really liked it for 16mm shooting outdoors in mixed sunlight and shade. It has very pastel colors that are pretty accurate and pleasing to the eye.
Not the eye popping pizzaz like Kodachrome or E100D, but more of a dreamy look. To be sure, I'd bet Kodak can come up with an E6 film of 40ASA or 400 ASA that would really be to most shooters' liking.

[Angus]

VNF film was not designed for projection at all, it was intended for telecine and to be broadcast on TV. Hence the low contrast, which the film scanners of the 70s and 80s could easily deal with.

That said, I'd take VNF over what we have now for colour reversal (nothing).

VNF 7240 was introduced to plug the hole left by Ektachrome 160 when it was finally discontinued in 1997. Shooting under low light, for example the bright lights of a city at night or houses decorated with lots of Christmas lights, 7240 looked OK even on projection from super 8. Shot in low daylight it looked very flat and quite boring....but at least you got an image. Compared to K40 it really did look dull, but K40 could not reasonably be used on a cloudy day, or at dusk....or indoors under lights. It gave an option which would otherwise have been removed when E160 was discontinued. Super 8 was very small business for Kodak back then and VNF 7240 allowed them to continue to offer a higher speed colour reversal film without spending lots of money developing a new product.

So...I would take something crap over nothing at all. However what really worked was 100D, that looked gorgeous in most lighting situations.

Any more updates on this "rumour"?

[Tscan]

[/quote]That actually looks good, I'm thinking that maybe there was some post processing to keep that grain so low. Like you said, the right stock for the right job. I should revisit what I have on that stock and see if a modern transfer would bring it more life.[/quote]

Thanks, like Will and Angus have suggested, it looks better scanned than projected due to it's low contrast intended use. The stage lights were pretty optimal for the film speed, not a lot of visible grain to begin with. The only post processing really involved was me adding contrast, which make the colors pop a lot more, and Vimeo's compression.

I like the idea of new reversal films and what they could be with today's technology. The idea of a new low con reversal is even more interesting, could even be controversial. For folks who prefer to only project, a low con film wouldn't be the best thing. But now days everyone is used to or prefers the digital workflow, because there are 3 color negatives available. Personally I prefer the digital workflow, and I've always had a love affair with the look of reversal film. So I'd really enjoy a new low con reversal that I could scan well. I don't think I would do much projecting unless they came out with a new compact LED projector of some quality. I feel like I'm taking a gamble with my films every time I load up my old Elmo ST-1200. Again I won't hold my breath.

[Angus]

I don't know that a low contrast colour reversal film for scanning would be necessary....as people who have the intention of scanning can already use the negative films. A film for projection that also scans well however....might be useful.

You've reminded my that my ST-1200 has an issue with the gate that I haven't managed to solve yet...

[sciolist]

The idea of a new low con reversal is even more interesting, could even be controversial.

I'd really like to have a low contrast color reversal film for use with my J-K K-104 optical printers, but I expect the demand for such a stock would be very small.

[Will2]

Don't get your hopes up for a Kodak Super 8 camera by Christmas. Looks like 1st quarter 2017.

[Tscan]

Don't get your hopes up for a Kodak Super 8 camera by Christmas. Looks like 1st quarter 2017.

Where did you here that? They've been tight lipped since January. It's Oct 20th and no new info on their site, so I'm not really anticipating one by Christmas.

[Will2]

Don't get your hopes up for a Kodak Super 8 camera by Christmas. Looks like 1st quarter 2017.

Where did you here that? They've been tight lipped since January. It's Oct 20th and no new info on their site, so I'm not really anticipating one by Christmas.

I know a guy. It's legit.

I do wish they'd be more open and transparent about the timeline officially. They're not Apple. They'd do better if they'd just talk about it...all the film nerds would pass the info around and they'd get free publicity. It's not like Fuji is going to beat them to a new Super 8 camera release.

[Andreas Wideroe]

Agree. Being open about it is better.

I heard the release was closer to summer now. They had problems with image stability..

Andreas

[aj]

Wasn't stabilty the main advantage of the Logmar design which is the basis for the Kodak cameras?