Barry Lyndon film?

[O. Pyykkö]

I was just wondering, what would be the closest modern C-41/E-6 equivalent of the Kodak 5254 motion picture film, used in films like Barry Lyndon [1] and the Godfather [2]. I really adore the look this film has (but of course lighting plays even more important role in this matter).

- O. Pyykkö


References:
1. http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/2001a/bl/page1.htm
2. http://www.cinematography.net/edited-pages/FilmsOn5254.htm

 

[Tom Kershaw]

If you can get access to 'Listen Again' or podcasts on the BBC Radio 4 website; there was a good discussion of 'Barry Lyndon' on 'The Film Programme' last night.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/arts/filmprogramme/filmprogramme.shtml

Tom.

 

[Ian Grant]

Welcome to APUG.

Those are old films, cine processing labs have their own techniques for bending and manipulation films to achieve desired results. Little is written about them and it might be difficult to emulate with current E6 & C41 films.

In many ways it would be better to describe what differences you want to get using modern films, compared to normal processing. You can push process E6 by 2 or 3 stops to get a grainier less colour saturated look, this would give results similar to early Sarah Moon images shoot on the high speed Anco slide films.

Ian

 

[df cardwell]

Ansco 500 was a fine counterpart to Kodak's Recording Film for grainy portraits.
1970 was JUST the other day....

But what I really miss is Agfachrome !

 

[Mark Antony]

I think they had a special Zeiss lens made just for the film from memory they were 50mm f 0.75 or something similar.
I think Kubrick wanted the lighting by candle light only, and I haven't seen the film for a couple of years but remember it looked warmish like daylight stock shot at 3200K.
I would shoot on daylight slide 400IS0 possibly with a weak blue filter very wide apertures say F1,4 or F2, you could even push the film a stop, if you need more atmosphere.

 

[Venchka]

GOOGLE knows. Somewhere on Al Gore's internet are several long interviews, one of them the cinematographer. In addition to the ex-NASA (0.75) CORRECTION: 0.70 Zeiss lens, they also used a Canon 1.2 lens. One scene required a 1/2 stop push so they pushed the whole lot. Good reading.

 

[BetterSense]

What an amazing film. It's too bad I have never found a decent DVD transfer of it. Perhaps there will be a bluray.

 

[O. Pyykkö]

Thank you very much for the replies.

To be more specific, I'm looking for a color negative / reversal film that exhibits low contrast, warmish tone and similar color pallette that Kodak 5254 has. I was thinking Fujiichrome Astia 100F and Fujifilm Superia Reala 100, but I think their color pallette is a bit 'too accurate' and modern, if you know what I mean.

Much can be done with lighting, filters, post-processing etc. but I'd like to know what are your suggestions for a starting point. I'm planning to shoot some portraits and I'm looking for that same painting-like quality that Kodak 5254 shows.

Tom: Thanks for the link, I'll look into it.

 

[frotog]

Overexpose and underdevelop kodak 400nc, scan neg., then use the Barry Lyndon filter in photoshop.

 

[donbga]

Thank you very much for the replies.

To be more specific, I'm looking for a color negative / reversal film that exhibits low contrast, warmish tone and similar color pallette that Kodak 5254 has. I was thinking Fujiichrome Astia 100F and Fujifilm Superia Reala 100, but I think their color pallette is a bit 'too accurate' and modern, if you know what I mean.

Much can be done with lighting, filters, post-processing etc. but I'd like to know what are your suggestions for a starting point. I'm planning to shoot some portraits and I'm looking for that same painting-like quality that Kodak 5254 shows.

Tom: Thanks for the link, I'll look into it.

Rollei CN was like that but is now discontinued - low contrast and not ultra sharp.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

Barry Lyndon was shot on 70mm color negative. I don't think you can ever replicate a color negative "look" with color transparency film. I think you need to start with color negative film.

 

[David William White]

And BL was shot with available light (necessitating the f/0.7 zeiss for indoors) and as often as possible at the 'magic hour' when low contrast conditions prevail. Great looking film.

 

[jamesgignac]

Very bizarre, I watched Barry Lyndon last night...who's been spying on me?

 

[Anton Lukoszevieze]

Yeh, the lenses were big ex-Nasa lenses, my friend told me the other day. They had to try and adapt them to fit on the movie cameras they were so big. Must have been cos of the candlelight scenes. Kubrick was also an ace photographer of course.

 

[kman627]

Here's the candle-lit scene. -Beautiful
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fWiOinTzOs&fmt=18

 

[Venchka]

While it may have been a beautiful film, as I recall, it was a crashingly boring film.

 

[David William White]

A little off topic, but a rental for the Kubrick fans: "Colour Me Kubrick" where Malkovich impersonates Stanley; based on a true story. Hilarious as the impersonator doesn't really look like Kubrick nor is he very knowledgeable about his films.

 

[2F/2F]

The film used will have an impact, but your use of light will make the look more than the choice of emulsion will make the look. Your choice of aperture and shutter speed will also matter. Candles are a constantly moving source of light, so shutter speed does matter. The film (my favorite movie, BTW) was shot with only period-correct lighting; no electric lights. I assume you are talking about the look of the indoor scenes. I would go ahead and light a gross or so of candles, and have at it with some daylight films like the two you are already considering, or a more flat neg film like Pro 160S/Portra 160NC. Try some with various degrees of cool filtration (82 filters), and possibly the full-on color conversion you get from an 80-series filter, which will still make for a warm tone in candle light. When shooting your negs, overexpose for two reasons: 1. So the blue layer gets enough exposure to let you change color balance as desired (if shooting without filters), and 2. to lower the over all contrast of the shot. If you are shooting transparencies, you can mess with pushing and pulling more than you can with negs; pulling especially. For your lens, whatever it is, I'd use it wide open to soften things as much as possible. No need to rush out and buy an f/1.2 lens. Just use whatever you have wide open and see what happens.

 

[O. Pyykkö]

Thank you very much for the replies so far.

Barry Lyndon was shot on 70mm color negative. I don't think you can ever replicate a color negative "look" with color transparency film. I think you need to start with color negative film.

Could you provide a refence for 70mm argument? According to the IMDb Barry Lyndon was shot and printed to 35mm [1]. You're probably right that chromes are a bit farfetched in this situation.

2F/2F: Just as I have said in my earlier posts, lighting is paramount to get the look I'm looking for, but thank you very very much for the tips.

- O.

Reference:
1. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072684/technical

 

[Venchka]

Most of the answers are here..........

http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/2001a/bl/page1.htm

 

[Kino]

I agree with 2F/2F here; the lighting, filtration and "mise en scene" of the production have far more to do with the look than just strictly the filmstock, although, I DO think you will have a hell of a time getting a reversal to even approach this look!

You'd be better off investing in a space blanket and some double wick candles (and a fire extinguisher, just in case!) than putting so much effort into choosing a film stock.

In cinematography, the film stock is important, but certainly takes back seat to the cinematographer's use of filtration and lighting.

 

[alan doyle]

the candle light scenes were shot on a very old rack over mitchell s35 a camera made between 1930's to 1960's..
the same family of cameras that orson welles used on citizen kane..
the movement was a work of art and was so stable panavision copied it..
this was a 35mm camera,the camera and lens are now in the hands of joe dunton in london.
the focus work was so critical they had to use a crude form of video assist to check actor positions.
john alcott the dp was a bit of a genius he did the ape scenes in africa on 2001,he was also responsible for the 10x8 back projection location plates which were used in the ape close up scenes.
kubrick allowed days for pre-lighting and was the king of testing.
those films have a unique quality,and the films are very different now that you will have a job getting a similar look.
even on kubricks last film,which i think is not good..he purchased the worlds supply of older generation kodak exr 500asa film,which he rated at 1000asa.
check out the film the draughtsmans contract...shot on a more modern stock in 16mm.
fuji astia would be an interesting route for testing in stills.

 

[Kirk Keyes]

There's an issue of American Cinematographer that covers Barry Lyndon. You might want to track it down to get some information that was published at the time of the movie's release.

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

Barry Lyndon is a gorgeous film.
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/sk/ac/len/page1.htm

One of my favorites by far.

 

[David William White]

Wow, did you (or someone you know) work on his films?

What of this 'crude video assist'? Did they have a second fast lens or how did they otherwise preview DoF?

the candle light scenes were shot on a very old rack over mitchell s35 a camera made between 1930's to 1960's..
the same family of cameras that orson welles used on citizen kane..
the movement was a work of art and was so stable panavision copied it..
this was a 35mm camera,the camera and lens are now in the hands of joe dunton in london.
the focus work was so critical they had to use a crude form of video assist to check actor positions.
john alcott the dp was a bit of a genius he did the ape scenes in africa on 2001,he was also responsible for the 10x8 back projection location plates which were used in the ape close up scenes.
kubrick allowed days for pre-lighting and was the king of testing.
those films have a unique quality,and the films are very different now that you will have a job getting a similar look.
even on kubricks last film,which i think is not good..he purchased the worlds supply of older generation kodak exr 500asa film,which he rated at 1000asa.
check out the film the draughtsmans contract...shot on a more modern stock in 16mm.
fuji astia would be an interesting route for testing in stills.