even Movie film is not imune it seems..

[BetterSense]

Bye-bye to Kodak products, because I can't count on those products to be there tomorrow.

Right, and you can count on Ilford's products to be there, for you, provided you don't need anything weird like, oh, color film.

 

[Terrence Brennan]

If you want to buy Kodak products, that is entirely your business, not mine. I said that I wasn't going to support them, and I was expressing a personal opinion and choice, based on the facts as I see them.

If Kodak ceases production of colour film, it will be because the pro market has switched to digital capture, NOT because I buy HP5+ instead of Tri-X. What's killing the silver halide market isn't "art" shooters like me, but pros who have abandoned film for digital AND millions of amateur snapshooters who have done the same.

Film is now a niche market, a "boutique" item, if you will. B&W products will continue to be made as long as there is a market for them, for me and other photographers like me, who prefer traditional methods and processes, over the current digital options. Ilford has staked their fortune on it, so they must think that there is some future in it, albeit a greatly reduced volume over what was traditionally "the only game in town."

I have a project I started working on 13 years ago, which I have had to abandon, for lack of colour material resources. The only way for me to restart this project would be to "go digital," an impossibility given my financial situation. Personally, I am saddened every time I read of yet another product be discontinued, including colour materials.

 

[clayne]

I have a project I started working on 13 years ago, which I have had to abandon, for lack of colour material resources. The only way for me to restart this project would be to "go digital," an impossibility given my financial situation. Personally, I am saddened every time I read of yet another product be discontinued, including colour materials.

Color materials are easily available and priced affordably. Stop being so bull-headed about it. I personally don't care for the stand by and watch attitude.

 

[Terrence Brennan]

Color materials are easily available and priced affordably. Stop being so bull-headed about it. I personally don't care for the stand by and watch attitude.

It requires Ektachrome film--still available--and Vericolor Internegative Film to make internegs. Exposure is increased when the interneg is made to increase the contrast and colour saturation. of the resulting negative.

Internegatives made on regular camera stock will not give the same results as gen-u-wine Vericolor Internegative Film, which has been discontinued for some years now. My only option is to either shoot film and scan it or buy a digital camera. The end results will have to be ink jet prints.

Nobody's being bull-headed about it; the necessary materials don't exist anymore. But I'm not complaining; the prints I have made from the internegs I made are still worth looking at.

BTW, I made dye transfer prints many years ago. AFAIK, there are a few people still making them, but they have to manufacture their own materials. That's a bit beyond me; making my chemicals from scratch is more my speed.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Why is this such a big deal here? How many
motion pictures are shot in B+W these days?
Get a grip.

 

[clayne]

Why is this such a big deal here? How many
motion pictures are shot in B+W these days?
Get a grip.

Sanders, think a little wider and deeper on it. The same reflexive response is what kills film in general. I personally would love to see more
mp shot on px or tx, wouldn't you?

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Well, yes and no. Of course I would love
for Billy Wilder and Ingmar Bergman to rise
from the grave and make more B+W features.
But that just isn't going to happen.

I was wondering just last month why the B+W
films are still in Kodak's product line. My question
was not rhetorical: How many filmmakers are
still working in B+W? This isn't a casualty of
the digital age -- it's a casualty of Technicolor.

Thinking wider, at your invitation, I do not see
this as part of the creeping death of film. B+W
motion picture film has been a dormant medium
for decades. The removal of one emulsion from
the catalog cannot possibly have a measurable
impact on film use.

What am I missing here?

 

[Tim Gray]

Periodically, a film does use some of these stocks for scenes or the whole movie. In the last 10 years... Memento, Casino Royale, I'm Not There. A few others.

There are 3 (4) B&W stocks that Kodak makes (or made). Two reversal, two negative. The reversals are Plus-X and Tri-X. The negatives are Plus-X and Double-X. I don't know of the reversal films are made in 35mm. If Plus-X goes away, there would be one B&W negative film and one reversal film. I think the reversal films are used mainly in education or by amateur/artist types.

Also, it is unclear to me how different these films are from their still film counterparts. I have a sneaky suspicion that Plus-X motion negative, reversal, and still Plus-X are all the same stuff, just different cuts. If this is true, it could be bad for stills Plus-X.

 

[MartinP]

This isn't a casualty of
the digital age -- it's a casualty of Technicolor.

I'm not going to comment about anything else, but you do realise that Technicolor was an in-camera colour-separation system - eventually using three frames of b+w film per projection-print frame. In effect, all the different versions of the process massively increased the amount of black-and-white stock required for shooting . . . !

 

[GeorgK]

As almost all movie film stuff is scanned from negatives these days, it would be just plain stupid to use a bw negative. The workflow (e.g. Haneke's "White Ribbon") is now to shoot on colour film (Kodak Vision) which is than converted to bw digitally (with all the possibilities for filtering, contrast adjustment etc.).

Georg

 

[clayne]

As almost all movie film stuff is scanned from negatives these days, it would be just plain stupid to use a bw negative. The workflow (e.g. Haneke's "White Ribbon") is now to shoot on colour film (Kodak Vision) which is than converted to bw digitally (with all the possibilities for filtering, contrast adjustment etc.).

Georg

This is a rather insane statement and ignores everything about traditional silver-based films. There most definitely is a reason to use traditional silver stock and if that's the look they want, they should use it. They scan for ease of editing.

 

[GeorgK]

Why do you think it's "insane"? It is just a fact. And whats the "special look" you mentioned, besides a phrase? There is no "artistic grain" in movies, no "manual dodge-and-burn" on FB, no exotic developers used etc.
Making BW movies is quite different from BW hand-printing on paper.
And i doubt that Hollywood would do overnight stand processing in Rodinal 1:200 for a "special look".

 

[clayne]

Why do you think it's "insane"? It is just a fact. And whats the "special look" you mentioned, besides a phrase? There is no "artistic grain" in movies, no "manual dodge-and-burn" on FB, no exotic developers used etc.
Making BW movies is quite different from BW hand-printing on paper.
And i doubt that Hollywood would do overnight stand processing in Rodinal 1:200 for a "special look".

Has nothing to do with arcane developing or other tricks. What you're saying is similar to saying C-41 films (or ECN-2 in this case) have a similar look to silver-based films, which anyone who has used either knows is not true. Additionally, there's more to black and white film than converting color scans to black and white after the fact.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Has nothing to do with arcane developing or other tricks. What you're saying is similar to saying C-41 films (or ECN-2 in this case) have a similar look to silver-based films, which anyone who has used either knows is not true. Additionally, there's more to black and white film than converting color scans to black and white after the fact.

You are using Luddite logic to argue against reality.
The reality is no one in Hollywood shoots this stuff
in motion pictures any more. Why? (1) Almost no
movies have B+W footage. (2) Those that do, use
the film stocks on hand, that the cinematographer
already knows -- color -- and convert in post.

Those are facts. Call them insane, but do you really
think that your knowledge of the qualities of B+W films
is lost on cinematographers, who are professionals shooting
motion picture filmstocks for a living, who are tasked by
their directors with delivering the look they want, on a
deadline and a budget? What make you think you know
more about their trade and their art than they do?

 

[clayne]

You are using Luddite logic to argue against reality.
The reality is no one in Hollywood shoots this stuff
in motion pictures any more. Why? (1) Almost no
movies have B+W footage. (2) Those that do, use
the film stocks on hand, that the cinematographer
already knows -- color -- and convert.

Those are facts. Call them insane, but that's the
world and it isn't going to change becaus you attribute
arcane values to doing it another way.

Right, because your use of film for what others gladly use digital for doesn't apply in any kind of similar way, right Sanders?

I am fully aware of the grand lack of b&w cinematography out there. My original reply in that vein was more reflective and wishing, rather than anything backed up by lists of movies produced on Plus-X film within the last 10 years (the latter of which would be interesting to read). The original response was based on the fact that your reply along the lines of "not too surprising - it's not like anyone makes b&w movies anymore" was flippant and dismissive of a trade that, while heavily diminished, is still worth caring about.

Seriously, are you telling me to follow the commercial direction as a source of truth here? Considering the parallel, had/if I did that, I wouldn't own a single film camera based on said commercial direction/motivations as a guiding light.

Edit: you've edited, which is fine, but my response to your recent edit is that I highly doubt black and white stocks of any kind are being used in movies with directors and producers calling shots based on strict deadlines. People/groups still do make independent films out there, you know?

 

[Rolleiflexible]

Tilting at windmills.

The larger point, of course, is that filmmakers
were not large-volume users of Plus-X film stock;
that Plus-X film cannot account for more than a
minute portion of Kodak film sales; that this is
so because of the prevalence of color in cinema,
not the rise of digital technologies; and that the
departure of Plus-X motion picture film from
Kodak's catalog does not, as this thread suggests,
herald the demise of film, in movies or in still
photography.

Go on and wish. There's no harm in it.

 

[Rolleiflexible]

I highly doubt black and white stocks of any kind are being used in movies with directors and producers calling shots based on strict deadlines. People/groups still do make independent films out there, you know?

What makes you think independent filmmakers
are any less constrained by budgets and schedules?

 

[GeorgK]

BTW, "independent filmmakers" will be (or, are) the first ones to dump analog completely and change to the "Red" system.

 

[cmacd123]

1) I believe that last FULL feature shot on Black and white was probably "good night and good Luck" That one they wanted to use B&W release prins also, but had some problems at a few theaters because the silver image adsorbed enough heat to warp the film.

2) There is a petition started by the "professional Cinematorgraphers" over at http://cinematography.com/ to ask Kodak to reconsider this move. http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=45417

3) use colour and desaturate in post can be done, but it does give a different look than shooting a scene with a B&W negative. B&W can also be handy in doing special effects.

4) the RED system does have a lot of fans, but it has the same sort of limitations that keep APUG folks avoiding silicon image-making. The price of film stock is such a small part of the budget on any Movie or TV program, and the high rental rates for electronic imaging gear - which reflect its short service life before it is out of date - mean that the cost difference to start with film is not a serious concern in most productions.

 

[BetterSense]

My friend and I once calculated, using prices from Kodak's website, how much it must cost for film stock for a major motion picture. In the context of movie budgets, it's not a very impressive number, even considering 100:1 shooting ratios. I seem to remember we calculated that even if they shot in IMAX film, with a 10:1 shooting ratio, the total cost of the film stock would be less than a million dollars. In an age where Hollywood blockbusters have budgets in the 100s of millions of dollars, that much where the rubber hits the road doesn't seem like that big of a deal.

 

[Tim Gray]

Bettersense - exactly.

"Good Night and Good Luck" actually wasn't shot on B&W film. I'm pretty sure it was shot on one of the 500T stocks and desaturated. I believe I remember reading that Double X was both too slow and too grainy.

The most recent batch of films that I am aware of that were shot all or partly in B&W are Schindler's List (going back a ways), parts of Memento, the opening to Casino Royale, parts of I'm Not There, Clerks, and Pi.

 

[naugastyle]

How about The Man Who Wasn't There? Not desaturated color, was it? It was so beautiful.

 

[Metroman]

"Good Night and Good Luck" was shot on Vision2 500T (5218). "The Man Who Wasn't There" was shot on Double-X (5222) and Plus-X (5231) and the print done on Vision (2383).

There is an interesting article in the ASC magazine (Dec 2006) on the opening sequence of "Casino Royale".

 

[PKM-25]

I cannot see it going anywhere but further down big picture-wise, so it is up to we little guys to buy buy buy to fill the gap left by professionals who have abandoned film.

I hate to break it to you but a lot of pros use film for niche or personal projects, me included. We just don't have time to post on here as much as many of you do because we choose to spend our time making photographs instead of wasting time on forums...

 

[mikebarger]

Do you really think niche and personal projects is what he was referring to when saying professionals have moved from film?

Mike