Any ideas on what it could be? I feel like the Vision line already lines up with their pro films, in terms of technology and speed, that being the different versions of Portra. Unless they're suggesting they're bringing back 800 speed motion picture film, but is that necessary?
Or maybe without a REMJET backing?
There might be no reason to assume that it is based upon a current professional photography film.
well, on the instagram post of the DoP he writes:
"They supported the music video with a yet-to-be-released and never-before-used motion picture stock, which is similar to a beloved professional still photography film."
and kodak on their instagram:
"...on a yet-to-be-released Kodak motion picture stock, which is similar to a beloved professional still photography film. "
Adding my wish to the list: E400
A transparency film faster than 100 has been missing (for me anyway) for a long time.
REM Jet is almost needed for motion picture use. IMAX had to do technical handstands to get 5222 (which does not come with REM-JET) to work in IMAX cameras.
when Fuji still made Motion Picture films, they did make
Fuji Reala 500D 8592 / 8692
Or maybe without a REMJET backing?
My reckoning is the new stock is probably 500 or 640D. Maybe even 800D.
There's a whole sequence of reasons why a fast daylight balanced ECN-2 stock has become increasingly necessary, not least of which is the decline of tungsten and rise of LED.
So no, I don't think it's going to be remjet-less.
I don't think so either, but I can dream!
Hoping for Portra 800 400' rolls, would be great as a motion picture stock, and then I could actually afford Portra 800
There's a whole sequence of reasons why a fast daylight balanced ECN-2 stock has become increasingly necessary, not least of which is the decline of tungsten and rise of LED.
The 85B filter has been used on tungsten film stocks for color conversion for decades
A revered Professional still film is basically Ektar or Portra, if current. One way I tell some film shots is through that slight halation, infact I have some photos of NYC where this type of Halation between backlit buildings and sky happened on Portra 400. Don't have a source at hand, but certain conditions can overcome the antihalation. Also, there is supposedly more layer-interlayer light scattering in film than digital.It would be odd, but given some artefacts in the video, it's even possible:
View attachment 374078
View attachment 374079
Could just be the lens, though.
The scene with the gold foil in the background that was likely shot with a longer lens doesn't exhibit these artefacts.
So no, I don't think it's going to be remjet-less. It'd be kind of a risk for Kodak to do something weird like that. Why invite the risk of static discharge lightning artefacts, scratched film back and increased friction? Doesn't sound like something the industry would be very eagerly waiting for.
I'd expect that, yeah. A logical line extension, which also makes sense with the lighting in some segments of that video. So a kind of Portra 400 or Portra 800 equivalent in ECN2.
Exactly.
Kodak Ektar! Technically the 100 more or less should have the graininess of the 25; However look wise no idea. I am young and old enough to just have done Kodachrome, but I was not enticed into the Portras NC/VC back then.I don't think so either, but I can dream! I'm still hoping they'll bring back Ektar 25 and APX 25.
Ektar has more commonalities with cine film than Portra. IIRC it was some components and tech.
Technically the 100 more or less should have the graininess of the 25
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?