CINESITE: A Kodak Company

[Sanjin Jukic]

Here at the forum I'm all the time talking about very important fusion of Kodak film stock look with RED1 MX, Epic and Scarlet footage.

And again here we go:

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011) IMDb Pro >>>

"Cinesite, one of the world’s leading film visual effects houses,
has announced the launch of stereoscopic 3D visual effects services catering for films shot in stereo,
as well as conversion of 2D films into 3D.
Cinesite’s first stereo 3D project will be Pirates of The Caribbean: On Stranger Tides,
for which it has been awarded a significant volume of stereoscopic visual effects work."

Read more >>>

 

[M Most]

Here at the forum I'm all the time talking about very important fusion of Kodak film stock look with RED1 MX, Epic and Scarlet footage.

And again here we go:

I don't understand whatever point you're trying to make. Cinesite is a very well established visual effects company that has been in existence for quite some time and has done many, many shots that originated both on film and on digital sources. It has nothing to do with film manufacture or "fusion" other than being owned by a company that does do that.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

I don't understand whatever point you're trying to make. Cinesite is a very well established visual effects company that has been in existence for quite some time and has done many, many shots that originated both on film and on digital sources. It has nothing to do with film manufacture or "fusion" other than being owned by a company that does do that.

CINESITE is a company owed by Eastman Kodak Company and also one of its main goals is to implement
and promote emulating of the most famous and award winning Kodak Color Negative Film stock look
especially today in the age of transition from analog film to digital acquisition and distribution...

Hope this helps you to understand my above statement...

 

[Julio Quintana]

Sanjin, dude, I read your posts three times and I'm really not sure what you're trying to say. It's not that I disagree with anything, I just really don't know what you're trying to communicate to us through this post. I have to say that in general I like your posts, but I very rarely understand what you're talking about.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Sanjin, dude, I read your posts three times and I'm really not sure what you're trying to say. It's not that I disagree with anything, I just really don't know what you're trying to communicate to us through this post. I have to say that in general I like your posts, but I very rarely understand what you're talking about.

So Julio,

if you are not getting it in a sort of metaphorically speaking talks

than I must now directly say that RED should stick closer to any

company that could promote or develop workflow, software, plug-in or whatever

in a way of getting RED footage like a film stock look (Kodak or Fujifilm,...).

For RED today I found that is very important in a battle with other digital acquisition systems from

Sony, Panavision, Arri, Aaton, Vision Research, Silicon Imaging, etc,...

Let's say in a near future many digital cine cameras will be able to shoot and record 4K+

but what will differ all of them are the following "parameters":

image look they can make, codec implemented, recording option used, lightweight or heavyweight ergonomics, high or low price,...

 

[Jack Cooper]

Sanjin,

Did I read the link material correctly, Cinesite is going to do portions of the post for Pirates (which was shot on Red in 3D)...???

If so, I do find it an interesting signpost for the industry that a Kodak owned company is now posting material that was shot on Red)...An ironic time in history.

 

[Jack Cooper]

I must now directly say that RED should stick closer to any company that could promote or develop workflow, software, plug-in or whatever

On the contrary, from our perspective, we (NewDef) would say that other "support" companies should stick to Red...

"We shoot Red" ...so you (other co's) better enable us to increase effectiveness and efficiency to improve our project ROI's with products or services you provide to the market.

For example, I want our existing Adobe cs5 PP platform to edit Epic footage, "out of the box" just like it does R1 and I don't want to have to pay for anymore upgrades.

We choose Red...for those who can increase our asset utilization - they will get our investment dollars.

 

[Julio Quintana]

RED should stick closer to any company that could promote or develop workflow, software, plug-in or whatever in a way of getting RED footage like a film stock look (Kodak or Fujifilm,...).

Ah, I see. That's interesting. I guess what you're saying is that the easier it is to make RED look like film, the more widely accepted it will be. You may be right.

On the other hand, I think it's only a matter of time until people get accustomed to the clean look of digital acquisition, and the grainy look of 35mm will seem dated, the way 1970's cinematography looks to us today. I can tell you that after doing extended tests at EFilm in LA comparing 35mm to RED-MX, I found the film to be incredibly noisy when pushed to 640 ISO. Both I and the colorist helping me preferred the look of the MX footage.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Ah, I see. That's interesting. I guess what you're saying is that the easier it is to make RED look like film, the more widely accepted it will be. You may be right.

On the other hand, I think it's only a matter of time until people get accustomed to the clean look of digital acquisition, and the grainy look of 35mm will seem dated, the way 1970's cinematography looks to us today. I can tell you that after doing extended tests at EFilm in LA comparing 35mm to RED-MX, I found the film to be incredibly noisy when pushed to 640 ISO. Both I and the colorist helping me preferred the look of the MX footage.

GenArts Sapphire FilmEffect:

Provides a physically accurate model of film exposure and processing to make your video footage look like it was shot on film.
It can remove field artifacts, perform color correction for specific film types, add film grain, and apply glow or soft focus effects.
The color correction and grain can be selectively disabled using the Scale CC and Grain Amp parameters.
Inputs:

Source: The clip to be processed.


Parameters:

negFilm: Popup menu, Default: Kodak_5245.

Selects the negative film stock.

None: Ignore any effect of negative film.
This is not normally useful unless you also select None for the print film to disable both.

Kodak_5245: Eastman EXR 50D, low speed, daylight balanced, very fine grain.
Kodak_5246: Kodak VISION 250D, higher contrast, medium speed, daylight balanced, fine grain.
Kodak_5248: Eastman EXR 100T, medium speed, tungsten light balanced, very fine grain.
Kodak_5274: Kodak VISION 200T, medium speed, tungsten light balanced, fine grain.
Kodak_5277: Kodak VISION 320T, lower contrast, medium speed, tungsten light balanced, medium-fine grain.
Kodak_5279: Kodak VISION 500T, high speed, tungsten light balanced, somewhat grainy.
Kodak_5284: Kodak VISION Expression 500T, lower contrast, high speed, tungsten light balanced, medium grain.
Kodak_5289: Kodak VISION 800T, very fast, tungsten light balanced, grainy.
Kodak_5293: Eastman EXR 200T, reduced contrast, tungsten light balanced, medium grain.
Kodak_5298: Eastman EXR 500T, high speed, tungsten light balanced, grainy.
K_SFX200T: Special effects film, medium grain.

printFilm: Popup menu, Default: Kodak_2383.

Selects the print film stock.

None: Ignore any effect of the print film.
This causes the negative to be output directly.
If the negative film is also set to None, the color correction and grain are disabled.

Kodak_2383: Kodak VISION Color Print Film, rich blacks.
Kodak_2393: Kodak VISION Premier Color Print Film, rich blacks, some grain.
Kodak_2395: Kodak VISION Color Teleprint Film, low contrast.
Kodak_5386: Eastman EXR Color Print Film (discontinued by Kodak, replaced by 2383).


GenArts Sapphire FilmEffect >>>

The Foundry FurnaceCore ReGrain Plug in for FCP and AVID DS.

"Grain Stock

To add grain from a standard film stock, select from the Stock Type list. 2K, 4K, aperture corrected and non aperture
corrected stocks are included. Individual colour channels can
be selected and adjusted using the Gain and Scale parameters."

The Foundry FurnaceCore ReGrain Plug in for FCP, page 68 >>>

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

CINESITE is a company owed by Eastman Kodak Company and also one of its main goals is to implement
and promote emulating of the most famous and award winning Kodak Color Negative Film stock look
especially today in the age of transition from analog film to digital acquisition

Why would Kodak work on something that makes digital, their "competition" so to speak, look like their film stocks? Wouldn't it be like shooting themselves in the foot...on purpose?

Besides, a lot of people choose to shoot on digital mainly because it does look different from film, and viceversa, though for those who can't afford it, a tool like the one you're suggesting could make sense.

On the other hand, I think it's only a matter of time until people get accustomed to the clean look of digital acquisition, and the grainy look of 35mm will seem dated

You could be right, only time will tell. Frankly I don't think the majority of the people in the audience consciously notice the grain when they go to the movies, and the new film stocks from Fuji and Kodak have decreased its amount even more. I think it has a lot to do with personal taste as well, personally I love the "feel" of film and I don't mind grain at all, while I don't like ultra "clean", grain free pictures that much...but that's me

 

[Gabriele Turchi]

also one of its main goals is to implement
and promote emulating of the most famous and award winning Kodak Color Negative Film stock look

Hope this helps you to understand my above statement...

sanjin , but what do you mean by this ?

are they going to release a plugin or a software , or they provide color correction that emulate film ?

thanks

g

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

sanjin , but what do you mean by this ?

are they going to release a plugin or a software , or they provide color correction that emulate film ?

thanks

g

Gabriele,

something in this way as you were asked...

BTW Arri already offers:

ARRI RELATIVITY

The ARRI Relativity™ Software offers a rich set of tools for control of time and texture in image sequences.

With the optional Film Simulation module,
make grain an aesthetic choice by adding a pleasing texture to the finished product.
Finish your CGI work by adding natural-looking film grain.

LINK>>>

 

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, if Sanjin is suggesting that Kodak and Red collaborate on color science technology / issues, I'm all for that. If this is just about film stock look emulation for digital cameras, well, that's always had limited applications in the past because the creative process means that filmmakers always ends up finding their own looks, so all film stock emulation ever becomes is a quick way of making dailies and as a starting point in color-correction.

Even movies shot on film these days that go through a D.I. quickly drift beyond the basic gamma and color that the film stock was designed to create.

Also, as D.I.'s move beyond the 10-bit Cineon Log DPX film-centric world I think more filmmakers are going to embrace the inherent digital "look" except for select projects where the recreation of older film processes is desired.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Well, if Sanjin is suggesting that Kodak and Red collaborate on color science technology / issues, I'm all for that. If this is just about film stock look emulation for digital cameras, well, that's always had limited applications in the past because the creative process means that filmmakers always ends up finding their own looks, so all film stock emulation ever becomes is a quick way of making dailies and as a starting point in color-correction.

Even movies shot on film these days that go through a D.I. quickly drift beyond the basic gamma and color that the film stock was designed to create.

Also, as D.I.'s move beyond the 10-bit Cineon Log DPX film-centric world I think more filmmakers are going to embrace the inherent digital "look" except for select projects where the recreation of older film processes is desired.

Thanks David,

for the explanation and also well said like always....

 

[M Most]

CINESITE is a company owed by Eastman Kodak Company and also one of its main goals is to implement
and promote emulating of the most famous and award winning Kodak Color Negative Film stock look
especially today in the age of transition from analog film to digital acquisition and distribution...

Hope this helps you to understand my above statement...

You're really reaching for something to say here. Cinesite is a visual effects company and has nothing to do with the origination formats of projects that are brought to them. It also has no interest in making those effect shots look like anything other than what the visual effects supervisor and the director want them to look like. Cinesite is one of the visual effects vendors on this project, one of many. They are not involved in the digital intermediate work, which is being done by Company 3 in Santa Monica. There is no news and no irony involved here. You're inventing connections where there aren't any.

 

[Julio Quintana]

Frankly I don't think the majority of the people in the audience consciously notice the grain when they go to the movies, and the new film stocks from Fuji and Kodak have decreased its amount even more. I think it has a lot to do with personal taste as well, personally I love the "feel" of film and I don't mind grain at all, while I don't like ultra "clean", grain free pictures that much...but that's me

I agree that most audience members don't recognize visual aesthetics when they are the norm, but I think looking back, they will look dated. It seems weird to think about, but in 30 years, 35mm film shot with Master Primes will have a distinctive "early 2000's" look.

On another note, I always find it interesting when film lovers dislike the "clean" look of digital cameras, yet would love to shoot on 70mm film, which is extremely grain free. I'd be curious to hear opinions on why that is often the case.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

You're really reaching for something to say here. Cinesite is a visual effects company and has nothing to do with the origination formats of projects that are brought to them. It also has no interest in making those effect shots look like anything other than what the visual effects supervisor and the director want them to look like. Cinesite is one of the visual effects vendors on this project, one of many. They are not involved in the digital intermediate work, which is being done by Company 3 in Santa Monica. There is no news and no irony involved here. You're inventing connections where there aren't any.

Mike,

whatever but one or the goals is to get RED1MX/Epic/Scarlet image look as closer as possible to many of Kodak Color Negative Film and Print Film looks.

 

[Francesco Bonomo]

I agree that most audience members don't recognize visual aesthetics when they are the norm, but I think looking back, they will look dated. It seems weird to think about, but in 30 years, 35mm film shot with Master Primes will have a distinctive "early 2000's" look.

Well, I guess in 30 years you could say the same thing about digital, who knows what technology will be considered "contemporary" then. However, while I don't like the word "dated", I agree movies from the 2000s will probably look different, but I think it will be more because of their style rather than the tools used to achieve it. 35mm and Master Primes are used on movies that look so radically different from one another, and you could say the same about movies shot on Red, too.

On another note, I always find it interesting when film lovers dislike the "clean" look of digital cameras, yet would love to shoot on 70mm film, which is extremely grain free. I'd be curious to hear opinions on why that is often the case.

I can only speak for myself, and I'm not even a cinematographer. Even when watching movies partly shot on 65mm, I can always see a minimum amount of grain...it may be less than S35, where it's usually more evident, but it's there. Images from The Social Network look "cleaner" to me than the ones from Inception (just to name 2 recent movies): I loved both movies, I think both have terrific cinematography, but I happen to like Inception better. As I wrote before, I can't really explain it, I guess it has a lot to do with personal taste, but I just like the "right" amount of grain.

 

[Sanjin Jukic]

Film look is not so much about a grain and is more about the specific look that film has an ability to

reproduce artwork with the look and feel of an original with accurate color reproduction.

 

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

RED Funboy

:thumbup: