What is the workflow to 35mm from a RED?

[cinemano]

Hello,

If one had done his editing of his film from RED footage ( in 2k on CF)
how does one get about to transferring it to film?

 

[Chris Burket]

take it to a post house such as EFilm, Fotokem, etc... as DPX files, tiff files, etc.. and they will output it to film.

 

[AzelJames]

prices for film transfer

prices for film transfer

basically they take your digital output and frame by frame scan it to 35mm. Here is a link to some sample prices. it is about 450/min of HD to 35mm.

Transferring to 35mm is not neccessarily something an indie filmmaker needs to worry about until you actually sell your film. Because, most festivals including the LAfilm festival only require that if your film is selected you provide them a copy of it on HDCAM, Digibeta Tape, or DVCam.

Most of the time you can get a distributor to do the 35mm film print if they are going to do a theatrical release. So don't sweat it.

shoot 4k, cut 1080p on final cut, and transfer to HDCAM for festivals.

price link for film transfers: http://dvfilm.com/specials.htm

 

[vincelucero]

Great advice Azel. I get this question a lot and it would be so much simpler to say:

Most of the time you can get a distributor to do the 35mm film print if they are going to do a theatrical release. So don't sweat it.

 

[M Most]

Most of the time you can get a distributor to do the 35mm film print if they are going to do a theatrical release.

Yes, and they will subtract the cost of creating that deliverable from what they pay you for the picture. They will also do the work at a facility they have used before and feel comfortable in, regardless of the cost.

I don't know why people seem to have the idea that the cost of film recording - and some of the steps the properly color correct for this process - will be borne by a distributor. It's not the case and never has been.

 

[AzelJames]

never say never

never say never

It's not the case and never has been.

Pretty bold statement to say Never in any situation. Case in point; Robert Rodriguez cut his film 'El Mariachi' that was shot on 16mm from vhs transfer tapes in a local television network studio in Texas. Columbia bought the film and paid to do a 35mm print, and they even let him over see the project. I believe he got around 250k for his 7 grand film, now whether they subtracted 35mm costs or not he still made about 240k in profit. Not a very common practice but neither is selling an indie film to a distributor for a theatrical release.

again... shoot your film, output to hdcam, dvcam, digibeta and submit to festivals. if it is worthy of a theatrical release, a distributor will do the 35mm blow up.

 

[Gary McClurg]

Pretty bold statement to say Never in any situation. Case in point; Robert Rodriguez cut his film 'El Mariachi' that was shot on 16mm from vhs transfer tapes in a local television network studio in Texas. Columbia bought the film and paid to do a 35mm print, and they even let him over see the project. I believe he got around 250k for his 7 grand film, now whether they subtracted 35mm costs or not he still made about 240k in profit. Not a very common practice but neither is selling an indie film to a distributor for a theatrical release.

again... shoot your film, output to hdcam, dvcam, digibeta and submit to festivals. if it is worthy of a theatrical release, a distributor will do the 35mm blow up.

I agree with mmost...

Yes if it is worthy of a theatrical release, a distributor will do the blow up.. but it'll be charged back to you... so who's to say that blow that would have cost you $40k... isn't going to now be $100k... but the gamble is to get your money back and get your name out there....

 

[M Most]

Pretty bold statement to say Never in any situation.

I didn't say that, although clearly you interpreted it that way. Everything has some exceptions, but what I said is, in general, absolutely true. When you sign a distribution agreement, you get a list of deliverables that you are responsible for. The deliverables usually (but not always) include a film negative (not the prints, and regardless of whether it was shot on film or a digital format), multiple sound tracks delivered both as digital files and as an optical track to use when making the prints, HD video (usually on HDCam SR these days), SD video in at least 3 different formats (letterbox, full frame anamorphic, and full frame pan and scan) in both NTSC and PAL, and in most cases these days, digital cinema deliverables (at least the picture in proper format for a DCDM). That's not to mention any subtitle files as well as a considerable amount of paperwork. Anything on the list that you do not supply directly (or that do not pass the distributor's QC report) will be created by the distributor and the cost charged back to you. That's the way it works, at least 95% of the time.

 

[MikeCurtis]

MMost - thanks for laying it down the way it really is. I tell folks this, and they keep thinking they'll be the exception...

Talked to a line producer of indies, she said every project she's worked on is usually at least $25K short in post, and it is all about the deliverables, and the surprises, such as M&E separate tracks, etc.

 

[Adam Jeal]

MMost - thanks for laying it down the way it really is. I tell folks this, and they keep thinking they'll be the exception...

Talked to a line producer of indies, she said every project she's worked on is usually at least $25K short in post, and it is all about the deliverables, and the surprises, such as M&E separate tracks, etc.

Very true Mike, and costs are much greater here in the UK. Having said that, we are about to do a DI on Scratch for a documentary feature film at a very keen price. (this means getting the film-out part done abroad).

Scratch is also a killer toolset for creating deliverables!

 

[Thomas Mathai]

Pretty bold statement to say Never in any situation. Case in point; Robert Rodriguez cut his film 'El Mariachi' that was shot on 16mm from vhs transfer tapes in a local television network studio in Texas. Columbia bought the film and paid to do a 35mm print, and they even let him over see the project. I believe he got around 250k for his 7 grand film, now whether they subtracted 35mm costs or not he still made about 240k in profit. Not a very common practice but neither is selling an indie film to a distributor for a theatrical release.

again... shoot your film, output to hdcam, dvcam, digibeta and submit to festivals. if it is worthy of a theatrical release, a distributor will do the 35mm blow up.

El Mariachi is close to 20 years old. The industry was a different animal then.

There was very few good films being done for less than $20k. El Mariachi, Clerks, Laws of Gravity come to mind

Robert Rodriguez showed his vhs version of El Mariachi around , it created a buzz, got him an agent, who GOT him that deal with Columbia. He did say he wasn't expecting anything more than a shot at the Mexican home video market at the time.

There was only VHS and theatrical, no dvd, no download, no streaming.

Today even the Wiensteins have said they probably wouldn't have bought Clerks. There are tons of low to no budget films being made and distributers aren't interested in dealing with theatrical for a movie that may not be worth the marketing dollars, when it's easier to just have it go to dvd.

If anything have a digital master that can used for any type of distribution.

 

[Adam Jeal]

El Mariachi is close to 20 years old. The industry was a different animal then.

There was very few good films being done for less than $20k. El Mariachi, Clerks, Laws of Gravity come to mind

Robert Rodriguez showed his vhs version of El Mariachi around , it created a buzz, got him an agent, who GOT him that deal with Columbia. He did say he wasn't expecting anything more than a shot at the Mexican home video market at the time.

There was only VHS and theatrical, no dvd, no download, no streaming.

Today even the Wiensteins have said they probably wouldn't have bought Clerks. There are tons of low to no budget films being made and distributers aren't interested in dealing with theatrical for a movie that may not be worth the marketing dollars, when it's easier to just have it go to dvd.

If anything have a digital master that can used for any type of distribution.

Columbia sank around $450,000 into getting it to a theatrical print. Then there was all the P&A costs. The publicity for the film at the time was extensive, playing on the $7,500 'budget' and the whole 'medical experiments' angles. Make no mistake, Sony put A LOT behind the film.

All these films cost more than what was publicly stated. The spin that was around at the time in both mainstream and industry press was all to do with marketing (and it worked).

 

[M Most]

If anything have a digital master that can used for any type of distribution.

Provided one doesn't care what each of those distributed versions look like, or whether they look remotely the same.

"Digital" is not a format. It just means "not analog." A DVCam tape is a "digital master," just as sequences of log format DPX's properly color corrected through a calibrated color pipeline specifically for recording to film on an Arri Laser film recorder is a "digital master." With the first you could make a decent YouTube video, or perhaps a DVD. With the second you could make a film print that looks the way its supposed to, as well as HD video versios, SD video versions, and, yes, that YouTube version - all of which look like the film print. Your choice.

 

[mezmo]

Hello,

If one had done his editing of his film from RED footage ( in 2k on CF)
how does one get about to transferring it to film?

Hi cinemano,
To start, you need a Facility or System that can conform and grade your 2K
material, a good color management system and a lab like Duart
to burn out tests then whole reels of 35mm Neg so you can print/project
and OK them on the big screen.
A Surround Mix for audio and a Sound Neg to be married with image, Trial
and finally Release Prints. That's roughly a 35 film deliverable condensed. It
can of course be a little more complicated than that.
Some sales may require a interpositive and internegative for multiple
release prints,say100-200.
Who pays for this? On most projects it's all in the Distro Deal (Distribution Contract/Agreement) and every deal is different.
Most of the time , the producers foot the bill, directly of indirectly they pay for
everything up to and including the first couple of release prints.
This does however allow your film to be screened pretty much anywhere
in the world in a theatre on film. This has it's advantages for festivals,
markets and in the sales area. A potential buyer knows your film is FINISHED,very important, and can get a good idea about theatrical release quality. This can also help the
producer cut a less complicated and more favorable sales deal, Prints/IP/IN's can be then ordered from your Lab and Digital Deliverables in all flavours from your post house.
All in a coupla days, and with very little effort . Speedy delivery can be important.
Then it's, 'show me the money' time,.......... that's the part I really like.
Cheers Mezmo

 

[Monteiro]

Re 4K to Film

Re 4K to Film

Well to get back to the main point of this thread; if I am producing and Indie film in the next 6 months, with the goal of theatrical release, should I down convert my raw footage to HD for editing? Or should I do everything in 4K, and make an HD work print for film festivals knowing I have the 4K master ready to go if I get a distributor. Also does anyone know on average how much longer it takes to edit in 4K as opposed to HD if most everything is straight cuts? And is there a particular hardware configuration that works best?

Thanks

 

[Mourougaya]

Well to get back to the main point of this thread; if I am producing and Indie film in the next 6 months, with the goal of theatrical release, should I down convert my raw footage to HD for editing? Or should I do everything in 4K, and make an HD work print for film festivals knowing I have the 4K master ready to go if I get a distributor. Also does anyone know on average how much longer it takes to edit in 4K as opposed to HD if most everything is straight cuts? And is there a particular hardware configuration that works best?

Thanks

Hi Monteiro,

From what I gather, your best workflow is to shoot 4k and then go down to 2k and out to film. I remember reading awhile back that Peter Jackson said that shooting 4k and out to 2k will resemble 35mm film while shooting 4k and out 4k is like 65mm. I believe most people shooting Red will go the 4k to 2k to film route as 4k all the way is overkill and for now expensive. In editing 4k you are dealing with more than 4 times the information than HD so you need robust editing systems to edit that. The only system now that can handle Red natively all the way is the SCRATCH ASSIMILATE system (correct me if I'm wrong). Although with workarounds and conversions any finishing system can handle Red footage.

In the coming days me and a few friends of mine will have our hands on the Red camera doing some tests and post work to see how it handles and then do a film out to do a side by side comparison with 35mm.

Hope this helps

 

[Jim Hoffman]

You most likely will not edit in 4k - impractical - as for time? soooo many variables ...

 

[Thomas Mathai]

Columbia sank around $450,000 into getting it to a theatrical print. Then there was all the P&A costs. The publicity for the film at the time was extensive, playing on the $7,500 'budget' and the whole 'medical experiments' angles. Make no mistake, Sony put A LOT behind the film.

All these films cost more than what was publicly stated. The spin that was around at the time in both mainstream and industry press was all to do with marketing (and it worked).

That is the version that was shown to the public. The $7k version is what impressed the studio enough to stand behind that film and put money into it for a theatrical release.

But my point is that when those films were released, it was considered groundbreaking for what can be done with a small budget.

I don't think El Mariachi or Clerks would have gotten those theatrical releases today.

 

[mezmo]

Well to get back to the main point of this thread; if I am producing and Indie film in the next 6 months, with the goal of theatrical release, should I down convert my raw footage to HD for editing? Or should I do everything in 4K, and make an HD work print for film festivals knowing I have the 4K master ready to go if I get a distributor. Also does anyone know on average how much longer it takes to edit in 4K as opposed to HD if most everything is straight cuts? And is there a particular hardware configuration that works best?

Thanks

If you use a sytem like Scratch HD deliverables can be had from R3d files
and 2K DPX files can be had for eventual film out.
At the moment this is pretty much THE system for Red.
Chat with Luki, look for Assimilate Logo on posts.