8mm Forum: Film Stocks

This is topic Film Stocks in forum 8mm Forum at 8mm Forum.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://8mmforum.film-tech.com/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=003881

Posted by Robert Tucker (Member # 386) on July 23, 2008, 11:56 AM:

I have been recently been educating myself on the best possible films stocks. I have come up with an ultimate list as ranked the best and the worst, but if I have got anything wrong or if there is anything to add which I have missed I’m sure some one will correct me.

1 IB Technicolor
2 Kodachrome
2 LPP Eastman (1983) onwards
3 AGFA 2 s (tends to lean towards a Bluish colour)
4 Fuji
5 Kodak SP
6 AGFA S1
7 3M - Du-Point
8 Eastman

Posted by David Kilderry (Member # 549) on July 23, 2008, 07:22 PM:

A great conversation starter Robert, but it is difficult to compare some stocks. Kodachrome was almost never seen in 35mm and IB technicolor similarly not on Super 8; neither on 70mm.

Aside from their non-fade properties, I would say that Kodachrome was always a more realistic colour than IB Tech. Perhaps this is exaggerated by their popular use, home movies vs Hollywood musicals and epics. LPP is more realistic (natural) than both. That does not mean it is better, it all comes down to the look the director and audience is after.

We have 35mm trailers in our theatre that are often graded and processed very differently to the feature they promote and sometimes are miles away from the look of another trailer version of the same film. They are all on the same stock, but how the studio and lab put them together can have an enormous difference.

David

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 23, 2008, 10:17 PM:

I do know that Kodachrome was used for Castle Films Woody Woodpecker cartoons for awhile, and these still maintain beautiful color.

Posted by Steven Sigel (Member # 21) on July 23, 2008, 11:30 PM:

Some comments on your list:

1) Kodachrome can be a bit on the grainy side, so I'm not sure I'd rate it higher than LPP. It can be better, but not always.

2) AGFA and Fuji from 1983 onwards are low-fade and theoretically are similar to LPP (although I like LPP better).

3) No one really knows the difference between AGFA 1S and 2S although 2S does seem to hold up a bit better

4) 1970s AGFA can range from perfect to a bit on the purple side

5) Later 70s and early 80s Fuji is about the same as AGFA from that era. Early 70s Fuji goes purple.

6) SP is awful - goes brown. Not as bad as Eastman, but up there. Certainly worse than AGFA or Fuji

7) most of the 3m I've seen has been pretty red.

8) Eastman can vary from mild fade to totally red or pink...

Posted by Graham Sinden (Member # 431) on July 24, 2008, 07:16 AM:

Some of my films are printed on Agfa 3s. So where does this come in compared to 2s??.

Graham S

Posted by Mark Todd (Member # 96) on July 24, 2008, 08:08 AM:

Theres 4s as well, Usually very nice.
I wonder if any of the chinese stock ever made it this way, also does india have its won film stocks???
Best Mark.

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 24, 2008, 10:18 AM:

It appears that they were experimenting with the future L.P.P. in the 70's with these film stocks, as some of those Eastman film stocks from the mid seventies, have not faded at all.

Take those "Flinstones" episodes, manufactured in 1975. They are on eastman and the color is flawless after 33 years.

Posted by Graham Sinden (Member # 431) on July 24, 2008, 11:19 AM:

A lot might also be down to storage over the years with pre 80's prints, particularly if some of the same title have faded and others not. I have a MGM 400 which is competley pink and another copy which is not too bad.

Graham S

Posted by Steven Sigel (Member # 21) on July 24, 2008, 01:48 PM:

Osi - what flintstones episodes are you talking about?

Posted by Osi Osgood (Member # 424) on July 24, 2008, 11:30 PM:

Well, the two that I had. I say two, as I just sold one of them on ebay.

"The Monster From the Tar Pit" Great color, if a little worn.

"Groom Gloom" excellent color as well. The copyright thing at the end of the film says 1975. That doesn'r necessarily mean that the film was actually made or printed in 1975, but I'm sure it was around that time. Still, perfect color after over 30 years is nothing to be upset about.

I've heard that many of the Elvis movies produced on Super 8 during the 70's have held up incredibly well ... AS WELL.

Posted by Robert Tucker (Member # 386) on July 26, 2008, 01:51 AM:

I thought this might be of some interest!?!

http://www.paulivester.com/films/filmstock/guide.htm

Posted by Martin Jones (Member # 1163) on July 26, 2008, 04:14 AM:

Also worth working back from the link on the previous post to his other pages.

Martin

Posted by Steven Sigel (Member # 21) on July 26, 2008, 09:07 AM:

Osi : the copyright date at the end of the film has absolutely nothing to do with the year it was printed.

Flintstones were syndicated for years and years, and many prints were struck in the 1980s on LPP stock.

To find out the date, you need to look at the stock and read the date code of the edge...

Posted by Robert Wales (Member # 502) on July 26, 2008, 10:56 AM:

Osi is referring to the 400' Flintstones reels put out by Columbia Pictures 8mm division in the late 70's on Super 8 Sound, not syndication prints. I had a couple of them myself and they were truly as good as it got on 8mm. As I recall, they were among the first prints I ever had on estar film, which was impossible to break in two with your hands. I assume it's the same thing as polyester today ?

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2