I would go with Pip's suggestion. Did you re-shoot the film on 7222 using an
optical printer? Do you have access to some 7234 Intermediate film stock? If
you have access to an optical printer and you can get this stock I would double
splice the original and re-shoot it using the printer. Then send this negative
to the lab to make you a projection print.
If you are getting the lab to do the above work then I would just edit the
original 7266 footage to match how you edited the film digitally, double splice
the film and send it to the lab and have them create an internegative. The lab
can then create you a final print from this internegative.
Is this a silent film?
Do you have access to a 16mm steenbeck? If you are interested in doing the
entire thing yourself you can create a print using the steenbeck as a contact
printer. If this interests you send me a message off list and I can go into
detail on how to do this.
As for having a digital transfer completed so that it still looks like film,
well I just finished a 22 minute 35mm black and white film. I have a 35mm
projection print of the final film plus a 2K digital copy of the film. The film
screened last night at a local venue and their 35mm projector broke down so
they ended up screening my film digitally. The video projector they have is an
HD projector however the quality did not match what you would find in high end
commercial theaters so the 2K transfer looked like crap compared to the print.
You can have a 2k transfer done on your film but if the digital projector being
used to present the work is low end then its going to look as best as that
projector can look. My opinion is if you want the look of film then you need to
project film, because really they are two completely different processes in
projecting a moving image
To keep the process of projecting film alive I strongly encourage you to finish
to film and if there is anything I can do to help you please let me know. Film
looks best on film:)
Roger D. WilsonFilm Scientist613 324 -
Without failure you can never achieve success. I have based my process and my
career as an experimental film artist on this statement; and I welcome it as it
pushes me forward as an artist to try something different, something new.
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 10:38:50 -0700
Subject: [Frameworks] Advice with screening format for festival. Help!
I have an 8-minute 16mm film scheduled to be screened in a few
weeks in Europe and had I hoped to send it in film form.
The original was shot in 7266 Tri-X reversal on three 100' rolls
and the festival selected it from a low quality transfer, where I
cut the three rolls together digitally.
So in order to send a clean print, my plan was to re-shoot on
negative, have the negative cut, and then print it seamlessly on
one piece of film to send to the festival.
Which I did. But the print from the 7222 negative has crawly
grain! It looks like it's being projected on a bed of squirming
lice; the image is just too subtle to handle the grain and I can't
It only needs 2 splices, 4 with leader: should I try to splice the
original with tape or cement splices (will a festival take tape
splices and should they be both sides?)?
Or would I be better off to send the rolls out to be scanned in 2K,
cut it together digitally, and send digital media files (how big
is big enough to look like film?).
I only have three weeks before it must ship.
Thanks for any advice on this!
FrameWorks mailing list
FrameWorks mailing list