Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile | my password | register | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Warner using FUJI stocks

   
Author Topic: Warner using FUJI stocks
Brad Miller
unregistered




 - posted 05-30-1999 01:02 AM            Edit/Delete Post 
Well, upon close inspection of my print of "Lost and Found" I found out that
Warner has printed it on Fuji film stock.

Hope they have dumped Kodak and switched completely.

How about everyone else? Who else has received this film and what stock is it
on? I am wondering if they struck prints on both Fuji and Kodak stocks or if they
are all on Fuji.

Scott Norwood
unregistered




 - posted 05-30-1999 01:03 AM            Edit/Delete Post 

Who determines what stock a particular film is printed on? I'd assume that it
should be the DP or the director (since different manufacturers' stocks often look
different and a film timed for Eastman print stock won't look good when printed
on Fuji unless it is re-timed), although I suspect that it's more common that films
are printed on whatever stock the lab could get most cheaply. Maybe it depends
on the title and how much the director or DP cares about image quality and/or
how much influence they have on the distribution process. One thing that I really
do hate are what I call "mixed prints" (is there a proper name for this?) that arrive
with an assortment of reels from different prints. I've seen films that have a mixture
of SP and LPP footage, Fuji and Eastman, etc. Especially with older prints, it's
quite weird to see the color balance, focus, and fading characteristics change with
every reel change. I realize that a mixture of IB Tech or Fuji and Eastman stocks
aren't uncommon in collectors' prints, but I would tend to expect better from what
the major film distributors send out to theatres.

Brad Miller
unregistered




 - posted 05-30-1999 01:04 AM            Edit/Delete Post 
Funny thing there. Fuji stocks are generally cheaper than Kodak. Guess cheaper
occasionally IS better.

I think the deciding factor is how well the movie will do. Warner probably figures
Lost and Found won't play as long as Star Wars will...thus the savings in film cost
by going with Fuji. I'll bet Wild Wild West will be on Kodak stocks, though. If
only the studios really knew!

Joe Redifer
unregistered




 - posted 05-30-1999 01:04 AM            Edit/Delete Post 
My print of "Lost & Found" is also on FUJI stock. That's a good thing. It will be
clean and worry free. Kodak prints are BY FAR the worst. I fail to understand
why it even exists in its present form. The world does not exactly have and accute
need for their film stock.

As I'm sure every person in the entire world noticed with every print of Titanic (at
least all of the ones I have seen) there is a badly color-timed reel change. I can't
remember the specific reels, but it was early in the movie where Ismay was
babbling about something and then came the reel change and all of a sudden he
was very green! It looked awful! They should have done the reel change after the
scene ended, like 4 seconds later, and it would have been less noticable. I'm
suprised that a perfectionist like Cameron would let that slip by!

Scott Norwood
unregistered




 - posted 05-30-1999 01:05 AM            Edit/Delete Post 

That would be the reel 3->reel 4 changeover. Yes, it was bad. Worse, the
dialogue ran out to the end of reel 3 and picked up again right in the first couple of
frames of reel 4. It was really easy to accidentally cut off the dialogue in one of
these places if reel 4 wasn't threaded up perfectly. (Yes, I've run that film on
6000' reels for more times than I care to remember...).

Brad Miller
unregistered




 - posted 05-30-1999 01:06 AM            Edit/Delete Post 
EXACTLY! Even the 70mm prints were that way!

Incidently, the 70mm print the Northpark ran here in Dallas was print
#1...screened previously by the White House and before that by Mr. Cameron
himself, who OKd the print! Guess nature must've called during that changeover.

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17617
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 06-17-1999 05:11 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Anyone notice Universal is giving FUJI a try with Notting Hill?

Also, I noticed that New Line is now proudly placing the FUJI logo at the end of their credits. Anyone know the price difference in print stocks? I would be curious to know just how much more expensive the Kodak stock is.

 |  IP: Logged

Christopher Seo
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 530
From: Los Angeles, CA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 06-17-1999 05:49 PM      Profile for Christopher Seo   Email Christopher Seo   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
For some strange reason I thought I saw "Kodak" at the end of the movie. Perhaps it was only, "Originated on Kodak film"... which refers to the camera negative, right?

All I can say is that "Notting Hill" is the absolute cleanest print I've run.

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17617
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 06-17-1999 08:05 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes, Notting Hill was shot on Kodak film, but printed on FUJI! I also prefer the color saturation with FUJI stock over Kodak stock.


 |  IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99


 - posted 06-18-1999 03:24 AM      Profile for Joe Redifer   Author's Homepage   Email Joe Redifer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
FUJI has completely won me over! Both of our prints of "Notting Hill" are on FUJI and they look very rich, bright, and sharp. Not to mention that they are clean as a whistle! We never even need to wipe out the projector. With Kodak prints, we can plan on spending sevearl minutes each thread just cleaning out all that gunk the film leaves behind. All 3 of our prints of Austin Powers 2 are also FUJI and it has all the benefits of a normal FUJI print (especially the brilliant colors --- do that on video!) but also tracks better on Dolby Digital (lower error rate). I have even stopped buying Kodak 35mm film for my still camera and now buy FUJI as well. Long live FUJI!

 |  IP: Logged

Aaron Mehocic
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 804
From: New Castle, PA, USA
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 06-18-1999 02:12 PM      Profile for Aaron Mehocic   Email Aaron Mehocic   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Unless I'm wrong, New Line has been using FUJI stock for many years now. I noticed about two years ago all New Line prints were clean as a whistle, whereas the other prints from the bigger studios looked like powdered donuts just sitting on the platter let alone what could be found in the machines. FUJI is by far the best. There is no question about that. Has anyone noticed if the static problem is less on FUJI stock?

 |  IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17617
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99


 - posted 06-18-1999 03:13 PM      Profile for Brad Miller   Author's Homepage   Email Brad Miller       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes, there is NO static to speak of with FUJI print stock. I've gotten many Kodak films and can hear the crackle of static on the feed platter from 10-15 feet away. Even on the first run.

 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)  
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2018 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.