70mm Oppenheimer

[Brad Miller]

35mm prints will have SRD and DTS on them.

[David Ferguson]

35mm prints will have SRD and DTS on them.

Very exciting, I'll be trying to get my local cinemas to dust off their 35mm DTS equipment then. If Once Upon A Time In Hollywood didn't have DTS, then this will be the first 35mm DTS release in quite a few years, I think?

[Tony Magallanes]

Hi Tony,
thanks for the insights. We (Berlin venue) will screen a 35mm version of OPPENHEIMER alongside the 4K DCP.
How where the Black&White sequences realized in the final release prints? Optically printed onto color positive stock? Or a whole reel printed on B&W positive stock, like with DEATH PROOF / Planet Terror?

Also, I am REALLY hoping the 35mm prints will feature a DTS timecode, as the DTS mastering / discs are already present for the 5perf/70mm. I really don't understand why for example LICORICE PIZZA only featured SRD on 35mm. Is there a problem creating an optical sound negative with DTS in 35? Seems to work fine for 70, though.

Hi Sascha,
Very good questions! As Brad mentioned, you will be happy to know that there will be DTS on the 35mm prints.

As far as the B&W sequences go, both 70mm and 35mm versions negatives are printed on color positive stock.
As for the 35mm version, we made a reduction from the 65mm 5perf I.P. (that was made from the 5perf original), to make a 35mm color negative.
Currently, Kodak does not manufacture B&W positive stock.

Hope these answers are sufficient.

- Tony

[Tony Magallanes]

I wonder if this Nolan film will have intelligible sound. (The trailer seems about half and half.) Given the complaints on "Interstellar," I hope so.

For the most part, the sound is loud and great... however, prepare yourself for some mumbling quiet dialog that forces you to pay extra attention. Mostly science or political explanation dialog but pertinent information that you need to know to piece things together.

[Tony Magallanes]

Currently, Kodak does not manufacture B&W positive stock.

- Tony

... Just to clarify, Kodak currently does not manufacture "70mm B&W positive print stock".

[Peter Mork]

I'll be running a 35mm print at West Newton (MA).

[Kyle Mikolajczyk]

I'll be running a 35mm print at West Newton (MA).

Hey Peter, what theater you work at? I am not aware of a theater so close to me with 35mm like you are saying!

[Allan Young]

Hey Peter, what theater you work at? I am not aware of a theater so close to me with 35mm like you are saying!

As there's only one cinema in West Newton, I'm guessing it's this one...http://www.westnewtoncinema.com/

[Peter Mork]

That's the one. Yes we have film capability in one house, use it on occasion.

[Matthew Jackson]

Has anybody heard if the movie is any good? Interested in making the time and financial effort to see a 70mm Imax print, but don't want to if it's another Tenet.

[Emiel de Jong]

No... everything was finished on film optically.... With Tenet there was a time constraint and had to use some DI, but "Oppenheimer" is film to film throughout.

Hi Tony, thanks for all the information! I have another question for you... In 2016 I was involved in a short 35mm film to film experiment shot on Vision 3. The end result was not really satisfying: the really saturated colors I wanted weren't there and there was no way you could get them in color correction. Finally somebody at the lab here in the Netherlands could explain it to me: Vision 3 negative is meant for digital postproduction, where softer colors work better, so by making direct prints from it you will never get those colors you automatically got with the older negative materials. There had been a print stock that corrected for that but that print stock was no longer manufactured. How is this problem (if it still is a problem...) addressed nowadays?

[Clark Teddles]

I'm particularly interested to see if there is a difference in image clarity during the black and white sequences in the IMAX 15-perf prints. Should look better than the colour sequences, although this could easily be untrue.

I've heard they engineered a new IMAX camera just to run the B&W 70mm stock and could shoot SOME dialogue scenes, so the newly designed camera must be quieter than the previous 1570 cameras used.

can anyone confirm how much of the Oppenheimer feature is shot in 15-perf 70mm? Dunkirk had about 75% of the runtime shot in IMAX 15-perf, but that was only about 1 hour and 40 mins, Oppenheimer is 3 hours long. Hoping with the newly designed camera, they can shoot more of the scenes in the 1570 format.

[Tony Magallanes]

Hi Tony, thanks for all the information! I have another question for you... In 2016 I was involved in a short 35mm film to film experiment shot on Vision 3. The end result was not really satisfying: the really saturated colors I wanted weren't there and there was no way you could get them in color correction. Finally somebody at the lab here in the Netherlands could explain it to me: Vision 3 negative is meant for digital postproduction, where softer colors work better, so by making direct prints from it you will never get those colors you automatically got with the older negative materials. There had been a print stock that corrected for that but that print stock was no longer manufactured. How is this problem (if it still is a problem...) addressed nowadays?

Hello Emiel,

I consulted with our production services / film guru, Mark Van Horne, here at FotoKem... and here is what he had to share.

- Thanks, Tony.




"I think you’ve been given some wrong information. 5218 negative was first introduced in 2004, when films were using digital technology for visual effects but were still being released on film prints.

It’s replacement, 5219 was designed to capture about a stop more overexposure so it had more latitude but without looking “flat”
on prints. The film was introduced in 2008, while we were working on the film Star Trek, directed by JJ Abrams.

5218 was used for the Klingon ship and interiors of the Enterprise were filmed with 5219, to help accentuate the difference between the two hood and evil. Production printed dailies throughout and nothing looked desaturated. But there was a little more highlight detail and finer grain on the material shot with 5219.

Kodak used to offer multiple print stocks but they were not designed to accentuate the contrast on flatter negative film.

A few decades ago, Technicolor Hollywood announced they were going to revive the dye transfer printing process they had used for classics like Gone With the Wind and She Wore a Yellow Ribbon. The prints were not made photographically, but were created using dye, like printing a magazine, so there is an infinite range of colors and contrast.

Since this process was unique to Technicolor, Kodak decided to offer a range of film print stocks so that other film labs wouldn’t be at a disadvantage. Kodak had been making 5386 print stock but introduced Vision stock with increased contrast and a little more saturation. They also introduced Vision Premiere, which had extremely high saturation and very strong contrast. Labs could choose to print on any of the three stocks.

Ultimately, Technicolor was unable to perfect the dye transfer process, so after spending millions in research and development, they dismantled the equipment and sold it to China.

Film distribution was starting to decline, so Kodak decided to go back to one print stock. The stock they offered, 2383, had more contrast and saturation than Vision, but less than Premiere.

If your results have less saturation than you expected, it could be as a result of the film processing or exposure. Pull processing reduces saturation and contrast, as does underexposure. Every lab has different “ideal” printer numbers because their contact printers are set up differently."

[Emiel de Jong]

Thanks Tony and Mark! Very, very interesting information again! What exactly happened in my case is still a bit of a mystery then (I used 5203 50D, but that should not behave very differently from 5219 500T regarding these characteristics, and I know underexposure was not the case). So... now I know which kind of tests I should do the next time... OK, back to Oppenheimer

[Kyle Mikolajczyk]

Hello Emiel,

I consulted with our production services / film guru, Mark Van Horne, here at FotoKem... and here is what he had to share.

- Thanks, Tony.




"I think you’ve been given some wrong information. 5218 negative was first introduced in 2004, when films were using digital technology for visual effects but were still being released on film prints.

It’s replacement, 5219 was designed to capture about a stop more overexposure so it had more latitude but without looking “flat”
on prints. The film was introduced in 2008, while we were working on the film Star Trek, directed by JJ Abrams.

5218 was used for the Klingon ship and interiors of the Enterprise were filmed with 5219, to help accentuate the difference between the two hood and evil. Production printed dailies throughout and nothing looked desaturated. But there was a little more highlight detail and finer grain on the material shot with 5219.

Kodak used to offer multiple print stocks but they were not designed to accentuate the contrast on flatter negative film.

A few decades ago, Technicolor Hollywood announced they were going to revive the dye transfer printing process they had used for classics like Gone With the Wind and She Wore a Yellow Ribbon. The prints were not made photographically, but were created using dye, like printing a magazine, so there is an infinite range of colors and contrast.

Since this process was unique to Technicolor, Kodak decided to offer a range of film print stocks so that other film labs wouldn’t be at a disadvantage. Kodak had been making 5386 print stock but introduced Vision stock with increased contrast and a little more saturation. They also introduced Vision Premiere, which had extremely high saturation and very strong contrast. Labs could choose to print on any of the three stocks.

Ultimately, Technicolor was unable to perfect the dye transfer process, so after spending millions in research and development, they dismantled the equipment and sold it to China.

Film distribution was starting to decline, so Kodak decided to go back to one print stock. The stock they offered, 2383, had more contrast and saturation than Vision, but less than Premiere.

If your results have less saturation than you expected, it could be as a result of the film processing or exposure. Pull processing reduces saturation and contrast, as does underexposure. Every lab has different “ideal” printer numbers because their contact printers are set up differently."

Funny you mention the Vision Premier 2393, I have on my desk here a 2011 35mm trailer for "Wreck it Ralph" printed on 2393 and man is the contrast fantastic. When projected compared to standard 2383 you can see a massive improvement in picture quality. I wish more films were printed on this stock, and I am sad Kodak no longer produces it.