Click the link below and use code "VOYAGER" TO GET 10% OFF on ALL Film Convert products!
⭐️FILM CONVERT NITRATE: bit.ly/40Zvb1k
⭐️CINEMATCH: bit.ly/3KxIVuK
In today's video, we take a look at the history of B&W film, Christopher Nolan's obsession with it, and the B&W film behind Oppenheimer and what it could mean for the movie.
🔥🔥Behind The Scenes of Cinematography SERIES - kzhead.info/channel/PLQZkJfDdY7uBMweNNQQQuuQDjGNS3g69k.html 🔥🔥
⭐️⭐️⭐️
🖥️Editor: John Owens
✏️Writer: John Owens | Cheecken | Elwood
📚Researcher: John Owens | Cheecken | Elwood
🖼️Thumbnail Squad: Elusive Frame | Not Huy | Capycat
🤖A.I. Programs Used: NONE
⭐️⭐️⭐️
💬FRAME VOYAGER COMMUNITY💬
=============================
💭Join our Discord Channel💬 ► discord.gg/3aeNPU7GHu
🐦Twitter ► twitter.com/frame_voyager
📷Instagram ► instagram.com/framevoyager/
🎵TikTok ► www.tiktok.com/@framevoyager
Join our KZhead channel 📺 ►kzhead.info/tools/mXGDFnFh95WlZjhwmA5aeQ.htmljoin
=============================
0:00 Christopher Nolan and B&W IMAX Film
1:21 Christopher Nolan and the timelessness of Film Noir
2:07 Early B&W films had an EXPLOSIVE history
3:36 Nolan and the THREAT to historical films
4:45 Acetate Cellulose Film and Modern Film
5:48 Christopher Nolan and Chips Ahoy! Cookies
6:27 Why use B&W in Oppenheimer though?
7:20 Nolan and KODAK create the first IMAX B&W Film
8:35 Kodak's SCARY connection to Atomic Bombs
9:24 Why not just film in color and convert in post? EMULATE!
10:59 Difference between B&W film and Color emulsions
11:48 Nolan and LEARNING how to use film personally
12:34 How will B&W be used in Oppenheimer?
14:40 Timebending reality and Digital IMAX?
Disclosure - Some of the links in the description box are affiliate links. At no extra cost to you, if you use those links to purchase an item, I will receive a small commission. I appreciate your support :)
-----
#imax #oppenheimer #FrameVoyager
Which movie will you be going to see first on July 21, 2023: Oppenheimer or Barbie? ============================= 💭Join our Discord Channel💬 ► discord.gg/3aeNPU7GHu 🐦Twitter ► twitter.com/frame_voyager 📷Instagram ► instagram.com/framevoyager/ 🎵TikTok ► www.tiktok.com/@framevoyager
That’s a tough choice 🤔
Barbie of course
Both, back to back showings
Barbie in IMAX and Oppebheimer on my phone.
@@St-hu3om 💀💀💀
In France, if you want your movie to be shown in theatres, you have to make a film print for national archive. So every french production has a film print archived.
Ah, god bless the French!
And it’s stored in a beautiful fort : en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_de_Bois-d%27Arcy
You can make prints from digital files relatively easily. I mean you don’t have to shoot film to make prints. But that’s great! Just from an archival standpoint, todays print film is incredibly stable.
Cool! Do you know how they store the soundtrack?
@@leanderfalkenberg4308 On 70mm 15-perf IMAX prints it’s on a separate digital file. Often on a DVD. On regular 70mm prints there is an optical or magnetic track on the film. Both a time code markings on the print to synch up with the digital audio.
we live in a world where nolan has not won an oscar for best director yet 😮
It's INSANE
In 2023, Oscars are fucking irrelevant.
@@FrameVoyagerKubrick didn’t win one either, so it’s ok 🤫
Critics hate him... because he doesn't pay them to write something good.
He’s transcended above the Hollywood establishment
My local IMAX has 15/70 prints of the dark knight trilogy, interstellar, dunkirk, tenet, and 1 of 4 prints of the 'unrestored' 2001 space odyssey that nolan supervised. They will be addin Oppenheimer to their collection and fingers crossed they rescreen everything again in summer to hype up the new film. Black and white 70mm 1.43 aspect ratio will be crazy!
I HATE you...
What is your "local" IMAX? Even TCL Chinese Theatre (previously: "Mann's Chinese Theater" previously: "Grauman's Chinese Theater") uses IMAX with Laser nowadays.
TCL and the AMC Universal City bring out their 15/70 projectors for Nolan films. Every other film is projected in Imax dual laser
@@grey5626 the BFI London has all that Movies;) but not the 2001 one when i am correct
Christopher Nolan is one of my favorite directors BUT regarding cinematography we cannot forget Hoyt Van Hoytema. The guy is a GENIUS ! I still haven't come back from NOPE. I mean, the way he shot the night scenes. So brilliant.
I LOVED the cinematography from NOPE, the story kinda lost me towards the ending. But I'll definitely be doing some on that movie in the future
@@FrameVoyageryeah I thought nope’s story was calling more importance to itself than it actually possessed, but the cinematography was amazing. As was the cinematography for Her and Dunkirk.
The worst shit I ever tortured myself with. NOPE The Acting and pacing... The heck too unbearable for me. The visuals were good.
@@AyushBakshi agreed. Young people probably like it because they’re comparing it to the trash that’s been released recently. Nope was a very lukewarm film.
Eh. It’s a smart idea but the way shadows look are completely off to what seeing things at night would be like
I love Nolan's dedication to the medium. Really makes me wish there was a film IMAX theater remotely close so I could see it as intended.
Same
Where do you guys live if you don’t mind me asking
To me, this is more exciting than CGI, which is as common as dog doodoo.
none here in ohio :(
Only 30 theaters around the world will have it on 1570. I live near 4 of them (socal)
Very well done! I know a few things about how they got the BW 65mm to work for Oppenheimer: As you assumed they used 5222 Eastman Double-X and cut that in 65mm size for use in 5 and 15-perf cameras. That’s not that big of a deal since film can be cut in any size from master rolls and 5222 is available in medium format for photography from CineStill as BWXX. The lab, FotoKem had to switch their 65mm development machines from color to BW once or twice a week depending on what Nolan shot. Nolan finishes on film! No digital intermediate, only CGI shots go though a computer and even they are color corrected during the film printing with photochemical color timing. Because Oppenheimer is IMAX and 70mm the BW footage is being printed onto Kodak 2383 color print film and might have some slight coloration in the highlights or shadows because of that. The digital version of this will be made by scanning a color timed inter positive print and grading that to match the analog master print. With this process Nolan couldn’t have converted to BW in post since it would introduce another film generation into the mix and Nolan makes his IMAX prints directly from the camera negative for image maximum quality. And it’s not IMAX film really. It’s just regular 65mm film shot sideways with 3x the image area. But the film is not specifically IMAX film.
Appreciate it! And that sounds about right on how I would expect them to make this. Still would say it's a film made to use with an IMAX camera, but I get your point! Thanks for some of the extra details!
@@FrameVoyager Oh no it’s definitely made with IMAX cameras, it’s just the film that’s not specifically IMAX. It’s like when you put regular 35mm film in an X-Pan panoramic camera, it doesn’t become special panoramic film. It’s still just 35mm film.
Gotcha! Good to know
Is a master roll just a very wide roll of film that can be cut into different gauges? if so the tooling process should be quite easy.
@@Dennis94913 Yes basically. You’d still have to consider the film base. Idk if Double-X would be more susceptible to tearing in 65mm but if not then you’d only need to cut it in a different size from the master roll.
Christopher Nolan has the power to further captivate us with his crafts. His direction is something that should be consistently taken note of. He’s widely acclaimed as a storyteller of sorts. Oppenheimer already looks amazing right from the get go.
Cris Nolan is always trying to make something fresh, and that for he owns my respect.
Even if it doesn't always work out well, he always is pushing the boundaries
Besides the technical aspects as in this video, shooting in black and white (or shooting a digital video/photo in black and white setting on the shoot), gives you the opportunity to compose the right contrast in colors, based on their hue. You basically have to be careful because in black and white, you may get a different contrast if you just desaturate colors, as some will look the same. So it's really a challenge and experiment to form the right contrast shooting in black and white
Thanks for bringing this to our attention. Always happy to hear about this aspect of filmmaking and preservation.
I think Nolan is such a special director because the story behind all the film that man is just as interesting as the films themselves.
The most well known directors always create that aura of mystique around themselves. Doesn't mean they are good, but it does make them super interesting haha
@@FrameVoyager lol, I think you just described Tommy Wiseau to a T.
@@javidaderson 😂😂😂
I can't recommend 5222 enough. Every filmmaker owes it to themselves to try shooting it at least once. It's a beautiful emulsion that hasn't been changed since it was released in 1957. It has about 6-7 stops of dynamic range and renders reality as if it's a charcoal drawing. In 16mm, it is quite grainy as well. But in IMAX, it will no doubt evoke the look of mid-century portraiture taken on 6x6 and 4x5 camera which I'm sure is one of the motivations behind Nolan's decision to use it.
Excellent work here, especially the transitions in that buttery-smooth intro. Well done.
Cannot wait for this movie! Nolan still makes IMAX movies like no other! Didn’t see Tenet in IMAX because of Covid but I saw Dunkirk at it was a full experience like no other.
Whatever one's feelings about Nolan as an artist, respect is due him for his recognition and honoring of celluloid film as a discrete visual medium with its own distinct qualities, and his continued commitment to working in and preserving this precious medium. I think it's great that he's expanding the technical and visual parameters of black-and-white film with this latest project, and my curiosity is certainly aroused by what I've seen (though I am admittedly not fond of the IMAX format).
Yeah I'm interested to see how it all turns out. I'm hoping to get to go to an IMAX 70mm theatre to go see this movie. Might see about doing a video to cover it
But even Nolan has to admit that this may be one of the very last movies to be shot on film. Kodak accommodated his need for 65 mm black and white IMAX film but that is such an extreme except to the rule.
@@Sacto1654 It certainly will become more and more rare for raw film stock to be manufactured, actual films photographed, and celluloid films to be exhibited. Nolan and Quentin Tarantino are two of the few major directors active today who have the interest and clout to shoot on film, and once they either lose interest and/or give up on the old medium, it will be further consigned to obscurity. It is my understanding, though, that contemporarily made motion pictures are still, at least sometimes, archived as film transfers, as celluloid film is still a more reliable means of preserving the work than digital technology. If I am correct in my understanding, this represents a kind of lingering afterlife for the film medium.
Fun fact about acetate cellulose, it is the material high quality frames for glasses are made of. There are cheaper injection moulded frames as well, but longer lasting frames are made from sheets of acetate cellulose!
Oh interesting!
I really enjoyed reading American Prometheus. I hope Nolan digs into the post WWII drama between Oppenheimer and the US Government.
This is the most underrated channel fr. Great job guys!
Appreciate it! 👊👊👊
Agreed. Netflix quality. We're spoiled here on KZhead.
@@CNC-Time-Lapse 🥰🥰🥰
Woah, nice edits! Love it! Great job on this!
Appreciate it! Cool to see the process of rough cuts to final cuts isn't it? haha
@@FrameVoyager Heck yeah! It's a lot different! I'm literally taking hands notes of the changes and looking to incorporate some of the subtle change. Like, I like how you cut Nolan out in the very beginning and sort of slowly zoom in and little things like that. haha I swear these videos should be on Netflix. The editing is superb. Keeps me engaged.
This channel is just flat out amazing.
"Thanks to our sponsor, the type of thing Christopher Nolan hates with every fiber of his being"
😏
Film is actually coated in way larger format and then just cut down to the size you need. Be it 120 stills film, 35mm, 16mm, or 70mm. So it most likely was as easy as you summarised!
I'm surprised B&W CMOS sensors aren't more popular- my understanding is the dynamic range is incredible PLUS they let in a bunch more light since there's no BAYER FILTER
Same! ARRI and RED and plenty of others have created B&W digital cameras. Haven't seen them used that much. Might be worth exploring in another video at some point
Probably because there isn't much demand for B&W content and development of camera is expensive, the same with buying camera just for B&W things, which could be highly restrictive unless you specialise in only that one thing.
There are many of these used for astrophotography.
B&W is still a tough sell for most distributers and production companies. That's why you don't see it a lot.
Also you can get an astoundingly high resolution out of it because you can use every cell as a pixel, instead of each field of 4. Honestly it should be cheaper because you skip the bayer filter application, and can use much larger, easier to make cells for the same image size. Given how much I enjoy B&W film, I'd love to get a digital B&W camera.
Very well made as always, like a mini documentary. Mentioning now dangerous nitrite film was, my great grandfather had a few different jobs and one job he had was working as a projectionist in a cinema, possibly in the late 1940s-50s at least. I found out that one day one of my dad's cousins who worked with him in the cinema, after putting in the film into the projector and it started playing, it caught fire and could have burned the place down, but luckily that didn't happen.
Appreciate it! And that's awesome. Glad it didn't burn the place down! haha
This is like that scene in Inglourious Basterds "Face of Vengeance" scene!
I've read that many (most or all?) of the cinema projection booths in the nitrate era of film exhibition were coated with asbestos to protect against fire. When prints of feature films were released or rented to private individuals or clubs or societies, they were routinely transferred onto acetate stock as a safety measure. It's amazing that nitrate stock was used as long as it was.
Nitrate stock is why safety stocks came into being. And if you look at what EK has offered over the ears, it is truly astounding. I really wish Kodak was Kodak.
@@barrymoore4470 Kodak released a new base and called it Kodak Safety Film. This was done to eliminate these issues. Celluloid film base is nothing more than cellulose nitrate, an explosive. But, it was all they had back in the day. .
This movie may be one of the last hurrahs for movies shot on film stock. Digital cameras for movie work from ARRI and Sony have gotten so good in the last 10 years that very few filmmakers outside of Christopher Nolan will still stick to using film in movie production.
Atleast Quentin Tarantino and Wes Anderson from big Hollywood names are using film on all their films. And many indie filmmakers still want to shoot on film.
Actually that’s not completely true: to echo what Mirrori said, I’m an indie filmmaker working on comparatively very low budgets, nowhere near Nolan level (yet 😉) but I’m still making the choice to shoot on film. And it’s not as outrageously expensive as people generally assume. It just depends on how you work with it. For example, I shot list and storyboard everything very thoroughly, block it out and then I only need to do a few takes usually. That makes it less expensive. The production days go quicker this way and actors are more excited by the format so they’re more precise in their performances, knowing there won’t be a lot of takes. So this further saves money on production. Shooting on film actually saves money & time in post because there’s way less footage to sift through and color correction goes by much quicker because the colors and aesthetic already look so beautiful that it takes a lot less polishing. Kodak is also a fantastic company, and they’re offering me an incredible discount on stock because I’m also a teacher educating young students on celluloid. So there are all kinds of benefits and cost effective ways to shoot on film, if one is resourceful and creative about it! Which is why I firmly believe the medium will stand the test of time.
@@matthewrocca4197 However, there are two big problems: 1) film stock is now very expensive to procure and 2) finding a film lab to process the film is getting harder and harder to do. You really wonder how much money Nolan had to put up to get the specialized black and white IMAX film stock and to find a film lab that can process this unusual type of film stock for _Oppenheimer_ .
IMAX are launching new Film Cameras, and have said they're committing to making film, as well as offering Digital.
@@Sacto1654 Good points. But there are always creative workarounds. For example, the feature I'm working on right now is under 80 pages long, some scenes are B&W, and the shooting ratio I'm going for is 5:1, which is achievable due to the above-mentioned meticulous planning in pre-production. Partnering up with Kodak from an educational angle provides an amazing discount, and it also helps to have a DP who can attain a discount at the lab due to his exemplary working relationship with them (CineLab if you're curious). Don't get me wrong, I agree fees are high, but I also think a director should fight for shooting on celluloid if that's what he/she wants to accomplish, and don't be afraid to get creative in your approach to cutting costs. As I mentioned, you'll potentially save a lot of money on # of shooting days and in post.
No IMAX 70MM here in the state of Oregon but we do have an only regular 70MM theater here called the Hollywood Theatre which used to be a Cinerama once upon a time. Got the premiere showing which sold out and when Nolan releases a film it’s always around my birthday so this will be a treat!
Being that both Vision3 in 65mm and Double X have acetate film base, and that Cinestill has been selling Double x in 120 medium format for a while, I imagine it was a matter of just sending the master rolls down the 65mm cutter. I really hope that just like how E100 became available as a 35mm motion stock after it was used for that Netflix show, 65mm Double X becomes available for purchase
I live in a city with one of the last true 15-perf 70mm IMAX projectors. Dunkirk was amazing. I can’t wait to see this!
Ughhhhh, trying to find one for Oppenheimer
@@FrameVoyager I just checked and the one here isn’t operating anymore. Apparently it’s broken. The nearest one is two hours away now. Ugh.
The Eastman Kodak Company produced that film right here in Rochester, NY, and the George Eastman museum is at the cutting edge of film preservation. *ALSO,* Eastman Kodak had a NUCLEAR REACTOR (for neutron generation/product testing) at the Kodak Park research/Production facility!
I'm beyond excited to see this movie. My local theater is one of the few able to show it in 70mm IMAX and i managed to snag a ticket.
Even a moment spent highlighting the vanishing history of nitrate film stocks makes this video worthwhile. Of course there is more to it - much more to it than just that. But thanks for drawing our attention to the thorny issue of archival preservation of the moving image.
No problem! Yeah, that's always the hard thing with these videos is you could go on so many tangents. Try to give as best overview on it as we can without bogging the whole video down in it 😅
It's sobering to realize that there will come a day in the not too distant future where every frame of nitrate film will be lost to oblivion, and any image of the frame not otherwise transferred to another stock or format will utterly vanish from history.
@@barrymoore4470 Not necessarily, Scorsese started The Film Foundation for this very reason, to provide proper archival for films that otherwise could be lost to time. So there’s still hope!
@@matthewrocca4197 If understand correctly, though, nitrate stock inevitably decomposes with time, even under optimal storage conditions. I believe (and I hope I'm wrong!) that any nitrate film not eventually transferred to safety stock will invariably dissolve into oblivion in due time. In a sense, that entire early nitrate era of cinema will be lost to even specialists, as the nitrate prints preserving the special visual qualities of nitrate simply won't exist anymore.
@@matthewrocca4197 Look up Martin's open letter to Kodak and the controversy around Kodak and what they actually knew about just how long their films will last. Martin was bloody pissed off. He is doing his best to preserve film but the problems are baked in so to speak. Kodak has offered film stocks and processes that will not fade. Technicolor films if stored properly do not tend to fade. Kodachrome does not fade and their unreleased process called Azochrome will not fade. Cibachrome does not fade and dye transfer does not fade. Digital simplicity and people that do not want to wait for prints is why Kodak died along with film and film cameras. I can still get double perf 70mm stock and huge rolls of film for my Cirkit camera if needed but not from the Great Yellow God who is no longer a serious player in my world.
When I worked at Locanda Verde in NYC, they had an Italian red wine that at first taste made me think of black and white film grain. Don’t know why or how but that’s how I was able to understand it and explain it. Unfortunately can’t remember the name of the wine.
That sounds like an excellent wine
Every Frame Voyager video feels a documentary in itself
Haha appreciate it! We do like doing some deep dives to talk about history behind things. We might have to do a full length doc one of these days
For peeps look for when he covers the question why black and white it at 11:00 .. props for stretching it out 15 min it was very informative
Wow this was a really great video 👏🏽
Appreciate it!
Just came back from a 70mm screening and it was wonderful. I can't wait for it come out on Blu-Ray so I can watch it again.
A bit off topic, but I’m curious if you guys would be interested in making a video on quantum dot image sensors? The potential benefits of these sensors seems absolutely insane compared to CMOS. It’s also looking like they might be right around the corner of hitting the market.
I am definitely going to see this in the Massive IMAX here in NYC a the AMC Lincoln Square. Such am amazing theater, have seen Dunkirk and Dark Night here!
gold info brooo!!!!
Kudos to Nolan for his commitment to art and technical challenges in the film industry. I believe that digital filming is also possible without postproduction manipulations and artifice, but I quite appreciate Nolan’s choice based on the quality of the results.
you seen Kill Bill, in color ? What does this channel understand ?
Great video!
Appreciate it!
Eastman Double-X is a wonderful film stock. Contrast, tonality, luminance, and grain… just fantastic!
As someone who uses a 35mm film camera, true B&W film looks very different (and much better) than color film that’s later converted to B&W. It can capture highlights and shadows in a very unique and striking way.
Could you explain more on how B&W film does this?
@@rufaiajala The light sensitive layer of photographic film is made up of silver halide crystals. When exposed to light through a camera, these crystals react and capture an image. I can’t find anything detailing the exact makeup of color film (compared to black and white), but I believe it has an extra chemical layer to capture color. When manufacturers are creating a film stock they can alter the chemical makeup to create different “looks”. Kodak’s Portra line, for example, is known for its pastel tones and was created as a portrait film. Black and white films are designed to capture highlights and shadows differently because that’s all it can capture. Color film can still look good when converted to black and white in post, but it wasn’t created with that look in mind so it won’t do as good as true black and white.
I don’t have any interest in arguing what’s “better” and I don’t have a lot of experience with black and white film, but I do have a lot of experience with shooting digital in both color and black and white. I will say that I’ve looked at sample images from $150,000 achromatic cameras (they only shoot in grayscale) and my little Nikon D40 that I purchased on eBay for $21 produces images that are much more pleasing to my eye.
one of the reason why film is still used for preservation is because if you shoot on 70mm today, in 20 years you will be able to rescanner that film in 16k or whatever resoultion will be the meta then and so on. if you shoot in 4k/8k today that file will be forever in 8k. we are 4k rescanning stuff from the 80's that was shoot on 35mm and despite is more than 40 years old that stuff now looks shoot today w a today camera.
I always wondered why BW film looked different to just turning the colour off a colour film image. Thanks for the explanation of the chemical difference. Just fascinating! Explains the sharpness difference. “Clouds” can never be as sharp as crystals.
I saw it in the only 70mm film IMAX in my state, it was excellent!
Saw the film last night and whilst not wanting to give away any spoilers, Nolan really does use the B/W elements to great effect, they help punctuate the timeline (there are three running concurrent in the movie). Can see why he wanted to use, but only pure authenticity explains why he went to such lengths to actually film in B/W rather than opting to remove colour in post production. Any other director would be told to get lost if they asked, but Nolan has the gravitas to get what he needs to make the movie he wants to make. Fair play I say...
13:44 I remember the Line from the Hindu scripture the bhagavad-gita :- Now I become death the destroyer of worlds
There is more to it. It's a story but I cut it down for timesake
Nice product placement!
Amazing video,Very informative! Just wanted to ask if Imax claims to have 18k res on their 70mm film which is later projected at 70mm in select locations, doesn't the film get converted to digital for post-production and then back in film for the final print? That would bring the resolution back to 4k right?
First of all, film has no set resolution, so this 18k estimate is an exaggeration, and most film labs will scan IMAX negatives at 12k maximum. There is a demo by cinematographer; Steve Yedlin (who did The Last Jedi and Knives Out) showing that an Alexa 65 camera (which shoots at 6.5k) still holds more detail than a 12k scan of IMAX 15/65mm negative. So resolution isnt everything, there are other factors than pixel count. Second, Nolan likes to finish his films photochemically, so for shots featuring no digital effects will just be printed and timed the traditional way. For shots that feature vfx, the negatives are scanned at 12k or 8k, VFX are done at 6k, then those shots filmed out back onto IMAX negative at 6k again.
@@kraftpunk6654 Ok. Thanks alot for the info.
Let's just say I've talked to several different experts and no one can agree on resolution for film lol. Which is understandable for something chemically based converting to something digitally based. But Kraft Punk gives a good explanation
I never contemplated Guy Pearce look until now. Genius in its simplicity of why it looks and feels the way it does. Digital recording leaves the same taste in my mouth, at least in medium playback. Not sure about the capturing process.
Those soft red box chips o hoy cookies go hard!!!
cool, just in time ive recently watched the Lighthouse
I took photography and darkroom courses in the mid 80's, and used B&W film. Kodak T-Max was fairly new, and it offered high resolution and very dark "dmax". Later, my "normal" (color print film) vacation photos looked washed out and grainy in comparison. A dedicated B&W film is _much_ better than just shooting color film in shades of grey only. Now, what will the print use? Are they switching film stock based on the scene and splicing it all back together, something you never do on the distribution print? Or is it just printed on color film, losing the deep blacks and higher resolution of the true B&W footage?
What I want to know is, what are we going to be seeing in the IMAX theaters? Will there be B&W stock in the projector either by splicing or by using two projectors at once, running the color print in one and the B&W print in the other and choreographing the handoff? I suppose they're doing that already in IMAX theaters in order to get the running time past 45 minutes?
You got a like from me for the Tim and Eric’s Universe clip.
Interesting. What about audio? Should we make an optical sound print for storage too?
As a photographer who has shot on BW film his entire life, this was inspiring.
5222 is so beautiful and unique, there is no simulation that can do what it does.
If you want to see a serious tour of Kodak behind the scenes , Destin at _Smarter Every Day_ did a serious dive with them. there's an even longer version of the tour on his second channel, and if your seriously interest in film, that's the one to watch. The laminar flow application process for the film is WILD. And they actually talk about specialty film like this. The hard part isn't the chemistry, they do special blending for that fairly often. Nolan would be designing film like he was ordering a Porche The machine that perferates the film though... that's absolutely insane. Like a watchmaker and a machines met and made nightmare The chem is wild too. they cover everything from reaction vessels with hunderes of lbs of silver in them, to how the diet of the cow they get the bones to make the backer
nolans comments about archival and media reminds me of a similar question where Steve Albini from electrical audio about digital audio and vinyl. that being, and im paraphrasing; vinyl is great for archival because there isnt a tried and true way of archiving digital and the playback method for vinyl is very basic.. Also the choice for using black and white in certain scenes i totally get what hes tried and is attempting with this new movie.. it illicits a tone and your eyeballs break react differently to a monotone palette. There are some examples of this used in the most recent david lynch's twin peaks season 3.. anyway...
I think another big reason why Nolan doesn't want to convert color film to bw is because he likes to finish his films photochemically. I can't see any other way to convert color film to bw than to do it in a DI process.
That's a good point! Yeah, I would assume there are various technical and creative reasons for Nolan to use B&W film specifically. Also the fact that he is an absolute purist when it comes to film lol
Black and white film is the best choice if your goal is black and white images on the screen. As an aside, my favorite process is Technicolor 3-Strip.all shot on black and white film.
@@robertmaxey5406 Do you happen to know if Technicolor color is even possible anymore? Everyone says it’s sadly extinct, even Tarantino has said that he’s tried to resurrect it but for technical reasons he doesn’t understand, it can’t seem to be done. I’m trying to emulate that look on a feature I’ll be directing, shot on film, and trying to figure out the best way to achieve it!
@@matthewrocca4197 no offence but the look will be just that, only the look. Big difference to be sure. As for bringing back Technicolor, the short answer is no. The company did bring it back for a time, but they had a hard time finding qualified people who understood the process. By process, I mean the three-strip process or Process #4 which dominated the industry. For awhile, Technicolor made dye transfer prints by color separation of one of Kodak's color negative stocks. Absolutely not the same thing. It was largely a cost saving measure. Ever see a Technicolor camera in a blimp? Huge. Lots of light was required as well. This meant lots of heat on the set. Besides Natalie Kalmus is dead. Kodak could make matrix film, dyes and other materials you would require, but the experts are long gone. The equipment is largely gone. To bring it back would require lots and lots of effort. Not to mention, cost. I seriously doubt Quentin's ability. Not saying it can't be done, but it would be very tough. It is now just a very fond memory, sadly.
Again - Great!
Appreciate it!
IMAX film stock is identical to regular 5/70 stock physically. The areas for the sound track changes, but otherwise its entirely the same stock, so its highly likely that very little actual R&D had to be done to create black and white IMAX stock.
IMAX movies have never encoded their soundtracks on the film. They were originally put on separate 35mm magnetic film reels and synced to the projector. Later the system was updated to use CD-ROM discs, and then updated again to use DVDs. For the CD and DVD systems the audio is usually copied onto the sound system’s hard drive instead of being played directly off the disc, but either way the film print still has to be manually positioned in the projector on a specific frame for the audio to be correctly synced to the image.
@@jordanbradford7729 You're correct, but this had no bearing on the film used in the cameras, as they didn't encode the sound on the film ever either, for 5/70 or IMAX. You're correct that the sound sync still relies simply on specific timing based on a start frame. Theoretically, IMAX has the space on the edge to encode a DTS timecode if one wanted to do that differently in the future, however, the speed the film moves at may raise some issues, as from my experience projecting, DTS already has sync issues with the speeds 5/70 moves at.
I hope I'm the one who put you onto this subject. I don't like Christopher Nolan on a personal scale, I think he's an ass, but I am thankful for him understanding the neccessity of film in movie making and preservation. The fact now that Kodak have begun working with filmmakers to create film that fits their projects instead of making their projects based around the film is a massive godsend. And not only this but making those films available for public use is another amazing thing. I recently had a peak at Kodak's order pamphlet for available film types and now they're allowing filmmakers to purchase 35mm Ektachrome for their projects after its use in Euphoria, which I find beautiful. They've also released the archival film you mentioned along with optical sound recording film that caters both to digital and analog recordings. Meaning that a preserved film can be played on a projector made in the 50s and also play on a projector made in 2020s since the film sound is compatible with both. Me thinks this is due to pressure from Mr Nolan. I think in a sense, film is like books. There rarely is a better way to keep hold of things than something physical. When you go to an archive, they'll usually keep two or more versions of something both on physical and digital. This should be the commen practice for all things related to filmmaking. Even the Internet Archive understand this and keep most of the stuff donated to them mainly books, video tapes and vinyl records. So Mr Nolan, despite often being wrong, is right about the neccessity for film preservation and to do it solely digitally is beyond a waste of resources and safety. I personally prefer using film because I can hold up the negative and say "This was there." You don't really get that feeling with digital. Digital is like acrylic paint but film feels like oil. It isn't impossible to make a great painting with acrylic and it's more than possible to make a bad painting with oil, but there's a certain essence each medium shares that'd be hard to replicate in the other. That's film. I love film. And that's why.
"Despite often being wrong", genuinely curious, how so?
@@timlapointe4067 Mainly his pretentiousness when it comes to people actually seeing his movies and what format is benneficial to them. He believed that his movies should only be seen in theaters to the extent that it can put people in danger, as was with Tenet during the COVID-19 chrisis. Talking about putting people in danger, his banning of seating on set is beyond ableist and can and will cause serious harm to people who need to sit down. There has been several horror stories about his mistreatment of staff and actors as well. Not in a Kubrick way but more in a "dick for no reason" way. He's also not one for safety on set, which you could probably already tell. Overall, he's a bit of a nasty fellow. I don't like his pictures too much. They lack the coziness that I look for in cinema. Too vast and yet not very styilised. It is too matter-of-fact for my liking. I don't find what I like in his movies but I do consider them to be a good experience. Just not very rewatchable.
@@ActuallyHoudini Where is it documented about Nolan's mistreatment of staff and actors? Likewise with the lack of safety on his sets?
@@philaoriginals Oops, sorry. I was mixing up Nolan with Cameron and the chair thing was only a minor misunderstanding. Though there has been some talks about issues with safety on set, especially regarding stunt work. A bit like Cameron but not as severe. I can't link any articles but it is a good rabbit hole to go down. Though my criticism about his pretentiousness surrounding movie theaters stays the same.
@@ActuallyHoudini So basically, you've said absolutely nothing. This is just blatantly false and a bunch of he said she said. And also, disliking Nolan's films is contrarian-ism at worst.
So if I understand it correctly, the film exists in two versions on IMAX prints? The colour and black&white versions?
I can't wait for ther movie!
I've always wanted to do a black and white IMAX with the depth of Zone System large format (i.e. Ansel Adams) purity and scale.
Question: How is the switch from B/W to color going to be done. Remember, the thickness of the two film stocks is different and therefore refocusing is needed to compensate for the change. I remember showing films with the two stocks on the same reel, glued together. As a projectionist (and this was in 16mm) I had to be vigilant at the change to make sure the picture on the screen remained in focus.
hmmm maybe that is the reason for the special B/W film stock
Kudos to Nolan for correctly stating the truth most people are unaware of - that there is no stable digital archiving format or workflow available today, and the only truly long-term storage medium we know today is film - particularly black-and-white film stored at low to very low temperature. Color films may be separated into three RGB strips of black-and-white film and stored in the same way.
I like to think Oppenheimer had that “destroyer of worlds” planned. Like, he came up with it in the shower a day before, and after the test goes off, everyone is congratulating each other, and he tries butting in “yeah, hey, now I am bec-“ but he gets cut off by other people being like “great job everyone!” and then he waits for a another moment of silence “uhh, uh, _*now I am become death…”* People are like “wait what?” and he’s all coy “yeah just a cool thing I thought of just now, nbd.”
Film, old or new, can be re-scanned for modern digital sales. Even though one can use a BMD 12K camera to capture, once sales require more, then only film will suffice.
Work for a very old school system. 10 years back we collected every old film from 100 schools. Some started smoking the second we opened the can. We had to get a fire box in the warehouse. Some looked like the one you showed with bubbles. No fires but it would it would have not been long. S FL so very humid here too. The steel, that's why salvors are pulling up pre war wrecks from deep ocean. Pre war no radioactivity
One small correction to your explanation of B&W. Not all Kodak nor B&W has T-Grain. That only is applicable to one kind. Other than that, thanks for the video. :)
Appreciate the correction!
I remember a reddit comment saying it would be awesome if the movie was black and white first and then color after the explosion so I wouldnt be surprised if screenwriters steal ideas from online people😒
Or vice versa
Because it's a FILM and not a long TikTok video like all the other movies today
Very nice describe
Why don't they just film it regularly and then turn on grayscale in the editing software?
Very big quality difference. Even digital cameras have monochrome versions for filming black and white. We explained the process in the video and how it's just different
Xavier Dolan shot Adele music video “Hello” on IMAX film. Which was black and white
Specific shots in it and it's not clear if it was black and white film or post converted. Regardless, this is the first film to feature b&w imax film and it was specially developed by Kodak. All Technical specification of that music video here www.imdb.com/title/tt5431624/technical/ show that it was shot on Kodak 65mm color film. So likely post converted
So while I am glad to see Kodak finally get a win again, it would have been incredibly ironic had they worked with Fuji. I wonder how that phone call would have gone.
You make it appear that there are only two options for film stock base material -- old combustible and new unworkable. Had you been around in the 1950s, '60s, '70s, experience would make you informed in substantial and nuanced ways. For many years, there were post-nitro stocks that could be operated effectively in cameras and could be spliced conveniently without resorting to using tapes. There were (are?) post-nitro camera-original negative and positive stocks designed with effective color and density latitude for generous release prints, and that would not damage a camera that jammed. If you saw a movie in a theater in the 1960s-1970s, there's a very good chance it was not polyester (well past the days of nitro) -- while other prints of the movie were kept on polyester as backup. Distributed prints became disposable in the early 1950s, because total wear-out was almost inevitable, whatever the base material. But even in those days even "B" movies had archive copies stored properly, up to a point. (If a movie saw a rapid gain in popularity, further prints could be struck from a clean print more easily than from the negative of the release edit. Those are the source of many restored films.) Far, far more film warehouses were lost to aggressive real-estate economics than to fire or other material disasters after the nitro era. That may also be partially the case in the nitro era. Even the average person on the street knew the dangerous instability of nitro stock in its day. Just as we know that refrigerated food can spoil and even become toxic. Look in every fridge you see for the next year and decide exactly what you'd do with what's in there at that moment. That's how movie storage was decided in the nitro era. If the movie was deemed past its healthy life -- in the market or for further storage -- it was, for better or worse, tossed. Neglect and mishandling were not the biggest cause of loss. Dubious-yet-thoughtful consideration could mean that the film my gr-granddad enjoyed seeing the most in 1929 was thrown away, but the one that your gr-grandma enjoyed seeing the most is still in decent storage. The ratio might be 84/16. But the decisions were made, not neglected. It's that orphans got no love at all. Judgement was brutal. Values go in cycles. People are subject to their lack of imagination about what will be valued in the future. Digital archiving was thought to mitigate by handling massive volumes of data. Archiving can be mitigated by reconciling the physical and aesthetic realities; making informed decisions. Biased uninformed discriminatory thinking reconciles nothing.
BTW: Please don't jump to the conclusion that because I use refrigerated food as a storage comparison, I mean that refrigeration is mandatory or can be expected to be the primary-option film storage method. I'm suggesting that a common best-practice for food is not fool-proof. We have yet to reconcile a best-practice for movie storage. The oldest instances of film storage were subject to the same thinking that is common to what's in the typical domestic refrigerator: imperfect, and with inexact time limits. Loose parameters in a well-known instability.
I believe it was Einstein who said "I don't know with what weapons world war 3 will be fought, but I know that world war 4 will be fought with sticks and stones." Very heavy shit.
How do they edit it like in normal digital one we have the video encoded so we edit it in software. But how will they edit this as its a film in order to put animations and visual effect
More than likely will go through a film scanning process that translates it to digital to work on and then will be transferred back on to film.
I wonder how many people will actually see this movie as a projected film print? Nolan seems to make these technical decisions based on the viewing exoerience he will get to have, which will be far higher than the majority of people.
I definitely want to go see it on 70mm film. Have a few around me but definitely worth it
A small number I should guess. When was the last time any of you saw a Technicolor three-strip IB Print? Not many, I guess. And that is a shame. Owing to the nature of original Technicolor prints and the fact they can't be recreated makes it difficult to see one projected on the big screen. And what a shame. Should you get a chance to see one, go see it.
I will definitely drive two hours (three in traffic) to Los Angeles to go see this projected as an actual film print! There’s nothing like that experience, seeing it projected on DCP doesn’t do it justice. Same reason I journeyed out to Tarantino’s theater the New Beverly to go see “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” for the bazillionth time this past weekend, so I could see it again in its proper format 🎞️
Christopher Nolan should direct a Mission Impossible movie. Just imagine the crazy stunts they'd put in there.
People are switching to Davinci Resolve so fast right now because Peter McKinnon & Matti Happoja switched to it. When I use to tell people they should switch, they always said no
😅😅😅 yeah I use premiere pro still. Just have too much built into it at this point
@@FrameVoyager that I totally understand, it’s a valid reason
Nitro-Cellulose has a more common name. Gun Cotton. For an example of use, see Battleship New Jersey. The 16" guns were bag loads of nitrocellulose propellant grains. Another common use was ping pong balls of all things. they were nitrocellulose up until the 90's early 2k's
I hope he manages to mix the dialogue track properly this time around(unlike with Tenet).
What's the name of the music playing in the background
If you can I’d recommend reading The Making of The Atomic Bomb by the author and historian Richard Rhodes! He provides in rich human, political, and scientific detail all about the project. I’ve been enjoying it so far almost done with it!!
Considering Cinestill sells this film in 120 format, it can’t have been rocket science for Kodak to produce it in 65mm.
I have the Filconvert products and although I grew up with B&W (1950/60s) I just cannot bring myself to apply to my efforts. I attended many "how to" classes but still cannot develop a B&W "vision". Oh well ...
I think it's worth voicing the fact that every time 'Nolan' was uttered, I literally heard 'no one'. So you can imagine this is immensely confusing. Otherwise really enjoyed the video.
Let's be real, for preservation digital is objectively superior since you can make identical copies without any degradation and have as much redundancy as necessary.
I don't disagree with you haha!
But, try playing a videogame from the 90s that came on a CD on your computer of today (I know it's a different thing but take it as a metaphor). I've tried it multiple times. It's not just that you may not have a CD reader nowadays, but even if you have one, the game doesn't install and you can't do anything about it. I've tried this and believe me, even after searching on the internet, with virtual machines, with older drivers... Nothing works. This applied to film. Every time you changed the way the software works, you'd have to revise the digital copies of all the films you are preserving and update them so they work with the newest system. With film, you can keep it well stored and saved in a cool and dry ambient for 50 years, come back without any projectors for it, and still you can put light through it and the image projects on the wall. That's future proofing.
@@Jorge_Ambruster I don’t think I’ve ever heard this better articulated, bravo!
Couldn’t think of anybody better to play Oppenheimer than Cillian Murphy!
Anybody know what movie the shot at 6:40 is from?
Can't imagine the cost of retooling to make a black and white Double X Film, the Double X usually comes in 16 or 35mm gauges, maybe at the end of the day it was worth it keeping a good relationship with Nolan.
It probably only made them move the big rolls to the 65mm machine and cutting them there instead of using the 16 or 35 ones. And the testing... Yeah, it's money. But the Double X 65mm film has never existed so they put the price on it. Double X has always been cheaper than Vision 3 so they probably balanced the extra costs of testing by simply asking the same for the 65mm Double X as for the 65mm Vision 3.
Its good that he films with "film", so we analog photographers will have more time with film.
The cookie reference is funny, I hate soft cookies because I can taste that odd chemical flavor that makes them soft.
Chips Ahoy to refuse Product Placement in all Nolan films.