How much does Super 16mm, or 35mm film cost?

Paul Cypert · October 14th, 2006, 10:27 PM

Hey,
I'm in Thailand too working on some stuff...

I'd seriously look to video first. With all the added problems over here of humidity, high temperature, etc...but biggest concern for me is "Mai Bpen Lai"...you know it over here as much as me. Thais will do something half a and then..."nevermind"...do you want some budget guy hired for pennies on the dollar running around with your film?

Plus quality developing, printing, etc over here is just as much if not more than in the states...talent is cheaper as are hired hands...but you have to hire more than in the states because they don't work well or can't think outside the box. You can hire some film school guy in the states that can do DP, editing, sound in a pinch...over here trying to get Thais to think outside what they know and stretch themselves is a pain.

Lastly why blow all that dough just to have film? It's not going to make it more successful...strong story, sets, lighting, etc will do that. Get a good video cam and invest all that money in lights, folks who know how to run those lights, good editing equipment and machines, decent talent, etc. I could stretch 100K pretty dang far over here if I wasn't trying to get film stock....

Paul

Sean J. Manning · October 15th, 2006, 05:47 AM

Thanks for the advice everyone.

Steve House · October 15th, 2006, 09:04 AM

An hour of 16mm filmstock, ~ $1500 USD
Processing an hour of 16mm film stock ~ $1500 USD

versus

An hour of premium DV tapestock ~ $25
Processing an hour of tapestock $00

Jarrod Whaley · October 15th, 2006, 02:44 PM

EDIT:removed a light-hearted joke that was no longer relevant.

Derek Lewis · October 16th, 2006, 05:26 PM

This is what it costs me, with a student discount, shooting 16mm...

For color: $80 for every 100 foot (3 mins)

B&W: $60 for every 100 foot

I used B&W Kodak Reversal and Kodachrome Color, both Tri-X. I get both projected as well (put on MiniDV tape).

Michael Struthers · October 26th, 2006, 07:30 PM

An hour of 16mm filmstock, ~ $1500 USD
Processing an hour of 16mm film stock ~ $1500 USD

versus

An hour of premium DV tapestock ~ $25
Processing an hour of tapestock $00

-----------

Of course, super16mm looks great, and DV looks like....

Bill Pryor · October 26th, 2006, 07:59 PM

On top of processing you've got the cost of transfer to tape and that tape stock cost, as well as shipping the film to and from the lab, not to mention the cost of syncing up the sound.

Joe Winchester · October 26th, 2006, 11:34 PM

I shoot 16mm film on an Arriflex 16bl. Here's some of the costs I have when shooting:

- 400ft of Kodak Vision2 250D 7205 Color Neg is around $80 retail.
- I really love Kodak Double-X 200 7222 b&w as well.

- Processing is roughly .16 / foot, so about $64 per 400foot reel, plus the postage to get it there and back.

- Telecine charges will vary greatly depending if it's supervised, scene-by-scene color corrected or just one-light throughout. I've seen telecine for one-light around .15 / ft and scene-to-scene around .18/ft. Supervised is expensive, say $100-150/hr.

Ways to save some cash - Buy short ends or recans of film. Always cheaper than retail reels, but not always easy to track down. 35mm will probably be easier to find than 16mm in short ends.

Of course, these are just some of the actual film costs. Hiring a DP and a crew is many many times these costs. I shoot all of my own film, but then again I was trained in photography, so it's an easy jump. If you're not so familiar with f-stops and light meters, you might have some trouble at first. Good luck. FIlm is a wonderful medium, much more expressive than digital. Not everyone wants to tread those dangerous waters.... but it's usually worth it :)

Joe Winchester · October 26th, 2006, 11:41 PM

--Derek, where are you buying your film man!! You're getting ripped off!!

100' reels should cost $30 at the very most. 400' should be arouns $80-90 ea. Call kodak or fuji and get a better deal!

--Oh, and Steve and hour of 16mm is not $1500 :)

400ft = 11min at 24fps
400ft kodak color neg film = ~$80

6 cans of 400ft (2400feet = 66min) @ $80/can = $480

Processing:

2400 feet @ .16 / foot = $384

So you're looking at roughly $865 to shoot and process 66 min of 16mm film. Not too bad:P

Joe Carney · October 27th, 2006, 10:50 AM

I thought I read somewhere that the cost of silver is going way up and Kodak and Fuji where having to raise their prices.

Saturnin Kondratiew · October 27th, 2006, 11:02 AM

shoot digital....save yourslef lot of money that can be put toward the story and art direction etc..... and especially since u dont know much about filmmaking other than what looks good. If i was in your shoes i'd shoot digital HVX or somthing...

Kevin Shaw · October 27th, 2006, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Winchester

FIlm is a wonderful medium, much more expressive than digital.

That depends. I've never had so much fun with photography since digital cameras came along, since I can now afford to experiment to my heart's content. As digital video cameras get better the same will increasingly be true for movie-making, especially since most film footage ends up getting digitally processed these days anyway. Bits created digitally from the start won't be any less expressive than bits converted to digital from film, once the digital cameras are good enough.

Joe Winchester · October 27th, 2006, 09:48 PM

Sure, it depends on your opinion and experience. I love both formats for their particular uses. More tools for the toolbox.

Paul Jefferies · October 28th, 2006, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean J. Manning

I do not know anything about cameras. I know what I want frames to look like. I know what shots I want. In my mind, I can picture the entire movie from start to finish.

If you know nothing about cameras, then before you worry about 16mm vs 35mm film stocks etc. you should grab a video camera and go and shoot some test scenes with your actors, so that you learn more about cameras and their limitations. Don't just hope your DoP will do it all for you. Everyone can picture a film in their head, but everyone finds that things are a bit different when they are actually on set.

Wade Muller · October 29th, 2006, 05:30 AM

Hi Sean i am a DP based in Bangkok , give me a call sometime if you have some more questions +66868821620 , my last short i shot here on 35mm can be viewed at http://www.myspace.com/105058870.

I recommend for you to shoot on HD either the F900 or Varicam because of your budget , i can get some great deals here on equipment and crew.

October 15th, 2006, 09:04 AM	#18
Steve House Inner Circle Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Posts: 5,742	An hour of 16mm filmstock, ~ $1500 USD Processing an hour of 16mm film stock ~ $1500 USD versus An hour of premium DV tapestock ~ $25 Processing an hour of tapestock $00 __________________ Good news, Cousins! This week's chocolate ration is 15 grams! Last edited by Steve House; October 15th, 2006 at 03:14 PM.

October 15th, 2006, 02:44 PM	#19
Jarrod Whaley Major Player Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: chattanooga, tn Posts: 721	EDIT:removed a light-hearted joke that was no longer relevant. __________________ -->jarrod whaley. www.oakstreetfilms.com Last edited by Jarrod Whaley; October 16th, 2006 at 01:36 AM.

October 16th, 2006, 05:26 PM	#20
Derek Lewis Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: East Lansing, MI Posts: 45	This is what it costs me, with a student discount, shooting 16mm... For color: $80 for every 100 foot (3 mins) B&W: $60 for every 100 foot I used B&W Kodak Reversal and Kodachrome Color, both Tri-X. I get both projected as well (put on MiniDV tape). __________________ Mac forever. derlicte@gmail.com www.wasteddevelopment.com

October 26th, 2006, 07:30 PM	#21
Michael Struthers Major Player Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: SF, Ca Posts: 421	An hour of 16mm filmstock, ~ $1500 USD Processing an hour of 16mm film stock ~ $1500 USD versus An hour of premium DV tapestock ~ $25 Processing an hour of tapestock $00 ----------- Of course, super16mm looks great, and DV looks like.... __________________ Michael Struthers www.buzzdigital.com

October 27th, 2006, 10:50 AM	#25
Joe Carney Inner Circle Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Centreville Va Posts: 1,828	I thought I read somewhere that the cost of silver is going way up and Kodak and Fuji where having to raise their prices. __________________ Boycott Guinness, bring back the pint!!!

October 14th, 2006, 10:27 PM	#16
Paul Cypert Regular Crew Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Bangkok, Thailand (work in US in the summers) Posts: 89	Hey, I'm in Thailand too working on some stuff... I'd seriously look to video first. With all the added problems over here of humidity, high temperature, etc...but biggest concern for me is "Mai Bpen Lai"...you know it over here as much as me. Thais will do something half a and then..."nevermind"...do you want some budget guy hired for pennies on the dollar running around with your film? Plus quality developing, printing, etc over here is just as much if not more than in the states...talent is cheaper as are hired hands...but you have to hire more than in the states because they don't work well or can't think outside the box. You can hire some film school guy in the states that can do DP, editing, sound in a pinch...over here trying to get Thais to think outside what they know and stretch themselves is a pain. Lastly why blow all that dough just to have film? It's not going to make it more successful...strong story, sets, lighting, etc will do that. Get a good video cam and invest all that money in lights, folks who know how to run those lights, good editing equipment and machines, decent talent, etc. I could stretch 100K pretty dang far over here if I wasn't trying to get film stock.... Paul

October 15th, 2006, 05:47 AM	#17
Sean J. Manning Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Bangkok Thailand Posts: 35	Thanks for the advice everyone.

October 26th, 2006, 07:59 PM	#22
Bill Pryor Contributor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 4,449	On top of processing you've got the cost of transfer to tape and that tape stock cost, as well as shipping the film to and from the lab, not to mention the cost of syncing up the sound.

October 26th, 2006, 11:34 PM	#23
Joe Winchester Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 125	I shoot 16mm film on an Arriflex 16bl. Here's some of the costs I have when shooting: - 400ft of Kodak Vision2 250D 7205 Color Neg is around $80 retail. - I really love Kodak Double-X 200 7222 b&w as well. - Processing is roughly .16 / foot, so about $64 per 400foot reel, plus the postage to get it there and back. - Telecine charges will vary greatly depending if it's supervised, scene-by-scene color corrected or just one-light throughout. I've seen telecine for one-light around .15 / ft and scene-to-scene around .18/ft. Supervised is expensive, say $100-150/hr. Ways to save some cash - Buy short ends or recans of film. Always cheaper than retail reels, but not always easy to track down. 35mm will probably be easier to find than 16mm in short ends. Of course, these are just some of the actual film costs. Hiring a DP and a crew is many many times these costs. I shoot all of my own film, but then again I was trained in photography, so it's an easy jump. If you're not so familiar with f-stops and light meters, you might have some trouble at first. Good luck. FIlm is a wonderful medium, much more expressive than digital. Not everyone wants to tread those dangerous waters.... but it's usually worth it :)

October 26th, 2006, 11:41 PM	#24
Joe Winchester Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 125	--Derek, where are you buying your film man!! You're getting ripped off!! 100' reels should cost $30 at the very most. 400' should be arouns $80-90 ea. Call kodak or fuji and get a better deal! --Oh, and Steve and hour of 16mm is not $1500 :) 400ft = 11min at 24fps 400ft kodak color neg film = ~$80 6 cans of 400ft (2400feet = 66min) @ $80/can = $480 Processing: 2400 feet @ .16 / foot = $384 So you're looking at roughly $865 to shoot and process 66 min of 16mm film. Not too bad:P

October 27th, 2006, 11:02 AM	#26
Saturnin Kondratiew Major Player Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: vancouver Posts: 310	shoot digital....save yourslef lot of money that can be put toward the story and art direction etc..... and especially since u dont know much about filmmaking other than what looks good. If i was in your shoes i'd shoot digital HVX or somthing... __________________ My documentaries - http://www.asphaltjunkiez.com

October 27th, 2006, 09:48 PM	#28
Joe Winchester Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 125	Sure, it depends on your opinion and experience. I love both formats for their particular uses. More tools for the toolbox.

October 29th, 2006, 05:30 AM	#30
Wade Muller Film & Digital Cinematographer Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Thailand Posts: 1	DP Bangkok Hi Sean i am a DP based in Bangkok , give me a call sometime if you have some more questions +66868821620 , my last short i shot here on 35mm can be viewed at http://www.myspace.com/105058870. I recommend for you to shoot on HD either the F900 or Varicam because of your budget , i can get some great deals here on equipment and crew.