16mmfilmmaker said:
Just for basic info: 35mm 1000Ft. roll which lasts aprox 11 min costs about $600 direct from Eastman. Thus an hour of 35mm stock would be about $3500 without processing etc..
Ron
Ouch. That means you have to get the shot exactly right each time or else it wil cost more film with each cut.
Shooting 1:1. The whole movie in one take. Need more flexibility, buy more negative.
Processing is about $.15 per foot and best light print $.35 per foot. 90 ft per minute, at 5400 ft = $2700 (USD) more for an hour of negative. Just processing and print. Want some sound in the movie? $.45 per foot = $2430 more for optical sound. Gotta shop around for optical sound.
Wanna see dailies? More money. Editing (with or without a telecine), cutting and conforming, your Christmas bonus is spent.
(these numbers are coming from a particular lab I've worked with but I see many lab prices are similar)
You have to appreciate what people put into a 35mm film originated movie because it's a lot of money and it's very careful work. Not ideal for newbies. Even dp's cost money.
16mm might be cheaper. I don't know.
Film is still the purest and prettiest of formats. I don't think film will ever die. Dv and HD are, for some people, used mainly because of budget reasons. It is that way for me, at least. digital video does hold up well, although a llittle blurry...
sorry for the long rant and correct me if i'm mistaken, but constructive criticism pls... just my $.02