Hollywood Editors

DBoz699

DBoz699

Veteran
Ok...a lot of you will think im stupid that im asking this..but ok ive kinda wondered this...maybe im just weird.

You know how 35mm is higher quality than HD?

Well how do the editors that edit the films shot in 35mm edit and export them?

Do they edit in HD? or standard? and somehow export the finished movie to full 35mm rez??

cuz they need to get to the quality standards of film so wen its shown on a 50 foot screen...theres no loss or nething..


Maybe Barry Green can help me out wit this...


Ive jus kinda wondered this for the past few days...
 
Last edited:
Well... they scan the film into their system... I know that... then I am not too sure where the workflow goes from there.
 
It depends on the project. You can have the film transfered to whatever you want. HD, DV25, whatever. Then cut the project and export a Cut List. Then the 35mm print is cut according to that list (I mean physically cut by a Negative Cutter) and then that cut print is used to make copies for distribution.

The other workflow is to do a Digital Intermediate which is where the film is scanned in, manipulated, then the computer exposes new film with that image thereby creating a new 35mm print.
 
Cineon has been a pretty mainstay format, from what I understand. I've also read that alot of people are adopting OpenEXR (ILM's format) but to what extent I'm not sure.

But, I could be wrong on both counts, having never worked with film...
 
krestofre said:
It depends on the project. You can have the film transfered to whatever you want. HD, DV25, whatever. Then cut the project and export a Cut List. Then the 35mm print is cut according to that list (I mean physically cut by a Negative Cutter) and then that cut print is used to make copies for distribution.

The other workflow is to do a Digital Intermediate which is where the film is scanned in, manipulated, then the computer exposes new film with that image thereby creating a new 35mm print.
Click to expand...
Good job, Chris. You beat me. Drats. ;)
 
Yeah thanks for the refresher guys, I've read how all that's done but have forgotten it (not having to do it).
 
I'm guessing the cut list is pretty accurate in translation to 35mm? it seems like a tedious process. it's like editing twice.
the digital intermediate process sounds more comforting.
 
dvpixl said:
I'm guessing the cut list is pretty accurate in translation to 35mm? it seems like a tedious process. it's like editing twice.
the digital intermediate process sounds more comforting.
Click to expand...
Well, by making a EDL it gives them the chance to play with "what if's", not having to make the actual cuts on film until they have it all figured out.
 
And even though the DI process is becoming more common place, my understanding is that it's still pretty expensive. I'm sure within five or so years DI will be the norm, esspecially with the explosion of films shot on HD.
 
krestofre said:
The other workflow is to do a Digital Intermediate which is where the film is scanned in, manipulated, then the computer exposes new film with that image thereby creating a new 35mm print.
Click to expand...

but in this way, you lose data, because, the scanning, don't you?
 
That's a point of argument for a lot of people. The DI films that I'm aware of were scanned in a 4K which is an incredibly high resolution file. Since film is analog, it's hard to assign a numerical value to it the way you would a digital file, but I don't think any human could detect the difference between a 35mm frame and a 4K scan. Mathmatically you're probably losing something.

It's like the "which sounds better: CD or vinyl?" argument. :)
 
it is like MP3 sounds like CD quality music. yes in your 0.5 dollar headset. but not in a studio. HD in cinema? dunno... I think you can still make difference between 35mm and HD. or are right there, and finally we can stop raising resolution?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top