Quality difference from 16mm to S16mm

[Lazlo]

I was wondering how much of a difference there is in quality in shooting 16mm or S16mm. I know that S16mm if better because it shoots in the 1.66:1 aspect ratio as opposed to the 1.33:1, but how much a difference is there really? Thx.

 

[morgan_peline]

Hi,

Here's my 2 pence worth from when I was in film school:

I would have thought that there is actually no difference in image quality apart from aspect ratio.

The issue is when you have to decide what you want to do with your film once it is completed. If you are sending your film as a print to short film festivals then most festivals only accept 16mm prints as 'standard' because then they can only project the film with the sound imbedded optically within the print.

If you wanted to have the film projected as a wider aspect ratio then you would have to shoot in super 16 and then do an optical blow-up to 35mm (which would include an increase in the graininess of the film and production cost). The reason for this is that shooting in super 16 uses the part of the print that allows you to include the optical sound. If you wanted to project your super 16 film you would have to have the sound on seperate magnetic tape.

As far as I know, though I may be wrong as things change, most festivals do not have the facilities to project seperate image and sound in 16mm.

If you are going straight to tape after shooting on 16mm, I would suggest shooting in super 16 as I always think that this looks more 'cinematic' unless of course you specifically want a 1.33 look. You could always still shoot super, but frame principally for 4:3 whilst protecting super and then make the decision of which aspect ratio you want in telecine.

Also, I've seen some 16mm cameras with 1.85 ground glasses just for the purpose of blow-ups or emulating 35mm cameras.

Morgan

 

[David Mullen ASC]

If you ONLY compare the 1.85 : 1 area on both formats, you see that the Super-16 frame has effectively 40% more negative area than Regular 16mm. This is not insignificant when blowing-up to 35mm for projection in terms of reducing graininess and improving sharpness (more the first.) Doesn't mean that you can't counteract some of that by using slower film in Regular 16mm, etc. Doesn't mean you won't like the results of Regular 16mm blown-up to 35mm either.

For 4x3 full-frame standard def video transfers, you only use the Regular 16mm area of the Super-16 frame anyway. With 16x9 and letterboxed 4x3 transfers, there is some minor improvement with Super-16 compared to cropping Regular-16, but it won't be as obvious as with a blow-up to 35mm or a transfer to HDTV.