Reversal: I want details

[Krumly]

I've read on various filmmaking message boards that Kodak reversal film is "fine for transfer to video." Can anyone share any experiences they have with 16mm reversal/transferring it to video? I'm interested in how it looks versus a negative transfer mostly. Will people look at my transferred reversal (assuming it's all exposed/lit correctly) and think it looks "weird" compared to the movies shot in negative they're used to seeing?

I don't plan on ever projecting the reversal stock; it will be transferred to video only.

TIA for any info you have and please excuse how unorganized my message is.

- Krumly

[Spoon boy]

just what is reversal film, I've seen it for super 8 cams before. Whats so special about it.

[eddie]

Reversal film is the opposite to negative film.

When you film something, on negative film you get a negative image on the film. From which you would normally make a print. Usually the lab hang onto your negative and send you a rush print of that negative.

If you film something using reversal film you get a positive image on the film.The roll of film you send off to the lab is the roll of film you get back. It is the master. Your only copy.

[eddie]

I think that the only advantage with transferring reversal strraight to video is the cost.
Its is a helluva lot cheaper to shoot on reversal film, transfer to video, then work (edit) on video, than it is to shoot on negative, get a rush print, edit, send off to the lab, get back your final print, then transfer to video for the final thing.
Of course this is only relevant if your finished result is straight to video. (eg: El Mariachi - although that was shot on negative film, then the negative 'printed' straight to video, on which it was edited.)

[eddie]

But, Krumly, I dont think you will see much difference between
neg-> video
and
reversal->video.
fraid I dont know

[Spoon boy]

Thanks.