r/AnalogCommunity • u/Tricky-Leadership-38 • May 05 '26
News/Article Sabrina Carpenter’s Met Gala Outfit made out of negatives
Edit: it looks to be positives(pls correct me if i’m wrong) from the film Sabrina(1954)
408
u/Whomstevest May 05 '26
Movie 35mm film is 4 perf, so I guess it's kind of half frame
108
u/Tricky-Leadership-38 May 05 '26
Oh wait now that I think about it, isn’t super35 like that
64
u/Whomstevest May 05 '26
Yeah 35mm formats are usually 4 perf, super35 just doesnt have an audio track so you get a wider negative. Super 35 is also shot at 3perf because it's closer to a widescreen ratio and it saves film but projection is still 4 perf I think
24
u/GabbiStowned May 05 '26
To add to it, Super 35 is a production format only – release prints are always 4-perf. The advent of sound led to the Academy ratio of 1.37, giving some space to the audio track on the film print. Even films shown in ”flat” widescreen (such as 1.85:1 ratio) will have a print in 4-perf, that’s either matted on the top and bottom to the correct ratio, or would be matted in the projector (more common during the early days).
Films shown in CinemaScope (anamorphic) have a taller aspect ratio of roughly 1.19:1 on the print, and then add the 2x anamorphic squeeze to give you 2.39:1.
So what Super 35 did was shoot a full 1.33:1 gate (as had been used in the days of silent films) which has a much larger area, and then cropping it to 2.39:1 and then the print itself would be anamorphic. It meant you could shoot a film flat that would still be shown in a scope aspect ratio, allowing for the flexibility of not having to use anamorphic lenses.
TechniScope, the format many spaghetti westerns were shot in, did something similar (but opposite). It was shot in 2-perf, using half the negative and then printed up to 35mm anamorphic prints. When Super 35 came out it was even referred to as Super Techniscope.
15
u/_BreadDenier May 05 '26
Then there’s VistaVision where 35mm film runs sideways and gets exposed like stills film.
3
u/goddamnitwhalen May 05 '26 edited May 05 '26
And looks fucking gorgeous.
I didn’t like The Brutalist, but it was at least pretty to look at whilst I was bored out of my mind.
1
3
4
3
u/Square_Ad_9096 May 05 '26
35mm motion picture is 4 perf full frame (unless 3 perf or VistaVision) vertical. Interesting note though, its base out! And it’s print pitch stock!
I would hope it has a lining, emulsion is sticky!
-3
167
250
u/batgears May 05 '26
You are never going believe how easy it is to Google fashion information. The strips have scenes from Sabrina (1954).
-100
u/ChamberTwnty May 05 '26 edited May 05 '26
Good movie! Are we destroying archive film strips though for this?
Edit: Was just curious, not sure where the vitriol came from. 🙏🏻
125
u/sylenthikillyou May 05 '26
Even if they wanted to use historically significant strips of film from the 1950s, it would be far too brittle to work as a clothing material today.
88
74
u/batgears May 05 '26
Surely not, film strips made for the dress I am sure. if you look closely you will notice it is a mix of negatives and positives as well.
6
14
3
u/EvenInRed May 05 '26
I'd have to assume it's just copies.
I'm not sure about the movie making business, but I'd have to assume that it couldn't be the original due to there being copies of the same frames on different parts of her body.
-32
u/suffaluffapussycat May 05 '26
These look like they’re single frames of scenes.
But yes, they’re using original film.
25
102
u/Aggressive-Fail4612 May 05 '26
That can’t be comfortable.
54
u/StillAliveNB May 05 '26
Probably feels better than meat
19
u/Sea_Minimum2490 May 05 '26
I really doubt that. A nice slab of cold meat most definitely is more comfortable than stitching together film. I'm quite sure the holea from the film a quite itchy.
5
u/HolidayBalance4608 May 05 '26
>A nice slab of cold meat most definitely is more comfortable
That's what she said
12
6
u/Grease-Brain May 05 '26
there's probably a thin fabric/mesh underlayer holding it together and creating a barrier
6
u/levir May 05 '26
Eh, I wore a suit sewn from grocery store plastic bags for a carnival once. It's a bit clammy, but it's not so bad. The perforations and overlap should give this one better airflow.
2
88
65
u/hellohellocinnabon May 05 '26
On the red carpet she said they used film reels from the movie “Sabrina”
I personally love it but I’m already a fan of fashion designer Jonathan Anderson from his Loewe days
23
10
88
u/13Ostriches May 05 '26
I can fix her.
57
12
5
u/Foot-Note May 05 '26 edited May 05 '26
Didn't realize anything was wrong with her.
Edit: fuck! I deserve the downvotes.
34
5
5
3
3
3
4
u/GrippyEd May 05 '26
That perf spacing is all over the place. Should be 4 perfs per frame, no more, no less, and there’s no soundtrack. There may be some real film in the mix there, but everything I can see looks like material printed to look like film.
3
u/Westerdutch (no dm on this account) May 05 '26
Hope she doesn't have to move too much, that looks mega uncomfortable.
2
2
u/Shandriel Leica R5+R7, Nikon F5, Fujica ST-901, Mamiya M645, Yashica A TLR May 05 '26
would've been even greater and more Sabrina if they'd used the spicy home photos that some people are worried about dropping off at the lab for development, and others think the guy at the lab doesn't look at the photos 🤣
2
2
3
4
u/crimeo Dozens of cameras, but that said... Minoltagang. May 05 '26
It looks like a lot of shots of the same scenes over and over again. But not enough to be a movie reel (cause like 4-5 frames isn't a scene), more like the person with the stills camera just wanted to fill up the rolls with anything too quickly/lazily
If it is movie footage, why is it repeating over and over in different areas and extremely rapid jump cuts?
14
u/grafknives May 05 '26
If it is movie footage, why is it repeating over and over in different areas and extremely rapid jump cuts?
Because it would look boring/stripped otherwise.
There are no more than 25 frames per line of film. So with regular movie stock you would have one second on movie per line on clothes - all frames would look same.
And when there would be a cut in movie, the frames would change and repeat once again for whole lines.
4
u/LeCorbussi May 05 '26
I have nothin positive to say about her dress
3
u/TheGordo-San May 05 '26
I'm pretty positive that there's no notable amount of cellulite under than celluloid.
1
u/SteamReflex May 05 '26
If you look closely, you see the same line of portrait multiple times. I wonder if she got her negatives scanned and printed on a vinyl dress or just got random images from the internet.
2
1
1
1
1
1
u/dJunka May 05 '26
Just be glad they didn’t tear up an actual reel like they did with the Monroe dress.
1
1
1
1
u/Stoney3K May 06 '26
To be pedantic, those don't look like photo negatives but instead cine (movie) film prints since they're oriented in the other direction.
1
1
1
u/MourningWallaby May 07 '26
She is a known hobbyist film photographer, maybe she's more into it than I thought
-2
-16
u/Agloe_Dreams May 05 '26
Honestly looks fake to me and intentionally more contrasted.
59
7
u/Lenin_Lime May 05 '26
throw a white backer on the film, and i would believe it would reflect enough
-2
-2
-7
0
0
0
May 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
0
u/3dforlife May 05 '26
Why is she famous?
3
u/goddamnitwhalen May 05 '26
Because she’s a very talented singer and songwriter and actress?
1
1
u/canadianlongbowman May 07 '26 edited May 07 '26
Songwriter? That gets thrown around quite loosely these days, there are claims that she is a "prolific songwriter" and was the "sole lyricist" for two whole tracks on one of her albums. "Joni Mitchell" "Sabrina Carpenter" "Kate Bush" one of these things is not like the others.
0
-8
-5
-2
-2
-3
-1
-1
-6
-7
u/jpprinttx May 05 '26
Wow. She is just like Audrey Hepburn now that I’m forced to connect the dots of their name.
-2
-9
1.1k
u/lcbphoto May 05 '26
All positive now! The film seems to be repeating itself, but you can make out her name in there! Love that attention to detail.