One of the most persistent myths in independent film is that Vincent Gallo achieved the saturated, hyper-gritty look of Buffalo ‘66 by cross-processing his film stock. It is a compelling technical story—developing negative film in positive chemicals to destroy the image—but it is entirely false. Gallo did something much rarer and technically demanding.
35mm Ektachrome Reversal
Instead of cross-processing, Gallo made the highly unusual decision to shoot the entire feature on 35mm Ektachrome color reversal film. Reversal stock is typically reserved for still slide photography. He processed it normally, using standard E-6 chemistry.
Because reversal film produces a positive image directly onto the celluloid, it inherently possesses extreme contrast, thick grain, and intense color saturation. Gallo specifically chose this volatile stock to emulate the look of late 1960s and 1970s NFL broadcasts, aiming for an abrasive nostalgia rather than cinematic smoothness.
Flashing the Internegative
However, choosing reversal film creates a massive logistical problem: because it is a positive image, it cannot be printed traditionally for theatrical distribution.
The footage had to be optically printed to an internegative. During this delicate optical transfer process, Gallo deliberately “flashed” the image (exposing it to a controlled amount of light). This flashing slightly reduced the extreme contrast of the reversal stock, resulting in the iconic, “faded photograph” aesthetic that defined the film. It was not a chemical accident; it was a highly controlled manipulation of the rarest stock available.
Insights regarding the debunking of the cross-processing myth and the use of 35mm Ektachrome reversal stock were synthesized from cinematography forums.