250D underexposure problem

Stephen Gordon · May 25

Shot a wedding ceremony yesterday with my Beaulieu 4008 M3 using 250D from Pro8mm. The room was not well-lit, I had no room to augment the light, and the meter needle was at the very bottom of the exposure indication area in the viewfinder even though I was at maximum aperture and shooting 9fps (I'll adjust the speed in post). How much underexposure can this stock take ( my first time using it) and still get a usable image in post? I'm not sure how many stops under are indicated by the meter needle being in that low position. Am I right in thinking that pushing the film in processing will not make it any brighter but only affect contrast and grain? Would you say I need to accept that this will probably be a bust and resolve to shoot 500T and colour correct when faced with similar light levels..?

Mark Dunn · May 25

If you can possibly get back to the venue with a light meter you will have an idea of how much you're off. There's no way of knowing otherwise.

Stephen Gordon · May 25

Thanks Mark - good suggestion but unfortunately venue is a three-hour drive and there's no way of replicating yesterday's overcast weather conditions... Any thoughts about how this stock responds to underexposure..?

Dennis Toeppen · May 25

I'd push it one stop in processing. I've pushed this stock two stops and not been dissatisfied.

Edited May 25 by Dennis Toeppen

Stephen Gordon · May 25

Very helpful - thanks Dennis! Can I ask if the push made the image brighter than it would have been otherwise?

Tyler Purcell · May 25

Yea, the Beaulieu's Achilles heal is low light, they have a much higher shutter speed than some of the other lower-end super 8 cameras. This means, they're really the worst camera for low light situations. Also, the built-in meter can be iffy if it hasn't been serviced/tested. I never trusted mine and my 6008 which I DO trust, at least over exposes instead of under exposes.

Also, I'm not sure if the 4008 actually adjusts the meter properly for alternative FPS unless you're running the camera. I think it averages out the meter based on 18fps unless you're running.

250D isn't really a low light stock so with all the issues you've had with low light, meter and shutter speed of the camera, I don't think you'll get much but some reflective highlights, even if you push it. Even with 500T, the scenario you recounted above, is probably something I wouldn't attempt unless I had a faster camera system like 180 degree shutter S16mm.

Edited May 25 by Tyler Purcell

Giray Izcan · May 25

3 hours ago, Dennis Toeppen said:

I'd push it one stop in processing. I've pushed this stock two stops and not been dissatisfied.

I wouldn't push s8.. even s16 gets dicey with push.

Joerg Polzfusz · May 25

Hi!

Please excuse this question: Why have you been using an outdoor film (daylight balanced) for indoor shots (most likely tungsten lights unless using „daylight“ LEDs + sunlight coming through the windows)? Using a Wratten 80A will cause the loss of two f-stops which isn’t what you want in a low light situation.

(Yes, you can kind of „fix a missing filter in post“ when doing a video transfer.)

Tyler is correct: you should have used an XL camera instead of a Beaulieu: the default lenses are only 1.8 or 1.9, the widest shutter degree is only something like 110°. E.g. a Canon 310xl has a 1.0-lens with a 220 degrees shutter. (Okay: The downside of the Canon would be „only 18fps and not properly supporting the 250D“.)

Tyler Purcell · May 26

9 hours ago, Joerg Polzfusz said:

Tyler is correct: you should have used an XL camera instead of a Beaulieu: the default lenses are only 1.8 or 1.9, the widest shutter degree is only something like 110°. E.g. a Canon 310xl has a 1.0-lens with a 220 degrees shutter. (Okay: The downside of the Canon would be „only 18fps and not properly supporting the 250D“.

Bingo, can't beat the low-light potential of 220 degree shutter and F1.2 lens of my Elmo 1012XL. It can even properly expose 250D (uses 160 ISO setting, so it over exposes a bit) but it works great.

Dennis Toeppen · May 26

Yes, pushing it makes it brighter, pulling it makes it darker. Assuming there weren't any really bright shots on the roll, you should have some headroom to play with - spare latitude. The more you push it, the more grain you get. In my experience, pushing 250D one stop doesn't result in substantial degradation.

There are infinite things you could have done in advance. It is no longer in advance.

Edited May 26 by Dennis Toeppen

Stephen Gordon · May 26

Thanks Tyler - my camera was CLA'd by Bjorn and so far the metering has been reliable. The exposure system does compensate for fps changes (on my camera at least). I note your prediction for pushing and am grateful for you taking time to answer.

Thanks Giray - interesting to see the very opposing views on this question in these answers!

No problem with your question Joerg: in this case daylight through the windows was the predominant source. I understand in retrospect that I made the wrong camera choice but I was unable to recce the venue in advance and the photos I was sent of the room looked easily doable - unfortunately the room was changed at the last minute! Still daylight but fewer windows and much smaller. Next time I'll have my Canon 1014 XL-S on standby for a similar unexpected change. Hard lesson learned!

Thanks for your reply to my follow-up question Dennis - so it will be brighter but grainier.

So far one person in favour of pushing, one doubtful that it will help, and one person advising not to push.

A lot to think about! Thanks again to all of you.

Giray Izcan · May 26

Super 8 is already a very grainy format.. pushing it will make it even more grainy for a negligible gain. I like to shoot each format as sharp and clean as possible within any format's limitations.

Stephen Gordon · May 26

Take your point Giray - thank you.

Joerg Polzfusz · May 28

On 5/26/2025 at 12:29 PM, Stephen Gordon said:

…No problem with your question Joerg: in this case daylight through the windows was…

Thanks, this makes a lot of sense now. (Indoor shots are always a royal pita: Windows that cause backlit scenes, not enough light in the actors‘ faces, mixed lighting, rooms that are suddenly darker than expected, … .)

I hope that you can get it fixed by the lab.

Stephen Gordon · May 28

Cheers Joerg - appreciate your kind wishes!

Stephen Gordon · June 29

Update if anyone is interested - I asked Kevin at Gauge Film to push the film one stop which was very successful in that it gave me useable footage that I'm sure would have been otherwise badly underexposed. I applied a LUT to the 2K log scan and did some very light grading and am more pleased than I expected with the results. Would certainly have the confidence to do this again in the future. I've linked to a short clip and thanks again to everyone for all the advice!

https://vimeo.com/1097271271/f964192154?ts=0&share=copy

Mark Dunn · June 29

1 hour ago, Stephen Gordon said:

if anyone is interested

We're always interested.

Joerg Polzfusz · June 30

Yes, this is looking great, Stephen.

Luis Hartmann · Thursday at 08:17 AM

On 6/29/2025 at 12:03 PM, Stephen Gordon said:

Update if anyone is interested - I asked Kevin at Gauge Film to push the film one stop which was very successful in that it gave me useable footage that I'm sure would have been otherwise badly underexposed. I applied a LUT to the 2K log scan and did some very light grading and am more pleased than I expected with the results. Would certainly have the confidence to do this again in the future. I've linked to a short clip and thanks again to everyone for all the advice!

https://vimeo.com/1097271271/f964192154?ts=0&share=copy

Thank you for giving an update!