How to achieve this look with motion picture film

[gustavius smith]

 

 

I was hoping for advice on how to achieve this look with motion picture film. These are stills of Brazilian photographer Mario Cravo Neto he uses a technique of printing called cibachrome.

 

I love the dark blacks, deep saturated colors, and natural lighting and I am set on requesting this look for a feature set in the Bahamas. I am guessing that this can be achieved with color reversal stock if DI was not an option. I thank you in advance for your time and consideration.

 

Gustavius Smith

NYNY

 

 

An interior shot, with practical I assume I can make this light warmer if I want to instead of cool blue

 

 

 

An interior/ext shot with daylight

 

 

 

 

A nighttime shot

 

Edited November 15, 2006 by gustavius smith

[Stuart Brereton]

Perhaps it's just the still that you've posted, but I don't see anything unusual in this still with regard to saturation or 'look'

 

It just looks like a well exposed exterior, perhaps with a Polarizer for the sky.

 

The other stills seem to be in natural, fairly soft light. Again nothing out of the ordinary.

 

The last still seems to be lit with firelight and low level tungsten sources, so would necessitate a fast (500asa) stock

[gustavius smith]

Perhaps it's just the still that you've posted, but I don't see anything unusual in this still with regard to saturation or 'look'

 

It just looks like a well exposed exterior, perhaps with a Polarizer for the sky.

 

The other stills seem to be in natural, fairly soft light. Again nothing out of the ordinary.

 

The last still seems to be lit with firelight, so would necessitate a fast (500asa) stock

 

 

That's good to know. The blacks seem to be so much deeper to me than the films I have seen recently. One film that comes to mind is House of Sand that is similar in style.

[K Borowski]

With respect, I must disagree with you Stuart. THis definitely looks like slide film. Its more saturated, more contrasty, and definitely deeper blacks, at least from what I can derive from the small scans on the monitor. I can imagine what the actual cibachrome can look like from your representation. When I was first starting out in photography, I got really into slides for a bit, and, being an analog purist, wanted to try cibas. From what I understand, it is a dye-destruction process, which makes it pitifully slow if you were to use the emulsion coated to film in-camera. You COULD use cibachrome micrograph film, used for making microfilm records, as a print stock if you could get the company to make it with MP perfs. It is made in 35mm but I believe only unperforated. I don't think that the cibachrome look is possible to duplicate exactly in the MP world, but you can definitely get the same "feel" with some experimentation. Definitely shoot an E6 film, Kodak's 5285 or maybe Fuji if you can stilll get that in 35mm. Cibachrome is designed not to boost contrast, so I don't think duping onto another camera-speed E6 stock would be the right choice here, but you could try getting some EDUPE with the right perfs or try to digitally adjust contrast and saturation. I'd recommend trying to get as much of the look in camera as possible though. To me digital mimics look fake. I don't know if you budget or the scope of this project could warrent custom film orders or not.

 

Regards,

 

~Karl Borowski

[Tim J Durham]

With respect, I must disagree with you Stuart. THis definitely looks like slide film. Its more saturated, more contrasty, and definitely deeper blacks, at least from what I can derive from the small scans on the monitor. I can imagine what the actual cibachrome can look like from your representation. When I was first starting out in photography, I got really into slides for a bit, and, being an analog purist, wanted to try cibas. From what I understand, it is a dye-destruction process, which makes it pitifully slow if you were to use the emulsion coated to film in-camera. You COULD use cibachrome micrograph film, used for making microfilm records, as a print stock if you could get the company to make it with MP perfs. It is made in 35mm but I believe only unperforated. I don't think that the cibachrome look is possible to duplicate exactly in the MP world, but you can definitely get the same "feel" with some experimentation. Definitely shoot an E6 film, Kodak's 5285 or maybe Fuji if you can stilll get that in 35mm. Cibachrome is designed not to boost contrast, so I don't think duping onto another camera-speed E6 stock would be the right choice here, but you could try getting some EDUPE with the right perfs or try to digitally adjust contrast and saturation. I'd recommend trying to get as much of the look in camera as possible though. To me digital mimics look fake. I don't know if you budget or the scope of this project could warrent custom film orders or not.

 

Regards,

 

~Karl Borowski

Umm,

Cibachrome is a printing process. It differs from other color printing in that you are printing onto polyester instead of paper. The prints themselves have a distinctive look (in my opinion, they are MORE contrasty, not less) but any scans there-of from the prints to the internet would likely lose the distinction of comparing them in person due to the variables of getting it from point A to B.

 

I'd guess you can come up with a fairly close approximation of those particular photos (even the original Cibachrome prints) in motion picture film as I've seen plenty of films with similar looks. I'm with Stuart. They're beautiful photos but not all that out of the ordinary as far as color. Cravo Neto is a content-guy.

[Sam Wells]

Are you shooting for print, DI yes or no, or video finish ?

 

-Sam

[gustavius smith]

Are you shooting for print, DI yes or no, or video finish ?

 

-Sam

 

Shooting for print with no DI. 35mm regular framing.

[Sam Wells]

I've gotten an "E6" look pushing 7245 one stop.

 

I think that paradoxically this can yield a better E6 look than shooting 5285 which will just be a lot of contrast to manage thru IN (2272) to print.

 

Also, in 35mm you can print on Vision Premiere

 

-Sam

[gustavius smith]

I've gotten an "E6" look pushing 7245 one stop.

 

I think that paradoxically this can yield a better E6 look than shooting 5285 which will just be a lot of contrast to manage thru IN (2272) to print.

 

Also, in 35mm you can print on Vision Premiere

 

-Sam

 

 

The higher quality digital Crato stills were too big to upload. Please see: http://www.artincontext.org/LISTINGS/IMAGE.../D/H9ZIHN1D.htm

and: http://www.artincontext.org/LISTINGS/IMAGE.../E/H9ZIHO1E.htm

 

After a day or so of quick research on the web it did seem to me (just a director not a cinematographer) that reversal film was close to this look. Where can I view examples of of the 7245 pushed one stop.

 

Sincerely,

Gustavius Smith

NYNY

 

Umm,

Cibachrome is a printing process. It differs from other color printing in that you are printing onto polyester instead of paper. The prints themselves have a distinctive look (in my opinion, they are MORE contrasty, not less) but any scans there-of from the prints to the internet would likely lose the distinction of comparing them in person due to the variables of getting it from point A to B.

 

I'd guess you can come up with a fairly close approximation of those particular photos (even the original Cibachrome prints) in motion picture film as I've seen plenty of films with similar looks. I'm with Stuart. They're beautiful photos but not all that out of the ordinary as far as color. Cravo Neto is a content-guy.

 

 

The higher quality digital Crato stills were too big to upload. Please see: http://www.artincontext.org/LISTINGS/IMAGE.../D/H9ZIHN1D.htm

and: http://www.artincontext.org/LISTINGS/IMAGE.../E/H9ZIHO1E.htm

Edited November 20, 2006 by gustavius smith

[Sam Wells]

After a day or so of quick research on the web it did seem to me (just a director not a cinematographer) that reversal film was close to this look. Where can I view examples of of the 7245 pushed one stop.

 

Unfortunately I can't post an example frame otr two at the moment.

 

That said, a frame on the web can't be more than a hint of what a 35mm projected print will show. Macintoshes and oranges.

 

A reversal *original* yes will give you a "reversal look" ! But you need to go through a motion picture film printing process. I'll admit I have not (nor do I personally know anyone who has) shot 52/7285 and then gone to the 2272 IN designed for printing from color reversal originals. It might look great, or at least very stylized in a cool way (16mm Kodachrome can be beautiful albeit a bit strange printed this way). But I suspect you would want to flash the IN etc ---- again, 5285 is a very high contrast highly saturated stock, which could be unweildy for your purpose.

 

I don't know, you'll have to try some things to see what you like.

 

I think I _do_ know what you want -- and I haven't quite seen it either, nor have I got it yet.

 

(I think a DI and print with Technicolor IB might do it but you're gonna have to fake it alas)

 

ps Cibachromes seem to me to be a bit on the hard contrasty side, why I suggested Premiere as a film printing stock with prehaps some equivalance.

 

-Sam

[gustavius smith]

ps Cibachromes seem to me to be a bit on the hard contrasty side, why I suggested Premiere as a film printing stock with prehaps some equivalance.

 

-Sam

 

 

Yes somewhere else on the net premiere was mentioned I just can't remember now. When one researches deep saturation, contrast, sharp images, you run into reversal + cross prosessing. Films like Clockers, and that Iraqi film with George Clooney and Ice Cube ( can't remember the name) also comes up. But what I am talking about is more natural looking just with deep color and sharp images. I was not suggesting cibachrome print by the way. Here is Mario's website by the way. www.cravoneto.com.br/

[Sam Wells]

Of course not, I'm aware Cibachrome is a paper print process. (I don't think the micrograph film is a possibility) I was suggesting possible similarities in look.

 

-Sam

[Stuart Brereton]

I think, as Sam has already said, that if you were to shoot 5245 (the old Kodak EXR 50D stock), if there's any left, perhaps overexposing by 2/3 stop, then 'printing down' on Kodak Premiere stock you would get that sort of saturation and rich blacks. No need to shoot reversal.