Jarin Blaschke Posted September 12, 2004 Share Posted September 12, 2004 As far as contrast, grain and saturation, how do these stocks compare? Just in case are they shot-to-shot intercuttable? I usually under-rate my stocks, does this make less of a difference with one than the other? Thanks. Jarin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted September 13, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted September 13, 2004 '46 is grainier than '45 like you'd expect. Otherwise, it is similar in contrast and color saturation, with the '45 a tad more saturated. I wouldn't intercut them in the same scene unless an emergency or for TV viewing only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharding Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I shot a bunch of daytime exteriors with the '45 and ran out and briefly switched to some '46 short ends. I was shocked at the difference....totally different characteristic. Also, I shot a bunch of '45--some of which was in shadow. Even though I had plenty of stop, I did not like what the '45 did when I was forced to shoot it in complete shadow. The contrast seemed very high and did not dig into the shadow as much as I was used to from the Vision stocks. The high contrast and duller color reproduction might be the look you are going for from the stock. The colors really pop when the '45 is shot in daylight. The '46 would be more versatile in the shadows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted September 13, 2004 Share Posted September 13, 2004 I push 45 to darken the shadows, but what you do get is very nice. I shoot it like a "virtual reversal stock with extended highlight response" -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Michael Nash Posted September 14, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted September 14, 2004 "Agreed," to everything. The '46 will have slightly lower contrast with more detail in the toe and shoulder. If you're forced to make them match in the same scene, you might try rating the '45 normally at 50 ASA, and overexposing the '46 one stop at 125 ASA. Still not a perfect match, but it will help snap up the color, contrast, and grain a little bit. If you're going for telecine, don't overexpose the '46 more than 2/3 stop, and use color correction to match the looks. You could try overexposing and pulling the '45 one stop to better match the '46, although this is a guess since I've never tried it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted September 15, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted September 15, 2004 I like Michael's idea of slightly overexposing the 5246 to get less grain and slightly higher contrast and color. Matt Harding wrote: I shot a bunch of daytime exteriors with the '45 and ran out and briefly switched to some '46 short ends. I was shocked at the difference....totally different characteristic. They should have been closer than you found. Maybe the short ends of '46 were old or had been stored improperly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F Bulgarelli Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Hello there From what I'm reading. Would you guys say 46 is the closest match to 45 of any stock. I really like 45 but for my upcoming music video I need more speed so I was debating between 45 and maybe 18, just because is even faster and has very little grain. Also, I should mention, we are shooting super16. Thanks Francisco Bulgarelli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattharding Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 Francisco....45 to 18 is a huge jump. Can you get away with ASA 200? The '17 would be great--I've found it recently to have very tight grain. I think the 74 would match the look of the 45 much better than 18 would. The 18 has lower contrast and is a little creamy...but it is very sharp--probably as sharp as the 74. John....as far as I know the 45 short ends were in good shape. The EXR and Vision stocks just feel so different to me. The 46 seemed so much more pastel, dug into the shadows so much more, and the green for some reason in the 46 has such a distinctive look. It pops in way that really screams 46 to me when I see it on a screen. When cut together, different scenes shot with the two different stocks cut together fine. But I think the dramatic difference was when I set up a shot, shot exteriors, changed stock and then saw the same scene side by side in transfer. In a split screen, for example, all the different characteristics are so much clearer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 From what I'm reading. Would you guys say 46 is the closest match to 45 of any stock. No, it's not a close match. If you tried to intercut them, you would definitely see the difference. A close match grain wise would be 7248 or the new 7212. If you're shooting '45, I'm assuming you're shooting exteriors. With an 85 on the '48 or '12 you would gain 1/3 of a stop over the '45. Personally I like the '48 over the '45 on exteriors, I like the contrast better. As far as 7218, from my experience it seems to have tighter grain than the 7246. I recently used 7218 intercut with 8622 and 8672. It matched OK with the 64D and made the F500 look like the odd man out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted September 15, 2004 Share Posted September 15, 2004 I've shot 7274 (w/ 85 usually) push one and no exposure compensation for the push, and leaning on it at that -- in an effort to get something that has the feel of my pushed 45 but is a little less "pretty" - 45 can be beautiful, but can occasionally look too nice when a more sombre yet still somewhat saturated feel is needed. (also, although the effective speed isn't really any greater I can still go a little later & dig into shadow here & there a bit more). It seems that if the 74 here is really dense, on some subjects it can look quite similar or maybe better to say "sympathetic" but a close look will reveal the grain & texture difference. -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F Bulgarelli Posted September 16, 2004 Share Posted September 16, 2004 I'm assuming you're shooting exteriors. Sorry, I meant to say 46 or 18 instead of 45. This is actually mainly interiors; a hotel hallway; there is some light coming through windows and skylights but it's pretty dark. Also, the walls are painted bright colors and we want that to pop. I was thinking about using a daylight stock so I dont loose any stop by having to use an 85 filter and also avoid too much of a mixed light situation. Our lighting package consists mainly of 1200 HMIs, Kinos and some small units. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Lamar King IMPOSTOR Posted September 16, 2004 Share Posted September 16, 2004 Well it depends on color balance. If you have those HMI's you could go with a daylight balance. Use the HMI's as fill if the window light is strong enough to be a key, if not use them to boost the window light. I personally would go with a daylight balance, the '18 with an 85 rated at 320 to 250. I love the '18, it's rapidly becoming my all time favorite stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now