Practicing lighting/composition

Alex Opdam · October 10, 2004

Hi everyone,

I'm in the process of buying a 16mm camera which i intend to practice on soon (albeit in a very frugal manner).

People have discussed the idea of practicing lighting and exposure on a 35mm SLR camera to save on development costs. I realise there are a lot of differences between motion and still film but is there a way to make them comparable?

For example if i was to get a roll of say fuji 500D film and fixed my shutter at 1/60 (putting 500ASA and 1/60 into my digital light meter for light readings) would the relative exposure levels be similar to if i had been shooting 500ASA 16mm stock? (of course taking readings at 1/50 with my light meter's correlating aperture suggestion).

If that paragraph was a little confusing, what i mean is this: if i fix my SLR shutter to 1/60 (which is comparable to the 1/50 id be using at 25fps on the 16mm cam) would i get an accurate sense of how many stops above and below i could effectively expose in my 16mm shooting?

Is the latitude in still and motion stocks similar or is there really no substitute for actual 16mm tests? Keeping in mind this is really just simplistic testing like keeping fill 2 stops below key light on a face, shooting with a subject in front of the sky/light source and that sort of thing.

I've seen some website like rgcolor.com mentioned before (this doesn't work for me so i assume it is slightly differently spelt) which sells motion stocks in still canisters - can anyone tell me where i can get these and if its worth getting them over standard still film?

The idea of all this i guess is that i can practice composition and lighting on an SLR (i realise i need to crop the picture to get correct aspect) and then practice pace, cutting and continuity on my old consumer minidv camera, so i really make the most of what i shoot on 16mm.

Thanks in advance for any advice people.

Cheers,

Alex

Nate Yolles · October 10, 2004

It's www.rgbcolorlab.com. They do put Kodak motion picture stock into still canisters. If you want Fuji, you can go down the street a couple blocks away to the Fuji Building. (although if you're shooting 25fps, I don't suppose you're around that side of town)

If you take your light reading at 1/50 or 1/48 and set your camera to 1/60, you'll be 1/3 of a stop closed down. You can take the reading and open up the 1/3rd to compensate. With my camera I can set the shutter to 1/45 which is as close to 1/48 as I need to be.

I think it is a fine way test stocks for lattitude, over and under exposure. Except I like to see the grain moving.

Alex Opdam · October 10, 2004

Nate thanks for the reply and the link.

Just to clarify, i can:

1) set my SLR camera to 1/60 and my light meter to 1/60, expose as the meter suggests

and get comparable results as if i had:

2) run the same stock through a 16mm camera @ 25fps and 1/50, expose as the meter suggests

Unfortunately looking at my camera now, since it has digital aperture and shutter controls it only allows me to change aperture in full and half stops which could be a bit of a pain.

By the way, with the rgbcolorlab canisters, am i able to get it processed + printed at my local (Sydney, Australia) consumer still photolab? I'd tell them not to adjust the image, and print on matte. I'm just thinking that postage could get expensive if the film has to make 3 trips.

Lastly, was that a 'no' on using normal still film in the mean time to practice deliberate over and underexposing by certain fstops on areas of the frame?

Thanks again.

Nate Yolles · October 10, 2004

You must process the motion picture film at RGB labs, still film uses a completely different process.

I think that it would be rather pointless to test exposures with still film since each stock has its own unique characteristics and it is the different motion picture films that you really want to test and compare against each other. If you take a certain still stock and test it and push it to its limits that's great, but when you go to shoot a movie your film is going to behave differently and you still don't know the limits of what you can do.

Filip Plesha · October 10, 2004

The differences between MP film and still film are rather elementary, and are the same as differences between two different motion picture films.

The negative itself has a different contrast I think, but you won't get

"motion picture look" and "still film look" they will just look as two different

film stocks would.

So if you just want to experiment with lighting and composition and see how your

sets look on film in general, you can use professional still film. But don't make

ECP slides, just view your work on photo paper.If you are using still film, be sure to use low contrast , high latitude negative film such as Kodak Portra series this will get you close to the latitude of motion picture film.

But if you want to learn about the characteristics of certain film stocks, and learn what can you expect from them, then it is very clear that you can not use still film.

Filip Plesha · October 10, 2004

One more thing..

I don't know what kind of SLR do you have, but why not set the exposure time to 1/45 instead?

Phil Rhodes · October 10, 2004

Hi,

I've read about still and motion processing, and it isn't a completely different process - it's actually a pretty similar process, with one particularly critical step added for the motion. If you don't do this step, you'll wreck the chemistry, and everyone else's film.

Phil

Alex Opdam · October 10, 2004

Thanks for all the replies guys.

Windman, unfortunately my SLR (or at least the one i am borrowing) has digital aperture and shutter controls. The shutter setting goes right from 1/30 to 1/60 so i guess 1/60 is the best option.

And thanks for the film suggestion!

Filip Plesha · October 11, 2004

Thanks for all the replies guys.

Windman, unfortunately my SLR (or at least the one i am borrowing) has digital aperture and shutter controls. The shutter setting goes right from 1/30 to 1/60 so i guess 1/60 is the best option.

And thanks for the film suggestion!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

which one is it? (the SLR)

Most new SLR's have digital shutter control, it really has nothing to do

with the "density" of shutter speed settings (some are stop based, some

are half stop based, and some are third of a stop based)

My newest SLR is pretty avarage in features and has half a stop based shutter control (digitally controled) so I thought that yours would have at least that.

In fact my oldest (god It sounds like I'm speaking about my children ;) )

has a mechanical shutter and is one-stop based only. So digital or analog controls don't really make any difference for shutter speed.

Alex Opdam · October 11, 2004

It's a minolta AF 5000 (i assume that is the model number). It does aperture in half stops but it just so happens that the shutter speeds go from 1/30 to 1/60 which is what i was saying earlier.

Basically i'm just looking to get some practice with relative exposures so it doesn't matter too much if the latitude doesn't correspond exactly with motion stocks. I just want to be able to see roughly what it looks like to have fill light 2 stops under key light on a face and basic things like that.

By the way i went and bought a roll of kodak portra 400NC today, i think i'll go and shoot a few this afternoon. I'm going to write down the light meter readings i get, the aperture, the shutter speed (which ill leave at 1/60 i think) and anything else of mention so it should be interesting.

Filip Plesha · October 11, 2004

Portra 400NC will give you nice subdued colors and a lot of latitude.

Try to find a lab where they still have an optical printer. It is getting harder and harder to find a lab that doesn't have a digital minilab machine.

Digital minilabs have really crapy scanners inside that will give you contrasty images. Digital labs are good if you have your own scanner.

One more thing.

You will have a LOT of problems with getting the prints from these one-hour labs

the way you want them if you are using lighting and want to be creatuve.

I strongly suggest that you find a professional lab, they will listen to you and

will not try to adjust your low-key shots to look like crapy avarage bright images.

If you can't find a pro lab near, or something, you could use slide film instead.

That way you get exactly what you aim for, and you depend on nobody.

Dan Salzmann · October 13, 2004

Taking still pictures (with a fully manual camera) is a great way to learn about exposure and composition. It is not a substitute for motion picture film but remember a DP is a director of PHOTOGRAPHY. Being a skilled photographer is a plus.

I started taking pictures and then making super8 films when I was very young and then became a photographer's assistant and then a professional photographer before I became involved with movies.

At 46 and a professional DP, still photography remains a great source of inspiration, along with paintings, comic books and of course watching films (which unfortunately I have less and less time to do).