Nathesh Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 :unsure: I am aspiring to direct a film and I am just doing my home work on "the suppose to be look of my film". Obviously I am going to get a very tight budget. The story is about two entirely different people. I know I am going to get lights and utensils that are years older and will be forced to work with hand me down film stocks. Here arises my problem. I have decided and will convince the producer to use Kodak Vision 200T and Kodak Vision 500T, I have read a lot about their features and reviews. I did make up my mind after watching "Casino Royale (2006)". Phil Méheux, BSC has used them saying he has much more experience in Vision 500T than Vision2 500T. They shot the film in Super 35mm and then did a DI. I intend to do Super 35mm with 3 perf and do a DI. I know I need to make use of the available or natural lights to optimum. It is just this Can the film be shot normally like any other low budget film and the richness in color and contrasr can be added later in the DI process without doing any changes while the shooting process. To do so I would also like to know how to plan my film according to the less fancy lights. There are not going to be any grandeur action sequences except a few hand to hand combats and the story pretty much happens in the city. Are my stock selections OK? Please I would be glad to hear some advice ... B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frederico Beja Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 (edited) :unsure: There are not going to be any grandeur action sequences except a few hand to hand combats and the story pretty much happens in the city. Are my stock selections OK? Please I would be glad to hear some advice ... B) Hi! It is always good to have lots of references from other films when you chose your stock. But don't stick to what you see: many details were achieved during the telecine process, with color correction. So I'd suggest you research for more films that used those stocks (you can search for films on iMDB and check their technical data), and see what they have in common. Then you should decide if that's the look you want (contrast, saturation, sharpness, grain, etc). Also, visit Kodak WebSite and take a look at the charts and curves for those stocks (see how they react to light and different exposures). Have in mind that the 200T is more saturated than the 500T, so you'd need to compensate in color correction, ir order not to tell the difference (unless if that's what you want). Just another thing: If you're shooting in the city, are you shooting outdoors? If so, I'd recommend you to use a daylight stock also (something fast as the 50D), so you can work around the T4, T5.6 (try not to go above this, or your Depth of Field will be affected, and lenses always react better in lower stop numbers). Of course you can use the 200T and correct it with filters, but if you have lots of shots outdoors, why not get a Daylight stock? Less grainy, richer colors... Think about that :) Hope this is helpful :) Edited February 26, 2008 by Frederico Beja Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valerio Sacchetto Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 If you're going to only direct you should get as many references as you can and let the dp decide which stock to use. Phil Méheux may be more comfortable with kodak vision but your actual cinematographer may be not. I tell you this just because you may get the wrong results, and be disappointed. The look you want is a thing, the way to get it is another. Happy shooting! ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.