7218 Daylight?

[Guest Tony D]

Hey

 

Not really an EXT. but I'm shooting in an apartment in a few weeks. The apartment has a rather large window, but the way the director wants to block the scene the audience will never see it.

 

I chose 500 because we don't have access to a lot of power in the apartment (most of the circuits are 15amps). What I plan on doing is blacking out the windows so no unwanted blue comes in and using my tugsten sources for both day and night scenes.

 

I was thinking suggesting to the director that it might help us to frame by the window and use the natural daylight. My concern is once I drop the 85 (ASA 320) in, is 7218 too fast of a stock to shoot a scene that is primarily going to be lit by daylight?

[John Holland]

No its not to fast ! more important is which way does the window face ? North , South etc and what part of the world are you shooting this ?

[Hal Smith]

My concern is once I drop the 85 (ASA 320) in, is 7218 too fast of a stock to shoot a scene that is primarily going to be lit by daylight?

Not if your filter kit includes a series of combination 85 and neutral density filters. For instance my set of 138mm 85ND's goes from 85N3 to 85N1.2 in one stop increments.

[Guest Tony D]

Thank you.

 

Shooting in NYC. Window faces North.

[Markus Lanxinger]

Hey

 

Not really an EXT. but I'm shooting in an apartment in a few weeks. The apartment has a rather large window, but the way the director wants to block the scene the audience will never see it.

 

I chose 500 because we don't have access to a lot of power in the apartment (most of the circuits are 15amps). What I plan on doing is blacking out the windows so no unwanted blue comes in and using my tugsten sources for both day and night scenes.

 

I was thinking suggesting to the director that it might help us to frame by the window and use the natural daylight. My concern is once I drop the 85 (ASA 320) in, is 7218 too fast of a stock to shoot a scene that is primarily going to be lit by daylight?

 

you could of course also shoot without an 85 and use an LLD instead (no exposure compensation) and then have the telecine colorist grade it to your color chart.

[Kiarash Sadigh]

you could of course also shoot without an 85 and use an LLD instead (no exposure compensation) and then have the telecine colorist grade it to your color chart.

 

This is ablolutely correct, however there is always the option of closing down your shutter down to 90 degrees (which will bring your 320 iso down to 160) depending on the type of camera you're using of course.

[Andrew Koch]

First thing, please change your screen name to your full name and create a signature as these are both requirements of the forum. Of course I'm assuming the D is an abbreviation. If that is your full last name, then obviously ignore this message. (sorry, I couldn't resist).

 

I definitely do not think the 18 is too fast. If you have too much light, a full set of ND filters will take care of that and they are fairly cheap to rent. This will also let you shoot longer into the afternoon if you use natural sunlight, which you might need to do since you only have 15amp outlets. I don't think it would be a good idea to use small tungsten lights to simulate daylight because they will have to be too close for you to get the right exposure and thus create unnatural falloff.

 

You could use some reflectors, bounce boards, etc.. and maybe a 575W HMI. 1200W HMIs can be problematic on 15amp outlets because they strike at wattages higher than 1200 and some of the ballasts can draw as much as 19amps, as always, do some research on this and test.

[Andrew Koch]

This is ablolutely correct, however there is always the option of closing down your shutter down to 90 degrees (which will bring your 320 iso down to 160) depending on the type of camera you're using of course.

 

 

This is true. It will cut your light in half, but the change in motion blur will be noticeable. This could make it hard to inter cut shots if you need to change the shutter if the sun suddenly gets bright. Dropping an ND is much simpler and it does not effect your motion.

[Serge Teulon]

Hey

 

Not really an EXT. but I'm shooting in an apartment in a few weeks. The apartment has a rather large window, but the way the director wants to block the scene the audience will never see it.

 

I chose 500 because we don't have access to a lot of power in the apartment (most of the circuits are 15amps). What I plan on doing is blacking out the windows so no unwanted blue comes in and using my tugsten sources for both day and night scenes.

 

I was thinking suggesting to the director that it might help us to frame by the window and use the natural daylight. My concern is once I drop the 85 (ASA 320) in, is 7218 too fast of a stock to shoot a scene that is primarily going to be lit by daylight?

 

I shot daytime with 500 once (ran out of 200 on set with 2 quick scenes to do) and I had to use so much ND to get my stop that it was virtually impossible to see through finder. Additionally, there will be grain issues.

 

If your problem is lack of light why not use slower stock and push it?

 

Cheers

S

[Michael Nash]

I shot daytime with 500 once (ran out of 200 on set with 2 quick scenes to do) and I had to use so much ND to get my stop that it was virtually impossible to see through finder.

 

That's true for sunny exteriors, but shouldn't be a problem for day interiors with indirect light. 500 ASA (320 with an 85 filter) is certainly not "too fast" for an ambient-light day interior.

 

Pushing a slower film doesn't really improve the grain situation over a faster stock rated normally (not to mention the change in contrast and color). By the same token, you can always overexpose a faster stock to minimize its grain.

[Mike Panczenko]

I shot daytime with 500 once (ran out of 200 on set with 2 quick scenes to do) and I had to use so much ND to get my stop that it was virtually impossible to see through finder. Additionally, there will be grain issues.

 

This raises something I've been wondering- why has no one else but Panavision made a decent behind the lens filter system? I know you can use them on Arri's, but it's just so close to the focal plane, that almost no one will do it.

 

Why haven't other manufacturers incorporated a more "usable" behind the lens gel system?