Tungsten emultion with 5500K light

[Nicolas Eveilleau]

Hi,

 

I just read David Mullen's subject on Jennifer's Body and I was kind of surprised when I read that he tested tungsten balanced film with HMI to correct them in the lab.

 

So my question is simple : why using a tungsten emultion with daylight to correct the color in post more than simply using daylight emultion ? I thought that the more treatment you use, the more stressed your image will be, but am I wrong on this ? Is there any aesthetical reason ?

[David Mullen ASC]

Because the 500T stock is one stop faster than the 250D stock if I don't use a filter.

 

If I had enough light for 250D overexposed by 1/3 to 2/3's of a stop, I'd use it. But lately I seem to be shooting in overcast locations in dark interiors where I would overpower the natural ambience if I lit for 160 to 200 ASA all the time.

 

Otherwise, I use 250D stock all the time for day interiors with HMI's.

[Nicolas Eveilleau]

Ok that's what I thought but I get confused because you tested the 5212 and 5217 too ^^, but I guess it was just curiosity then, and being able to compare the numbers ?

 

And I knew that there was the REALA 500D but I just saw on the Solstice subject that you found it to grainy so...

 

Thanks ^^

[Jamie Metzger]

Because the 500T stock is one stop faster than the 250D stock if I don't use a filter.

 

If I had enough light for 250D overexposed by 1/3 to 2/3's of a stop, I'd use it. But lately I seem to be shooting in overcast locations in dark interiors where I would overpower the natural ambience if I lit for 160 to 200 ASA all the time.

 

Otherwise, I use 250D stock all the time for day interiors with HMI's.

I've heard that this is very common, and the only thing you theoretically "loose" is the 2/3rd's of a stop of latitude during CC? Did I hear this wrong, or am I getting this wrong?

Jamie

[David Mullen ASC]

I tested 5212 and 5217 because I'm using them outside in daytime.

 

I'm not sure you can measure the loss of latitude in color-correction in that exact a manner. Shooting tungsten stock without the 85 filter basically overexposes the blue record and underexposes the red record, so the limitations in color-correct sort of depend on how you are trying to color-correct the image -- if just to get back to "normal", then you shouldn't have problems, just that it takes a little fiddling. But if you want to add more warmth to the image than normal, you may find the underexposed red record is causing more noise or grain to appear as you push the image warmer and warmer.

 

Also, if the blue record is too overexposed, at some point you may start seeing noise in the blues.

 

But one of the side effects of the new Eterna and Vision-3 stocks is that the blue record does seem as dense as it used to be, perhaps because the orange color mask is not as heavy as it used to be (and on a color negative, blue objects are yellow). So they seem to handle the loss of the 85 filter a little better than before with Vision-2.

 

The other reason why I didn't use 250D (5205) in this case, though I love that stock, is that the new Vision-3 500T seems closer to a 320 ASA stock, grain-wise, so I don't think I'd see any improvement in grain compared to 5205, so the only advantage to using '05 would be to get the correct color balance in 5500K with no filters.