Trying to find my error

[Guest Joseph Gioielli]

Greetings and happy 2005.

 

I recently got a Krans K-3 and shot a test roll of color reversal. When I got it back, the developer included a note that said "no image" and, sure enough, there was no image.

 

The camera appears to be fine and the lab I used (Pac Lab) seems to have a good reputation so I feel confident that it was something I did wrong.

 

There was no image at all. Nothing. The film did look like it had been exposed. When I ran it through the projector the only thing I saw was that the film "got brighter" at one point (which corresponded to the point when I opened up the iris during filming.) It really looks like the film was exposed to light, but no image was recorded.

 

So what do you think? Does this sound like I loaded the film in backward? Any ideas would be great.

 

Joe

[Kevin Zanit]

It is possible the film was loaded backwards, but not likely. Is the film single or double perfed? If it is single, you can rule that theory out.

 

I am assuming you film is black and not clear. On reversal this would mean that the film received no exposure. My guess is that

A. you severely underexposed the film (if you could tell me what speed film, where you were shooting, and your stop I can tell you if you were anywhere near exposure).

B. If you did shoot through the base, when you opened the iris in shot, that would explain for the increased exposure. The base eats about 3 stops, thus if you were already underexposing, and then shot 3 under, you could have possibly no image. I don't really think this is the case as 3 stops under is nowhere near pure black.

C. On the k3 it is fairly easy to have the wrong frame rate. For example if you where shooting at 48fps (the fastest the camera can go) you would only be a stop under, but if you did all the above, that would just explain it even more.

D. The lab did not leave it in the soup long enough/ any other kind of lab error (such as the second exposure step in the reversal process).

E. Faulty film.

F. The shutter is not rotating, thus the film receives no exposure at all. In theory there is still some small amount of light hitting the film, thus the exposure change mid roll. Did you see flicker in the viewfinder?

 

Personally, I doubt it is either B, D, or E. If you give more info, I could help more.

 

Kevin Zanit

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

See, this is what would happen to me. And you have no idea - none - until it's far too late. What if this hadn't been a test roll? Okay, so the s8 I shot in Vegas and LA during last year's NAB looks, to my somewhat unpractised eye, to be of approximately normal density, but that was just using the camera's inbuily metering.

 

Phil

[Guest Joseph Gioielli]

Thanks for the help, the film speed was, if I remember 160 (all my gear is packed up as I am in the process of moving. It was a cloudy day and I was using a handheld meter. Foolishly, I did not write down the settings.

 

I was using single perf. thanks for ruling the backward load theory. For the life of me, I couldn't figure out how on Earth I could have loaded the film in backward.

I've been shooting regular8 so I am familiar with the process. But as this is my first 16mm, I couldn't rule anything out.

 

The film was "buyback", unopened stock bought from a filmstock company (This was not eBay mystery film). It was a 400ft reel that I cut down and rewound into 100ft spools. I did this in a locked bathroom, in the dark, with a towel under the door in a dark house at 2 am. I don't think that was a factor. Had the film been fogged or had dust and dirt on it I could understand it. But it was blacker than the backend of midnight in there and everything seemed ok.

 

The film was black, it was not clear.

 

I think that your "Answer A" is correct.

 

I come from video, I've only been shooting Reg8 film for about a year. My Sony VX2K uses "zebra stripes" and my Bolex 8mm had "match needle"metering. So I was new to metering. It's a Sektonic Studio Deluxe. The numbers seemed very wrong when I was setting the stops. It seemes very likely that I had bad settings.

 

I did see flicker while I was filming so I think the shutter was working. The running time seemed about right so I think the frame was right. But it is possible.

Thanks again

Joe

Edited January 1, 2005 by Joseph Gioielli

[Wendell_Greene]

The film was black, it was not clear.

 

 

I'm not trying to be facetious, but did you remember to remove the lens cap?

[Kevin Zanit]

I'm not trying to be facetious, but did you remember to remove the lens cap?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think he did as he said he saw an image, and the K3 has a reflex viewing system.

 

I am willing to be it was an error on the meter. Maybe you had the wrong disc in?

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Wendell_Greene]

Perhaps it is as Kevin said earlier and he misread or wrongly set his light meter so that when he mistakenly set his aperture set at F16 or F22, which would also meant like looking through the view finder on the K-3 would have seemed like it was wrapped in black gauze. [Are you sure the ND filters that come with the camera weren't on the lens?]

 

And continuing to build upon Kevin's earlier educated guesses as to the problem, if you add to the theory of a fully stopped down aperture the possiblity that the dial was set to 48fps, well then, a bad situation becomes worse.

 

So all of this begs the question, what exactly were you filming and what images if any, as opposed to 'flicker' did you see in the viewfinder?

[Chris Keth]

Perhaps it is as Kevin said earlier and  he misread or wrongly set his light meter so that when he mistakenly set his aperture set at F16 or F22, which would also meant like looking through the view finder on the K-3 would have seemed like it was wrapped in black gauze. [Are you sure the ND filters that come with the camera weren't on the lens?]

 

And continuing to build upon Kevin's earlier educated guesses as to the problem, if you add to the theory of a fully stopped down aperture the possiblity that the dial was set to 48fps, well then, a bad situation becomes worse.

 

So all of this begs the question, what exactly were you filming and what images if any, as opposed to 'flicker' did you see in the viewfinder?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

What speed were you shooting at? It's pretty easy to accidentally change the speed on that camera, especially since you load it by running the film at 8fps through the sprockets.

 

 

I'd check that you metered properly. You could have the wrong slide in, or you could have turned a dial wrong, it's fairly easy the first time out with that meter.

[Guest Joseph Gioielli]

Wow, thanks again for all the help!

 

No, I didn't have the lens cap on. And don't worry, I'm not insulted. It DOES happen and I'm glad you mentioned.

 

I was shooting at 24 fps. At least, I intended to shoot at 24 fps. As the camera is packed, I can't check it. But I do understand that if I had it set to a fast setting will result in a darker image if you don't iris up. (I did some 8mm work in NYC, I wanted a slo-mo of the taxi cabs so I sped up the film but didn't iris up. The results were too dark to be usable.)

 

No, I left all the filters home.

 

At this point I feel very certain that it was a metering issue. The view finder was very dark. It looked very wrong from the get-go. It was my first time with the meter. I was unsure about everything. I was using the meter as a reflective meter and no doubt metering the sky. (It was a rainy but sunny day, so the sunlight was bright and scattered) I'm sure I made every mistake imaginable.

 

What I bet I did was meter the sky, got a high reading, and stopped down accordingly. Yes, my fstops were in the 16 to 22 range. I didn't have enough experience to know that those numbers on a cloudy day should have been a warning sign that I was doing something wrong.

 

I've been using the meter with an old 35mm still camera and I have learned alot more about it. Now that you guys have found my mistake...

 

ONCE AGAIN INTO THE BREACH!

 

To that end, does anyone know any place that developes color reversal film in San Francisco?

 

Thanks again for all the help guys!

 

Joe

 

I think you guys hit it on the head.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Did the processed film have visible KEYKODE Numbers (edgeprint)? If so, that would indicate the film formed an image during processing, and was not totally fogged. If the KEYKODE is fine, look for a camera or exposure problem.

[Guest Joseph Gioielli]

Yes, there was edgeprint. I don't think the lab did anything wrong. I pretty sure it was my fault.

 

Thanks

Joe

[David Mullen ASC]

Typically with a spot meter outside, you would check the brightness of something close to 18% gray, like an asphalt road (or a gray card!), or you would meter the actor's face and open up one stop (expose as Zone 6 instead of Zone 5) if they are caucasian. Of course, if you are shooting shots of cloud formations, you'd probably spot meter that but if there wasn't something close to 18% gray (sort of a medium gray) in the sky, you'd have to make some decisions on how to expose what you were metering (for example, how many stops over should a white cloud be over medium gray?)

 

All this is one reason why I think incident meters make more sense for the beginner.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

I dunno, the whole spot-meter thing has always made more sense to me. Aim at something, ping, right, that's going to be mid greyish in tonal value. Incident meters always seem a bit vague - wave it generally in the location you're shooting, and average the dozens of different readings you get as the light falls off, bounces around, etc.

 

I'm sure it's essential for wider studio stuff to ensure eveness.

 

Phil

[David Mullen ASC]

Sure, spot meters are more precise but you have to constantly interpret the readings because the real world isn't made up of 18% matte gray objects. Of course, you could meter a gray card instead but then you just get the same reading as your incident meter.

 

It's not really a right or wrong thing but the difference between measuring the reflectivity of an object versus the amount of light falling on the object. I generally want to know how much light is falling on the room or landscape, whatever, because I'm shooting a scene from multiple angles of the same location so the consistent factor is the amount of light falling on the scene even though I may be pointing the camera at different objects in the scene. I'm not exposing one way when I point at a green couch and then another way when I point at a face if I established the way they both looked together in the wide shot. I want to maintain their differences in reflectivity.

[John Sprung]

Yes, there was edgeprint. I don't think the lab did anything wrong. I pretty sure it was my fault.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

OK, you have the edge numbers that Kodak put on the film. Do you see frame lines at all? Does this camera have a variable shutter? A variable shutter closed to zero degrees or a shutter loose on the shaft and stuck closed would give you no frame lines at all. A shutter way out of sync with the pulldown would give you sharp side frame lines, but smeared lines or no lines top and bottom.

 

I did screw up royally once shooting with a 16BL. We had to move in a hurry, so I latched a new magazine onto the camera just to have one piece to carry, and when we got to the next building, I forgot to open the door and thread the gate. We were in a hurry to get set up because the speech we were shooting was going to start, and I just didn't remember it. Oy, veh.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Edited January 4, 2005 by John Sprung

[Kevin Zanit]

No the camera has a fixed shutter. Also, if his shutter was too narrow he would have seen it in the viewing system.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[John Sprung]

Also, if his shutter was too narrow he would have seen it in the viewing system.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I'm not familiar with that camera. I've never heard of a film camera that displays shutter angle in the finder. The ones I'm familiar with all use the same amount of mirror surface to feed the finder no matter where the extra part of the shutter is set.

 

A couple other thoughts:

 

If the camera can be inched, you can check shutter sync using a short piece of lightstruck film. A foot would be plenty. Use a sharpie to write numbers on the frames on the emulsion side, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. Thread this short piece into the gate, take the lens off, and look thru the aperture as you slowly inch forward. You should see the shutter open and reveal a stationary number 1, then close before the number starts to move down. Then when the shutter opens again, like magic there should be a stationary number 2 there, and so forth. If you can see the sharpie-marked film moving at all, then the shutter is out of sync.

 

If you can get access to a still photography dark room, you can save a whole lot of money on film and developing. Testing this kind of thing only takes a couple feet of film, which you can hand develop as black and white. If the camera uses daylight spools only, load it, shoot about 8 - 10 ft, then in total darkness cut the film just before it goes to the takeup spool. Close the camera, cut off the last 2 - 3 ft. of exposed film, and dunk it by hand in trays of chemicals. Dominic Case or John Pytlak can probably tell you more about the chemical side of doing that kind of slop test.

 

Shoot a day interior shot with a blown out window in focus in the middle of the frame. A two foot slop test of that will confirm whether you're getting a focused image on the film.

 

From the previous discription, one thing that I should have thought of before is the possibility that the gate wasn't fully closed, or that the pressure plate was stuck in the wrong position. That would allow the film to be in some random position way back from the focal plane. Depending on the lens, it could be far enough out of focus to be just a uniform blur.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[John Pytlak RIP]

Almost any B&W developer will work for a "slop test". Here are typical B&W processing conditions:

 

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professiona...rocessing.jhtml

[Thomas Burns]

A common film school mistake with some older cameras is when a student jumps in a car to hurry to the next location and doesn't realize that they accidentally turned the camera on. Assuming that you transport your camera with the lens cap on, could this have happened before you started shooting (meaning that the film was already shot out before you began filming)? Did you run the camera at all before commencing the shoot? I'll admit it's strange that you wouldn't be able to hear the roll's tail turning inside the camera, but at a noisy location this could be the case. Sounds strange, but I've seen it happen on multiple occaisions.

 

Thomas Burns

DP, LA/Austin

[Wendell_Greene]

Unlike the Scoopic or Arri S the unmodified K-3 is a 16mm spring wound camera that takes 100 foot daylight spools.

[Guest Joseph Gioielli]

There were no frame lines on the film, just blue. Upon second viewing, it seems to be a pretty consistant shade of blue.

 

All the speeds work and "sound right", so I will assume that it was running at the correct speed. The running time also seemed consistant with 24 fps.

 

I was shooting at an outdoor location (the POW camp at Andersonville,GA.) I just strolled around at shot at my leasure. I don't think the film ran out. But I did consider that I may have sent the wrong film to be developed. I brought 2 rolls and only exposed 1. I did mark the exposed roll, but if one day I get a double exposure roll back, I wouldn't be too suprised. I guess I'll just call it an art film.

 

The film gate was in place and that also seemed fine.

 

As for the metering, the sekonic website gets into the whole reflected/spot/incident light meter thing. Now if only I had read it BEFORE I tried to use the meter. I took out an old manual 35mm camera, the infamous 18% grey card, a colorbar card, and took some pictures setting the fstop with the meter. My model did not have spot ability so that was out, but I did do reflective vs incident tests. Incident looked more "true to life", but both were acceptable. There was about a stop difference. I think my metering error came from the fact that I just didn't have any experience with the meter. I think I must have had it set inproperly. The numbers seemed all wrong. F22 or f16 with slow film on a cloudy day just don't add up to good exposure.

 

Thanks again

Joe

[John Pytlak RIP]

There were no frame lines on the film, just blue. Upon second viewing, it seems to be a pretty consistant shade of blue.

... But I did consider that I may have sent the wrong film to be developed. I brought 2 rolls and only exposed 1. I did mark the exposed roll, but if one day I get a double exposure roll back, I wouldn't be too suprised. I guess I'll just call it an art film.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So far, based on your description, that is the most likely scenario. When you say "blue", do you really mean a bluish black? Or blue like the sky?

[Chris Keth]

A common film school mistake with some older cameras is when a student jumps in a car to hurry to the next location and doesn't realize that they accidentally turned the camera on. Assuming that you transport your camera with the lens cap on, could this have happened before you started shooting (meaning that the film was already shot out before you began filming)? Did you run the camera at all before commencing the shoot? I'll admit it's strange that you wouldn't be able to hear the roll's tail turning inside the camera, but at a noisy location this could be the case. Sounds strange, but I've seen it happen on multiple occaisions.

 

Thomas Burns

DP, LA/Austin

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Definately not this. A k-3 sounds like a small jet airplane when it runs...that and it'll only run 20 seconds or so on a wind.

[John Sprung]

There were no frame lines on the film, just blue. Upon second viewing, it seems to be a pretty consistant shade of blue.

 

All the speeds work and "sound right", so I will assume that it was running at the correct speed. The running time also seemed consistant with 24 fps.

 

The numbers seemed all wrong. F22 or f16 with slow film on a cloudy day just don't add up to good exposure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sometimes on very dark night exteriors it can be impossible to see the frame lines. This is a pain in the negative cutter's tush in 35mm, where there are three wrong places to cut for every right one. But ASA 160 isn't all that slow. At 24 fps and 180 degree shutter, f/22 on a cloudy day may be underexposed, but very unlikely to be so far under that you can't see the frame lines.

 

Another thought I shoulda thunk of before: You say that this is single perf and that you spooled it down from a 400 foot roll to 100 ft. daylight spools. Did you wind it off to another reel and then back onto the daylight spools to get the edge numbers going in the right direction and the orientation of the perfs right? Or did you just take it straight across to the daylight spools? If so, the single perf may have forced you to shoot thru the base. If it would have been underexposed the right way around, that might be enough to put you off the toe of the curve where you don't even make frame lines. One side of the film should be a rich shiny black. That's the anti-halation backing, which should go towards the pressure plate. The other side is a matte brown/tan/gray color. That's the emulsion, which should face the aperture. Check one of your three remaining spools and see if maybe that's it.

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Guest Joseph Gioielli]

I can't rule anything out. But based on the information provided here, I took a second look at the exposure meter.

 

I would be willing to bet a kidney that I was reading the meter from the "H" side rather than the "L" side. Even at the brightest exposure value, there was no way I was supposed to be anywhere near f22 reading from the "L" side. If I read from the "H" the reading was over F44. Sooooo, it would seem that is what happened.

 

Remember, coming from video, I had no idea about fstops and lightmeters, I have learned much since then.

 

The color was a dark blue. I still may have sent the wrong roll into be processed. As I go through the rest of the film, I'll know if I come across a roll that has already "gone through".

 

And as for the cutting down from the 400 ft roll, I can't begin to tell you what a pain in the tush it was. Yes, you do have to wind it off, cut it, and then rewind it on the spools. It took 2 and a half hours.to do 4 rolls. If you don't do the rewind, yes, you will end up shooting through the base (Which is something I considered) but as it is single perf, it wouldn't have loaded properly. The K3 only has sprocket engagements on one side. I double checked this last night and it just will not run upside down film.

 

Next time I'll make notes so if I have another error, I'll have more to go on.

Thanks

Joe