Eterna 400T

Adrian Sierkowski · February 19, 2010

Hey All,

I got hired on to do some additional photography for a super low budget short here in Philadelphia. The project has been shot so far on Fuji Eterna 400T on 35mm with a BL4. For my own bits, I'll be using my Konvas 2M for the MOS parts of it as well as the BL with a combination of Lomo standard speeds for the Konvas and Cooke S2/3s on the BL.

What I have upcoming are a few interior shots at night which I'm not too worried about and a morning INT shot as well, again, not too big of a concern.

What does worry me is a night ext up coming which is comprised of a long steadycam shot at night own a city street. Having a look at location there isn't much 'round in terms of lighting and my meter was reading a T 0.5 and 1/2 @1250 asa.. so basically nothing. I'm hoping to build up some exposure and dot the landscape with some par cans as well as get the houses along the opening of the block to let me reglobe their porch lights with higher wattage bubls, but I'm curious how far I can dig into the curve of the 400T before I get into trouble with excess granularity and loss of detail.

Our main actress is African American, and is about mid-range in darkness not too much so and should be wearing some saturated primary colors (not 100% sure yet on wardrobe).

I'd love the luxury of a test, but sadly budget won't allow for that, and I can't get into contact with the previous DP either, which is.. well odd...

I come normally from Kodak stocks but I've rolled the Eterna 500T in S16mm before.

In any case, any input would be nice.

John Holland · February 19, 2010

Eterna 400T is a lower contrast stock than the 500 T , so good for getting into the shadow areas , but hey you need some light pushed into that street !!

Adrian Sierkowski · February 19, 2010

Good to know John.

I'm thinking of building up to around a T2.8 on the street falling off to nothing ness and work in silhouette with the actress as the walks paste the houses, then pick her up with a PAR from afar (hey it rhymes!) as a hard edge wrapping a bit around her as well be tracking from behind, down the street to the corner. At the corner there is a parking lot on the ground so i'm going to dress up 2 more pars as "security lights" and shoot them across the parking light as a back light when we're behind her, and as a motivated key for the turn around. She then hides behind a dog-dirt-bag-holder-thing next to these flags which I'll up light with something to provide motivation for a side light on her face in a close up.

So that's the plan. and hopefully I'll be able to hold the city street lights all 'round. Experience on '19 from Kodak tells me I can get good detail out of city street lights with nothing else... but then again that's on the '19 stock which is pretty phenomenal. I'd love to use it on this, but one can't argue with a could thousand feet of free Fuji.

K Borowski · February 20, 2010

Well, it's still underexposed, but I'd go for '19 instead. A third of a stop of true speed is a third of a stop.

I don't like going more than 1600 ASA with a 400 stock (but actually exposed at 1000 to be well on the safe side.)

You should be able to get useful images with 400T but they'll be grainy as dirt, even with 35. I don't think the grain would be dramatically different between Kodak and Fuji. I prefer the former, but I'd imagine you'll want the lower contrast too to counteract the buildup from the push.

See if you can find any advice on what Fuji's sweet spot is (I'm sure Dave Mullen has a favorite EI for it).

Keep in mind meters can be way off in that low of a light level too.

Satsuki Murashige · February 20, 2010

5219 or even 5229 will definitely be tighter in terms of grain and you can safely underexpose them a bit more than the Fuji 400T. I've over/under tested the 400T and one stop under (rated 800ASA) was just on the fringe of becoming too milky and grainy for me on workprint - YMMV. The Fuji 500T is slightly better, but for clean low-light stuff I think Kodak is the best.

I think if you have to use the 400T then rate conservatively and use more light.

Adrian Sierkowski · February 22, 2010

Thanks Karl and Satsuki. Looks like I'll have to get more lighting into the street and a bigger genny ;)

I would go Kodak, but saddled with the Fuji, this time at least not that I mind as any stock is better than no stock.

K Borowski · February 22, 2010

Thanks Karl and Satsuki. Looks like I'll have to get more lighting into the street and a bigger genny ;)

I would go Kodak, but saddled with the Fuji, this time at least not that I mind as any stock is better than no stock.

Well, if you can light it, you have more flexibility. They used to light by 100T filmstock, maybe pushed a stop.

Initially you were talking about shooting in available-light only, no?

Paul Bruening · February 22, 2010

Adrian,

Partly, this sounds like an artistic decision. While a DP is obliged to capture the subject with sufficient exposure, there is something poetic about the subject moving through separated dashes of light. If you can frame the shot through the motion so that the subject is dark against the light backgrounds while moving through the holes in the lights, even more poetic.

Adrian Sierkowski · February 22, 2010

No I had always plan to light it up, it's just a question of how much, ya know.

As for moving through live and dark, that's what I'm going to push for when I'm there, Paul. Or rather instead of really "through" as i've nowhere to put 'em, more like against where I'll hit BG objects with some light and that'll be where she silhouettes, at least for the wide. I still need to build up a bit of a base, though.