Brandon Whiteside Posted March 3, 2010 Share Posted March 3, 2010 So, lets say I shoot most of my film on 250D, and I am able to get a free roll of 500T. If I use an 85 on that, I realize that t will drop my ASA to 320, and I will have to compensate my exposure. If i were to properly expose both stocks, would the difference between them go unnoticed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Satsuki Murashige Posted March 3, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 3, 2010 So, lets say I shoot most of my film on 250D, and I am able to get a free roll of 500T. If I use an 85 on that, I realize that t will drop my ASA to 320, and I will have to compensate my exposure. If i were to properly expose both stocks, would the difference between them go unnoticed? It depends on how you're planning to use them. Daylight and tungsten stocks render color differently. Faster stocks are generally grainier than their slower counterparts. Finally, Kodak and Fuji are different so Fuji 250D will not look exactly like Kodak 250D, etc. So if you are trying to intercut the stocks in the same scene, then you may notice the difference. If they are used in separate scenes, say the 500T for night exterior, and 250D for day interior then probably not. I recently mixed two stocks on a Super16 short, Fuji 160T Vivid 8643 for day exteriors and Kodak 500T 7219 for day and night interiors. Most people will never notice the small differences in dynamic range, color rendition, and graininess between the two because of the greater difference in the designed look of the exteriors and interiors. The 8643 was actually perceptually grainier than the 7219 at times! It also did not hold highlights and shadows as well as the 7219. But it made lush green foliage pop while rendering pretty skin tones without too much red, which was what I needed it to do. You pick the right paint for the corner of the picture you happen to be painting at the time, that's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Whiteside Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 I'm sorry, I did not specify that BOTH stocks would be 7219! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Satsuki Murashige Posted March 3, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 3, 2010 Well then I guess they will match, won't they? ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Whiteside Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Awesome! Basically what I was getting at was that I am going to have an extra roll of 500T and we are shooting this project on 250D. If I had to use this can in a pinch, making all exposure equal, would this go unnoticed. Thanks for your answers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted March 3, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 3, 2010 Awesome! Basically what I was getting at was that I am going to have an extra roll of 500T and we are shooting this project on 250D. If I had to use this can in a pinch, making all exposure equal, would this go unnoticed. Thanks for your answers I'm confused -- first you ask if 250D and 500T would intercut, then you say that it's all 500T, and now you're saying that it's a mix of 250D and 500T again. You can get away with intercutting the two if this is just for video, but if this is for print, there are some minor differences that may make it a bit trickier to intercut freely, I would save the 500T for specific shots that are not repeated on 250D, as in, try to avoid intercutting close-ups made on the two different stocks, or worse, the same close-up with some takes on one stock and some takes on the other. But for wide shots or inserts, it matters less because you aren't trying to match skintones as obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Whiteside Posted March 3, 2010 Author Share Posted March 3, 2010 Sorry for the confusion, and yes, we will be going to video. Thanks for the answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Satsuki Murashige Posted March 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 4, 2010 Awesome! Basically what I was getting at was that I am going to have an extra roll of 500T and we are shooting this project on 250D. Erm, say what? Didn't you just say both your stocks were 7219? Now I'm totally confused... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted March 4, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 4, 2010 Just to try and clarify for the OP, 7219 is the stock number for Vision 3 500T in 16mm. It's not a generic number for all vision 3 stocks or something like that. The number for 16mm Vision 3 250D is 7207. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Whiteside Posted March 4, 2010 Author Share Posted March 4, 2010 Shoot! The lady at Kodak kept calling all of it 7219...no wonder everyone is confused! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dominic Case Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 If the Kodak person can't get the stock numbers right, there's no hope for the rest of us! I know that they do follow a system of sorts, but it's less than informative. 7219: 7=16mm; 2=camera negative; 19=something that isn't 18, 05, 72, or anything else. Is there anything less useful? Some car manufacturers (the ones that haven't gone for silly, meaning-free names for models) still use simple number series that told you something. Peugeot 30x is a small family sedan: 40x is a larger family sedan; 20x is smaller. And the x simply changed with new models, so a 407 was a later model than 406. Why can't they number film stocks that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimitri Zaunders Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 I know that they do follow a system of sorts, but it's less than informative.7219: 7=16mm; 2=camera negative; 19=something that isn't 18, 05, 72, or anything else. Is there anything less useful? I think their numbering system is even less intuitive than that! Some of the Kodak stocks I've been shooting recently are 7265 and 7266 - B&W reversal stocks. Even worse, their 8mm stocks also begin with the numbers 72!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Charles MacDonald Posted March 6, 2010 Premium Member Share Posted March 6, 2010 I think their numbering system is even less intuitive than that! Some of the Kodak stocks I've been shooting recently are 7265 and 7266 - B&W reversal stocks. Even worse, their 8mm stocks also begin with the numbers 72!! They started the system back in the Nitrate film days, and so it is a bit flakey the 7 means "smaller than 35mm" 2 in the second digit means a camera film, while 3 is a lab film. (like 5302 for example) the other two digits are the specific type of film and get re-used from time to time. I belive that if the last three digits are the same, for one stock that is 35mm and one less than 35mm like 5222 and 7222 the actual emulsion is compatible. They have repurposed the digits 2 and 3 as the first number to indicate a polyester stock. again 35mm or wider and less than 35mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now