Testing and Screening Super 16 Film Stock

[Robert Edge]

I'm planning a project that will be shot on super 16 and completed on video. Much of the film, which will be under 30 minutes in length, will be shot on a single set using tungsten-balanced Kodak Vision 2. As part of the rehearsal process, I want to do some tests, using 200-400 feet of stock, to fine-tune lighting and composition and to decide how to expose the stock. For a given setup, the exposure tests will involve shooting footage at two or three different exposures one stop apart.

 

Here are my questions:

 

Am I correct that the best way to evaluate the exposure tests is to contact print the negative, using one light, rather than transfer the negative to video?

 

If so, is there a particular print stock that I should ask the laboratory to use given that I plan to finish in video?

 

My understanding is that some projectors (e.g. certain Kinoton models) can screen a super 16 print, which would seem to suggest that there is such a thing as super 16 print stock. Are there any New York labs or projection facilities that offer super 16 screening, or am I stuck with printing on standard 16mm print stock and losing part of the image that I want to evaluate?

 

Thanks.

[David Mullen ASC]

If your final project is for video transfer only from the negative to tape, then the most accurate way to judge the film is the same method as for the final project: a transfer from negative to tape. If the final project is for print, then the most accurate way to judge the film would be to make a print. You want to be comparing apples to apples; the way the film is handled in post affects the look so you should test the film using the same post methods.

[Sam Wells]

As long as the print stock is single perf, it's usable as "Super 16 print stock"

 

How to screen it would be another issue. Talk to the NY labs. DuArt, maybe ?

 

But it really does sound like this is not so relevent, as David says.

 

-Sam

[Robert Edge]

I'd like to thank Messrs. Mullen and Wells for their comments. One thing that is clear is that I need to get a better understanding of the film to video transfer process than I have at the moment.

[Robert Edge]

In case anyone is interested, a bit more on this question:

 

Colorlab, on its website, and Steve Ascher, in The Filmmaker's Handbook, both suggest that when shooting film and completing in video, some of the footage should be printed and screened. For Colorlab's recommendation, see: http://www.colorlab.com/services/dailies.html

 

For Colorlab and Ascher, it would appear that the argument for doing this is that it enables one to evaluate a larger image than one sees on a video monitor.