What are your suggestions ?

[Dominik Muench]

Hi,

 

i have following task to fullfill, shooting 100 feet of kodak black and white reversal film as creatively as possible, i can do any special processing i want.

equipment wise i do have a arri sr2 super 16mm with a set of zeiss primes. lights are basically tungstens, a couple of redheads, blondies and lowell dp lights.

 

i would like to do something really unusual processing wise, however im not very experienced with special processing techniques. does anyone have any suggestions ?

 

thanks.

[David Mullen ASC]

There's not many unusual things you can do with b&w since there isn't color to make into weirder colors, or more pastel colors, or more intense colors using processing tricks.

 

With b&w, you can do things that will increase the graininess and contrast, that's about it. There are fewer ways of making the image look "wrong" since color is not a factor.

 

Otherwise, you can use diffusion filters, color-contrast filters, etc. You can also print it onto color stock with a tint, or color tint it in a video transfer.

 

For example, I've used push-processing, a heavy fog filter and heavy red filter outdoors for a fake infrared film look.

[Dominik Muench]

uh yes an infared look would be amazing, is it possible to get infared filters for motion picture cameras ? if not, just a red filter and a fog filter in the matbox ?

[David Mullen ASC]

Well, an infrared filter is sort of a really, really, really heavy red filter, but since you aren't shooting real infrared film, you wouldn't get much exposure if you used a real infrared filter. There is a semi infrared b&w negative that Ilford makes but I think they got out of the motion picture business. Of course, Kodak makes real infrared b&w film.

 

Using regular film, push-processed for more grain & contrast, plus a red filter to increase contrast outdoors and darken the sky, plus a heavy fog (or ProMist) filter to increase halation and softness, will give you a fake infrared look but of course, you won't get glowing green plants, etc. like with real infrared photography.

[Dominik Muench]

great thank you very much, i think i give that a try :) should be interesting, if i can get those filters from panavision.

[Freya Black]

great thank you very much, i think i give that a try :) should be interesting, if i can get those filters from panavision.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I guess you could try solarising the film?

 

love

 

Freya

[Tim J Durham]

Hi,

 

i have following task to fullfill, shooting 100 feet of kodak black and white reversal film as creatively as possible, i can do any special processing i want.

equipment wise i do have a arri sr2 super 16mm with a set of zeiss primes. lights are basically tungstens, a couple of redheads, blondies and lowell dp lights.

 

i would like to do something really unusual processing wise, however im not very experienced with special processing techniques. does anyone have any suggestions ?

 

thanks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm not a film guy but I spent many years in the darkroom doing photographic printing and one of my favourite effects was to use a diffusion filter when printing to make the blacks bleed, as opposed to using the diffusion on the camera lens to make the highlights bleed.

 

I've never seen anyone do this on a film so I don't know if it can be done, but it IS a very cool effect. I'd be very interested to know if/how it could be done with motion film. I might even consider learning S16mm just for that effect.

[Dominic Case]

Colour filters can give you quite strange looks. They lighten the colour of the filter and darken the complementary colour - so a red filter would give very dark skies and foliage (exteriors of course) and pale skin tones. A green filter will give very pale foliage and fairly dark skies.

 

AS you say you have to shoot b/w reversal, I guess this is an exercise with no budget - ie you will project the original - am I right? So no fancy printing.

 

How will you process the reversal film?

 

*******************

Dominic Case

Atlab Australia

*******************

[John Pytlak RIP]

Here is the technical data for the Kodak B&W reversal films and process:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...1.4.4.8.8&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....4.4.8.10&lc=en

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en....4.4.8.16&lc=en

 

Here's a discussion of filtration for B&W films:

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/support/...ilterP.shtml#bw

[Dominik Muench]

freya: solarisation ? you mean like a negative effect ?

 

dominic: yes i cant do any special printing, only processing, i do however have a telecince session since the endresult will be screened on DVCam, so aslast resort i do have a color correction option :)

processing wise i think i go for a normal process when i overexpose the stock evenly by half a stop, to get really deep and rich blacks.

 

 

John: thanks for that, that was really helpfull.

[Sam Wells]

processing wise i think i go for a normal process when i overexpose the stock evenly by half a stop, to get really deep and rich blacks.

John: thanks for that, that was really helpfull.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No No ! It does not act like a color negative does. Overexposing 1/2 stop will give you something that looks 1/2 stop overexposed. Strange but true :)

 

-Sam

[David Mullen ASC]

No No ! It does not act like a color negative does. Overexposing 1/2 stop will give you something that looks 1/2 stop overexposed. Strange but true  :)

 

-Sam

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Especially for b&w reversal, where the blacks are plenty rich already, but if anything, underexposure makes them richer, not overexposure. With b&w in general, if I want more contrast, I'd more likely use a slower-speed stock and push-process it, like use Plus-X and push one stop. But b&w reversal has PLENTY of contrast.

 

And the only way to make direct prints is onto b&w reversal again, which doubles the contrast.

[Dominik Muench]

oh ok, learned something new today. thats good to know cause i would have guessed its similar to a color negative, but it makes sense that it actually behaves differently.

[Dominik Muench]

so another question would be, if that black and white stock is so contrasty, i guess it only has a very small exposure latitude and i have to be very carefull with my lighting ?

 

timJBD: do you have any examples of that effect ?

Edited May 17, 2005 by Dmuench

[Tim J Durham]

so another question would be, if that black and white stock is so contrasty, i guess it only has a very small exposure latitude and i have to be very carefull with my lighting ?

 

timJBD: do you have any examples of that effect ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Here's a Ray Carafano print done that way, although a little too overdone you can still get an idea of the effect:

 

http://www.carofano.com/image.asp?id=9867&...id=3405&entry=y

 

trying...to...attach...%*#* photo...not..work..ing

 

[Tim J Durham]

Couple more, now that I think I've got this attachment business going...

 

 

 

Can't forget props to the photographer:

 

Edited May 17, 2005 by TimJBD

[Dominik Muench]

wow thank you very much, that looks awesome, do you have any more detailed resources of how to achieve that ?

[L K Keerthi Basu]

If you really want to play with the contrast try to shoot with PRINT films and SOUND negative. I have shot some with them ,they are really contrast. I have exposed sound negative 2378E the lighting was very critical. Mostly I exposed that in the daylight.

 

L.K.Keerthibasu

[Tim J Durham]

wow thank you very much, that looks awesome, do you have any more detailed resources of how to achieve that ?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I know how to do it in a darkroom. The idea is to use your diffusion at any point in the process where the blacks become the highlights. In B&W photographic printing, you would mount the diffusion filter (Pro-mist or whatever) between the enlarger lens and the paper your printing onto.

 

I don't know if there is an opportunity to do this when you make a film print, but if not, I'd say you could print a negative and project that negative image onto a screen with the filter on the front of the projector lens, then shoot the projected image.

 

There's got to be a better way, but I don't know what it would be. I'm not familiar enough with

motion picture development.

 

If you DO find a better way, I'd sure be interested in knowing how you did it.

[David Mullen ASC]

I don't know if there is an opportunity to do this when you make a film print,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Only in an optical printer. Otherwise, you'd have to use a camera diffusion filter.

 

However, that type of diffusion effect is easy to achieve in digital post -- basically it's a gassian blurred layer over on a sharp image. A tricked-out DaVinci with a Color Toolbox has that feature; otherwise, you'd be doing it on some other system with diffusion tools.

 

You can also add diffusion inside some telecine machines for a similar effect of adding it to an enlarger. However, remember that he's shooting b&w reversal, so it's a positive image, not a negative image, so the blacks won't halate anyway except digitally.

[Tim J Durham]

Only in an optical printer. Otherwise, you'd have to use a camera diffusion filter.

 

However, that type of diffusion effect is easy to achieve in digital post -- basically it's a gassian blurred layer over on a sharp image. A tricked-out DaVinci with a Color Toolbox has that feature; otherwise, you'd be doing it on some other system with diffusion tools.

 

You can also add diffusion inside some telecine machines for a similar effect of adding it to an enlarger. However, remember that he's shooting b&w reversal, so it's a positive image, not a negative image, so the blacks won't halate anyway except digitally.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi David,

Any idea what the per hour charge would run for that sort of work? How many hours would a standard Da Vinci session require for, say, 20 minutes of finished product? I've never dealt with a Da Vinci but I am seriously considering attempting to shoot my next short in B&W S16mm, which I haven't done since my high school film class. So I'd llike to get an idea what sort of budget I'm going to have to come up with to go that route.

 

Let's see...

 

Camera/lens/battery/tripod rental + someone who knows how it works...

Processing

Color correction/Da Vinci (is this the same step?)

Printing

 

What's missing?

 

Thanks, Tim

[David Mullen ASC]

It depends also on what format (digi-Beta, HDCAM, HD-D5, etc.) you are recording to, and what telecine (Spirit, Rank, Millenium, etc.) you are using (the DaVinci is just the color-corrector portion -- there are also Pogle color-correctors)... but $500/hr is not uncommon for a Spirit transfer session to HD-D5, for example. And you'd want to book double your footage time.

 

The main thing is to find out what features their DaVinci has (Color Toolbox, how many Power Window events, keying, etc.) because they are all different. Basically, the more features they add, the more it costs them and the more they tend to charge.

[Tim J Durham]

It depends also on what format (digi-Beta, HDCAM, HD-D5, etc.) you are recording to, and what telecine (Spirit, Rank, Millenium, etc.) you are using (the DaVinci is just the color-corrector portion -- there are also Pogle color-correctors)... but $500/hr is not uncommon for a Spirit transfer session to HD-D5, for example.  And you'd want to book double your footage time.

 

The main thing is to find out what features their DaVinci has (Color Toolbox, how many Power Window events, keying, etc.) because they are all different. Basically, the more features they add, the more it costs them and the more they tend to charge.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hi again, David (and Thanks for the lesson, btw)

So the editing goes on after the processing and telecine but BEFORE color correction? Is that right? If it's $500 p/hr I guess you wouldn't want to do all your raw footage. Atleast I wouldn't. Ouch.

 

Then color correct, then back to film?

 

Tim

 

PS: I just moved "Northfork" to the top of my Netflix cue. Ebert gave it 4 stars and had some very nice things to say about you in his review so I'm gonna check it out. I'm all curious now.

[Dominik Muench]

Thanx David and Tim. unfortunately i dont have the option to do a print, however i am going to telecine and they use a 2K DaVinci system. A best light pass on DVCam costs me 330 an hour, so i might try it there. im tempted to try both looks now, Davids infared suggestion and Tims david fincherish seven look :)

[David Mullen ASC]

There are too many post combinations to list. You could do all of your color-correction at the time of initial transfer from the camera rolls, you could do most of it, edit it, and do a tape-to-tape correction later, you could transfer to a cheaper format at lesser quality, edit, create an EDL, re-transfer selects on a better format/system, online the selects to create an edited master, do a tape-to-tape color-correction... or do that but cut the neg, answer print, create a color-timed IP, transfer that to tape on a high-end system, etc.

 

If your footage is short enough, it's probably worth it doing a supervised shot-by-shot color-correction at the time of the original transfer from the camera rolls. Otherwise, if you plan on using the transfer as the basis for the video master, at least spend the money on transferring it on a good system at a flat one-light or best-light and then do a tape-to-tape color-correction session later from the edit master.

 

The other option, like I said, is to transfer fast, dirty, and cheap on whatever you can get a deal on, cut the project, create an EDL, and then either re-transfer selects on a high-end system, online/conform the selects into an edited master, do a tape-to-tape correction, etc. OR cut the neg, answer print, make a color-timed IP, etc. like I said before...