Grainy 35mm

[Manu Delpech]

Nah, it's just that mostly every post of yours is like one of those drive-by posts, setting fires left and right, mocking people, or making weird comments.

[Ari Michael Leeds]

You accuse me of being hostile? That's not my intent, unless it's people I think really deserve it, like saying they're DPs because they can do 3D animation.


What is YOUR intent, in calling me out, here.



Calling someone a "weirdo" because you don't like their sense of humor seems to be antagonism and fire setting, nothing more, nothing less. I'd appreciate if you give me the benefit of the doubt instead of casting judgement on someone over the internet.

[Manu Delpech]

You're a piece of work, phew, and I do not have the patience for this.

[Ari Michael Leeds]

Got it, so no agreement to leave it at that and move on. Not sure what derailing a thread on "Grainy 35mm" has anything to do with your opinion of my sense of humor Manu. I'd really appreciate if you could move on.

[Sanji Robinson]

Adding contrast is basically throwing highlight and/or shadow information away. It is always easier to throw information away in post than it is to add it, so adding more contrast in a D.I. is not difficult.

 

Again, a test would answer a lot of these questions about which approach would be better.

 

Thanks.

 

Why did you use 200T for "The Love Witch" ?

[David Mullen ASC]

Basically by using 200T and rating it at 100 ASA I would be forced into lighting more like an older movie, with my lighting more or less overpowering any natural ambience. Of course I could have done this with 500T and just stopped down the lens, but the director wasn't a fan of grain even though regular 35mm stocks from the late 1950's were on the grainier side. So in some ways I was getting closer to the finer grain of a VistaVision movie from the 1950's or 3-strip Technicolor than I was with a standard 35mm 1.85 movie from that period.