What have I done wrong here?

[Brenton Lee]

Hello!

 

I fired of a few rolls of 16mm film recently, two of them came back heavily foggy and I'm pretty sure it's due to over exposure?

 

If you can give me any tips or think it may be anything else, please throw your thoughts in - I'd appreciate it!

 

Info -

 

Both scenes were shot on a Bolex EBM, modded for S16. I used a canon FD lens, most likely 50mm on this one as it's relatively fast and versatile. Film was bought directly from Kodak, was stored in a cupboard for maybe 3 months. Shot and processed within a week. I was pretty careful loading and unloading, although there's a slight light mark on the side.

 

The interior shot was on Vision 3 500T, the lighting was dim with only bulb in the ceiling and a crummy skylight. Outside the sky was very overcast but not entirely dark. Light meter on my lady friends face said 1.8ish

 

The exterior shot was on Vision 3 250D, I can't remember too many details of the shot but it looks like it also has quiet a lot of of fogging too.

 

I included an effort to clean it up too just to give you an idea of the finished product, but what can I make sure to do next time to get a better result?

 

Thanks for any advice.

 

 

 

Follow this link for the pics

https://goo.gl/photos/ZpVS5VufA1V3F6iW8

[Brian Drysdale]

Does your camera have a filter holder fitted into the slot behind the lens? Not having one fitted will cause fogging.

[Brenton Lee]

Yeah, the filter holder is empty but is installed. I'm pretty sure if it's installed, light can't leak in that way. But you never know ... I'll make sure I double check and maybe even put some tape over that area to make sure for next time.

[Mark Dunn]

Are you sure it's not just a flat scan? I'm not sure it's fogging based on the photographs.

How does the film look? Is there fogging in the rebate?

[Brenton Lee]

Oh that's a good thing to check ... It's in a 400 ft reel so I'll set it up and look tomorrow. thanks for the idea.

[Heikki Repo]

I'd say it's just a flat scan. After levels being set:

[John E Clark]

Are you sure it's not just a flat scan? I'm not sure it's fogging based on the photographs.

How does the film look? Is there fogging in the rebate?

What is a 'flat scan', vs say a 'log' representation of some sort... or a 'telecine' scan... since I've never dealt with this, I am not that familiar with how motion picture scans are specified.

 

For stills I did not have any real concern about this as the resulting TIFF files (typically) were spec at say 24 or 48 bits, of (8,8,8) or (16,16,16) RGB.

 

Given how they 'cleaned' up, I don't thing the problem is due to processing/fogging, although perhaps could be slight over exposure. But the white book covers some have something other than 'white' so the over exposure, if that's what it is, isn't all that off to me.

[Jeff L'Heureux]

The graded footage looks fine to me. Maybe slightly overexposed, but you didn't lose too much details and it looks like film should/would look, ie: very nice. The lens and stop you shoot at can also affect the contrast/exposure, of course, but this is pretty much exactly what I'd expect Bolex 16mm footage to look like.

[Tyler Purcell]

Generally a flat scan doesn't have that high of mid's lifted, but it really depends on the log curve.

[Shawn Sagady]

Generally a flat scan doesn't have that high of mid's lifted, but it really depends on the log curve.

Its also really inconsistent between the two samples, though that could be the stock I guess, 250D vs 500T, but I would expect a more consistent curve.

[Brenton Lee]

It may well be the scan, but I had S8mm scanned on the same machine and it came back beautifully coloured so I assumed it was something I haven't done right.