Tommy T

Wow...that really looks good. What did you to achive that look. Was it photoshop, After Effects. ?

Thanks everyone! I appreciate your help. Well, it looks like a majority of you say it looks underexposed. Ok, I am cool with that. However, it brings up another question. I was taking an incident reading with a digital Sekonic and was coming up with an F-Stop of around 5.6. Should I have ignored this number and overexposed by a stop? How and when do you know when to ignore the meter and overexpose? Thanks again to all. p.s. I lit the scene with a diffused 2K, so there was plenty of light. Thanks.

Ok, here are a couple of screen captures of the test footage I mentioned. As you can see, there is a ton of grain in the blacks. Do you think I tried to push the shadows too much? I was testing for color contrast and deep shadows. Any ideas? Thanks again in advance.

Hello All... If I were to intentionally overexpose Koday Vision2 16mm 200T by one full stop...is it best to tell the lab and let them perform some forced processing or just let them process it from the grey card with no special notes. Will the results vary in any way? The purpose of the questions deals with eliminating grain and getting a sharper image at the most affordble price. Thank you in advance.

Hello All... I just sent 100 feet of 16mm Kodak Vision2 500T to Post Works in NY. I had the film processed normal and transfered (best light) to DV-Cam. I got the footage back today and really liked what I saw. The only down side was the heavy "dancing" grains in the deep areas of black. The colors looked great, skin tones were awesome, even the greys were pretty clean...but the ole blacks were real grainy. Note, the blacks were not milky in any way. The blacks were very rich and very bold...it just so happens the blacks also had dancing grain all throughout. Finally, I shot a grey card at the head and every shot came out very nicely and evenly exposed. Any thoughts? Thank you in advance.

thanks guys. I will be posting screen shots when I get the film back. Until then...

Does anyone have any experience working with Post Works Lab in NY? Any comments would be greatly appreciated. Later this week, I will sending them a 100ft roll of Kodak Vision2 500T. The roll contains test footage to gauge the look of the film to see it if meets my needs. I want the best quality possible on the transfer to DV-Cam. Is there anything I should ask for besides a BEST LIGHT TRANSFER? I can not afford a shot-shot colour correction. Thanks in advance.

Thanks karl...a little more information that time. I appreciate the help.

Hello there... yeah it was all fresh. Both me and My school order the film right from Kodak.

karl... I think it is you who are wrong. I never mentioned printing to film. I spoke of processing and telecine. Please get you facts straight before you harpoon me like a whale. Second, the point I was trying to make about 35mm still processing was that I get consistent results without ever having to talk with a lab tech or colorist. Motion Film Lab processing seems to be a real hit or miss process whereas the labs really want a lot of instruction for something as simple as a one light transfer. Sure, they want to work with the filmmaker to get it right, but they rarley do (in my opinion.) Sams was just an example, pick whatever facility you want. But the point is the same...my 35mm still print will come out with no grain, scratches, color problem, etc. And that is with no communication between myself and the person developing the and printing the negatives. I appreacite your comments. gregorscheer... Awesome story. I think you have guts for picking up a new profession after having spent so much time doing other creative work. I wish you all the best. And thanks for the info on the film lab. I will check it out. All the best, TOMMY

Awesome! I really liked your work. Was that shot on 35mm? Where did you attend grad school at? I really appreciate your help. I am studying at the U of Michigan and am out of the loop with regards to the real film world, post houses, film processing centers, etc. Here in Michigan we only have 1 option and it is not a great one. That is why I went looking for other "student friendly" facilities. I will definatley try the link you provided. Thank you so very much. I really really appreciate your help. I would still like to post some stills and give you an idea of the crap I have been dealing with. Well, thanks again. You have encouraged me that not all is lost. All the best, Tommy

Wow...I am begining to think that I may be the only one. Thanks for all of your comments. To answer your questions, YES, I have always called the labs and inquired about the problems. They do the usual thing and check the logs, but alas, they find that there were no issues on their end. OK, to the other students out there...are the labs processing your work as a stand alone or with a bunch of other stuff strung onto it? Is there any way that you could post some screen captures of either a one-light or best-light transer? I will post a couple of examples to show you guys what I am talking about. Finally, could you please provide the contact information for the labs you have worked. Thank you very much. PS, I have also worked with PRO-8 in California. They were probably the worst of the bunch with my 16mm. Ok, thanks again.

Hello There Sir.... I find it very hard to believe that I am the only one to have had this problem. I have read numerous postings on this very forum about concerns with lab work. Maybe "professionals" do not confront this issue as much. Maybe they have more money to spend and the labs realize this. But I am telling you, as a student, they treat us like crap. I have talked to labs and been told that my film was strung together with other rolls in order to keep the price down. The problem is that the lights were set up for the first roll of film to the detriment of all the other rolls...and the labs dont care. They figure (I guess) that nobody wants and or expects a decent telecine the first time around. They expect us to come back again with more money to hire a colorist to sit and hold their hand for something that should have been done right the first time. It is totally bogus and all together frustrating. I just had a run through with Film Craft Lab in Farmington Hills, Michigan. They botched 200 out of 500 feet of film. Three rolls went through great and the telecine to DV-Cam was fine. However, 200 feet was very dark, very grainy, with white specks all the way through. Now figure this...it was all the same lighting set up, same camera, same day of shooting. What is more, rolls 1, 3 and 4 were great while rolls 2 and 5 were crap. Random camera error I guess (chuckle chuckle.) I have also used Cine lab in Boston and Bono Film Lab. In short, it is hit or miss. No consistancy...even within labs. However, as my earlier post indicated, consumer 35mm still print processing facilities have none of the same problems. I am curious as to why. Any help and or insight would be greatly appreciated. Thanks again to all. gregorscheer... I just thought of something, a challenge if you will. Let us put my theory and frustrations to the test. I will send you a 100ft of colour neg film stock. You shoot the load with a standard setup (high Key) and then send the film to one of the labs I have discussed. Make sure you shoot a grey card at the head of the lighting setup. Order whatever you like, a one or best light processing with a telecine to DV-Cam ( I will pay for it.) Then preview the film and take a couple of screen captures and post them to this site. Oh yeah, when you send in the film, mark the can as NYU FILM STUDENT Joe Blow. Watch the results and you will be introduced into the world of student filmmaker. $10 will get you $20 that there will be noticable issues with the film image.

Hmmm....no replies. I must have hit a nerve. I knew it, I WAS RIGHT!

Ok, Why is it that some geeky kid at Sams club with a high school education does a better job at developing my 35mm still prints than a professional motion picture film processing facility does with my 35mm film stock? Granted, the geek is developing single prints from a 35mm slr camera and the film processing center is developing and processing rolls and rolls of 35mm film stock...but come on. I have NEVER gotten back a bad print from Sams, Walgreens, snapfish.com, etc., but constantly get crappy results from places with so called high-end equipment aka DA VINCI'S. With the motion picture stock I use good lighting and grey cards...but alas, the results always suck. The lab ALWAYS has some excuse. I have gone wiht one light, best light, scene by scene colour correction, you name it. The results suck. With the 35mm stills, I took no precautions with regards to grey cards, but again, the prints always come out looking good. There is no grain, no white marks (dirt,) no nothing. Just a sharp image. And before you ask, it is not the 35mm motion picture camera that I have been using. I have used three different models and the results are the same. I have used NEW Kodak film stock, the results are still the same. I think the whole thing is a scam. From now on, I will be shooting and finishing on high-end HD. Any colour corrections I will personally take care of in the Avid Adrenaline or FCP. Film Labs suck...I think they purposfully screw over students so that we have to come back and get our prints worked on again and again. Well not any longer. Oh yeah...I have a 3.8 GPA and have a real solid idea of how to capture an image to film. Again, that is not the problem. Ok, I am done griping...on to the digital forum. All the best. TOMMY T