Jump to content

Camila Freitas

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Camila Freitas

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  1. Hi could anybody share their feelings and impressions about what spherical lens series would be a good choice for using wanted flare as a narrative choice? which lenses would be most prone to produce beautiful and organic flares according to your experience? i've been thinking of Cooke S3 series but also wondering about Schneiders (though these might be a little too much), what would you guys say? Thanks a lot
  2. A well-exposed, i.e. denser-than-normal, negative helps reduce grain and improve blacks, which makes for a better blow-up. Most people do this by rating the film stocks slower than normal, like by 1/3 or 2/3's of a stop (1/3 of a stop is farily negligible however -- 2/3's of a stop is better.) Does that also apply to a s16-HD-35 blow-up? What differences do you consider most important between the two routes? Many thanks, Camila
  3. Hi Is it necessary to compensate for exposure when you shoot S16 for an optical blow-up? Thank you Camila Freitas
  4. Hi there I borrowed a set of Cooke Speed Panchro 35mm lenses to shoot a short movie with my university's Arri 16SR. This set usually goes with that camera. I'd like to know what difference there is in using 35mm lenses for 16mm cinematography, if there is any kind of adaptation the lenses or the camera have gone through and WHETHER I USE THE DEPTH OF FIELD TABLES FOR 35MM OR 16MM, FOR EACH FOCAL LENGTH. Thanks a lot! Camila
  5. Do daylight stocks render more natural colors in mixed lighting? How exactly should I use a color temperature meter when I want to measure the color temp of one specific feature?
  6. Camila Freitas

    TV light

    Hi I have a scene in which an actress is watching television, and I'd like to know whether somebody has experience with that (in low budget!). Do you know ways of imitating TV frequency on a person's face (the tv set isn't in the frame). Thanks in advance
  7. I'm sorry if my questions show some anxiety... it's only my third short movie, and I got really concerned when I realized I wouldn't be able to roll even simple tests. But that's it! I'll do the skip bleach even then. Thank you very much!
  8. Can anybody tell me what is the equivalence of an HMI lamp power/ penetration in terms of tungsten lights? For example, a 575W HMI fresnel, what would be the equivalent to it in power for a tung fresnel, if there is such rule? Thanks
  9. "On a short I did some years back all I could run was a 575W HMI on the car due to power." I have the same situation in a few weeks and I thought about using exactly a 575W HMI. But how did you or your gaffer do to get the supply from the car battery? And wherer did you fix the light? I was thinking of some way of mounting it at 45o to the windshield, as well as the camera would have to be mounted frontally. But I just can't figure out how to power supply a source that is not 12V like the car battery. Is there any adaptor for that kind of situation that you'd know? Thank you Camila Freitas
  10. "here we would go down about 3 to 4 trims - that's equivalent to half a stop in the midtones, but rather less at the toe of the curve (of the print)". I don't quite understand: we would go down with bleach bypass more in the midtones than at the toe of the curve, the darker areas? "So you can pretty much use all the latitude that the negative offers you at the highlight end". I gather that the silver retention brings your print down progressively, more at the toe and gradatively less as you go up the curve. At the brighter areas, there should be no silver retained at all, isn't that right? I'd appreciate if you could give me a technical explanation on how that "progression" happens. All my concern about latitude of a negative that will be printed with such a process is exactly because I know there is a greater "crushing" of the blacks than of the whites, so I'm not quite sure if that negative reating should be parallel for both sides - darker and brighter areas. Besides using a compesating technique such as a filter, should I reduce my working range in the shadows, too (i.e., not trespassing a certain limit for low light, even if I go pretty much to the maximum in the highlights). I know I'm kind of repeating an earlier question, but that's maybe because I still don't have so clear the physical differences of the silver retention in each area of the curve.
  11. So, in a general way, I could get a lower grade for exterior/days, a mid one for interior days and nights, and a stronger one for exterior/night, right? And, if I understand well, if there's anything to be adjusted because of the light boost the filter causes, it can be done at the timing. No exposure adjustments on camera are needed, that's what I want to be sure of. In Cinematography, you also talk about homemade devices for decreasing contrast and diffusion. Since there's a character in the filme that should be always out of focus, I thought about helping my depth of field by using that glycerin idea smeared on a piece of glass in the area this character will occupy. But, since I'm already using the Ultra Con, and the less glass I put in front of the lens the better, can I smear it directly onto the filter or will it damage it? Thanks. This conversation has been certainly enlightening for me.
  12. I really appeciate your answers! And I still have a few questions about filters for a bleach-bypassed print: I'm shooting S16 to optically blow it up to 35mm, so I already have a definition loss along the process. This is something that worries me about using a filter all the time, though I know the skip-bleach will also restore a sensation of better definition on the print. I'd choose to use a Tiffen Ultra Contrast - because it seems to be the only Tiffen filter which doesn't produce any halation or extra flare at highlights at all - but it certainly wouldn't be advisable to use the same filter gradation for all situations, would it? We have exterior and interior days and nights, that is, too many different lighting contexts, and for each I think the filter will react in a different way. To be sure of that, of course it would've been great to have had them all tested, but like I told you before, we couldn't make it. So, could you tell me something about your experience with those filters? At Tiffen website, they say Ultra Cons will let you "see more"... does that actually mean that you have to give the negative less light to compesate for that light gain? How do I measure that... is a spot meter in the place of the lens be enough to measure that? Maybe you can tell me if other filters are best for some of these specific situations. The other question I'd like to pose to you is about my working latitude when exposing a negative for a bleach-bypassed print; can I work just the same as if I weren't doing it? Or do I really have to hold my blacks and shadows up to -3, as I suggested before? If I have them below that, will I actually be in danger of losing all detail because of the skip bleach, or can't we exactly say the bleach bypass would "darken" my blacks? Also, would you say that it's best to hold the highlights up to some limit or is that the limit of my negative's latitude and that's all? (I'm using Kodak - Vision 2 250D and 500T, which of course have great latitude, esp. when it comes to highlights). Thank you once more!
  13. Hi I have a shoot in a few weeks and I have a few doubts about how to expose a negative for a skip-bleach print. My main objective with the process is color desaturation and more opaque blacks, though I don't want to have much too contrast since the film is mostly about solitude in everyday life dullness, and the scenes happen in a common family apartment and a supermarket and mostly day exteriors, which I don't think that match a very contrasty and heavy look. My first question is: since my blacks and midtones are going to go down about 2/3 ou 1stop because of the bleach bypass, I thought about compensating for that with an overexposure of 2/3, so that when the print is processed with the skipbleach the blacks and midtones don't lose as much detail as they would naturally after the silver retention. In order not to wash out my highlights, I would hold them up to +2.5 stops, and my shadows wouldn't be darker than - 3 stops in relation to an 18% gray card. Well, having in mind that the bleach bypass process on the print will affect mostly the darker areas of the image, it makes sense for me that overexposing 2/3 is advisable to keep some detail in the darker areas. But, if the lighter areas are not to be much affected or not affected at all by the silver retention, it means that if I overexpose the negative by 2/3, they may wash out a little. Can you tell me to what extent are highlights affected by bleach bypass when it's done to the print? I once read an answer of Mr. Mullen for a student at this forum about a similar question in which he said that compensating wouldn't be necessary in such a case because you could do it on the print. But, to compensate for loss detail with stronger lights on the print will also cause the highlights to go up maybe more than they should, won't it? Wouldn't it be really best to keep your highlights up to a set limit, like +2.5, so that they don't wash out, and overexpose it to have a thicker negative in the highlights and in the shadows so that more detail can "survive" the silver that will be retained? You see, I have a contradiction here. If you can, help me out by telling me your views on the matter. Also, since I don't want a too contrasty look, I've been thinking of using a low contrast filter too. In Cinematography (by Malkiewikz and Mullen), it says that these filters sometimes require exposure compensation for less light, since it scatters light all over the negative and has a similar effect to flashing it. If using a filter can be a form of compensating for that detail loss in the dark areas, thus if you use it you wouldn't need to overexpose? Is there a factor table for these filters (we unfortunately won't be able to shoot tests for this short movie)? Which grade would you recommend in this case? Do the low contrast filters soften the image or produce any artifacts? I'm shooting Super-16, so I don't want to lose much sharpness as well. Well, I also appreciate if can you send me links to pages where I can find more information about these topics. Thank you for reading this long and maybe too confused mail! Camila
  • Create New...