Tebbe Schoeningh

First: thank you, Jonathan. I did´nt understand what you mean with "printing down". Do you refer to the final print to positive for the 35mm copy? If you mean that, I´ll have to find a different way because we don´t have the budget for a blow up. By now the finish will be in DVD and 16mm positive... What would you suggest? Thanks! Tebbe

Hi! I´ve just seen "Clockers" by Spike Lee and I really liked Malik Hassan Sayeed´s cinemtography. I got a couple of questions about the "how" and "what", maybe some of you know more about that movie and could give me some answers... 1st: There are a couple of shots made with long lenses that look very nice. Do you know which lenses they we´re using? 2nd: There are some flashback sequences, that seem to be shot in a different format. There´s the one when Delroy Lindo tells Mekhi Pfifer the story of his first murder. It looks really grainy and so on. Could it be Super 8? Mekhi Pfifers flashbacks look like cross-processing. Did Malik Hassan Sayeed use it on tht film? 3rd: I suppose that most of the emulsions they were using on that film are discontinued, but anyway I´d be interested in knowing which stocks we´re used. 4th: There are some scenes which were aparently shot with filters. I liked especially the last one, when Mekhi Pfeifer is on that train. I´d looks like an orange filter which desaturates the image in a way. Which one could it be? Thank you all! Tebbe PS: I could up some stills of the scenes, but I don´t know wether it´s legal or not...

Hi! In about two months I´m going to shoot a 10 min shortfilm on 16mm. There will be mainly two looks/light-situations. The first one is night-interior, low-light and high contrast with deep green tones dominating and I want to "justify" the light by only one visible source (im going to attach a picture of the desk lamp, it´s the typical "old-fashioned" library-lamp). To reach a high-contrast looks with the colors "popping-out", I plan to underexpose and push-process the negative by one stop. Anyway, I´d like the image to be as clean as posible and avoid to have a grainy look... The second one is day-interior (actually it´s the same apartment but it´s day...) and I want the light to "invade" the room coming in through the half-closed curtains (maybe I´ll use some ambient smoke). The look should be less contrasty and kind of cold so I thought of overexpose and pull process at least one stop. We also want some grain in this scene. The projects budget is quiet low (we´re all students...hehe) and we don´t have a lot of light available so I´m considering to use fast emulsions like Kodak Vision2 500T 7218 or Fuji F-400 8682 (for the day-interior) and Fuji F-500 8672 (for the night-scenes). Fuji´s student-politics is quiet fair here in Argentina, they offered single-perforated F-400 and F-500 at 60 Dollars which is about 40 Dollars less than Kodak, so I think we go for it. But my problem is, that I don´t know much about the look of Fuji-Emulsions and how it reacts on under- and overexposure. In fact all the tests at film-school we´re doing on Kodak Vision (1) or Kodak Vision2 and almost everything I know about shooting on film is pure theory because this is going to be my first project on film as DP. I feel quiet unsure about what we´re going to do and how to expose (yeah, in fact i´m afraid of messing it up...hehe) that´s why I´d like to hear somebody´s opinion about this who actually has got experience with shooting on F-400 and F-500 in situations which are comparable to the ones I described before... Thank you very much for your answers! Tebbe

Kind of funny, I´m responding here and where studying at the same university... My personal experience with the Z1 is quiet good, especially in low-light situations the footage looks quiet nice. obviously it hasn´t the same dynamic range as film has, but compared to the canon your mentioning, the blacks look deeper... i worked on the canon xh a1 (NTSC-Version) on two shorts and I didn´t like the camera because we had A LOT of problems in postproduction. Final Cut 5.1.4 didnt recognize the device and finally we were only able to edit downconverted material which looked really bad. saludos, compadre tebbe

if you´re still searching: www.ucine.edu.ar

i´m studying at the FUC (www.ucine.edu.ar) in Buenos Aires too and I really would not recommend this school for cinematography. Camera an lighting classes are quiet good, but only once a week...

Thanks for the fast replies! Now I understand the rating-thing ;) Tebbe

Hi! Reading the ASC-Article about "Die Hard 4.0" i got confused by the description about the ISO Rating of the filmstock Simon Duggan was using on that film. "The Cinematographer shot the picture on two Kodak Vision2 stocks, 500T 5218 (often pushed one stop and rated at ISO 800) for studio and night work and 250D 5205 (rated at ISO 200) for day-exterior work." Could somebody explain me what is this ISO Rating about? I thought that pushing the film by one stop, the ISO doubles (ergo 500T would be 1000T) is that right? :blink: Thank you very much! Tebbe