Chris Keth

It's very obvious. The film footage was shot with a CP16.

I'll give you what I know in short. You should really do some research on your own, you know.

Edit: I just checked in my American Cinematographer's Manual and it lists the Bolex H16's mechanism as "single claw pulldown" so I think single perf stock will be alright. You might look as I detailed below to make sure, though. As long as the camera only has one pulldown claw, you're golden. Super 16 stock is just 16mm stock that is missing perfs on one side. Take a look in the camera, if the only pulldown claw is on the right side (with the camera right side up and positioned as if you were looking out through the lens), you're good. If it has two claws, you'll have to get double perf stock.

Absolutely, as long as you know how to get perfect readings with it, use whatever you want. On a side note, I just bought a spectra classic on ebay, I should get it this next week :)

I think the issue is that, since most people still have standard def TVs so anything shot for commercials will be downgraded to television resolution, which is far less than 35mm res and far far below 65mm res. So, considering that, why would you shoot 65mm which is going to cost loads more than 35mm when it's just going to be downgraded to the same thing?

I'm a sophomore in film school right now and I'd love to find a job or internship in the western pennsylvania area for the summer. Is anyone interested in a loader or something or know someone who might be? Or alternately, does anyone know a good resource that I might keep looking?

You could have it calibrated but what he did accomplishes the same thing. I think I personally would have put a circle of ND in there instead, but that works.

Experience.

I'm gonna give this a bump. Unfortunately, the scanner wasn't good enough to show off the quality of the film, but they both look very good projected.

Yes, that's what it means. The film will register detail over that range.

I forgot to add this in my original post. He wants something that he can get black and white, few to no grays in the middle. We're looking at some kodak intermediate films but are unsure of the exposure index of those and it's not listed on their website.

Yup, a white reference and a black reference will put all the grey tones in between in their proper reference and make the print look much richer.

I have a friend who is looking for line copy film. He wants to try and shoot a 16mm experimental on the stuff and is wondering if it's available in 16mm and in lengths suitable for shooting in a motion picture camera.

Then I've been unlucky. I've looked a few times and come up with nothing but the digitals. I'm sure those are very good but I don't have the money.

I think you're just reading the curve wrong. Nothing there corresponds to an f-stop setting, really. It's just a measure of how great a range of brightness values can be registered on the film. Film is only effective over a certain range of brightness, metering your scene shifts this range of light levels up or down. The curve tells you how wide or narrow (compare that so a curve for a reversal film to se an example of narrow) that effective band is. So the -4 to +6 range means that if you expose at F4, there will be some kind of detail on things that are 4 stops darker than that (as read by a spotmeter) and 6 stops brighter than that.

I've ruyn into a couple mentions of lighting fixtures that I don't know of. What are "dedolights"/"dedos" and what is a "source 4"?

They will reduce any color temperature by the mired value for that filter. Doesn't matter what color temp you start with.

Speaking of old light meters, does anybody know ehere I might obtain an analog spectra meter? I mean the type that reads in footcandles with no slide in and has slides for different EI ratings. I can't seem to find anything but the new digital ones for sale, though the spectra website still lists the Classic.

I've found that this works the best for me. No introducing characters, just throw the audience right in there to see for themselves what is up and who it's happening to. That way, your screen time can be better spent on the cool stuff :)

This is another frame of the project I shot for someone else. This is a POV of the cops as they're in the observation room. The man in question is blind (as far as we know) and is suspected of being a peeping tom.

This one is one I shot. It's shot on 7222, processed normally. It's a kind of gritty police interrogation feel, evgen though in content it's a comedy. This is the first thing I've ever been the DP on, I'm pretty happy with my first try.

Hey, everyone. I scanned a few frames of my latest two projects. This first one is a short I directed and am cutting on a flatbed now. A good friend of mine was DP, it's shot on 7218 processed and shot normally.

Wind some of your own daylight spools if it's cheaper. It's pretty easy to do with a rewind bench and some darkness. Hell, get the parts for a rewind bench off ebay and go in a closed up bathroom.

That's what I thought. Anyway, even if they did still sell 110 film, it would be different than 16mm motion picture film, it'd be make to make prints from rather than to be printed onto positive stock The lenses would be different, as well. It wouldn't be a very good test because of all the different variables you introduce. I think (and John Pytlak can correct me if I'm wrong) that kodak sells most if not all of their stocks in 100ft lengths. These are probably daylight spools but maybe cores, too. That would be a pretty nominal fee to pay if you get the benefit of good reliable tests on the equipment you plan to use.

If lights are your problem, shoot faster film or video so you don't have to bring as great of a quantity of light. That way, you can spend your resources on bolstering the parts of your scene that need sweetening rather than just getting a shootable stop.