Robert Sawin

thanks for all the support guys keep the Idea going by posting comments and uploading your tests. I look forward to seeing new tests.

I would have to agree with you the lens was a bit soft and it was a bit frustrating because I was using school equipment. Apparently few students seem to want to take care of the schools equipment. As for the charts I was very stubborn to use them because I wanted the tellecine operator to only use the tellecine analyses film "TAF" strips. But it turns out that they did not have them. Well in short I did learn my lesion as far as film testing goes. I had no idea how important the color chart was till after my experience. What is even more frustrating is that even if I did have the taf strips the operator would still have to correct for the taf strips so in essence there is no 0 value for color. I guess that is what I get for being stubborn. But I will use the color chart more often next time to keep every thing some what even. I really hate it when there is an operator correcting for the color when a film test is presented.

Why would you say that?

Thank you so much for uploading all that. Don't forget that there is a lot more written content of my experience on the youtube video descriptions. I can't wait to experiment more but I don't think I will have an experience quite like this one again on my own budget. It cost a pretty penny but I would be thriled if I could experiment more before a shoot and I will post more as I shoot more. Again thank you Brad

I am glad to hear that. :) I did my After death short for $600 for every thing. But equipment was provided by the school. most of my stuff is low budget. :) You can see after death on my web-sight. Maybe it will give you some ideas.

Hi art I am glad you found the visuals useful. I updated my webpage so you can have many resources and more. I edited the footage at apples 422 codec so there is little loss and compressed the footage using h264 codec and uploading it I found that it was better then my other uploads at least I think. the bad thing about youtube is that it compresses the footage even further but it at least it works some what. don't be afraid to download the zip file the images are uncompressed so you can better judge for your self. I am really excited in contributing to the cinematography community and hope to see bigger and better things from it. I hope your projects go well. :)

Sorry I can't It is over a 100 mbs. It is too many to sort through. But you are more then welcome to have at it if you like. I am just doing my part. Sorry if you feel that downloading the file is too much for you. :(

well this is kinda sad cause the web inherently has a lack of quality but it does not mean that we should not at least try to share our findings. I mean I really think I am the first to really do this in this way. But I don't want to be the last. I believe that we are a community of cinematographers and we should at least upload videos and images to the community for others to learn. But that is my opinion. Here is another Download link of the uncompressed image sequence. Enjoy. :D Let me know if this works for you. http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=ff528e4...04e75f6e8ebb871 http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?qqnzznejknm

I am actually kinda surprised I was expecting more activity in this thread. I mean when I set out to do these tests it was like I could not find anything out there public to give me an idea as to how film stock reacts under different development process. And I have seen all of Kodak and fuji films demos but nothing like this before. Really as a community of cinematographers it would be nice if we shared our tests and experiences. I mean at least this is how I feel.

Let me know if you got it to download. :)

all the way at the bottom it says "Save file to your PC: click here" click on the "click here" text.

http://www.2shared.com/file/5965286/c47fbf...e_sequence.html http://www.2shared.com/fadmin/5965286/f698...quence.zip.html

I made a tiff image sequence. Hopefully this will help. :)

Thanks for posting. No I do not work in a lab. I got all this done at foto kem. I knew what I wanted when I was testing the stocks. I was more concerned with the quality of the grain structure and the clarity of the image. If I do it again I probably would mix things up more and go more extreme on the pulling. like do a pull and a skip bleach and a cross process on a color reversal all on one stock. or maybe pull 4 or 5 stops. color is way more forgiving then B&W. and foto kem won't do any thing too extreme unless you bend there hand backwards or tell them it is a different stock. like saying a 250 stock is a 50 stock. something like that. I have been doing amateur photography for 13 years so these special process are not new to me. But motion picture film is so different then still in so many ways.

Don't be shy I see people are viewing the thread but it is ok to respond. :) Really I did this for the aspiring and practicing cinematographers. Any criticism is greatly welcome. :)

I set out to experiment on different types of motion picture film and manipulate them in developing. I worked with several different types of stock namely, Kodak 7219, 7201, 7285 and Fuji film F-64D and ETERNA250D. I wanted to take advantage of the diverse selection of stocks to choose from. I chose not to place emphasis on lens selection and camera technique. I predominantly used the 10 mm lens to shoot many of my film tests on. I mainly choose the 10 mm lens because it is better suited for landscape photography. I also conducted experiments using different types of filters including gradients. In the development I wanted to experiment with skip bleach and Pushing and pulling the film stock. If you are interested In viewing all the test I have done please view the youtube channel to view the 16mm motion picture test. http://www.youtube.com/user/3980time Or you can click the the 16 mm cinematography test link on the left hand side of the page http://trip3980.googlepages.com/home I decided to do this for those who are interested in conducting or learning about various film test and special development process with different stocks. So this is for the cinematography community to enjoy and I hope these tests help. I am always hungary for working more with motion picture film projects so if you are interested let me know and I would love to help. Thank you and please feel free to ask me any question or comments you wish or post any link to something that may help other cinematographers with future test ideas. Regards, Robert Sawin

yesterday I was at fotokem and I was talking to one of the film lab techs there about pushing my film. I shot 16mm film using only one arri 2k light through the window. there where wooden blinds on the window to add some texture to the room. the issue was that the highlights where reading at f2.8 and my zoom lens had a max f stop of f3.3. even tho the film was under exposed at about a half a stop, the tech suggested I push the film to 1.5 stops. so I oked the go ahead to push it that much. But when I went to entertainment post to reserve for telecine an older man who had a lot of wisdom to share told me that by pushing the film 1.5 stops it increased the grain structure about three times. so essentially if that 16mm film stock was blown up to 35 mm the grain would be 1000 EI and by pushing it 1.5 stops thats like 2000 EI equivalent to 35mm film. I guess thats ok but I shot with a 1600 speed film before and that was kinda granny so I can only imagine. so here is the question. why shoot 35mm 500 or above EI when I can shoot 16mm to match the equivalent grain structure. for example a 16mm film rated at 250 EI has the equivalent grain structure of 35mm film rated at 500 EI. Essentially the film speed of 16mm is double that of 35mm. Now is there any real disadvantages to shooting 16mm film and blowing it up to 35mm? especially with the new film from Kodak like the vision 3. I mean can a movie goer really tell the difference between 35mm scanned at 2k and a 16mm scanned at 2k?

It is always good to talk with every actor individually about the script and the story in general more specifically the back story way in advance. there is really no need to rehearse the hell out of a scene especially with the rest of the actors. I believe it just wastes everybody's time making them all come for some rehearsal. A professional actor should be more then capable to bring him or her self to the set ready and prepared the way they are accustom to. The director is only there to serve the vision of the script and to guide the actors. In reality there all actors have there own voice finding out how they act first should help you figure out how they will act on set. Encourage them to keep an open mind about how they see the story and there character. If you come to the set already having pre conceived ideas as how exactly you want them to act be prepared to be disappointed. also it is a highly recommended that you let the actors mingle before you shoot observe there interaction let them rehearse the scene just before it is shot with out any direction see how they see the scene. You never know you may stubble upon something you never thought of. When shooting let them finish but after you cut it is more then ok to direct them in effort to mold there performance in front of the other actors. Remember the director is at the hem of the ship and people need to be assured that you have every thing under control even if you think you don't and never just rely on your self for the vision keep the environment as open as posable you never know what easter egg may pop up. Hope this helps Regards Robert Sawin

Hi all, Ok I have a question about the Directors relationship with the DP. I noticed that there are two types of Directors the ones that are technically inclined and the ones who are not so technically affluent. Directors like Martin Scorsese I believe is a technical director but Julie Taymor isn't so much. as for me I am very much a director that loves the technical side of things but I am unsure of how the relationship exist between the two. More specifically when it comes to shot selection, composition and lighting for mood. is there any line or is it more something that varies from DP to DP and Director to Director. any thoughts? Thanks Robert Sawin

Hi all I just shot a film yesterday and I shot with the new Kodak vision 3 500T. I was shooting with only one arri 2K light at night from the window through wooden blinds. The room is white and I had blind patterns on the wall as well as the subject. Rating the stock at 500 speed the meeter was reading the highlights at F2.8 now I was using a zoom lens and that had a max F stop of F3.3. Now if I am correct I think I want to push it one stop and I think that means that the film would be rated at 800 speed but not sure. its been awhile sense I have done any push processing so I forgot the math. And I have only done it with B&W not color. I want to do the push processing but I am not too sure what to expect especially with color. I only used one light in an attempt to create hard shadows. So if I push the film would that be too much? If so what effect should I get. How would push processing effect color film? and does any one know where I can see examples of push processing before and after stills? All of you have been a big help in the past with my questions and I look forward to any wisdom you have to share. Thanks Robert Sawin

What is the most Commonly referenced paintings, photography, and other motion picture art by professional Cinematographers for inspiration. and what do you think makes these inspirations to light so profound. And if you are a cinematographer yourself what do you reference for inspiration. as for me I like looking at modern motion picture productions television shows and even music videos. However, it is striking that the motion pictures I look at I can't help but think the cinematographer who authored these images also reference off of other paintings and works. So in one way I feel like I am referencing to an and artist who was referenced off of another artist. Almost like the torch is being handed down from one generation to the next. Any thoughts? Trip...

oops miss read what you wanted to do sorry. ignore what I said. :/

ez 4 or more 1 k soft boxes attached to the celling facing down. works every time good even lighting real strong shadows.

Thats not the problem tho I have always had the crew, actors and yes many times sag, and locations etc... but what I really want is for a producer to say I got a script and backing can you please direct my film. I never had a problem producing I just don't like producing in the least but I can do it very well more so then any thing else but I hate it. I latterly have actors and crew ask me regularly do I have another project they can work on with me. Don't get me wrong but people only see prestige and I hate fame I hate award I hate to actually be the one to distribute my work. I always end up giving my actors and crew a copy and just set it on the shelf as just another project I did. IDK any advice as to how to get out of this hole?

I would take apart the mag look at the gears or what ever. check to see if there is any signs of rubbing or wear. use a spool of exposed film to run a test and slowly crank it while it is open. listen for moments of noise then pinpoint that. sounds like oil ain't going to work for this job. if all else fails bring it in to a shop to see what they can dish up. Trip...