Ruben Arce

Thanks for your reply Tyler, I agree in a few things. I'm shooting log with Ursa Mini and I understand the postproduction process, I still believe that the best and in many cases the only way you can create the right mood is in the camera. I mean lighting the scene in an interesting way and creating three dimensionality and the mood that you want for the picture, a good color palette, good blocking and good framing are things that you cannot get or fix in post. I know DaVinci is very powerful, but still has it's limitations and I don't think just shooting and fixing stuff in post is the way to go. I have had very good results lighting by eye and meter, and treating digital cameras like film cameras. I'm not against the modern tools available for filmmakers these days. Basically what I do is... I find middle gray I test the limits of the camera on the highlights and the shadows with my meter (when I can test the camera before) and I create a mental map of the limits of the camera. That allows me to have information coming from my meter and my brain pretty close to the info I can get from false color, waveform scopes, histogram, etc. but without being an slave of the monitor. I may at the end check the monitor and the scopes, but I'm the one taking the decisions not the camera or the scopes, just like in the old days. You know because I know you are an expert on film as a medium, that people have been pushing an pulling film for a long time, and they test or used to test the limits and behavior of the film in that way and some times people just want to under or over expose a window or the sky and that is what they want to do even if the scopes say that's wrong. What I'm saying is I have noticed that manufacturers are playing games with ISO rates in order to make their cameras more appealing or at the same level as other cameras. The old concept of pushing and pulling, the problem with this has always been grain, and in the case of some sensors fixed patterned noise. If I just assumed that the camera is delivering ISO 800 and I get under exposed footage, I'll have to take it to "proper exposure on post" and that will bring the noise floor up too.

Thanks in advance for sharing your experience with me. I'm going to be DP on a friend's shortfilm and they want to use the Red Scarlet W with a Dragon sensor. I'm excited about that because I have never used a RED camera, but I have some questions, specially since I won't have acces to the camera pretty much till the shooting day. How do you expose for this camera? I know it sounds like a dumb question but I'm really asking, where do you put your 18% gray? and how's your experience with your technique? I like using my light meter to set exposure, but now with a variety of cameras available and manufacturers putting 18% gray wherever they want it's complicated. Here is my point: I have an Ursa Mini 4.6k and it's a great camera. I tested the camera using an 18% gray card and some other tests and I determined that in order to get proper exposure without correcting in post I have to overexpose the camera by almost two stops. I set ISO 800 on the camera and ISO 250 on my light meter, and I get what I consider proper exposure. There is a video where Shane Hurbult tests the camera and he gets pretty much the same results. I guess it was sort of embarrasing for Blackmagic to say their camera is rated at ISO 250 so they said it's a ISO 800 camera like REd and Alexas, but by doing that they are forcing people to under expose a camera that doesn't have tolerance to underexposure. It's a great camera, if you expose it properly and that is not at ISO 800. I know they are trying to protect the highlights, so their camera looks good, but I know how to take care of my dynamic range and I rather take it to the limits taking my own decisions. Is there something similar with RED cameras? How do you expose for RED specially with a light meter? Do you over expose or underexpose for some reason? Do you get more noise if you underexpose it? How far would you take ISO and still get a decent image? I'm not lazy, I did read the manual, but knowing that manufacturers play games with specs I rather have some info from people who have experience using the camera or I may say the sensor. Thanks in advance for your help.

Damn Guy Holt, You know your stuff!! Wow, a lot of great useful information. I know a lot of those thing and it has taken me years to understand them. I wish I could work with you, I could learn a lot from you. I always have my light meter with me btw.

I am passionate about light meters, and I think that using a properly calibrated meter, properly calibrated meter for the camera or LUT that you are using is the best way to work, but you need to know what you are doing. It would be helpful to know which camera you are using, since you refer to it just as a video camera. If you are using a good entry level cinema camera, or even better a good cinema camera you can treat it as a pro camera, as long as you have your facts straight. You will need to know how to use a light meter, your cameras dynamic range and the zone system... But you should not assume that your meter knows where your camera is placing middle gray. You need to test the camera, the meter and the LUT's. Would I shoot a scene that looks way over exposed in the EVF because I'm following the meter information? If I know my numbers, my camera's limitations and my meter, yes I would. Why? Because I know that I can bring it back in post, and if I do it that way I would get less noise or grain compared to shooting an underexposed scene just because the EVF tells me that before any post-processing it looks right in the camera. That's just an example. You should not assume that your camera is properly calibrated with the meter. They don't know each other, they are calibrated in their own world, and not all manufacturers use 18% gray, You have to test your camera and compare it to the light meter to know where they meet and compensate for the difference. I'm sure you have taken pictures and you have noticed that if you select a different profile in your Nikon camera (I shoot Nikon) the pictures look different than other profiles. Let's say you take a picture on "Standard", one on "Neutral" and another one using the "vivid" profile. The "vivid" in the Nikon example is going to look more colorful, more contrasty and you are going to loose detail on shadows and highlights faster because it is more contrasty than the other ones, but that doesn't mean that the sensor is not capable of capturing more detail on those areas, so learn about your cameras dynamic range. It's about perception. If you look at a LCD screen at the desert in the middle of the day your perception of "properly exposed" is going to be different than if you look at the same LCD screen or EVF at night in a darkroom. A light meter bypasses that factor and gives you information that allows you to pre visualize the final image in your mind. Zebras, false color and wave form scopes will give you information as well. They are great tools and all of them are telling you information about brightness on the scene, but you need to be in front of the monitor and looking at the scopes in order to get that information. Test your camera and scopes and find common ground between the scopes and the meter, that way you can be next to your subject, getting info straight from the light meter, translating that information on your mind and knowing how it is going to look at the end, when you apply a LUT or color grading. If you know the limitations of your camera and you adjust the setting inside and outside the camera (lighting) to make everything fit into your camera's dynamic range, you'll make any DSLR look like a Red.

That's right Nick, You would have to compensate for F vs T-Stop, the prism (if the camera has one), I would add half stop to over expose a little and very important use the right shutter angle. People assume that the shutter angle on Super 8 cameras is 180 degrees as in professional cameras, the reality is shutter angle on most S8 cameras is 200 or 220 to allow more light into the film. In the case of the Canon 814 AZ the shutter angle is 155 degree, and that's a third of a stop difference. Yep so many things change when you use a hand held meter and the internal one, I'm not saying they don't work (when they work) I'm saying a light meter averages the tones on the frame, sometimes you'll get perfect exposure, sometimes under or over exposed images, because the light meter doesn't think, it uses information based on the reflectance of the subject, so if we are shooting for fun or "shoot and run" style it works. If we want to take advantage of the film to an extreme, then hand held, research and thinking is the way to go.

I wouldn't recommend using the internal light meter on any old super 8 camera and non professional 16mm cameras. These cameras are old now and some materials and batteries were used back in the day that are not available these days, most Selenium light meters for example are not working or are accurate now, and mercury batteries are not around any more. I know in your case the light meter takes power from the AA batteries powering the camera, but it would be a good idea to compare the internal light meter with a hand held reflected meter against an 18% gray card. As you know the light meter inside the camera is a reflected meter, that can be easily fooled by bright or dark scenes. A sunny day at the desert, the beach or the mountain with snow in the ground will cause your meter to underexpose. I would recommend using a hand held incident meter, it doesn't have to be an expensive one, and I recommend over exposing film by half stop. With film it is better to over expose, and half stop is nothing. That would allow to compensate for the difference in light transmission of your lens if it as F-Stops instead of T-Stops.

Thanks John, well $350 for servicing the camera is not that bad. The one that I'm looking to buy is said to be like new, the owner says I ran 3 cartridges on it, and that's all, but for sure it will need at least the battery. XTR Prods are sweet, I would like to buy one too, I had to decide a few days ago between buying a XTR or an Ursa Mini 4.6 and well knowing that I would have to spend a lot of money in film, processing and scanning I got the Ursa, but I like having a film camera around.

I'd like to hear about the results. I have the opportunity to buy one of these cameras in great condition at a great price, but the owner says it doesn't run, I can assume is the battery, but if I buy the camera I have to be ready to probably do more that re-celling the battery. Can I ask how much did the service cost? And if possible, I'd love to see the footage.

Hello Peeps, I have a Bolex H16 for sale on eBay. It is a great package, it is in good condition, for the most part and it was tested. The camera comes with case, a few lenses, adapters and some extra accessories. If you are interested please take a look at my auction, you will find detailed information about the camera in my post, as well as some pictures. Link to eBay post: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bolex-H16-Reflex-camera-in-absolutely-great-condition-lenses-accessories/152299098290?_trksid=p2050601.c100085.m2372&_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.SEED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D37338%26meid%3Defb46c8c2bc440f28e31079ecfbad9d1%26pid%3D100085%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D4%26sd%3D152299098290%26clkid%3D277360011974057540&_qi=RTM2247625 Link to a camera test video with lenses info: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1OyMB8CNzc Big Resolution pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/76622647@N06/albums/72157672298789583 Thanks for looking.

David, Thank you so much for your response. I wanted you to answer my question and you did, I appreciate that. You helped me realize something that I didn't wanted to accept, and that's nothing replaces experience and testing. I wanted to hear about a formula, but I guess that's the why cinematography is called a craft. I like your example, that's exactly what I had in mind and I agree that it comes to interpretation and serving the story more than getting "proper exposure" Using a hand held meter had helped me to take advantage of dynamic range on different cameras and that's the way I like working, so any advice on light meter techniques or tips are welcome from David or other users. Thanks

Hello everyone, I've been using my light meter for years (Sekonic 558c) and I've been researching as well for a long time and it's been really difficult to find information on how to properly use a light meter. I have tried books, tutorials, skein videos, workshops and even film school but nobody can tell me how they do it. I know light meter gives you certain information and you decide what to do with that. I know light meters and cameras can very a lot and I know how to compensate or calibrate the meter for a certain camera or gamma. I understand 18% gray, and the zone system, incident and reflected meters. But I know that aiming the meter towards the lens is not going to give me the precision that I'm looking for. Here is my example: I'm using a incident meter, I have a person sitting in front of the camera, facing the lens. I have a light source 90 degrees on the right side, easy right? If I aim the meter towards the lens it is going to compensate for the lack of light on the left side, average both sides and it will give me totally not accurate reading. If I point the light meter towards the light source (I guess is the best way to do it) It will give me a reading that is not taking into consideration the shadow on the left side, and it will be "properly exposed". I have done this for some time and I feel like even when my light meter is properly calibrated for the camera it feels a little underexposed. Is Lambert's Cosine rule affecting that light? Because if the light were aligned with the camera angle then I would have a "on the spot" reading. But in reality (the example) I have the light 90· on the side and I'm measuring towards the light. Is the light reflected from the subject affected by Lambert's Cosine rule? Do I have to compensate? I learned from photography class that when they use "Sunny 16" If the sun (light source) is behind you, you don't compensate. If the sun is on your side then you compensate bu half a stop and if the sun is against you the you open up one stop. I have been using this same compensation values with my readings and it had helped me get even better exposures. Why is this important? Well I want to be able to trust my LM and my judgment when lighting a scene, I want to be able to determine "proper exposure" and get consistent results every time so I can take it from there for more artistic interpretations. What do you think? Can you share your experience or even better your technique? Thanks in advance

I'm glad that you are finding useful information. The Spaniard filmmaker describes the "trick" in the comments section of the final music video in Spanish, you can find it on his channel. As you can see on the production pictures they treated the camera, lighting and production in a very professional way. I wouldn't risk using translucent tape. Black "electrical" tape is pretty inexpensive, and great at blocking light. Regarding the use of filters I try to keep it at as least at possible when I shoot digital or film. Unless you are using expensive Tiffen, Schneither or similar quality most filters will bring their own problems. Even something as simple as a UV filter can create light reflections "ghosts" when pointed towards the light source, chromatic aberration, comas, soften the image, change color accuracy and many other problems. I use regular and graded ND's when necessary, but other than I just avoid them. And talking about the status of the camera, well it's difficult to know. Professional cameras from my understanding are serviced every 2 years depending on how often they are used. 20 years without service is a long time, but the K3 is a trooper and it can work without problems. One common issue with old cameras in general is the degradation of the light sealing foam. But looks like your camera works fine. If you want really perfect images well you move to an Arri or Aaton camera. I just sold my K3 and a Konvas 2M to get a professional camera, because I really want steady, sharp images now. But that's at a completely different price point.

Yes you got the idea on my points. The K3 is not a professional camera, but if you respect it and treat it like a pro it is capable of delivering beautiful images. I tape around the gaps, cover the footage counter window, use a matte box, load it in subdued light and unload in total darkness, I keep the camera really clean, etc. I mean exactly what I would do with a more expensive or professional camera. I don't see major problems on your footage, just try applying those tips, probably the camera needs to be serviced too. Here is the video that I mentioned before. The guy explain in the comments of the final music video (in spanish) how he depressed the button to achieve the effect. Inspiring work for sure.

Your K3 looks just fine to me. I watched the video and I noticed that the "spots" occur when you cut. That is absolutely normal with the K3. It happens every time you cut or depress the trigger a little. The one at 1:03 is a cut, the one at 2:58 I can see you cut there too and on the other one probably you depressed the button a little slowing the speed of the film and overexposing that frame. The k3 is not a professional camera, but it can create beautiful images. Every time I shoot with my K3 I use gaffe or electrical tape to seal the gap of the "magazine" and for sure is a good idea to cover the footage meter. My camera doesn't have any light leaks, but I still do tape the joints all the time, even the permanent ones. Deceleration can cause spots or over exposure too. I saw a beautiful film shot with the k3 by a guy from Spain, and he explained somewhere that he was intentionally depressing the button to get those flares. And lastly he most typical one flares that travel trough the lens and reflect light inside the camera and then to the film in a different shape. I'll comment on the spools that you sent to the lab on this one too. They are nice to have them if you are a collector, but Kodak or Fuji metal daylight spools offer better results. So if you get them back and you wanna keep those, good. But try to use the metal ones for your work.

Thanks guys, Aapo that was exactyly the kind of information that I'm looking for. I already read all the topics in the forum related to the Konvas 2m or 8m if I'm asking for more info is because I want the inside information. And because as I mentioned the websites and links are down. So any useful information will be appreciated..

I recently bought a Konvas 2M with the 17.. Sync motor. The camera appears to be in good working condition. Looking condition is fair to good. It came with a 400ft magazine, 4 pin XLR cable and M42 adapter. I already have the camera, some film to practice loading the mag and I order some film to shoot soon. Why am I posting here? I've been trying to find information about the camera. But basically every link connecting to websites related to this camera are out of service. I found the user manual at rafscamera's website (thanks) But other than that there is not much recent or usable info any more. I know the camera is pretty straight forward. Easy to use but I would like to lub it, and be careful so I don't damage the camera. I wanna do it myself, because I can't pay. Not that I'm super poor, but probably the camera is not going to generate money for me at any point. But I still feel a profound respect for cameras and film and I would like to use occasionally in my personal projects. So I have the user manual, I have shot super 8 and 16mm before. I know how to expose and use lenses.. You know the basics. But I would like to receive some specific advice for this camera. Thanks

For some reason scanners have more resolution on the horizontal axis. That's not a problem with 35mm film, but with smaller formats like Super 8, 16 and super 16 it certainly is. I have tried and the picture is just a mess of lines and colors. It may be different with newer scanners like Epson v800 I don't have one. But I tried different older models and it was imposible tome to get a usable picture scanning in the vertical axis.

Haha that would be great. But I have no clue about programming or engineering. That's the why I was looking for a way to use everyday software to do the job. And I would never tried to scan more than 10 seconds with this method any was. But yep let's keep thinking and sharing ideas. Who knows? Maybe we can develop a really good method and shoot as much film as we may want. Good luck with the new project widening the gate. Keep it up.

It is labor intensive Josh, but considering that I paid $5 for the scanner and that anyone can do with not expensive software I think it could be useful in camera, lenses, or emulsion tests. And it can be done almost for free. I was thinking that maybe your preocess could benefit from the After Effects stabilization but now that I watched that new video that you posted I can see how stable it is. And looks great by the way.

That looks great Josh, I hope you don't mind me shearing a method that I'm using to scan film. Is not as good as yours, but it may even help in your process. I'm using a flatbed scanner to scan up to 6 frames at a time that I latter bring into Photoshop and place in a given frame. Can be SD, HD720, 1080 or 2k. This is a painful process. I have to move and position every frame in the right position of the HD frame. Is not that bad neither. Suing the first frame that I scan I create guides in Ps using the sprocket holes.Since the scanned image is a strip I position the one on top in the HD frame first and after that one I just have to use the arrows in the keyboard to move the next image to the right position. After doing this a few time I was able to create a clip with 119 images in about 90 minutes. Why am I doing this or why someone would want to do something like this? I bought a Krasnogorsk k3 from ebay last year. I paid $70 for the camera in great condition, But I didn't know the actual working condition of the camera. What can you do to test the camera? You shoot a roll of dil that cost $50 and ask as a favor to a lab to develop and scan just one roll. You know they have a minimum amount $125 or 400ft. But they are friendly and they do it for you. I never took this step. I did remove the loop formers from the camera first myself. I'm use to doing stuff like that and I didn't wanted to pay $400 to someone to do it for me. That means I did open the camera. So after that I didn't know if the camera was going to scratch the film or let light leak and fog or ruin the film. After almost a year I shot one roll, send it to process and asked as a favor to the lab to do just one roll for me. They agreed and the result was just great. No leaks at all and motion just great as well. Now I want to change the plate of the camera to convert it to Super 16mm. You know what that means? Yes. Opening the camera changing the plate and not knowing if the camera is going to work properly again :( Hey lab can you do another camera test for me? So I decided to buy some B&W film that I'm planning to develop at home and the scan using this method before I shoot something important. I don't wanna waste a $50 roll of film and pay $80 for develop and scan to learn that the camera is not working properly. Then try to fix the problem and repeat right. This is my reason to find and alternative way. And here it is. Sorry for the long explanation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okEuNUfwtZU&feature=youtu.be

Great work.

I totally agree Will, I'm fan of lighting. I do try to properly light my shots when I'm shooting stills, digital or film and my digital video or film. In this case I didn't have much control of the situation. Location sense and maybe a graded ND are some good allies in landscape. But there were many things out of my control. It was just a camera test. But now I know that next time I shoot I have to overexpose. A little, controlled, calculated. But overexpose. Cause in this case I was exposing for middle gray. Which was supposed to give me a proper exposure. I didn't take in consideration the way film grain behaves and how even being properly exposed can be grainy because the shadows don't have enough light. But that's exactly the idea, to learn from experience and from people who knows more than ourselves. I have seen some of your work Will and I know it's really good. I'm an old school guy too and I like keeping the ASA or ISO as low as possible and light accordingly. Thanks for your input.

Thanks Pav, 1 Roll. That's it. Scanned came out in a file of 3 minutes of video. 3 seconds of transitional flare, I forgot to compensate for filters 3 times, so those 3 shots were underexposed and I didn't used them in the video. It was my first time and I was nervous because of that, the light was fading super fast and I covered the footage meter, so I didn't know when to stop. By the end of the shots including by the creek I wasn't sure that I still had stock to keep going. Specially because I was changing lenses and filters fast and trying to keep up with the process. So when I moved to the second location I was shooting with no expectations. I just didn't wanted to waste stock but It felt like I already had shot a lot. Happily I kept going till I heard the loose end hitting the inside of the camera.

@ Mathew. Thanks for your suggestions, I know it may be intimidating to do color grading and color correction. I just do the best that I can with my little knowledge about coloring to complete my little projects. But it would be nice how different it may be if done by a professional. Lenses that I used: - Meteop 5-1 f1.9 17mm-69mm K3 Camera Lens - Super Takumar 55mm f1.8 - Vivitar 28mm f2.8 - Vivitar 135mm f2.8 (Fisherman working on the thread 24") - Polarizer filter - ND Filters 4x4 from ebay. The really cheap plastic filters. When I tested them in a digital camera they had this annoying magenta cast. But it didn't bothered me with film. I tried solid ND 3, 6 and 9. And graded 0.9 on the shot where the trunk is inside the water and mountains in the back. (Second 20) I mounted the camera on my rig. So I had a follow focus and a matte box. It was just a test, but I wanted to see the potential of the camera, lenses and filters if used appropriately.

Thanks guys, A lot of good information and ideas. I appreciate your comments and suggestions. Looks like over exposing 1 or 2 f Stops is the ways to go to avoid grain. I'll try a different color grading software or I could try Video & FIlm solutions color grading services. That way I could see what the difference may be.