Kaspar Kamu

Dear all,

I'm shooting a short film next month with an Arricam LT. Our number of mags are limited, so we will go with 1000' rolls. On the ST I've seen that the magazines can be mounted on top of the camera. My question is whether it's possible to do this with the LT as well.

We need to do this, since many shots will be on a jib, and if the magazine is mounted to the rear, it will undoubtedly knock against the jib if we're in a steep low-angle.

Alternatively (and this might be a question better suited to a gripping subforum) is there a way of extending the jib to avoid the aforementioned problem? '

Many thanks in advance!

 

yes, that is correct :)

edl is for Edit Decision List (a software readable text file containing info of the edit points) and dpx is a standard file format for film scans. dpx scanning is normally quite expensive which is why only the material needed for the final movie is scanned in best quality to dpx. after developing the raw materials just get the most affordable basic telecine transfer so that the edit can be done affordably and when absolutely sure which frames are needed, then finally scanned in best available quality.

 

if you are shooting very small amount of material (like under 1km or so of 35mm 4-perf) it may be more practical to just transfer it all in reasonable quality to prores444 or proresxq or uncompressed quicktime and do your edit versions and final versions directly from that transfer (the transfer quality needs to be good of course and material needs to allow grading) . I tend to do "technical grade" transfers instead of full Best Light because I will grade everything properly later anyway and it is much more expensive to actually grade material in telecine rather than just correcting the too dark/too bright/ clipping/crushing shots in film transfer and leaving the other variances there to be corrected in final grading. it may necessitate for you being in the transfer session with the operator to guide which shots need more highlight correction and which need more detail to shadows etc. so that the operator can make quick adjustments to settings on the fly. it is not live grading though so you need to know which shots you can grade to the desired look afterwards without adjusting scanner/telecine settings for that specific shot and which need to be corrected in film transfer so that you don't miss the critical parts of detail from the negative

Thanks for your help, Aapo!

I think the quote we got from Focus Film is very reasonable for the two scans, so I think we're going to go with the option they laid out to us. The 2K scan to dpx itself (for a 7 minute film) costs over 700 €, so I can only imagine (and quiver) at the thought of what it would cost for the entire batch of raw footage.

Is there anything else I should make the editor aware of when exporting the EDL? We're all very new to this kind of jazz and feeling a little bit anxious!

If the transfer is ONLY for offline editing, then they might as well get something close to normal Rec.709 gamma, color -- seems a pain to have to personally grade all of one's dailies just for editing when you're going to re-scan and color-correct again from scratch.

 

If the transfer will be used to make a color-corrected master, then yes, a flat log scan would be best and then you can make a set of dailies with a Rec.709 LUT applied.

 

If the transfer is for some personal project where you plan on doing minimal corrections yourself on a home computer to something mostly correct, then it makes sense to ask for something close to normal Rec.709 but a little lower in contrast so that nothing is crushed or clipped.

Thanks for your very useful input, David!

it depends a lot of your shooting ratio which option is more practical: to do a best light (or technical grade) scan/telecine right away of all the material OR to first do a "preview quality offline scan" of all the material and then scan selects according to EDL after the edit is locked.

 

I personally shoot with low shooting ratios so it is more practical for me to do "technical grade" scan of all of the material to prores444 and edit directly from that. I am working with shooting ratios of about 2.5:1 to 5:1, if you're shooting lots of dialogue scenes with for example 10:1 it is probably much cheaper to do the 1k onelight and scan selects to dpx after editing.

 

the Stockholm lab is very high quality and you can ask quotes if processing more material at a time.

Another great European lab is DeJonghe in Belgium, I have used them a lot recently. they have similar approach with scanning, onelight or lightly graded editorials with telecine and dpx scanning for the finished edit according to edl.

 

I used DeJonghe for developing last year and transferred the films (35mm and some 16mm) to prores444 technical grade here in Finland in ReelOne Oy with Millennium2 scanner. as said I use very low shooting ratios and the current arrangement is the most practical for me but if you are shooting with high ratio it would probably be much cheaper to just edit the onelight transfer and then scan selects to dpx with proper scanner

Aapo, thanks a bunch for your reply!

So; explaining it to myself as if i were a 5-year-old:

1. We send the lab our material, they develop it and scan it to 1K which they send back to us.

2. The editor locks an edit which we send to the lab.

3. From said edit, the lab scans the developed material to 2K based on the edit we sent them?

Is this correct? Sorry, it's just that I'm a complete novice when it comes to shooting on film.

And what do the abbreviations EDL and dpx stand for?

Thanks again!

Hello colleagues,

I'm shooting my first film on 35mm in the of next month and I've been in contact with a lab in Stockholm about the developing and scanning.

The quote they sent me, however, has left me a little puzzled - and instead of potentially making a fool out of myself with them I'll take my chances with you guys (ha).

They want to charge me for 2 scans - 1k AND 2k. The lines in the quote are the following:

Kodak 5207/7207 250D and 5203/7203 50D Vision 3 stocks.

Ah yes! Thanks for your advice Michael!

Printing, not processing.

 

500T is more than enough, forget about pushing. I'd shoot that on '07 or even '03 given a lighting budget.

Excuse my incompetence, but what do you mean by '07 and '03?

 

 

If it won't be too dark, then why do you need to push the film?

 

Plenty of movies have been shot without the 85 filter in daylight using tungsten stock -- "Barry Lyndon", "Greystoke", "Heat", "Shawshank Redemption" to name a few.

And these films were then given a slightly warmer tone through photochemical processing?

 

 

If it won't be too dark, then why do you need to push the film?

 

Plenty of movies have been shot without the 85 filter in daylight using tungsten stock -- "Barry Lyndon", "Greystoke", "Heat", "Shawshank Redemption" to name a few.

Thanks, David.

The look that we're going for is still relatively high key, and I'm afraid that if we're rating our film at 320-400 we'd need more light to compensate - something that our budget doesn't allow. Also, we're shooting on location (café, ground floor) and it's at this moment unclear how many light sources we'll be able to place on the sidewalk without obstructing pedestrian traffic.

The simple solution in my eyes is to use 250D.

 

I do think there are places where 500T is great, when you're dealing with any "daylight" at all, it's just too darn sensitive. The real power of the stock goes to waste through heavy filtration just to make it workable.

 

Honestly, I work with 50D and 250D for almost everything I shoot. This is partially because I light with HMI's mostly and I have nice glass CTO inserts for my tungsten lights. Really the only time I use 500 is exterior night and heavily controlled interiors with no direct sunlight. So buying a few rolls of 500 for those scenes is always a necessity, but for everything else, just stock up on 250D and if you need more range, push it one stop.

Thanks for your advice! I'll look into the possibilities!

Do you really need that much sensitivity for a day INT? Even ASA100 is more than enough to overexpose windows and then you can light the INT with small HMIs - 1,2-2,5K fresnels or same wattage diffused PARs are usually enough.

Or gel windows and light with tungsten. You can get away with '13 stock and you'll need ND filters with '19.

 

320T was once considered high speed film, 500T ultra high speed...

 

You've got a typo, Adrian. CTO not CTB.

 

Don't forget the 81EF.

I figured I'd rather be on the safe side, but I see your point. Coming from the digital era, I've never worked with such low ASA. Do you reckon bouncing an M18 on an ultrabounce through the window would be enough on, say, ASA 250 -- and then possibly pushing it one stop?

David - thanks again for taking the time to reply to my novice questions! It's very much appreciated.

It's an interior day shoot, so it won't be too dark. We'd still a like a fairly high-key look with a fair amount of tonality.

So if we would simply change the colour temperature in the DI, would we still get good colour fidelity?

Thanks for the advice on the LLD filter! Seems like a solid choice!

Thanks for your reply, David!

The reason I ask is also because I'm shooting a film on 35mm at the end of May and we're considering shooting on Kodak 500T, but we'll have to balance it to daylight which will make us lose a considerable amount of light -- taking our effective speed down to 320 or so. Our light budget isn't huge so I'm considering pushing the stock 2 stops to bring our ASA up to about 800 or so. Is this something you'd recommend or would the grain be much too much?

I should also point out that this is my first film on 35mm and due to our very limited budget we can't really afford to run extensive camera tests beforehand!

Best,

Kaspar

Happy Sunday,

I recently watched Inherent Vice for the second time and was truly captivated by the cinematography. I loved the soft vintage look, the noticeable but fine grain in the midtones and the creamy lens flare.

Does anyone know how this look was accomplished? I've managed to research my way to knowing that Robert Elswit used Panavision Primo spherical primes from the late 80s, but what accounts for the grain? Was the stock simply pushed a few stops to give it a look which matches period in which the film takes place?

I've been searching and searching, but I've not managed to find any interviews with Elswit about the process. I also read somewhere that they used "old film stock found in someone's attic", although I haven't been able to confirm this.

Any help or leads greatly appreciated!

Best,

Kaspar

Thanks for your reply!

I'm shooting digitally on a Canon 5d Mark III. It's day exterior with sunshine forecasted all day. I'm not after a specific look, really. Just a kind of slightly high contrast B&W look.

Hello,

I'm not sure if I'm posting my query in the right place, but I'll give it a shot.

I'm shooting a short film tomorrow with a black protagonist. Fairly simple. The only issue is that the film will be shot in B&W. So my question is how do I make the finished product visually pleasing without risking to underexpose his face?

I'm thinking about the possibility of shooting slightly overexposed and then raising the contrast in post. Would this work?

Thanks in advance,

Kaspar

Oh, and probably worth pointing out that there are visible, frequent scratches along and slightly below the perf.

Hello,

So I recently followed the trend and got myself a K-3 and some film stock to practice with before starting to shoot. Anyway; after loading I'd run it at 24fps and the camera would jam after a few seconds, the "pressure plate" would slide down and I'd readjust it after which the camera would run again for a few seconds before jamming again.

Last time I noticed that the film got stuck in the cog wheel and I had to pull it by force to get it out. The film would break and a fragment of film would get stuck in the wheel and I'd have to spend about 20 mins trying to get it out with a needle... What am I doing wrong? Any suggestions on how I can avoid this?

I apologize if this has previously been asked, I couldn't find this specific problem in the forum.

Thanks in advance,

Kaspar