Sanji Robinson

Thanks. Why did you use 200T for "The Love Witch" ?

Hi, I would like to do long dolly shots, while booming up or down. Some of the longer dolly shots require that the camera pushes in while booming down. I obviously don't want to see the tracks in the shot, so the camera should be feets ahead of the dolly. I can think of two possible options: 1. Use a dolly with hydraulic boom. Either PeeWee or Fisher. Then use a 36-inch slider or camera plate extension to keep the camera ahead. 2. Use a dolly with hydraulic boom. Either PeeWee or Fisher. Then use a small Jib arm to keep the camera ahead, and use the jib arm to boom down. Any thoughts?

(in your experience) is it worth pushing the contrast photochemically (combined with some D.I) over doing everything in the D.I? Will the extra cost in testing/special processing yield better results? Not thinking about the added grain for now. Good thinking, Phil. I have had this experience with 16mm grain and low-Mbps H264 transcoding. What software would you recommend for the encoding to Blu-Ray/Web? You must know quite a few.

Karim, Someone someone at a big lab (no names mentioned!) begs to differ. Can anyone confirm that pushing the film stock 2 stops will give you no advantage over raising contrast in the D.I (grain and saturation aside) ?

Tyler, I actually would like it if the faces were a little grainier than the rest of the frame. So you recommend exposing normally and pushing 2 stops? Without't that burn the highlights even more?

Spherical 3 perf Underlit New stock It's hard to say where the color will go. I will shoot a test. Another reason to use 5213 is that the contrast build up should be higher when pushing two stops than shooting 5219 and pushing one stop. Any other thoughts?

Hi, I am going with 35mm for the shallow depth of field. I am planning on using the Kodak 200T 5213 (not 19') since I like the color of this stock. I will underexpose the film by 1 stop, then push process it by 2 stops, so it reaches 800 ASA (with 1 stop overexposure to protect shadow detail). Would you do anything different? I am going for grain on people's faces, texture and very high contrast...but without degrading the quality of the image. Also I don't want too high saturation, so I will bring that down in the D.I.

Satsuki, you mean overexposure and bringing it down in the D.I will yield more contrast But does anybody have experience with skip bleach and pushing 1 stop?

Anyone selling?

Hi, If I want high contrast, deep blacks but normal color saturation, would you advice against a skip bleach and 1 stop push on the negative? As opposed to developing normally and taking care of the contrast in the D.I? Not planning on using the Panaflasher/Varicon, so relying on the low contrast of Vision3 to retain some shadow detail if I take the skip bleach/push path. Finishing digitally.

Let me quote the Variety article: Sounds like he is talking about every lab out there. I am not saying he is wrong. I am wondering if it's true?

Please, someone post to his forum. I am sure there are more than two dedicated labs out there who are unhappy with Roger's comment that essentially paints all the labs with one brush.

I am confused, Satsuki. What "lab work" are we discussing? There is quite a range of steps in the process. Processing? Printing? or Telecine? (the latter can be substituted by a professional color house. Labs like Fotokem don't have to do your digital dailies) If Seamus McGarvey was complaining about the "timed dailies", he meant either the dailies print or the telecine, correct? But Roger said there was a "lab work" issue on "Hail, Ceaser!". So, he meant inconsistent processing of the negative?

Deakins says: "You can’t even process differently these days. You don’t have that option." What does he mean? Most labs will still push/pull process the negative, cross process and bleach bypass. OK, maybe ENR/Oz is gone, but that's print only.

Satsuki, do you work at a lab? To my knowledge, Fotokem is a very good lab. Film processing is pretty regular business at Fotokem, and I would be surprised if the chemistry was not checked on a daily basis. What "perfect prints" are you talking referring to? "Hail, Caesar!" to my knowledge was DCP only. No prints were struck. What does Roger Deakins mean by "We had some stock issues and stuff like that"?

Hi, My 2nd AC mistakingly mislabeled the film magazine as 5207 which we later found out was 5203. What a bummer. This whole time we were shooting, we were underexposing the film by a full 2 stops. We have not developed the film. What's the right way to go about this? Should we push the film 1 stop (which won't affect the loss in shadow detail) and then correct the rest in the D.I? Or don't push the film at all? Thank you

Who else has them then?

Hi, Anyone knows where to rent an 8perf vista vision camera in the west coast? We tried Clairmont Camera without luck... Thank you.

Thanks everyone! I know the X-ray scanners effects on film is less damaging when going through the airport. However, the film went through three times! Is it less bad when with unexposed film, as opposed to exposed? Also, what can I expect from a stock of this age (V2 100T, 200T). What can I expect (thinner blue layer, more grain) ?

Dear Knowledgable Cinematography Community, I'm currently in the middle of an island in the Caribbean on a shoot for a short film. We are shooting on 16mm film, which we brought with us from the United States. The film was X-rayed three times (once in LAX, once in Bogota, Colombia and once at the destination). We tried to ask for manual inspection, but the security people didn't have a clue on what to do (Yes, that includes the folks at LAX...). We tried to minimize the x-ray by putting the films in the changing bag before running it through the xray machines. The film that we are using is Kodak 7217 (Vision 2, 200T) and Kodak 7212 (Vision 2, 100T). Both were bought through eBay. On top of the x-raying, the films are also past their expiration date (although not by that much probably). The film was x-rayed while unexposed. What do you think the film might be like after all this? Still shootable? I plan to rate the films at 100 and 50 ASA, respectively. Also I am not using an 85 filter...I'll just let it go blue and fix it later in the DI. Also note It's too late to purchase anything directly from Kodak since it will take too long to bring anything it to the island (and they probably x-ray the crap out of it too). Help is appreciated. Peace