Stelios Contos

Cool Cool. I figured so.

It seems like exposing for [ insert skin tone here ] skin tone is more of a refined and poignant version of using a 18%grey card. I understand that my exposure is based on the subject matter and creative decisions, but is there another advantage of using a 18% grey card over the skins talent when the subject is the human ? I would think in an event where multiple skin tones are being captured a grey card would do better than selecting a certain to skin tone to base the exposure around. As far as I my knowledge goes, I think most human skin tones lay on 5 in the zone system....and other skin tones within a + - stop and fraction or thereabout within #5 in the zone system. So girls and guys, To close out and hopefully this makes sense, when do you choose to expose your subject with a grey card versus their skin tone or is it less imperative than I'm thinking. Thanks for your input. I love learning so let me know if a mix of exposure tools are useful or do you use one and done.

When I have a monitor, weather on camera or an additional one, and they do not support on-board frame lines or uploading them to the camera, how would I go about in masking a monitor with tape for framing for my desired finished project ? What formula would that be say to get 2.39|1, 1.85|1 or any other ?

Hey, I noticed some interesting personalities coming from Benoît Debie cinematography practices. I was watching a movie directed by Wim Wenders called Every thing will be Fine. As an added side-note I want to mention the writer,Bjørn Olaf Johannessen, because its connected to the bigger image I noticed personally. The things Im interested in is 1: Benoît's light choice for an early morning scene in this movie? & his all around esthetic - lighting & framing specifically. And the other question was 2: The combination of influences on this projects development? First, the lights question: If you look at the stills I added theres a neon quality to Benoîts lighting in this scene. What I mean by that is the light glows and wraps around some items. The pictures I think show his representation of a really early/late night 2 morning transition lighting. There are 2 ext lights skimming off the exterior windows framing & filling some of the frames space. In the distance outside is the wide open field and the people are in the foreground. Anyone have any knowledge on what Benoît's like lighting choice was when he created that light. From what I noticed from Benoîts style is that he tends to make some of his lights glow. You think this was enchantment in edit or on location DP choices? If you watch & check out stills from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1567609/?ref_=ttmi_tt http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2101441/?ref_=nm_knf_t1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3eAMGXFw1o The other part I wanted to see if anyone noticed was the quality the movie gives off? To me (generally speaking) its gives off part french color/saturation look w & audio style, German novel/script story development & Scandinavian spatial theories. I can expand. Just curious to see if anyone picked up on what Im seeing as the embodiment of various countries. Its neat I think. P.S The lights Im interested look to be the same color you'll see dotted around this movie as well as in Rihannas MV & the flashlights in The Maze Runner & other films.

Ay, Im selling one of my camcorders, a Sony FS100 Super35mm digital camcorder. I think you'll dig the price. :rolleyes: You can go here to check it out... http://www.ebay.com/itm/262485531371?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1555.l2649

Thanks again David & everyone. If been reading a lot about film. I've been reading this page and those wiki pages too. http://www.digital-intermediate.co.uk/film/filmscanning.htm

ooo, is the horizontal captured area of the S35 film...I thought I was on to something. Im looking at the wiki pages Tyler provided which I have read numerous times before, thanks again, I'm getting a lot of it but I possibly need some hands on too.

I suppose when I said "blow-up" I meant : What is the standard resolution of 35mm film & what are the possibilities of up-resing it [E.G 2,4,6k or to a bigger piece of film like Imax?] David, the chart is informative. Is the chart describing the S35mm optical blowup process with a spechrical lens and the bottom display describing a ANA lens being applied to achieve the same 2.35 AR? If my question above is right, couldn't one just use an ANA lens on the S35 negative to achieve using the same surface area like the 35mm ANA film since the grayed out area is still usable on the S35mm film? I just have to keep looking over the math. The used area of the ANA 35mm film is smaller because of the vertical squeezing ANA lens, right?

David I suppose I shouldn't have grouped the blow-up process for film with the re-sizing or enlarging of digital. I also previously dint know that celluloid has such range when it comes to resolution. Thats what I meant when I said: resolution limits. Meaning, at what point would one notice a unsharp picture @ a certain resolution with a 4-perf 35mm frame film during a blow-up process? But, your respond to my question works to. Are the qualities of 4 perf 35mm used with ANA lenses that different than cropping S35mm w spherical lenses? Also a little more on film S35mm. I leave it on film to make things more simple. S35mm initially has a notion to me that its bigger than 35mm. Do you mean 4 perf 35mm has a bigger surface area than S35mm right of the bat? Or is S35mm surface area smaller because the spherical lens usage during production then when everything is said & done it will be cropped to 2.40?

Wow. That arri info David provided is making sense. As is everything else now. Is 4:3/1.33 : 1 full aperture?

I'd like to have been apart of that insider. They were born in Feb, no?

So what are the resolution limits of expanding (for simplicity) 4 perf 35mm film? I always wondered how did the process go about in starting with one frame sizing film stock and ending up with a 2k DCP digital master. Originally, I looked at it in the way of you take a digital image and if you just resizing it in the most general way, one would start to loose quality from its original size. Also, are you saying that: The most often case if a movie is shot on film and slated for a DCP then that movie would go through a Telecine process? Telecine then D.I? Just one of those process's because doing both would be redundant, costly and degrading to the source footage?

ha, I never heard that for the widest stop. ha. Is there one for a super closed aperture?

Hotdam. Thanks Tyler & everyone else who decided to assist me. You have some project page or something of your creations Tyler?

Is there no waste/loss when using 4 perf anamorphic because 4 perf 35mm is standard? So when shooting on S16 (with its respective film size) with a 1.3x anamorphic lens w/o any cropping what happens as far aspect ratio? Is the 1.3x lens making or utilizing more of the film space than a spherical lens would?? Im rocking two ? marks now;I'm getting there!

Adrian, whats WFO & is ANA is anamorphic shortened?

So, Tyler. Depending on what film size & perforation as well as lens like 1.3 anamorphic, 2x anamorphic and other combinations you can have different results on a film? Could you explain what the different anamorphic lens magnifications on various film sizes means, I don't really understand that. Thats is, if how I explained the anamorphic question right. I definitely understand the price breakdown that you described when contemplating finishes with S16, 2 perf35mm or 4 perf. P.s I meant 2.40 in my original post, but y'all knew.

Stuart, thanks for that knowledge. I've seen anamorphic lenses but never applied to the camera. Does the lens slit-appeared interworking face vertical (if looking through the lens from the front) or horizontally? I ask because I'm trying to understand the loss/waste of film stock when the anamorphic lens does the squeezing of the image during production & the un-squeezing later on... depending on the film format I would assume. When I hear discussions from people that have experience working in such production I'm trying to cross-reference the data of the film area and how the numbers work out.

Hey all, I wanted to know if anyone has found a site that gives literature breakdown as well as footage that shows the DI or Telecine process's? Also, are film "Blow Ups" [E.G for IMAX] done in the DI or Telecine stage? And could someone expand on Film Blowups and when/how they are used? My 3rd questions is partially tailored for a film section topic but: Generally speaking, whats the better option when shooting 4-perf 35mm, 16mm film or digital super 35mm sensor for a production company intended for DCP release(theater release if thats correct) with a final aspect ratio of 2.35? If the production company wanted to save money, would the principal photography process benefit from shooting w anamorphic lenses or just do the cropping and ratio changes @ the end? Easier said: What are the resolution, sharpness, grain, etc gains or losses when using anamorphic lenses v. spherical lenses on 4-perf 35mm, 16mm or S35mm digital sensors? Also, I'm still trying to wrap my head around the idea behind the cost associated with shooting with one film size & the final released aspect ratio (I.E The cutting of the film) that suits the story at-hand. Thanks. Hope that make sense. Sites, video links, charts are all helpful.

Well, thanks everyone. Im out of questions and I know more than when I began. cheers.

Everyone has answered my questions & some. Landon, thanks for that bit about upscaling first w/o the titles or it would be noticeable from previous exposure to text this I know can true. David. When you said: 2K and 4K DCP's for cinema release are 1.85 and 2.40, so if you wanted a 4x3 (1.33) release, it would probably be pillar-boxed (side matted) inside a 1.85 DCP. Do you mean that regardless of what the aspect ratio of the finished project comes it at (E.G: 1.33) the cinema would display the 1.33 pillared boxed footage wrapped in a 1.85 or 2.40 AspectR? P.S: I understand what you were saying about the cinema screens different Aspect R. Also,David, by one shooting 4x3 on the Alexa with a spherical lens they would be still taking full advantage of the film/sensor so and the end of the tunnel there Master would for DCP would be a 2.40 release? Please expand on the relationship between the resolution of 4x3 AspectR & its resolution & how for the final projection we get to that 1.85 or 2.40 cinema experience?

For all who decided to give information towards my question/topic, thanks sincerely. Landon: Would there be quality loss associated with the upscale from 1920x1080 to 2048x1080 to get that 1:85:1 native ratio? Brian: Could you expand on why an anamorphic lens is needed to shoot 4x3 to get cinemascope and you couldn't use a spherical lens and record at a different AspectR on the Alexa to gain some quality for example...if that sounds right? Thanks for the knowledge Tyler.

So, Tyler, If the a project was shot using the Alexa's 4x3 ratio to achieve 2:40:1 does that mean the final project (if shown in theaters or @ home) would fill up the whole screen as 1.75:1 does or would theaters & home tv sets still be cropped on top & bottom? Also, side note. Anyone, what would be the best way to achieve the highest possible resolution but still get 4:3 Aspect R? The first thing that comes to mind is to mask off a monitor and record in the highest resolution available. Cheers Tyler.

There are two questions I'd like to more about. Links, images and lengthy explanations are welcome. 1: In film or digitally what would be the benefits of changing Super 35mm aspect ratio to 35mm aspect ratio or any ratio that is smaller than super35mm? 2: What if I shoot digitally HD on super 35mm at 16:9 AR, then what are the pros&cons of aspect ratio changes & if lowering an aspect ratio originally shot at a higher higher AR & resolution would result in supersampling the master copy or render? thnks, SP