Jump to content

Stephen Perera

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    467
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Stephen Perera last won the day on May 24

Stephen Perera had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

34 Excellent

About Stephen Perera

  • Rank

  • Birthday 06/19/1966

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Other
  • Location
    Gibraltar, Europe
  • My Gear
    Hasselblad V system, Leica R, Aaton XTR XC 16mm
  • Specialties
    Graphic Designer/Photographer

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://www.instagram.com/stephenperera/

Recent Profile Visitors

11636 profile views
  1. I've been tracking THE LIGHTHOUSE since I heard of it (I've even downloaded the posters from A24 website haha) and lo and behold the person who shot it is in here!! chapeau....I'm totally inspired by the look of this film and I bought another 900ft of Double X in 16mm format for my next project because of it!!!! It will be a personal piece of my father who's been an athlete all his life - he's still out there running at 81 years of age. It's a self indulgent, visual heirloom for the family....no more no less! Jarin, I heard your podcast on 'Go Creative' show number 193 and as a Hasselblad stills shooter myself I totally get what you said about composing in the format....hence why I've kept my Aaton at standard 16mm.....having shot Hasselblad since the early 90s I think square....I'm conditioned by it.....the dogs seem irrelevant to me when I shoot people.....know what I mean.... .....another thing you said that struck a chord was the lack of latitude you felt Double X has.....I totally agree...it really IS a hard film to shoot in that sense and your metering has to be spot on.....presumptuous of me to say to YOU haha but hey film is film....I find you cant be more than 1 stop out.....half a stop even.....esp out in bright sun I would rate at 250 asa box speed....inside with lights 1/2 to 1 stop over max..... this is my (humble) experience with Double X.....best at 2K res. on Vimeo....would welcome any more feedback on the stock to help with the piece I want to do on my father???
  2. now here's a man with real experience...thanks for coming in on this....
  3. no problem man....you did say a valid thing.....but I will say about tech....I started using a Mac in 1988 in my final year of my degree course in Graphic Design at Harrow School of Art (now part of Westminster University) - with loads of darkroom and photography hours done..... and Ive used Photoshop since it was invented and then Lightroom and all the rest of it......so Im in a great position to comment on the fact I now find myself in front of a computer way more than back in the day when I scanned perfectly exposed, professional quality photography shot on e.g. Fuji Provia on my drum scanner for use in my brochure designs for clients......so I never left film and continue to use it now for the big jobs 'cos its just all so much easier if you have a patient client!!!!!! shoot, send the film to lab, get scans, done (although in my case I shoot, then develop all my BW or colour negative film and scan myself on my Hasselblad Flextight 646 scanner)....no hours spent trying to make the highlights look nice let alone skin tone hahaha So I guess Im talking about the rabbit hole I find myself going down into cos of all the tech .....too many variations and options open...too many RAW versions and implementations etc....its frustrating
  4. karel.....its not a thread to knock anything or anyone and cinematography isn't for me cos there's no way at my age of 53 with my film mindset and where Im from Im going to work in this industry nor do I pretend to be one but I enjoy using my Aaton 16mm and I produce stuff both paid and personal on it using my chosen medium, film.... I'm just questioning whether its all become too thick with tech and whether cinematographers will be required to be more tech than art these days.....its a valid question to ask
  5. I guess I AM saying that Robin ....as a non-DP or 'amateur' in here but with a solid background of 34 years in film photography, using light metres and the zone system and all the rest of it......I've found it IS a lot easier and less work for me to shoot film (16mm) than digital.....but the thread is meant to be about people missing the word for the trees due to all the massive amount of extraneous kit and tech associated with digital
  6. the essence of this thread is to sit back and question if you've all gone down the rabbit hole of the technology of digital or not....esp applicable to lower levels of people shooting moving images where you own a lot of cameras and computer stuff....its not another film v digital thread....personally as moving images is not what I do for a living but rather 'another skill' of what I do for a living and Im able to choose my medium I see this all the time around me......
  7. .....as an observer and reader of this forum and the UK one hosted by Geoff Boyle it seems you are all just too concerned with the whole world and complexity of shooting digital (those of you that don't touch film) and what a sensor does or doesn't do and what a camera does or doesn't do and whats connected to what and what the monitors show and the IREs and the false colour and the this that and the other and the post processing raw and the amount of GBs it takes up and all the drives you need and all the big time computers you need and the LUT here or there and the this and that and everything.....and then there's 2K 4K 6K 8K......em......ok.......it seems to me like there's the trees and there's the woods......I'm certainly not a DP to make such a sweeping statement but that's what it looks like to me.....yes I know...bit of a cheeky post but hey.....seems like I'm a generator of....drama these days haha
  8. you should also read about what was done on The Lighthouse where they used Double X but with a filter to make the 'reds' darker
  9. Nik and Trick (UK) sell the D96 developer and F6 fixer for that film...made by Bellini https://ntphotoworks.com/product/bellini-d96-fixer-f5-kodak-double-x-package-deals/ Also....Eastman Double X has little latitude in my experience.....I used it on this personal project and my exposure had to be within like 1/2 stop to be 'on'....this is MY experience with the film.....not saying its universally correct for everyone as I guess depends how you light it etc. I particularly found that for exterior shots you have to be spot on with the metering esp. in bright conditions with the sun full on. I rated it at 250 iso like Kodak says and for me this is accurate. I lit the main close-ups with a Multiblitz V6 LED light on a rectangular soft box....the bed and shower scenes with the light coming in from an Arri Plus 1000w tungsten and the beach part with bright sun In my experience, using Double X is like using E6 film when it comes to metering....but what a beautiful beautiful stock it is.... I did this with it....Cinelab London processed and scanned for me.
  10. Hey Tyler would welcome anything to do with film coming my way!!!!
  11. OK as the original thread creator can we stop with the personal and get back to the theme....I say this respectfully to all.....I am a 'learner in here and look to this place for knowledge and inspiration....(for any Brits in here I have the big red L stuck to my back) P.S. the only advice I can offer is related to my limited experience with 16mm film on an Aaton I own and my 34 years doing film photography mainly on Hasselblad......I can talk about using handheld metres and the beauty of Kodak Portra etc etc haha......
  12. Yeah Cinelab London know how I send stuff by now...Its obvious I'm trying to light seal it when they see the mag tape all over it hahaha......BUT GOOD THING you've said this Mark....next time I WILL let them know how I just put the film in just in case!!!......and yes the roll fits in perfectly and as i said with a bit of play...a few mm all over...it can 'rattle' a bit....but of course will not affect the film.....the box is 100% lightproof when you seal the lid of course....its all solid hard plastic
  13. Tyler, you say "sadly film on a core won't fit into a 100ft daylight box, it gets close, but alas it won't" Sorry but this is incorrect.....I have shot 12 seperate rolls of 100ft Kodak Vision 3 since I got my Aaton XTR XC and I have placed each rolled up film on its core into the same black box they came in every single time.....it even has a few mm of 'play'....what I do is put the film into the box as is......don't worry about it hitting the plastic cos the 'exposed' roll is the tail end so nothing will get ruined......and then I seal the box via the 'click-on' lid with mag tape and then place it all into a small 'black bag' for another layer of light-proof(ness) and off to Cinelab London they all go..... This is, of course, my way of doing things.....I don't re-use the white plastic film holder for example......I just put the exposed rolled up film straight back into the box as is
  14. thats it....back on track.....the original thread being dream job what format etc
×
×
  • Create New...