Simon Averin Markström

interested aswell!

prices? Could you ship? :)

Hey Simon thank you for the suggestion man!

No worries! And i do not only recommend them because i'm swedish ;) they got some solid stuff. Always happy when the rentalhouse got their cages.

check out videoassist sweden, they got a lot of cages for tv-logic :)

manchester_dp @ instagram was selling one the other day i'm pretty sure. maybe dm him?

He is a very experienced DP / 1AC so he knows what he's doing, but i think he was maybe thinking of fujifilm when the filmstock was fresh maybe... what does printing down mean?

Hello! These films of Fuji Etherna have not been manufactured for more than 5 years, so these are old stocks. They are sensitive. Now it is about 80-100 ISO. Also, it's better to overexpose the film than underexposure. Since it is difficult to "overexposure", she has a good range in the highlights. Here I can attach a sensitogram of a similar film made this summer

I recently got the film back from the lab, since i wrote this post a bit late i did not have time to get your opinion before shooting! My mentor told me that he loves the look Fuji gives underexposed and told me to experiment. Since i trust him i decided to, not underexpose, but just expose it according to the ASA (250), because i had a feeling older filmstocks = less sensative so i figuered it would give a nice look. What i did think was that age and recans would affect it that much! i think some shots is atleast 2-3 stops underexposed, thank god its film so it still works!

It gives quiet a moody look to the film which suits the work well, i only have a problem with a close up which is a bit on the darker end (the eyes). In hindsight i would have over exposed maybe 1 stop and push it down in the DI. Oh well, it was fun, it works, and I have shot my first project on film! :)

Hi!

I recently got back my first scanned 35mm footage from the lab. i have never worked with DPX files before, yet with scanned film, does anyone have any tips on how to go ahead? i have both Premiere and DaVinci Resolve.

/Simon

Hi!

I'm shooting a musicvideo this sunday on 35mm Fujifilm eterna 250D Shortends (i got a bunch with the camera).

They have been fridgestored since they were used so im not really that affraid of the film degrading (or is there anything i should consider? i shot tests and they were ok).

I'm wondering; was there any known exposure "hacks" when this film was used?

Similar to how Porta 400, in stills, is suposed to be over exposed 2/3 of a stop to get a denser neg.

Thank you in advance, this forum is really amazing!

Like Phil said, it's possible to do this but it's quite the exercise in patience mainly due to it not being crystal-synced sound. For example, I shot a musician play a full song in one take (actually I was helping with a project designed around this concept called 50 Feet of Song) using a Canon 814XL-S at 18fps. Then I took the 24fps scanned file into Premiere and interpreted the footage at 18fps so it played at realtime. Then I took the audio file from my ZOOM H4N and placed it in the timeline. Now the fun part... since Super 8 cameras don't run at real-time unless they are crystal-synced, you have to splice up and squash and stretch segments of the video (NEVER the audio since that's realtime) in order to get it to match up to the audio. It's a chore. It's call wild-sync. It's not fun haha. But it's not impossible either. I've posted the two times I've done it below.

 

Even if you find a camera that shoots 25fps (I'd recommend the Nizo Professional), you'll still have sync issues since it's not crystal sync. That's the key. Without crystal sync you'll have to mash up your footage to match your audio. Because for maybe 5 seconds your camera is running at 25fps then for 10 seconds it's 25.5fps then for a few seconds it's 24.7fps... etc etc. It's not 100% consistent.

 

Otherwise, you'll have to buy a very expensive crystal sync Super 8 or 16mm camera. Honestly if your 35mm camera is sound-sync which it seems like, it may just be less hassle to shoot it with that honestly but your call.

 

Wild-synced Super 8 below.

 

 

Thank you for you respone! Alot to think about. I had no idea 8mm usaly is this funky with sync! ill pass on s8mm this project then since i already is way over my head dp/dir this project hehe.

What do you think about Bealieu?

Does that camera have the same problems? im thinking for a future project.

Or you could look at 16mm.

 

It's a lot cheaper than 35, and super-8 is notoriously expensive. 16mm may not be that much more expensive.

Maybe. But since i own a 35mm camera and a super8 camera, going 16mm will ramp up my rentalcosts by a large amount... Thanks for the input though!

thank you for your detailed response! I will go ahead and do what you sugested and just try to find a s8 camera that does 24/25fps. feels like the most convinient solution!

Thanks again,

Simon

Hi!

This is my first post, so im sorry if it is not formated like it should!

This weekend i'm shooting a musicvideo on my Arriflex 35, since 35mm is expensive i figured that i should shoot the lip-sync on s8mm.

But my 8mm camera is only shoots 18fps.

My question is then, should i make a version of the song that is x% slower that the singer will lip-sync to or could he just lip-sync to the song normally?

Thanks!

/Simon