Jump to content

Sune Bang Ingemann

Basic Member
  • Posts

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Cinematographer
  • Location
    Copenhagen

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Spot metering is meassuring reflected light levels so of course a face, wall, car etc. will reflect a certain amount of light, but the sky is miles upon miles away. I suppose i am just metering the reflection of "air". Say I wanna do the zone system on a blue hour scene with both some forground and the horizon as the background. Could i just point the spot meter at the sky and trust the numbers? Best regards
  2. My friend color corrected a roll of 16mm tungsten stock (500T i think) in post. You can see it here: https://www.instagram.com/p/CBH_kDkhqO9/ Some DP's prefer not to use an 85 filter. Chivo as an example says that it "homogenizes the color" (Qoute from Tree of Life article in ASC magazine). The thing is that these DP's have world class post infrastructure with some of the best graders in the world, combined with extensive testing. I would guess you don't have the same luxury. If this is a low budget thing then i don't think you should worry about this, and just use an 85. There are bigger fish to fry ... That being said I would recommend using Resolve' printer light hot keys feature to color correct. I find it to be the most intuitive way to color correct 16 mm (Haven't done 35).
  3. I found a reseller that has the strengths 1, 2, 3, 4, and even 5, the filters might be quite old. On Tiffens own website I can only find from 1/8 to 1. The strength 5 seems so strong that I find it hard to believe that it was ever massed produced. I was wondering if they used to go the strengths 1-5, instead of 1/8 to 1? I'm looking for 4x5.65 sizes btw. Best regards
  4. https://www.yedlin.net/ResDemo/index.html and https://www.yedlin.net/OnColorScience/index.html
  5. Hey, I just wanted to get back to you. I found an assortment of rubber grommets at the local car store, and one fitted perfectly! Unfortunately, it's height made it press down on the memory button under it. I had to cut off the bottom, to stop this from happening. This made it not sit secure, as there was no space between the top and buttom layer to "pop" in anylonger. I decided to do it the fast and ugly way, and glue it firm. Afterwards i have used black paper tape to cover it. It works perfectly! Thank you Phillip!
  6. Okay, I know this might be REALLY stretching it, but I thought that if there is anywhere online where someone has encountered this before, it would be here. I persume that the build of the 758D is very similar to the cine version, so if anyone has tried it with that one, let me know. The "Rubbery plastic flap" that covers the "memory" area fell off my beloved meter recently. Assume just because of old age. Now, the thing is that there is a gaping whole into the meters electronics. Searching for any replacements parts has been futile. Basicly I just want a way to cover up the hole, I never use memor function anyway. I thought about covering it up with adhesive putty or gluing some thick plastic over it to seal it up.. Has anyone ever experienced this and solved it? This meter is my most priced possession, so I'm willing to go quite far to fix it. Best of love
  7. There will always be a crowd for art films and, at least in Europe, there will always be funding. There seems to be a consensus that audiences today are more used to faster pacing, cuts, movement of camera etc. Google "David Bordwell intensified continuity" if you want a more academic take on it. I think that streaming will greatly help preserve som of that "auteur" spirit, "Twin Peaks The Return" surely ticks a lot of the boxes you mention. Recently Amazon Prime released "Too Old To Die Young" By Nicolas Refn with Darius Khondji as the main cinematographer and that show has ridiculously slow pans, tilts and zooms that can seem tedious even for "art film lovers". Some of the producers might not always like it though:
  8. Surprised no one mentioned 'Blue Ring Gaffer's Glass' for keeping an eye on the sun when shooting outside.
  9. @Stuart Brereton Uncoated lenses increase halation on digital as well? Very interesting. @Giray Izcan Yes of course. The wish for uncoated lenses are the entire look. I was wondering on the differences in contrast reduction from uncoated lenses vs contrast filters. It seems now that the question is probably a bit too schematic.
  10. Yes, you are right of course. The choice for the uncoated lenses are because of the entire look, not only reduced contrast, but of course tests are necessary. I am not in a situation where I can't simply do tests at the moment, since I do not have significant contacts at the rental houses and the budget is next to zero. So I am trying to get as close as possible before taking anything of our miniscule budget and do any testing. Thanks a lot for the answer.
  11. Hello, I am in the middle of prepping for my final project at film school and had a question about uncoated lenses. To my knowledge uncoated lenses do the following: Reduce contrast and apparent sharpness Introduce more vivid flares. In this project I was originally looking at ‘normal’ spherical lenses, which I would pair with a Schneider Digicon and a halation filter. After more talks with the director we have gone to highly consider a pair of uncoated Zeiss B-Speeds because of their looks and flares. What I was wondering was; Except for flares, how does the reduced contrast affect the image compared to say a Schneider Digicon (Or similar filter from another brand)? My original intent with the Digicon was to lower the blacks in post as with old school film-flashing with the Arri Varicon (We’re shooting digital). Can I expect somewhat the same affect at a varying strength with uncoated lenses? Best Regards
  12. Hello Bruce, No, i can see now that i misread your original reply. You wrote that you normally would have 3,4-5 stops above grey card value, where as i read it as 3,4-5 stops of underexposure. I can see now that you wrote that if you expose normally then you would have 2.5 to 3 stops of underexposure with detail. This number is just surprisingly low to me. Since a key to fill ratio of 3 stops is so common, it would seem impossible in such a situation to darken the background further than a mere stop from the objects fill side. Thanks for your replies Bruce, especially with how push processing actually works, i had completely misunderstood it.
  13. Thanks alot Bruce! 1. Okay, hmm. I will have to read up on that. My thought would be that if the 18 % grey card was correct lit according to its reflectance, then the skin tones would be lit correctly at their reflectance level. I suppose i will expose them using a good old incident meter instead since i can see that i might have misunderstood exposing by greycard and spotmeter. 3. Okay, jesus! I was not aware of this, though it makes sense! It seems that pushing is more a gamma adjustment than a lift, very good that i found out about this! What are the parameters that decide if the underexposure value is 3,4 or 5? If there only are 3 stops of usable underexposure from the grey card value, then it seems if you had a key to fill ratio of 3 stops, it would be hard to darken the background beyond that by more than a stop? For tommorows shoot i only need a certain amount of stops to keep the shadows within. Are you suggesting that 4 is a more reasonable number than my pre concieved 5? Thanks for the reply!
  14. So, my very first post here at cinematography.com. I am sorry if this has been asked before, but in part with English not being my first language I have not been able to formulate this question probably in seaches and thus come up empty handed. So this quesion is in two parts, a theoretical question about lattitude of Vision3 and a practical question of how to keep shadows within the range of same lattitude. So in two days i will be shooting a very low budget proof of concept with a scene in a basement. We are limited with lights (2, 2k blondes, 3 800w redheads and one aputure with silks, unbleached muslin and flags to boot). I will be shooting on a 416, ultra primes and 500T 7219. I am however pushing it 1 stop to 1000 asa. In part, because of my success with doing the same in still photography and in part because i simply want to able to expose my characters key at a correct exposure with our limited budget. The film will be scanned as a 2k DPX with a scanity (My only option). So, about the dynamic range (or perhaps lattitude of 16 mm). I have read that Vision3 has 14 stops of dynamic range. David Mullen wrote in a reply in another thread that you could discount the lowest stop since its very close to fog level. Since this seem quite logical i will do the same and discount the lowest stop. I will expose with a spotmeter and a greycard. I will expose my characters key at the given value. So, if I exposed the scene at the greycard value for my characters key, how many stops below that can the shadows be without hitting the fog level? This math is a little confusing for me, and i guess i just need a good old pre-digital book, but if I exposed at middle grey in a 14 dynamic range. Would it then be correct to assume that i would have 6 stops below and 7 stops above my exposure? If i then discount the lowest stop I would then have 5 stops below and therefor 5 stops of possible underexposure. Is this a correct assumption or have completely misunderstood something? A bonus question. Film handles "overexposure" quite well correct? So another way to keep the shadows within range would be to overexpose the key by one stop and then bring down in post if needed yes? For the practical question. How would I practicaly meassure that the darkest area of the scene are above the fog level? My approach would be to simply spotmeter the key and then spotmeter the various dark areas in the scene to confirm that they are not more than 5 stops under the key exposure. Since spotmeter is the reflected light, this would be the correct way of keeping everything within the lattitude right? Thanks for taking your time! Best regards
×
×
  • Create New...