Dimitrios Koukas

ordered 5 rolls of EXR 50D today, i hope it was a good decision :)

 

john: how much exposure latitude does that stock have ? i still have troubles deciphering the curve, i figured 10 but that might be a bit too high ?

All this figures have to do with how you will light your negative.I have done a whole feature film with EXR 7245 and I was able to see all the grey bars on the Kodak's grey chart.

But If you want all this latitude (most of the times u don't) u have to light this way.

Dimitrios Koukas

Hi,

 

I've noticed that the viewfinder and LCD of the DVX-100a shows a smaller frame than what the camera records. Like the one you see in a monitor set to underscan the image. Is this some kind of safety area that i won't see once projected or viewed on a t.v? or should I do something in post to get rid of it?

 

The editor of one of the last projects I shot with this camera. Has pointed out that he sees equipment at the edges of some shots. Equipment that I did not see on the camera while shooting. We did had a field monitor though I decided to pay no attention to the underscaned image. Did I do wrong?

Thanks.

For TV, the only problem is that u will loose some image left and right of the frame, and for the equipment in the frame u can just zoom it in post if u can, but not more than 10% of the actuall frame.

For a theatrical release u should mark your viewfinder at 1:1,85 aspect.

Dimitrios Koukas

Folks,

 

Here's the situation: We've got a scene taking place in a moving car at night. One actor, obviously the driver. Driving on a road that's supposed to be fairly dark with only minor oncoming traffic. No rain or other adverse weather conditions. We need to shoot him from the front, through the windshield, and from the side as if looking from the passenger's seat.

 

We are, as most newbies are, extremely limited in our budget. We are filming on a Canon XL-1 camera. For the majority of our shots, we have been lighting using regular and daylight-balanced photofloods. Not the best thing out there, but they've served our needs well in most cases. Except here, where they are obviously way too bright for the scene's needs.

 

We obviously don't have the money to use a tow car, so this has to be shot with the car sitting still while giving the illusion of it being in motion. This particular car has no sunroof or other unusual features. Well, except one. It's a Scion xA, and it's instrument panel is in the center of the dashboard rather than on the driver's side, so the light would logically be coming from a slightly different direction. But, to be honest, the instrument panel is not even seen in the scene, so that won't even be noticed.

 

The two problems we have to solve are, obviously, how to light the scene and how to effectively give the illusion of movement.

 

Thus far, we have tried using china balls, as well as simply using a small 40-watt bulb placed in the instrument panel area. The former just didn't look right. The latter seemed to work pretty well, actually, and I think we could get away with it, but the lighting on the actor's face was honestly a bit too much for what would be coming from the dash (i.e. the whole face was lighted evenly).

 

As for simulating motion, we tried some simple techniques of rocking the car, using Mag lights to simulate passing headlights, and having another car positioned behind this car to have the sight of headlights through the rear window. But none of these were effective, at least not how we did them. They all looked like we were, well, trying to fake motion from a car that was sitting still.

 

So, I'm looking for any and all suggestions on where we should go from here, both in lighting the scene and in filming it in such a way that it looks like the car is in motion.

 

Thanks in advance for your help!

 

=Tom=

Hello,

Are u using a studio?Or you want to simulate this outside in the street with the car parked somewhere?

For the side shot I would used some blurred brojection, in the far background,(you can easily shoot some footage and project it on a surface, canon will not have a problem neither u will need a powerfull projecor.

As for the rest of lighting try the poorman's proccess posts as mentioned.

Dimitrios Koukas

Hey everyone!

 

I'm shooting some exterior shots for this student project this week on old 7245 stock. It's about 5-6 years old. Now, I have no time to clip test but I'm thinking that because the 45 has such low grain in the first place the grain might not be that bad (i'm not sure about fogging though) I've been wondering about how I can compensate...I was thinking of overexposing by 2/3 of a stop and rate the film at EI 32. I would rate it more and pull process but the school is paying for processing and they won't pay for special processing. I wanted to know what else I can do to compensate for any aging problems. Also, I want to know how this 2/3 overexposure would affect the image with normal processing. I'm getting a best light telecine transfer; no film print...

 

Please let me know your opinions

Old stocks, tend to loose some colour characteristics too, usually the Green curve of the stock gets weaker, wich as a final result u get some magenta tint.A test is the best solution, I would suggest 30meters strip shooting colour patches and a person, with different f/stops.

You will then see the tendency of the film to colour some dark areas, especially when underexposed,(all negatives do this) but the old ones maybe will do it more.

Kodak is a very reliable company,I have done tests with old stocks,(1-2 yrs after expiration and the result was great), I believe that good storage is the point.

Dimitrios Koukas

Thank you Dimitrios.

 

I´m doing a table with the f stops at 1/60 ,1/65 and 1/80. After developing I´ll tell you my results. By the way, today the weather in London is horrible and the maximum reading I can get is 5.6... so for smaller times I have to close a lot the iris.Do you think I can get anything with this or everything is going to be dark and blured?

Is everything outdoors?

I believe 5.6 isn't bad at all, actually for many lenses is where they have the best resoulution!

Dimitrios Koukas

Hello,

All has to do with the action you have in the frame and the movement of your subjects in relation to your lens.

For some shots maybe there could be enough space, but for some others it won't.

I am suggesting to have the windows for the general shots, placed at nine or three o clock of the camera, so u will have side lighting that could be more even.(By either having lights come in the scene from the windows with any diffusion you like, or by just put some tracing paper on the windows using the daylight itself).

But this is just a gesture, I don't have any story board infront of me, to help you more.

If you can be more specific, I will try to help you more.

You see the action itself sometimes dictates the lighting.

If you have a vertical action for example of a person moving towards your camera and the light is placed just near you, the f/stop change could be dramatic, and not so elegant I may say.

Dimitrios Koukas

Thank you Dickson!!

Today I´m going to shoot some footage for the first time( I´m too excited!). Thank you for your replay! It´s going to be a big help!

Make the calculations by Sorensen,before u go for shooting and make your own chart.

Dimitrios

oh exr50D, interesting, i never thought of that, i have a set of primes which go down to F1.3 so that shouldnt be a problem, especially with all the sun here in australia. i surely will consider that option thank you.

Is it for TV or projection?

U can get very nice greens with fuji stocks, so I would suggest the 250 ASA Daylight (I don't remember the type number sry).

This can get you out almost thru the day, and in magic hour.

(If you like to keep your f/stops high, where the lens gives it's best).Also maybe you will need a polarizer filter, that will work ok with the 250.

In a bright sunlight situation, even 50 ASA needs some ND, so u can use some more for the 250.

Dimitrios Koukas

Unfortunatly, I had a major problem with color shifting in a room of florescents. I was shooting a TV pilot in an interrogation room lit maily by the overhead florescents. When we later went back and watched the footage, which was shot on 3 DVX 100-A's we noticed that the footage cycled from warm to cool and back again.... And when I say this I mean it went from nice warm flesh tones to a cooler white to blue to green and back. I had never heard of this before and there was no flicker. We were shooting at 1/48th shutter in 24pA mode. So needless to say Florescents scare me.

 

I realize that the color tmeperature has nothing to do with the flicker, so to clarify my question, when do you need to worry about florescents and flicker when shooting at 24 frames a second on film?

If you are in a voltage system that works at 60HZ period and you have an 180 degrees shuter then no worries at all at 24fps.

But if you want to be absolutely sure, there are some equipment that u just point to the light and click and you get their rate.

Dimitrios Koukas

I'm shooting with 7231 (BW Neg - 80D) mostly night interiors. I'd like to see an exposure out the window and light the subject with hard light for a moonlit effect. Because it is B&W I was planning on shooting day for night and lighting the subject with a 3 to 4 stop difference to outside and then using the natural light as my fill.

 

However, it's a very small apartment with white walls. I'm worried that any light I introduce is going to bounce like crazy and make everything flat and if I use smaller units, I won't get the exposure I need for 64T. Does anyone have any suggestions on how to light this tiny room and see out the window? Do you agree with the 3 to 4 stop difference from the actor to outside?

Does it going to look like a night when the outside will have three to 4 stops difference?{(wich means that you have to expose for the indoor (usually 2.8 f/stop to 1.4 f/stop)}.

I guess it will look more like a daylight shot to me.If you are doing a day for night, just add some ND filter on the windows, to compensate for the difference, and don't use so much difference between in and out.

This hard light I guess will be the sun?

Usually with an 64 stock you will have an 11-16 T/stop outside when there is bright sun, and a 2.8 near the window (inside).

So you have the difference you want, if you want the room dark, expose for the daylight.If you want the room brighter, u will need some fill.Always order bigger lights than the ones you are planning to use,

in case you need less, you can reduce it, but what if you need more and you don't have it??

Dimitrios Koukas

I have some metal halide lights for indoor gardening. They have daylight spectrum, are very intense -- require a ballast like HMI's. But can they be substituted for HMI's? If not, why?

 

If they can, you have a very cheap alternative, maybe $300 for a bulb and ballast compared to thousands of $ for a HMI.

 

Anyone ever tried this?

Not the same lights you are having, but I guess similar ones,

The only thing that you should check, is that maybe they will have different colour temperature.

So you will need a colour meter (a three colours one),to check them for small correction filtration like minus or plus green filters.Or even some CTO or CTB.Also you have to use them when your camera settings have an 180 shuter at 24fps.

Dimitrios Koukas

This would be the best way to go, or correct it in transfer. An 85 is REALLY orange if you're already using the correct film for the lighting conditions.

I haven't heard a rule for those types of filters. I DO know that diffusion filters (promist, soft FX, etc) should be the most forward in the mattebox stages as possible, since they generally rely on ambient light falling on the filter itself.

Hello,

I always trying to avoid putting pro-mists and soft-fx filters further away from the lens!

You see if light falls on to the filter the diffusion looses it's grade number and it's very easy to get an overall fogue in your image!

Maybe i am wrong here, but by my experience, a pro-mist filter that is graded 1/4 can work as an /12 if you move it away from the lens!

Also any light that might fall onto it will fogue the whole frame!

I am using them closest to the lens possible and with mattebox masks same to the lens I am using on the box.

Just because of their natural characteristics, they will absorb and diffuse any light that falls on them.

Dimitrios Koukas

All,

I been shooting 16 for a while, but with 100 foot daylight rolls. However, since I'm going to be out in teh field with my new sixteen (an eclair npr), I'm planning to shoot with a 400 load, for ease and convenience. To reign myself in, I've limited myself to one roll so I don't have to worry about changing loads in the field. That said, I'm still wondering if there are any tips, or warnings you all could offer when handling 400ft core loads. I mean, I know to load/unload them in total dark, but that's about it. What about the danger of core drop out? I'd love to hear any tips!

Thanks,

Best,

BR

Hello.

Do the procedure many times, and the sprockets threading in the magazine, with an allready developed negative.

U will be sure that u have the loop correctly and all the threading.

So try it with the lids open and use allready developed negative (or positive better).

Do the loading and unloading in bright light with allready developed film.

By doing this, you will have visualise the procedure for the dark room this way.

In case that u will stuck with anything, with your hands in the bag, ask someone to bring you an empty magazine to see it open and figure out what is going on.

Most cameras take the virgin negative operator's side (Left) and take-up side is right side.(from operator's view always).

There will be no problem if you have a roll-out, it's just a bit tricky in the NPR to cut it, if you have used let's say 320 ft of stock, and u want to save the other 80ft. for another day.

Dimitrios Koukas

helo,

If you have used more than one film stocks, one light won't help you, because of different film base colour.

So you will not be able to do the colour correction after like you suggested.

I believe that you have your answers from the two proffesionals above.

.

It is ok to do one light transfer only when:

A: u need a film transfered with keycode on tape for editing, that u will use the traditional way for release: negative editing, A-B roll and blow up or final print.

B: When u have your final print and u want it to transfered on tape or other media,Analogue or Digital.(sometimes people do colour corrections to the final print too).

Money-wise I would go one light with keycode to edit it, then cut and edit the negative, and after take the edited negative to a Spirit/da vinchi or similar that would do the final colour correction for tape release.

Dimitrios koukas

Hi,

 

White LEDs are you friend...

 

Phil

Phil Is right here,

and also fibre-optic lights.

Also try to use some lenses infront of your lens upside down (head to head), maybe you get make your own macro lenses this way.

C mount lenses at 25mm are good for things like this or try if you can find any panfocus lens at 10mm.

C mount too for 16mm.

Dimitrios Koukas

The more research I do and the more people I talk to, the CP-16 and Arriflex s16 continually come up. What are your opinions on these? I'm particuarly interested in the CP-16.

Cinema Products camera is standard 16mm with magnetic sound.

It was made for news gathering.Cp-R designates a model that uses lenses fitted with a CP mount and a built in reflex viewfinder.

16 and 16A designates a model that uses C lens mounts and uses lenses fitted with off-set viewfinders particullary the Angenieux 12-120 reflex zoom.

/A desginates the model that has a built in magnetic recording module (includes magnetic heads, amplifier,dual low impendance microphone inputs auxiliary mixer inputs, etc)

/DS means double system sound mechanism.I am not sure if this means magnetic or/and optical recording.

Any experienced users can help into this?

I am not sure if you can still find 16mm magnetic stock.

Dimitrios Koukas

Hey guys I have a important question. If I am shooting on Kodak vision 2 500T and I properlly expose the film but then I ask the lab to push it a stop what will it look like.

Thanks Mario C. Jackson

Are u going for telecine or projection?

For projection I would suggest to rate normaly, but expose for the key light or just a half stop over.(It's a night interior right?)Try not to have too much light comin in from the window.(in terms of f/stop)

Develop normaly and do some corrections in the final print.

Dimitrios Koukas

Hi guys I am enrolled at UT-Austin and I have the option of learning how to produce movies on film or digital equipment. Since I plan on doing my own movies and such I thought digital would be easier and cheaper thing to do. If I'm not mistaken digital has gotten pretty close to the look of film and thats what I yearn for! So what shall I take film or digital- I want to take what will be the best benefit? Thanks

First of all,

Be an artist, study Art related things too.

An artist can draw and qualify under any media available.Later on you will find your preferences.

But you have to know all the media available, so you can compare them.Or make desicions.

All student filmakers prefer digital media cause it's easy and cheap.

That has nothing to do with cinematography studies (digital or film).

Find the qualities in you and be an artist I would say.

And if I was you that was having to choose, I would go for film studies.

Easy way is not always the right way.

Dimitrios Koukas

not beeing too literal ,,,i am not DOP, i am a Director

 

yeah i know that 1 mm wont kill anyone,but to close,try to see it that way, 90° angle is not 91° ,,,1° i know , but go tell that to an architecte ,,,

 

of course,,, i ll make tests and compare the two and will tell you about it ,,,

 

of course,,, i ll make tests and compare the two and will tell you about it ,,,

Ivan,

Eisenstein probabaly was using one 27mm lens that had optical distortions and one 28mm that had no optical distortions, or there probabaly wasn't any 28mm manufactured those days.

I believe that we are talking here about differenses for old cinematographers that cannot compare to the new ones.

And let me just tell you this.

Do you believe if Bethoven was born today, he will be composing music in a classical Piano?Or he would be a technology geek?

So either you are a genius and my humble mind cannot understand you, so I am sorry for this, or you are trying to find differences to things that don't have (except their physical optical characteristics) One inch more or back in the camera can get you the result of an 28 or 27mm.

Unless u are talking for an 28mm build up in 1914 and one 27mm that was made today.

Dimitrios Koukas

Please forgive my silly questions but I am not totally understanding what I'm reading. So what is the difference between ENG camcorders and the whole PAL Professional camcorders and systems?????

ENG: Electronic News Gathering.Also Pal or Ntsc camcorders.AND also PRO camcorders.

Now there are some companies that claim to have prosumer cameras, but it's all about the format you are using and the signal proccessing (bits).

Example if you use one D35 Sony camera with a beta SP recorder hooked, then u do have an ENG camera, but with the low to this days quality of BetacamSP.

In the same camera u can hook a digital betacam camcorder so u have a Beta SX ENG camera.

And because your question is very general, I would have to answer in general and not get to so much details.

The basic differences are that most of ENG cameras are called Pro cameras too, cause there are for TV field news production that doesn't have the quality needs as a feature film or a TV drama.

So that's why many Sony cameras are using the P (pro) in the product code and some others are using the B (broadcast) code.

NTSC has a differential phase distortion problem, wich was corrected by the PAL system later on.

PAL counteracts any phase error wich may present on one line by introducing an equal and opposite error on the next line.This errors are canceled electrically by an averaging process in a delay-line matrix,before beeing demodulated and used to write colours into the display with great accuracy.

Anyway,

PAL analogue picture transmission, contains 432 active lines.(This is what you finally get on your tv when broadcasted), That's because of the physical characteristics of the transmition Bandwith that carries the colour,brightness, sound and sub- carrier in it's signal.

So in terms of shooting, most of the cameras that are in the market now, overqualify for broadcasting.

But there are some lists in this forums that comparing quality in terms of lines and signal proccesing (bits).

Some cameras now (panasonic Varicam) with 1280 x 720 CCDs and many more, have gone beyond all this standards , it's just that the media itself (TV), is still behind in terms of Broadcasting such signals.

Physical differences between ENG and prosumer cameras, sometimes is that u cannot change lenses or have a follow focus attached and so on.

I can understand your confusion, There are hundreds of new products that claim to be Pro, and not all of them are so (PRO) as they claim to be.

If you have specific types of cameras that you want me to help you compare, I will do,

Please forgive me of beeing too general here, there are so many cases of different proccesses in signal and formats that would have taken me a day to explain.

Dimitrios Koukas

I think you mean ACL instead of ECL. :)

Thank you,

I ve corrected it , yes I meant ACL.

Dimitrios Koukas :)

I know this is a rather common question but I'm interested nonetheless. I've been shooting DV for years and it's time to take the next step. What would be a good 16mm camera for a beginner? I have no experience with actual film, only DV. I realize they are quite different, but am a quick learner. I really like the KRASNOGORSK-3, but have been told I can only shoot silent films with it. Is this true? Is there a better 16mm camera to use for student films? I have a pretty good amount of money, and need sound. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Eclair NPR or ACL if you are going for 16mm, But would suggest an AAton too LTR or XTR for S16mm.

Dimitrios Koukas

I think I got the difference DVD but I will have to check when I get home. I do know that all the interviews were filmed on one of the 16mm 200 speed vision stocks. Most of the interviews looked good but a few were soft and had hair,dust, or dirt during the transfer. I didn't recall examples of digibeta vs 16mm film or anything maybe that is the other DVD.

 

I am interested in trying out this new 50 speed vision 2 stock. If well shot on video could it give 35mm a run for the money?

 

I do also wish there were newer inexpensive cameras. It seems like the only 16mm cameras being made today are 10,000 plus variety by Arri, and etc.

 

Don't get me wrong I am a film proponent. I think that nothing compares to films natural and wide dynamic range. I am just curious of what others peoples perceptions are.

There isn't a comparison in terms of resolution.

U can't compare different things,it's like comparing an apple with a banana.

TV has lines (interlaced or single field)

Film has photochemical emulsion that is made by millions of molecules.

Dimitrios Koukas

someone brought this up just a moment ago in another thread, but I thought this topic title would be a little more specific. Here is my question once again:

 

I love a good timelapse, but what's even better is a timelapse that pans, tilts or tracks. The only thing I can think of to achieve this is moving the camera ever-so-slightly between each frame....my inspiration for these shots is Ron Fricke and his many, many beautiful shots in films such as Baraka and Chronos. I know he rigged an electronic device with a bike chain of sorts to do his stuff, but it there any other way for us regular people?

 

Any and all help is appreciated...thanks!

First,

Some simple questions...

How long this time lapse you wanna be and what is about.A sunset?A flower? A dinner table?

Cause all this as you know have different filming rates, so if it something simple maybe you won't need something so advanced as an equipment.

Dimitrios Koukas

thanks for the tips charlie -- man, the whole thing of everyone's image being sacred -- no matter how fleeting-- seems to have totally eclipsed resonable use these days. I can see how someone wouldn't want to end up in some grindhouse movie, but generally it seems like a way to keep the big guy and some crooked lawyers in business, and crush the little guy.

G

If it was me,

I will have just sign people that I wanted to use for continuity to any close shots.

It's not so much like the old days now, people are more get used to the camera, with all the TV stations today.

And if you aren't going for a box office release (who could maybe cause you problems), I am suggesting you to do not worry at all.

It's just that people do have the right to be on a frame or not, and especially if they re walking around with their new boyfriend, and kissing in the street, and their wifes see it on tv.

You can ruin a marriage , have u ever thought about it?

Dimitrios Koukas ;)