Jump to content

Bryan Darling

Basic Member
  • Posts

    226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bryan Darling

  1. The black & white is reversal. 7265, 7266, & 7280 are all reversal Super 8 stocks. You'll find that the 7266 (Tri-X) is great for lower light environments. If you get an 0.6 and/or 0.9 ND filter, you can also shoot it in bright daylight. A good, decent quality filter from Tiffen would be sufficient. Check out B&H Photo online, there prices are the best. I find my meter reads f32 - f22 quite often during the middle of the day. I like shooting around a f1.9 - f5.6, sometimes more depending. Since Super 8 has enormous depth-of-field, you can shoot more open without worrying too much. The nice thing with the ND filter is you'll go from a f32 to f16 with the .6 or f32 to f11 with .9. If anything it will bring the bright light down into something more manageable. This may be way more information that you're looking for, but it's something to consider. Sometimes it's nice to just take one stock with you and just shoot it. Makes it easier to figure things out and you'll know how to get what you want. If you do want color, just remember that the E64T needs an 85B filter for outdoor use, which brings it's speed down to 40ASA. The nice thing is it works great for outdoors during the day, even in overcast situations. When it's overcast, you'll be shooting more open say f2.8 f-4, perhaps even F1.4/1.9 in darker places.
  2. If you haven't seen any other of Wong Kar Wai's films, might I recommend the following: -Fallen Angels -Happy Together -In The Mood for Love -2046 There are others but these I highly recommend, and not just for excellent photography.
  3. B&H Photo has a great assortment of filters at the best prices I've seen around. Tiffen filters are inexpensive and decent quality, especially for Super 8. Other brands are B+W, Hoya, and Lee. B+W are excellent quality filters, but you'll pay more. I feel they aren't as necessary for Super 8 work, but then I'm sure there are others that are more purist when it comes to filter quality who would disagree.
  4. I've shot 18fps predominantly in Super 8, whereas I've shot both 18 & 24 in 16mm. I have to say that when projecting the film through a film projector I can't tell a difference. Now I have shot 24fps on certain shots where I may be moving the camera around a lot or in situations where there will be more camera shake, i.e. a out the roof of a car or long end of the zoom. I then project that back at 18fps and it smoothes out the shakes and movements some. 18fps also lets you achieve "slower" slow-motion as 36fps becomes 100% slower, rather than 50% slower when shooting 24fps. I'd shoot both ways, say using one cart, 1/2 at 18fps and 1/2 at 24fps. Shoot something inbetween to help you note where the speed change is. Then project it and/or transfer it at those rates and see how you like it.
  5. I don't shoot negative film in Super 8, only in 16mm. I prefer reversal. For me it's a matter of ease of use and transfer, etc. I like to be able to project my films, edit if I so choose, and transfer them. I have a great system for digitizing the film, however it doesn't like negative film. I don't feel like spending hundreds of dollars an hour on a Super 8 transfer, I'd rather just shoot 16mm if I was going to do that. Additionally, I know if I got the exposure or didn't, I know what the color, etc., all by looking at the film. You learn so much about you camera, the film, and the process shooting reversal. Not to mention, it's just less expensive down the line: film is less, processing is less, transfer is less in that less time spent tweaking the image in the suite although you can if you want. Just how much less depends on the places and your discounts. I've pushed both 7266 and 7280. I love black and white the most, and Tri-X is my favorite. It has great blacks, good range, fast emulsion and pushes great. I've done a 1-stop but I think a 2-stop would be cool as well. It all depends on your aesthetic. My thing is, especially when traveling, I want to forget about as much technical stuff and just shoot! Just have fun and maybe grab a few interesting moments!
  6. Oops, you are right, it's the 514. Haha, sorry about that. As for the 47.5, are you sure you're not confusing the zoom lens focal length. I believe it's 9.5-47.5mm?
  7. The issue with the Canon 518 is that it has no manual exposure capability. Also it reads the ASA automatically from the cartridge. Now in the past that wouldn't have been a problem. It was designed in an era where there were a handful of different film types and speeds (ASA). Today's film types and speeds are different from when the camera was built and what it was designed for. A lot of other cameras are the same way. A few models made by Nizo, Beaulieu, and possible other manufacturers were designed to accept a wide range of films speeds. Those cameras' light meters are still useable if so desired. The workaround used today is utilizing a separate light meter and setting the camera's exposure manually. The problem with the Canon 518, and other cameras out there, is it has no ability for manual exposure. It only has an exposure lock switch which must be constantly held down to work, it is labeled (EE). This wouldn't be so much a pain if either the camera's meter was designed for a range of film speeds instead of specific ones. In which case you could use the meter, then hold down the exposure lock. However, unlike other automatic cameras, you can't place the exposure lock in position without constantly holding it down. This becomes tiresome and easy to slip, not to mention awkward since you can't run any other controls on the camera while both hands are busy. So basically here's what you can do with the camera. You'll have to get a light meter, find the shutter speeds of your camera at the various frame rates, meter the light, point the camera at something until the automatic meter gives you the closest f-stop you need based on what your handheld meter says, then hold the exposure lock switch down and then shoot. Sound complicated and tedious? It is. I personally would recommend a different camera. One more note, if you are using the Ekatchrome 64T in daylight you will need to buy a separate 85B filter to put onto your camera to compensate since the film is designed for indoor use. You will then need to adjust your meter for the amount of light the filter "takes away" when placed over the lens, 2/3 stop I believe. Is any of this confusing? It is for a lot of people who are just getting into film, especially Super 8. Unfortunately it's not so easy to just get a camera, toss in a cartridge of film and point-and-shoot. Not without doing a little research and homework first. I teach Super 8 and 16mm film basics to a lot of new people, I find it a lot easier to learn if you have something you can visually see and be demonstrated to you. A great book is Cinematography by Kris Malkiewicz, and edition will work. You can pick up used older editions of the net for around $2-$5.
  8. All I take with me is camera, film, and my lightmeter. The less the better. Depending, I also have a portable battery-operated 50w halogen I take with me. It all fits into a small camera bag and runs off a 12v motorcycle battery using XLR plugs I attached. Makes for getting good stuff in dark places with Tri-x film pushed a stop. Anyhow, when it all comes down to it, taking less is more freedom! I never really use tripods and would never bring one with me on a trip, to cumbersome. Have a great time, Toyoko should be amazing.
  9. I have Canopus ProCoder and it allows conversions between Raw DV. It's for the PC, however it can convert to various Quicktime files, such as DV or Uncompressed, etc.
  10. I've found 7285 to have a lot more latitude than envy other reversal film I've shot. The last shoot I did we underexposed it by one-stop, on purpose, and there was still a lot of detail. We decided to go even further to one and one-half stops under just to get it moody enough. I really liked the colors and contrast. In my opinion, shooting reversal is more a personal aesthetic and process choice. Could you get similar results shooting a negative film and then manipulating it in post? Sure, I don't see why not. However, why would you want to go to all the trouble and various processes when you can get the very look you want in one step...by shooting it that way. I find it so much easier to shoot film the way I want it to look rather than do it all later in a computer or telecine suite. It gives me a greater understanding of the medium- film, not to mention a lot less work. I feel too much of today's filmmaking, especially by those new to film, seem less about learning craft and employing it in the creation and more about the "end result." Film is more than just a movie, a commercial, and a music video. Film is a process and by learning the process and it's eccentricities, nuances, and faults you find a medium that is literally without limits. Film is more than just a movie, a commercial, and a music video. Now, that I'm far off topic, haha, let me just say that I love reversal films. You can't argue about the color or the exposure because it is what it is on the film. Same as slide film in still work, you look at the film and you know what you got and how to print it or scan it, or in the case of motion-picture work, how to telecine it. If you do choose to tweak it, you still can. I've found that tweaking in general is much more straight forward when you shoot film (any type) the way you want it to look in the finished piece.
  11. I love the onion, if only it could replace all the news media...what a better place we'd live in :D
  12. Brian, SD8 has nothing to do with the film itself in the sense of a physical manipulation/handling. All it means is that the camera's film gate has been widened out so that "normal" Super 8 film will capture a wider image than normal film. Now whether you will physically see this with your own eyes depends. Unless a projector has had it's film gate widened out, you will see no difference. The amount of extra image will be very small when looking directly at the film yourself, say by holding it up to the light or using a light box. A light box or light table may make it easier to observe the extra image area. So to answer your question, SD8 has nothing to do with processing or the lab. However if you have the film transferred to video you will need a lab that has the ability to record the widened image. They will need a gate that is wider than the normal S8 gates. Lastly, if you do find there really is no actual difference, then I'd say the camera has not been modified. However, it sounds to me that you might be very new to film in general. My guess would be that the extra image is there, but you are unable to see it because of your equipment, i.e. projector, and perhaps because your not sure what to look for. I would contact the person or company that modified your camera and ask them for assistance in figuring out if your camera has been widened properly.
  13. Yes, call Michael @ Interformat 415.626.1100. He's a cool older guy who has done a lot of optical printing work. He mainly does Super 8 blow ups and film restoration now.
  14. I must say that with the Nizo 2056 I have, I don't see the need for a blimp. Every camera is different. A lot depends on situations you are in. For instance being in a small room that is almost dead silent and the camera is right by the mic, will be more a problem with most cameras. However, how often are you in those situations? There are always work-arounds to many sound issues- camera placement, mic placement, and ambient noise levels that mask the camera noise, etc. The bulk of it will land on how good your sound recordings are. Speaking from experience, it's very important that you find experienced people when doing sound. This doesn't mean hiring full on professionals, but finding someone who is very knowledgeable about sound and recording techniques. The best method is to test out the camera and your recording equipment. Do some shooting and see how it all works. It will give you some knowledge and experience in regards to equipment, techniques, and various situations. Think of it as money spent on education, your own little film school. Look for books about sync sound shooting and editing, etc.
  15. I use a Nizo 2056. I've never heard a quiter camera. People have asked me if it's running. The link above is where I'm going to send mine in to have it crystalized. They also make a device that hooks between the camera and the sound recorder. It places a tone and flashes the film, allowing a sync mark without using a slate. Great way to keep things "on the run" and save film by not having to use a clapstick.
  16. No lab I'm aware of is doing S8 telecine in SF. That's why I was approached to do the work for a lab there. I'm in Sacramento. Currently I transfer to Mini-DV or hard drive. If at some point your interested feel free to PM me.
  17. If you have a PC then go for Adobe. If you have a Mac go for Final Cut. If money is an issue, both have "Express" versions.
  18. The Castro Theatre in San Franscico is going to start up their 70mm series on August 11th. They do this every year. The films are: 8/11 - 2001: A Space Odyssey 8/12 - Cleopatra 8/13-8/14 - Lawrence of Arabia 8/15 - The Razor's Edge 8/16-8/17 - Baraka 8/18 - The Doors 8/19 - South Pacific 8/19 (Midnight) - Tron 8/20 - Hamlet (1996) 8/22 - Playtime (Jacques Tati) 8/23 - It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World 8/24 - Titanic
  19. I have made a business in transferring Super 8 film to digital. On Friday I had a meeting with a motion-picture lab in San Francisco to set up a relationship where I will transfer/scan their clients S8 film to hard drive or Mini-DV tape for editing and archiving purposes. Depending on how things go, I may go through a complete upgrade and overhaul to do 720 & 1080 conversion of S8 film with the ability of going from complete uncompressed HD all the way down to Mini-DV. Right now I do SD conversions mainly to DV files on hard-drive or Mini-DV tape for editing and archiving. The transfer comes in with room in both the blacks and highlights so that the black and white levels can be set later. This is great in that you don't get "blown-out" highlights and you have detail in the shadows that you can control. I do a lot of the timing myself for clients since they don't have the experience or understanding of color and video levels. Additionally they can't control and manipulate in real time. The question as far as hard drive or tape is not one of quality and color space necessarily, in that I could deliver the same files that lie on my hard drive right onto Mini-DV tape and there would be no difference in either of those things that any of my clients could ever notice. It really boils down to how you plan on editing, what software/hardware system and what workflow, what kind of manipulation to the original footage you will do, and what format you will end up on. So much of the quality comes down to your editing platform. For instance my edit system will take DV footage and up-sample it to 4:2:2 native YUV color space. Any filters or effects added to it does not diminish the original quality unless you are taking the footage and going "way out" on some sort of color or levels manipulation where it just breaks apart. What's great is that upon final output you don't incur any artifacting, some may be familiar with that sort of mesh screen appearance to rendered footage using the Microsoft DV, or MSDV, codec. Finally, if your final format is for DVD or say projection on a DLP projector, then you probably won't need to have say a full uncompressed transfer as by the time you finish and get it out onto a TV or digital projector, there would be no real perceivable quality difference. Look how people using just regular Mini-DV cameras would do a film-out even years ago when it was new. So a lot of it comes down to how much money, time, and effort you want to expend in addition to how much knowledge and experience you have about a particular system/workflow, and how much that can take away from actually just shooting and making the film you want to make. There are no simple answers, just do what is practical and what you can afford. As time goes on and your resources, knowledge, and experience grows, you can do more and afford more.
  20. There are actually two designs of 400' mags. One was done by the English, the other designed by the French. The English has a pinch roller of sorts to take tension off of the earlier motors, the French were designed to work with the HD (heavy duty) motors on the ACL 1.5 & II models.
  21. Morvern Callar by Lynne Ramsey is a popular one.
  22. You want something daring and innovative, go for Weekend, try out Masculin/Feminin, and watch Vivre sa vie
  23. I'd say it's worth $400, esp if its in as great mechanical condition as it is cosmetic. I'd recommend getting a set of primes though. I've found that lens to be cumbersome to use with the Bolex, esp. doing handheld work. It's also got a limited range in that it isn't very wide. The standard wide angle for those cameras was 16mm, however I use my 10mm a lot. I don't use my zoom any longer since I got a set of Schnieder primes that were made specifically for the Bolex RX cameras. I use a 10, 16, 25, & 75. I've shot 7285, 7277 (320T), & 7277 (400BW). The lenses are amazingly sharp and fast. 3 of them have Tstops as well as Fstops. If you wanted a zoom, I'd recommend the compact zooms, either the Kern Switar or the Som Berthiot. You'll find the Switar to be more expensive as these lenses are more sought after. I'm sure the Som Berthiot will perform just beautifully. Hope that helps.
  24. I use the Eduis NX system with Edius Pro v3.61. I can't recall running into this issue, but might I suggest the forums on Canopus. I think that would be a better resource for your problem. It could have to do with the codec of the original file you are trying to render into a new codec. Have you just tried a plain render to file? Once rendered, the program places it in the file bin. Then drag that from the file bin into the timeline. This might help in tracking down the issue. I'd try that and see what happens, then put a post your question with results of tests you've tried onto the Edius forum.
  25. I'm not sure how familiar you are with b&w reversal. I've shot a lot of Tri-X and some Plus-X. You'll definitely see an effect with any type of over or underexposure at or above a 1/3 stop. Now I've purposely underexposed color reversal 1/2 stop for effect. There is no real right or wrong here, it's really about the effect you're going for and being able to achieve it. I'm not sure why overexposing the Tri-X would be a fortunate thing, but then I don't know what your lighting situation and final look your trying to achieve is. If you want the Plus-X to "look" like the Tri-X footage then I would recommend you push the film enough to match the exposure of the Tri-X. Otherwise if you want it to look close to "normal" then perhaps pushing 1/2 stop. That way your interior is only around 1/3 under. In the end I would just chalk this up to a learning experience, as it's meant to be :) Now you'll know for next time. The good thing is that this will give you guys a better understanding of the film emulsion and how it reacts to different exposures. That way when you want a certain effect you'll have a better idea how to obtain it. The main issue is that you really won't be able to "fix" the problem. You can try to compensate for it or mask it, however reversal is very unforgivable. Which can actually can be a cool thing in predicting a result or figuring out how to achieve an effect or look. So to bring this to a point, there is a difference between a desired aesthetic and technical "right" or "wrong." Most people can give you an answer to a technical "right" or "wrong" but no one can give you an answer to the aesthetic aspect. They can only give an opinion, they don't know what's in your head and what effect you trying to go for just what they would do or think of in reference to how they see things in their head. The thing to remember is the aesthetic dictates the technical. So roll the dice and see what comes out :) I hope that helps to some degree.
×
×
  • Create New...