Question for charles..
 

Hey Chas,

While still trying to raise money, finish stuff and get finally going with what i emailed you about eon's about, i have a small project to bring money in a couple weeks, and i had a couple small questions i hoped you could help me with.

I am shooting a very small experimental piece next week and i am at a loss of which of these 2 16mm reversals (b&w) i should opt for. I rang Kodak, i went into processing labs, i went to the big film school here and nobody can give me answers so strange.

I am hoping you have some experience with these or something similar.
The piece calls for a frankenstein(ish)/noir/expressionist style looks, so layered and textured lighting around the room and deep blacks. Grain is not an issue, infact may be a virtue for the piece. These are the two films i would like to choose from, budget being the biggest concern.

EASTMAN 7276 PLUS-X
EASTMAN 7278 TRI-X


99% of the shoot will be interior, in a studio using artificial lighting. I am hoping since it is b&w to get away with using an array of lights, everything from a normal desk lamp to tota's, table lamps with shapes... even some spot lights, candles and torches. Imagine a very kinda makeshift laboratory/workshop.



Is there one you would suggest from these two. I understand the 7276 is more filmic and retains less grain in the final output, but do you think it may be too slow without a fully professional lighting setup.

Again grain even flickering is not an issue it may add to the feel. As the ultimate piece will have quite a bit of motion graphics thrown on top anything may do, but you know garbage in garbage out.

Also if i was to use a minus blue filter (i can't get an answer from anybody about this) or even an orange, would that render the final footage un-usable (no experience with this stock yet), and will it effect exposure. Do they cut light out and i have to compensate with the meter and so on. Money is tight i would like to not waste a frame.

Would you like to take a flight out here be the operator?? heh i'll buy you a coke.

Anyways thanks for your help and jump in with any suggestions.

Zac

Oooh! Charles! If you come be the operator for me, I'll buy you cokes with lunch and dinner! At a nice place!

Zac:

As you guessed, the 76 will give you less grain. However, the type of lighting you are describing wil probably be best served by the higher speed 78.

Will this piece be telecined and remain on video, or will you be ultimately cutting a projection version? If telecined, you can shoot color negative and convert to black and white if that helps from an economic standpoint. It's certainly possible to dial in the look in the telecine suite, it's done all the time.

Contrast with reversal is a big issue and I would recommend shooting some tests before starting your project. It has similar latitude to digital in the highlights and even less in the shadows, in my experience.

Not sure about the "minus blue" filter, what are you looking to achieve? Orange and red filters are usually used in black and white filming to deepen the color of the sky, but since you indicated this will be an interior film...? And yes, exposure compensation is required. The easiest way to determine this is to use a spot meter pointed at a gray card, slide the filter in and out from in front of the meter and do the math between the two indicated exposures.

Thanks Charles... Just what i wanted to know :)

Charles the problem with colour negatives are, they cost over 4x as much, and this budget is very low, and you yeah you were right it is all going to be telecined.

The piece is only going to be around 2 minutes which means i can get away with a really low budget, since i can procure 400f runs for around $60 AUD, which is $40 USD. I can almost get away with only 2-3 runs of it. Colour neg is $200 per 100f.

Telecine prices also double. Luckily my uni has a dvcpro50 deck so i can get telecined to that and retain a nicer compression ratio.

The minus blue filters, yellow and orange, in b&w reduce greys and retain a higher contrast, and force it to become more black and white. They defeat the haze, it can be done in post as well.

I am tempted to find some ilford film. That is b&w negative and meant to be absolutely beatiful to work with, and only a bit more expensive than the reversal stock, but alas i can't find anywhere here that stocks it, and i am worried the telecine will cost more. I work with ilford all the time in still photography and it is meant to be the exact same stock. The ilford has wonderful contrast ratio and beiong a negative extends its ratio most likely well beyond what dv or reversal can give me.

http://www.mindfreeproductions.com/test/littleman.jpg

http://www.mindfreeproductions.com/test/oldhouse.jpg

http://www.mindfreeproductions.com/t...iralstairs.jpg

http://www.mindfreeproductions.com/t...ralstairs1.jpg

These are some test shots i took at the location using ilford stock.

thanks.

Zac