Jump to content


Photo

exposure for optical blow-up


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1 Camila Freitas

Camila Freitas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Student

Posted 16 February 2007 - 12:44 PM

Hi

Is it necessary to compensate for exposure when you shoot S16 for an optical blow-up?

Thank you

Camila Freitas
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20156 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 February 2007 - 12:59 PM

The exposure for the blow-up to a dupe element is a separate thing from the exposure for the original camera negative. Optical printer operators wedge test and determine the right exposure to create a new film element with the right density. Usually they are working with a color-timed, contact-printed 16mm IP so there is only an overall exposure for the reel (not scene-to-scene corrections) when making the 35mm dupe negative in an optical printer.

However...

A well-exposed, i.e. denser-than-normal, negative helps reduce grain and improve blacks, which makes for a better blow-up. Most people do this by rating the film stocks slower than normal, like by 1/3 or 2/3's of a stop (1/3 of a stop is farily negligible however -- 2/3's of a stop is better.)
  • 0

#3 Camila Freitas

Camila Freitas
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Student

Posted 16 February 2007 - 01:26 PM

A well-exposed, i.e. denser-than-normal, negative helps reduce grain and improve blacks, which makes for a better blow-up. Most people do this by rating the film stocks slower than normal, like by 1/3 or 2/3's of a stop (1/3 of a stop is farily negligible however -- 2/3's of a stop is better.)[i]

Does that also apply to a s16-HD-35 blow-up?

What differences do you consider most important between the two routes?

Many thanks,

Camila
  • 0

#4 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 16 February 2007 - 01:45 PM

A well-exposed, i.e. denser-than-normal, negative helps reduce grain and improve blacks, which makes for a better blow-up. Most people do this by rating the film stocks slower than normal, like by 1/3 or 2/3's of a stop (1/3 of a stop is farily negligible however -- 2/3's of a stop is better.)[i]

Does that also apply to a s16-HD-35 blow-up?

What differences do you consider most important between the two routes?

Many thanks,

Camila


Hi,

Slight overexposure is always a good thing, regardless of post route.

Stephen
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20156 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 February 2007 - 04:28 PM

Yes, doing D.I.'s I've still found that a slightly denser-than-normal negative is better, although a little less critical than for direct printing and optical work.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Technodolly

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineTape

Wooden Camera

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

The Slider

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC