Posted 22 November 2005 - 01:15 AM
Posted 22 November 2005 - 02:35 AM
If, for example, you were to shoot a daylight scene on tungsten film without using an 85 filter, then you would have to have the lab make corrections in the printing lights to bring the print back to a normal color balance. You would not use a different print stock, however, as the correction is made using the printer lights.
The lab is more interested in whether your negative has a neutral color balance (tungsten stock & tungsten light, etc.) or a mismatched and uncorrected color balance (tungsten stock & daylight). Then you will have to tell them whether they should correct the difference back to neutral for a "normal" look, or leave the color difference in for artistic effect.
Posted 22 November 2005 - 11:27 AM
If you use a tungsten balance film in daylight without an 85 filter, a mismatch in speed results, such that you may have contrast mismatch if all the scene information does not fall on the "straight line" portion of the film's characteristic. Likewise using a daylight balance film with tungsten light and no filtration could cause a mismatch issue.
With color negative film's great latitude, your color timer / colorist can generally correct minor variations in color on a scene-to-scene basis, unless the incorrect light source / filtration actually caused contrast mismatch. Let your lab know the "look" you want in the final print/transfer -- e.g., if you shot tungsten balance film with daylight illumination for a deliberate cold "look".
Posted 22 November 2005 - 04:16 PM
If you are talking of negative film, of course John is right, but, as he says, it's more a question of exposing the film at the shooting.
But I read the former post as a concern about lab printing.
If "SSJR" (please, sign your posts !) is talking about processing a negative that was just shot in a camera, then, yes we write on the label, not what kind of film it is (D light or Tungsten) but rather its precise reference, that includes this parameter. The process can be very different according to the film type, since the whole chemistry can be very different : ECN2 for negative, usually, E6 for reversal, for instance, and may be, - but, there again, John could be of a great help-, according to its sensitivity, the process can also differ, within a chemical family.
I think Mike read the firts post a third way : "does it matter that a processed negative film given to a lab for a print has no indication wheter it is D light or T ?"
Then, I think Mike is right.
You see, we sometimes have mixed D light and Tungsten stock edited on a roll for printing, even sometimes black and white mixed with colo negs, so I second the idea that it should not matter wheter the original stock was T or D light. Anyway, the reference is seeingable in the border of the processed neg, so the lab shouldn't need you to give the information, they have it here !
Anyway, I'm afraid that, though the way the question was put made Mike give that answer, which I would have given myself as well, it actually was put the wrong way (why would the lab ask such a question ?!), so that I'm afraid you are more certainly in a problem of exposition or neg processing, rather than printing only...
If you want us to help us more, give us more futher and precise information :
Are you talking about shooting a neg one way or another, according to its (D or T) reference ?
Are you talking about a neg being given for process with no (D or T) reference ?
Are you talking about a processed negative for printing only ?
Posted 22 November 2005 - 05:01 PM
It really depends on what you are getting the lab to do.
It's quite common (here at any rate) to make "one light" work prints or dailies from rushes negative. The lab will use a printer light that works for the particular stock if it is lit and exposed to standard conditions - without needing to put the neg on a colour analyser to find the actual light that the particular scene requires.
It's quicker and a whole lot cheaper than grading the negative, and works well if that's what you need.
Different types of stock do average out at slightly different "standard" lights. Not because they are daylight or tungsten, but because they are simply differnt types of stock. Sure, the lab can identify the stock type from the edge number prefix (Keykode), but that defeats the simplicity and minimal handling of a one-light print.
In those circumstances, mislabling your negative could produce an off-colour print.
That said, it's true that in recent times, all of Kodak's stocks (in any series i.e. Vision 2) are coming in at very similar standard lights. Older types, and Fuji neg, will be different.
In any other circumstances, if you oder a graded (timed) print, then the lab will be able to identify the neg type if it needs to, and in any case will grade the images as they see them.
Posted 22 November 2005 - 05:26 PM
But, in that case it could also be a mix of different negs cut together...