underexposure and pulling....
Posted 29 January 2006 - 08:55 PM
Were shooting on 79. Anybody have some experience with this?
by the way, been reading for a couple years, this is my first post.
Posted 29 January 2006 - 11:56 PM
You're negative will be very thin (4 Stops Underexposed!!!)
Plus since you are already using a low-con stock your image will be very flat and desaturated.
Are you sure this isn't a look you can approximate digitally rather than doing it photochemically?
'Birth' probably also benefited from some expensive colour correction and post production that might also be outside of your budget.
Here is a thread from a few years ago on 'Birth'
Posted 30 January 2006 - 12:14 AM
If I couldn't test, I'd play it safe, maybe just pull one stop and not adjust the ASA rating / exposure to compensate, thus ending up one-stop underexposed. Or underexpose by one stop in addition if you must.
Then at least you'll know you'll have an image to work with on the negative.
When you shoot your video, shoot one shot as a test that is underexposed two stops and pulled two stops AS A TEST ONLY so that someday when you do another music video, you will have tested this technique.
Posted 30 January 2006 - 02:24 AM
thats good advice. i was planning on playing it safe, so the entire production going down the drain isnt blamed on some cowboy dp. . .
i wanted to shoot 29. however the production is working off of unused 79 from a prior job.
underexpose 1/2 a stop, pull a stop. see what we can come up with in telecine....
Posted 30 January 2006 - 06:31 AM
If you are using 5279 and want a lower contrast / saturation "look", go no more than a pull-1 process. Additional underexposure will lose some shadow detail and give less density in the black areas. Filtration can also be used for contrast reduction. With contrast-reduction filtration and underexposure, you may even be able to use a normal process.
The combination of underexposure and lower density blacks will make the grain more visible.