Jump to content


Photo

64t reversal


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 31 March 2006 - 11:02 AM

hi all

i have never used this format before but im shooting a credit scene for a short film on a beach soon and i was wondering if anyone with a bit of experience could give me some good tips on how to use it and also how does the stock react on sunlit and bright scenes overall...how many stops will the 85 filter take off? should i use a meter just to be sure?

ta

freddie
  • 0

#2 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 31 March 2006 - 11:18 AM

I'd recommend either an ND filter or a polarizer. The internal filter takes away 2/3's of an f-stop. It's important to verify that your camera still has the 85 filter built in, don't just assume that when you move the filter switch to sunlight that an actual filter has internally moved into position.
  • 0

#3 Erdwolf_TVL

Erdwolf_TVL
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 31 March 2006 - 01:25 PM

My experience is that 64T looks great on textured surfaces, and appears slightly grainy on smooth surfaces. The sky is a smooth surface (unless there's some cloud coverage) and the sand could also be a smooth surface, depending on the particular type of beach you are filming. Ideally, you'd want people moving and general activity on the beach.

64T also tends to have very saturated colours. Expect DEEP blue skies and BLAZING red bikinis.

ND filter is recommended. Also remember that although 64T can be used with a built-in filter, it is actually balanced for a 85B (slightly deeper orange than 85A used with Kodachrome).
  • 0

#4 Mike Crane

Mike Crane
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 141 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 31 March 2006 - 05:18 PM

Fredie,

To my knowledge, the best super 8 reversal out there for a sunny day is the Velvia 50D available at Spectra. I have seen some this film used on a recent job - it was amazing!
  • 0

#5 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 02 April 2006 - 09:44 AM

thank you all for the nice and helpful replies. one question: i have few s8 cameras at my disposal but id try to avoid the ones with the 85 filter built in, id rather use somethign else as a mattebox. in this case what should i do? ive got some filters for a 50mm lens and thats it...

thank you.

p.s- nd filter even in case of overcast sky? assuming that my lens widest is 1.4 would that be enough to have a good exposure considering that ill have few filters on which will take lots of light off?

cheers

Edited by federico bonfanti, 02 April 2006 - 09:44 AM.

  • 0

#6 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 April 2006 - 10:06 AM

64T with an 85 or 85B correction is 40 ASA. In direct sunlight on a clear day, you'd be around an f/16 (at 24 fps / 180 degree shutter) at 40 ASA. On an overcast day, it could be more like a f/5.6 but it just depends on how bright it is.

So an ND filter is recommended just in case it gets really sunny, but you could also use a Pola instead, which would help you open up.

They also make professional 85/ND and 85/Pola combo filters.

Consumer screw-on filters are not that expensive, maybe 20 or 30 bucks or so. My Super-8 Sankyo took 52mm screw-in filters, luckily the same size that my Nikon still camera lens took. The pro filters are more expensive though, and so are the larger consumer ones.

But you can probably get an 85B filter or ND filter used too, maybe on the internet -- I remember as a film student, I used to rummage through a box of used filters at Birns & Sawyer and pick up all sorts of oddball filters for cheap prices. 85's were probably the most common filter I saw in the used bin.
  • 0

#7 Erdwolf_TVL

Erdwolf_TVL
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Other
  • London

Posted 02 April 2006 - 11:17 AM

p.s- nd filter even in case of overcast sky? assuming that my lens widest is 1.4 would that be enough to have a good exposure considering that ill have few filters on which will take lots of light off?


You only need an ND filter if your light meter indicates over-exposure or hovers near your camera's smallest apperture. With 64T, you will probably find that this is not the case.
  • 0

#8 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 02 April 2006 - 02:48 PM

Fredie,

To my knowledge, the best super 8 reversal out there for a sunny day is the Velvia 50D available at Spectra. I have seen some this film used on a recent job - it was amazing!


If you like grain then go for the 64t, otherwise take Mikes advice and use some velvia or perhaps some 100d. Further 64t results received back show less grain than Dwaynes processing. However, it still looks like the old agfa moviechrome 160 stock i used back in 1982. imo it is very poor film compared to k40. I have now given 64t a fair trial, it may be ok for t/k ing, but for direct projection its awfull. Images dont seem to be as clear as k40, images look like they've been shoot thru a net curtain. kODAK, PLEASE BRING OUT 100D IN SUPER 8.
  • 0

#9 Matt Sandstrom

Matt Sandstrom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts
  • Director
  • Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 04 April 2006 - 08:48 AM

Images dont seem to be as clear as k40, images look like they've been shoot thru a net curtain.

while i agree 64t has its problems this last statement of yours just doesn't make sense. if there's anything in this strange world of super 8 that everyone seems to agree on it's that kodachrome is never perfectly sharp and clear. in fact it often looks just like it's been "shot through a net curtain". 64t is much clearer in my opinion. its biggest asset in any comparison.

/matt
  • 0

#10 freddie bonfanti

freddie bonfanti
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 315 posts
  • Gaffer
  • LONDON

Posted 04 April 2006 - 09:55 AM

while i agree 64t has its problems this last statement of yours just doesn't make sense. if there's anything in this strange world of super 8 that everyone seems to agree on it's that kodachrome is never perfectly sharp and clear. in fact it often looks just like it's been "shot through a net curtain". 64t is much clearer in my opinion. its biggest asset in any comparison.

/matt



hey matt

i was wondering what stock camera and lenses did you use for that 1978 music video you posted not a long ago. i really like the colors and palette

ta
  • 0

#11 Andy_Alderslade

Andy_Alderslade
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1055 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London, UK

Posted 04 April 2006 - 10:09 AM

kODAK, PLEASE BRING OUT 100D IN SUPER 8.


That stock has very limited uses, its balanced for outdoors, which means if you want to use it inside or under tungsten you have to use an 80A filter which steals two whole stops. So if you need to shoot even a small amount inside you are going to need some serious lighting.
  • 0

#12 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 04 April 2006 - 12:10 PM

while i agree 64t has its problems this last statement of yours just doesn't make sense. if there's anything in this strange world of super 8 that everyone seems to agree on it's that kodachrome is never perfectly sharp and clear. in fact it often looks just like it's been "shot through a net curtain". 64t is much clearer in my opinion. its biggest asset in any comparison.

/matt


Hi, i sort of agree with regarding k40 not being clear and sharp, have found super 8 k40 images to look the best thru the angenieux 6-80 lens, or a 10mm cinegon fitted to the leicina.
Super 8 and 16mm k40 images when compared to k25 do look as though they were shot thru a net curtain. I agree that k40 is not the sharpest film in the world, but even k40 images are miles ahead of 64t. It really is too grainy to give a clear image. Have exposed 64t thru canon 814xls, leicina special, beaulieu 6008s and the zeiss so far, on all occasions the k40 images were a lot better. As i've said before, even my old e160 images are streets ahead of the 64t.
Andy
  • 0

#13 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 04 April 2006 - 01:00 PM

even my old e160 images are streets ahead of the 64t

Thats funny, because the opposite is true for me. with 64T, I can creat looks that don't have audience members saying, "it looks like it's from the 70's". 64T is a refreshing change with suppurior colors and detail, clean whites... no more muddy crap that looks like I put vasaline on my lens.
  • 0

#14 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 04 April 2006 - 02:50 PM

If any of you are using a standard mini-dv camcorder and making no additional adjustments to the camera, and then doing a film to video transfer with that camcorder, please don't give your opinion about Kodachrome 40 because your cameras are absolutely incorrectly set up to transfer reversal film, especially kodachrome 40.

From now on, when giving opinions about film stock quality, PLEASE comment on what transfer system you used, or if projected, what projection system you used, and maybe we cam begin to identify common trends.
Also how old was the film and even where it was processed might be of help.

I have a digital copy of a super-8 film that was originally shot around 1968, probably an early Kodachrome, and it is tack sharp, even in the wide shots. Kodachrome throughout the 80's, the same thing. From the 90's on, I don't really have enough information to make an authoritative opinion although the standard blue skys theory holds up well, shoot when the sky is blue, or shoot the ground level stuff and avoid the sky when the sky is white, and the Kodachrome still looks very nice.
  • 0

#15 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 04 April 2006 - 03:55 PM

I've used tons of K40 in S8/16mm, projected, transferred (pro & home). I used 16mm K40 for a convention in Las Vegas for the 100th anniversary... transferred on a Vialta and we gave it a saturated "technicolor" look of some of the few historic visuals left there. Sure it looked incredible, and nailed the look I was going for. I just prefer the look and performance of E6 films compared to K40 for pretty much everything else... A lot more shadow detail within richer colors, thats what I like.
  • 0

#16 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 04 April 2006 - 04:25 PM

Hi, all my footage is projected via schnieder f1.1 11-30 projection lenses, 64t may t/k ok, but k40 wins on a projected screen. Say, am i the only one who projects film?

Edited by k25rip, 04 April 2006 - 04:26 PM.

  • 0

#17 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 04 April 2006 - 04:44 PM

Hi, all my footage is projected via schnieder f1.1 11-30 projection lenses, 64t may t/k ok, but k40 wins on a projected screen. Say, am i the only one who projects film?



I would guess that the percentage of those who project AND use internet forums is not too high (with the exception of a dedicated projection forum or two), but there are definitely many people still projecting.
  • 0

#18 S8 Booster

S8 Booster
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 132 posts
  • Other
  • retired

Posted 04 April 2006 - 05:02 PM

........ As i've said before, even my old e160 images are streets ahead of the 64t.
Andy


although i dont dispute you or believe you make erratic judgement i find it hard to believe that the 64t is worse than the old 160 although i was quite comfortable with it.

i do believe however, that you may have been extremely unlucky with either the particular film material or processing.

my as of yet limited experience with the 64 shows nothing like those artifacts you describe.

the images posted below are captured of a dv tape from a totally crap diy off screen transfer so they are no proper reference, the reason for posting them is that the added e125 - now processed in some quasi e6 process is much worse than it used to be - much softer and less boquet still it holds up against the old 160 in my view and as you hopefully can see - the 64t is quite a bit better.

the bw image is added for some sort of a reference for the transfer "tech", plusx at 100.

proper transfer will follow later.


all images are shot with 85b filter incl the plusx.


-1/3
Posted Image

00
Posted Image

+1/3
Posted Image

just add the e125 for a sort of reference. not satisfied with the e6 processing. gone less "sharp". exposed t 80.

Posted Image

for reference of transfer tech only - exactly the same as above - plusx at 00.
Posted Image


s8hôôt

Edited by S8 Booster, 04 April 2006 - 05:08 PM.

  • 0

#19 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 05 April 2006 - 06:53 AM

Thanks S8 Booster for the images and reply. Took delivery of more 64t direct from kodak backend of last week, that was before i got back more dissapointing results. Anyway after seeing your colourfull images have just exposed yet another test roll, this time thru the 7008 with 6-80. One thing i did notice, the foil wrapping within the 64t box is now white, pretty sure my last 5 cartridges of 64t came with yellow foil wrapping. I wonder is i got sent pre-production cartridges???
Posting film to Andec shortly. Hopefully this batch may yeild better images. (not holding my breath though)
Andy
  • 0

#20 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 05 April 2006 - 11:55 AM

There has been a white wrapper for a while.
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

CineTape

Tai Audio

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

The Slider

CineTape

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Opal