Jump to content


Photo

Low contrast look.


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 James Rydings

James Rydings
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles, California

Posted 27 June 2007 - 03:21 PM

I am shooting a short film on Super 16 in Tuscany Italy. I want to give it a low contrast, natural, soft look. I want to shoot with Cooke lenses but it will end up being Zeiss as the production can get them for free, so I will probably use a little diffusion. I am uncertain on which stock to use. My first thought is the Expression or Eterna, but being super 16 I would rather shoot on a slow speed stock around 100-200. Are there any slower speed low contrast stocks? Or should I just shoot on the 7217 or 7212 (maybe even the 7201) and pull process, or use a low contrast filter? Also what are the differences between the Eterna and the Expression?
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20074 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 June 2007 - 03:30 PM

Eterna 250D, 250T, and 500T are fairly low in contrast, though not quite as low as Kodak Expression 500T or Fuji Eterna 400T.

But less contrasty than Kodak Vision-2 50D, 100T, 200T, 250D, 500T (which are not that contrasty either...) But the old Super-F Fuji F64D and F125T are more contrasty than regular Vision-2.

So lowest contrast: Fuji Eterna 400T, Kodak Expression 500T

Next lowest: Fuji Eterna 250D, 250T, 500T, Reala 500D

Next lowest: all the other Kodak Vision-2 stocks

More contrasty: Fuji F-64D, F-125T, Kodak Vision 74, 79

Most contrasty: Fuji Vivid 160T

If you want the finest grain, lowest contrast, I'd use Kodak 50D (7201) with an UltraCon filter or overexpose and pull-process. Otherwise, I'd use Fuji Eterna 250D, maybe with the UltraCon or overexposed and pulled (which would reduce grain).
  • 0

#3 James Rydings

James Rydings
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles, California

Posted 27 June 2007 - 08:41 PM

Thank you for your speady reply. I think I will use the 50D for the exteriors and the 250D for the interiors. However what would be the difference between pull processing and using the UltraCon Filter? I dont want the blacks to go milky. I am thinking of over-exposing 1 1/2 stop and pulling 1 stop. How does that sound?
  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 20074 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 June 2007 - 09:06 PM

Thank you for your speady reply. I think I will use the 50D for the exteriors and the 250D for the interiors. However what would be the difference between pull processing and using the UltraCon Filter? I dont want the blacks to go milky. I am thinking of over-exposing 1 1/2 stop and pulling 1 stop. How does that sound?


Fine. You'll get milkier blacks from an UltraCon more than you would from overexposing + pull-processing, which is more about lowering contrast.
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

CineTape

Technodolly

Abel Cine

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

Glidecam

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

The Slider

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Rig Wheels Passport

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineTape

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine