Jump to content


Photo

Range of Negative and Reversal stock


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Emil Soderman

Emil Soderman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Other
  • Sweden

Posted 29 December 2007 - 10:16 AM

Hello

Its widely known that Negative film stocks got a wider range then reversal stocks right?
Just to make sure i got this right, this will mean you dont blow out your highlights as fast and that you get more information from the darker parts of the scen aswell?

Im writing a dissertation, well i think thats the name in Englis anyway :rolleyes:
So if what im saying is true i need a source to quote aswell
Anyone can help me whit this?
someone who has worked proffesionaly would be a very nice source ;)

Thanks!
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 December 2007 - 11:58 AM

Yes, negative captures a wider exposure range than reversal film.
  • 0

#3 Emil Soderman

Emil Soderman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Other
  • Sweden

Posted 29 December 2007 - 01:00 PM

Thanks allot!
If you dont mind, i will qoute you on that.

Couldnt find any books that confirmed the theory, And the ones i orderd on Super8 hasnt arrived yet.
  • 0

#4 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 December 2007 - 01:24 PM

Negative's greater latitude over reveral (slide film) is mentioned throughout various websites:
http://www.photoques.../article4.shtml
http://www.nelsontan...s/slideneg.html
http://members.shaw....m?0morefilm.htm
http://en.wikipedia....y_(photography)
http://www.schoolofp.../infocus19.html
http://photonotes.or....pl?id=Latitude
http://www.nyip.com/...hotography.html
  • 0

#5 Emil Soderman

Emil Soderman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Other
  • Sweden

Posted 29 December 2007 - 02:05 PM

Thanks!
Lots of grate links, thats should cover most of it!
Maybe i should learn how to google better :blink:
  • 0

#6 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 29 December 2007 - 02:39 PM

Funnily enough, Emil ? in light of a debate on the 16 forum down from here and you doing academic research ? that last point you made is spot on!
  • 0

#7 Emil Soderman

Emil Soderman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Other
  • Sweden

Posted 29 December 2007 - 03:00 PM

I dont quite follow you to be honest, thats a long post, what is it that i should see or realize?
Or do you just mean "Learn to google" "RTFM" ? ;)
  • 0

#8 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 29 December 2007 - 03:26 PM

Posted Image

i just got a subscription to super 8 today and i read your article on the 4008 II. my question: how does my
4008 compare to the 4008 II. you compared everything after it but never anything before it. i learned a lot,
but what can i apply to my own camera?


Thank you for your kind words about my article. The point of this series of articles is to discuss the leading production cameras for the Super 8 format. I hence focused on the most accomplished designs (in this case the Beaulieu 4008 ZM II) and also critically commented on later developments that actually were a step back (the Beaulieu 4008 ZM IV) which I had to do because all too often, people assume that newer is automatically better.

To answer your question about the predecessor of the Beaulieu 4008 ZM II, namely the Beaulieu 4008 ZM which you own and kindly posted a picture of: The changes with the Beaulieu 4008-series are minimal (and they are all identical re. ergonomics and operations, so you operate it as I described), but have nevertheless varying available features and functions. Your 4008 ZM has only three differences to the ZM II, which neverthless do matter (depending on what you want to shoot):

First of all, you notice from looking at the published pictures and your picture that the motor-shaft/sync-sound socket on the left hand is covered by the body's case (it describes a tear-drop relief there) and is thus not accessible.
That means that you cannot use your ZM for two types of synchronisations to sepmag systems, namely those two that require the broadcast-standard Pilotton Synchro-Pilot or Erlson Contact-Switch to be inserted there.
That also means that there is no place to insert the 'reverse wind device' or rewind knob through which you execute lap dissolves or multiple exposures by hand. This means that you cannot do any of these optical effects. Although you might not need them ever for your type of filmmaking, these are nevertheless pretty much standard feature on production cameras for the Super 8 format. Their lack hence makes the ZM less accomplished then the ZM II which introduced these features.

This ties in to the second omission: if you look at the published pictures and your picture, you will notice that the small 'film wind locking button' or friction brake (which is pressed to declutch the motor at the starting point of lap dissolves or multiple exposures) is missing. It would normally be placed above the film counter, next to the frame counter dial

Finally, and most importantly, the ZM came supplied not with the leading lens for this small format, namely the Schneider Beaulieu-Optivaron 1:1,8 / 6-66mm (C-Mount) with Beaulieu Reglomatic, but with another lens that Beaulieu used as default earlier: the Angénieux 1:1,9 / 8-64mm (C-Mount) with Beaulieu Reglomatic. This is also the lens fitted to your camera. To see how the optical quality fares as compared to other lenses for the Super 8 format, please go to this post of mine here:

I hope that clarified the issue a bit. In case of any further questions, please feel free to post them.
  • 0

#9 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 29 December 2007 - 03:31 PM

OOPS!

SORRY! wrong posing in this thread. I got confused by time pressure and too many tabbled browsing windows. 1000 apologies.

THIS was meant to ge THERE:


---


Emil: yeah, quite right :lol:
  • 0

#10 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 29 December 2007 - 03:33 PM

For some reason, I can't delete the post... despite my sustaining member rights. Anyway, it's there as it is... again, very sorry for this mess. Has never happened before!
  • 0

#11 Emil Soderman

Emil Soderman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Other
  • Sweden

Posted 29 December 2007 - 04:03 PM

Well, ill try too choose more carefully what i ask in the future then
As i need something of higher information level then Wikipedia i thought id ask here for tips, my fault i guess.
Though seems im not the only one screwing up! :P

This thread is pretty much dead anyway so no worries ;)
  • 0

#12 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 30 December 2007 - 09:45 AM

Well, ill try too choose more carefully what i ask in the future then
As i need something of higher information level then Wikipedia i thought id ask here for tips, my fault i guess.
Though seems im not the only one screwing up! :P

This thread is pretty much dead anyway so no worries ;)


To be honest, if you are looking for higher or more valuable and asured information than Wikipedia (which is already something few students today would recognise as necessary ? in this case, my compliments to you), then I would not ask for advice in a forum where people with varying degree of seriousness and experience post. Very often, quite wrong or ill-assumed information gets posted here. The S8 forum is full of it ;) (just read all of my posts :D ) .

Now luckily for you, David replied to you, and you can very easily write in a dissertation (BA, MA, MSc is a dissertation, PhD would be a thesis) that you got this information through "...a conversation with David Mullen, a professional DoP and member of the ASC...". That is as good a personal source as you can hope for.

An alternative way in case of David's absence would have been to go for paper- or print- and hence peer-reviewed source material. I know this gets increasingly out of fashion in some unis/colleges/student bodies, but this is still the best way to go.
Now if you are not enrolled at a film school or art school, I recognise that it might be difficult to get speciality literature on cinematography.

But as a 3rd year media productions student in SE where you are required to shoot a film plus submit a written dissertation, I am sure that your library stocks for example David's update of the Malkiewicz book. If not, it's selling for 9.- Sterling at Amazon.co.uk. For an english-language textbook, this really is a steal!
Or just flick through Kodak's datasheets which you can download for free or order from your local rep for free, too, and do some maths re. the latitude ranges given for Ektachrome and Vision2.

Use this place here or other online material (i.e. netsearched stuff) to get a general impression and overview and a direction, and then follow this direction as the guiding line to do "real" research in those funny little places called libraries that hold speciality literature, monographic or peer-reviewed publications, corporate data sheets etc.

Sorry if I have been patronising to you. That was not my intention at all!
It's just difficult to know today what students regard as good practice and what not. I recently dealt with a PhD student from one of the top 3 universities here in the UK (hint: it's neither my old place at Houghton Street nor the "other place" near the river Cam...) and that person thought it was quite reasonable to give (not even non-dynamic) google search links as a quoted source in his PhD thesis while all the sources could have been easily quoted from one book that he had already bought for the taught parts of his degree... WTF?!?! You see my problem?

Anyway, best of luck for your degree! Keep us posted.

Cheers, -Michael
  • 0

#13 Emil Soderman

Emil Soderman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 49 posts
  • Other
  • Sweden

Posted 30 December 2007 - 10:08 AM

Thanks again for your help michael you've given me allot of much needed info and help here on the Super8 forum since i registered!
Greatly appreciated!

The problem is our library at school doesnt have much info about Filmworks im afraid.
Got a few books ordered from Amazon that should be Arriving soon! (Some of them you recomeded if i remember correctly)
Im just trying not to slack to much inbetween Christams and New Years and get something done, i hope atleast hehe.
Deadline comming up aswell, so no time to order anymore more books from other sources then Swedish really.

The movie we shot is scanned and ready aswell to be edited (Cant barely wait to get it)
Though only miniDV quality im afraid, woulde be a nice to send 1 or 2 reels to Zürich for HD scan and compare the quality.
Should be a significant difference dont you think?
  • 0

#14 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 December 2007 - 01:03 PM

These are moments when we really miss Kodak's John Ptylak and his contributions...
  • 0

#15 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 30 December 2007 - 01:28 PM

These are moments when we really miss Kodak's John Pytlak and his contributions...


That is so weird...

I had exactly that sentence in my above post where I wrote about your and other members' "quotability" as source material.

After a brief moment, I deleted this part-sentence and posted my text as it stands above, without mentioning John. I thought it would be better for everyone reading this to actually move on and not bring up this loss of 2007 to all of us again and again.

Yet since then, over the past hours, I couldn't but feel bad about that decision because if someone here and in the wider cinematographic community would deserve to be remembered again and again for his contributions, it would be John.

I learned so much from him as an unregistered reader here over the years, and it were his contributions re. Super 8 negative films and their technical capabilities and cinematic opportunities they openend up, plus his insisting assurance of Kodak's serious interest in reviving this format that actually lead me back to this format and my registration here.

Thanks, David, for actually posting this sentence. It matters more to me than one might think :mellow: .
  • 0

#16 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19760 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 December 2007 - 03:18 PM

I think it's a good thing to remember those who have passed on. As long as I live, and the others that John Pytlak inspired, then part of him lives on.
  • 0

#17 Alessandro Machi

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

Posted 30 December 2007 - 05:26 PM

For some reason, I can't delete the post... despite my sustaining member rights. Anyway, it's there as it is... again, very sorry for this mess. Has never happened before!


I think once you reply to your own post you can't delete the prior edit. Perhaps one can delete their latest post and then edit the prior one if all of that happens within the 24 hour time period but I don't know for sure.
  • 0

#18 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 01 January 2008 - 11:51 AM

I think it's a good thing to remember those who have passed on. As long as I live, and the others that John Pytlak inspired, then part of him lives on.


Yes, you are right indeed, David!
  • 0

#19 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 01 January 2008 - 11:57 AM

I think once you reply to your own post you can't delete the prior edit. Perhaps one can delete their latest post and then edit the prior one if all of that happens within the 24 hour time period but I don't know for sure.


Thanks for your hint. I believe I will stand by my mistake and not make any deletion attempts anymore.
I would also like to say that I have never experienced any problems with this forum platform before this mishap of mine. This forum is expectionally stable and graphically superb: clean, neat, to the point, easy-to-operate and absolutely fitting to what we discuss here. There are forums in the "cloud" which feel like an aggressive attack on all your senses just by looking at them (let alone reading through them).
  • 0

#20 Michael Lehnert

Michael Lehnert
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1086 posts
  • Other
  • London, UK / Basel, CH

Posted 01 January 2008 - 12:09 PM

While we are discussing online aesthetics..: I just loaded-up and read your website, David, which I believe to be brand-new (at least I have not remarked the hyperlink in your signature until the final days of 2007). Beautifully made!
  • 0


Glidecam

The Slider

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

FJS International, LLC

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

CineTape

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Opal

CineLab

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Paralinx LLC

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Aerial Filmworks

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider