Jump to content


Photo

Pull Process Examples


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Aurora Gordon

Aurora Gordon

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Student

Posted 19 January 2009 - 07:16 PM

Howdy,

I'm just curious if anyone can think of some good examples of pull processing. I can think of some good push processing examples, but not many films with pull process spring to mind. Also, would the amount of recommended stops to pull change between 16mm film and 35mm film? I can't think why it would, but just curious what experience other shooters have had.

-Rory
  • 0

#2 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 19 January 2009 - 07:44 PM

Howdy,

I'm just curious if anyone can think of some good examples of pull processing. I can think of some good push processing examples, but not many films with pull process spring to mind. Also, would the amount of recommended stops to pull change between 16mm film and 35mm film? I can't think why it would, but just curious what experience other shooters have had.

-Rory


Well Rory, without trying to come off like a smart-ass, I'd say that the reason you see so much more pushing than pulling is that cinematographers very seldom say "Aw, sh*&, we've got way too much light on this set." It's usually the opposite.

You see a marked drop in contrast, and a small reduction in grainularity (though not proportional wth just shooting a slower stock, though you don't have a choice with '01).

I'm sorry I can't provide you with any specific examples, but I'd hazard a guess that you might find some footage shot with '01 or older '45 that was pulled with some movies shot on really bright days, though you'll probably run into more instances where they just used ND filters.

There may have been a few movies that were shot pulled on purpose, but again, sorry to say, cannot think of any. I will do some digging for you though. . .
  • 0

#3 Daniel Porto

Daniel Porto
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 201 posts
  • Student

Posted 19 January 2009 - 08:55 PM

Well Rory, without trying to come off like a smart-ass, I'd say that the reason you see so much more pushing than pulling is that cinematographers very seldom say "Aw, sh*&, we've got way too much light on this set." It's usually the opposite.

You see a marked drop in contrast, and a small reduction in grainularity (though not proportional wth just shooting a slower stock, though you don't have a choice with '01).

I'm sorry I can't provide you with any specific examples, but I'd hazard a guess that you might find some footage shot with '01 or older '45 that was pulled with some movies shot on really bright days, though you'll probably run into more instances where they just used ND filters.

There may have been a few movies that were shot pulled on purpose, but again, sorry to say, cannot think of any. I will do some digging for you though. . .


Pretty sure that Fight Club was shot on 500T rated at 320T.

Karl, when you say that the reduction in granularity (when pulling a stock) is not proportional with just shooting a slower stock, which one in theory and practice would produce the less grain? ...lets just say that they are both at the same ASA.
  • 0

#4 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 19 January 2009 - 09:59 PM

Pretty sure that Fight Club was shot on 500T rated at 320T.

Karl, when you say that the reduction in granularity (when pulling a stock) is not proportional with just shooting a slower stock, which one in theory and practice would produce the less grain? ...lets just say that they are both at the same ASA.


Hey Daniel, I'm saying that the slower stock would be finer-grained still than a faster one pulled.

This is a general rule that, I think, holds true with all of the modern ECN-2 stocks.

Likewise, a slower film pushed tends to have coarser grain than just using a faster stock

I do remember one exception to said rule where still photographers said that they used to get finer grain by pushing Plus-X in Perfection Super Speed Developer to 4- or 500 than just using 400-speed Tri-X processed normally.

I've also heard rumors that the new, improved T-Max 400 pushes to 3200 better than the old TMZ P3200, a 1000-speed native stock from circa 1987.

This seems to be more the case when you have an older, faster stock, compared to a newer slower stock, or vice versa with Vision3 or Eterna, because the faster stocks tend to get improved first.

Now that we have '201, this is academic for at least four or five more years, probably, but I could imaging that the '212 or '17 pulled with a daylight filter would have conceivably been finer-grained than the older '45. Or if you were going for a low-con look pulling the '29 somewhat would produce an even lower-contrast look.

Hope I answered your question.
  • 0

#5 Daniel Porto

Daniel Porto
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 201 posts
  • Student

Posted 19 January 2009 - 11:03 PM

Hey Daniel, I'm saying that the slower stock would be finer-grained still than a faster one pulled.

This is a general rule that, I think, holds true with all of the modern ECN-2 stocks.

Likewise, a slower film pushed tends to have coarser grain than just using a faster stock

I do remember one exception to said rule where still photographers said that they used to get finer grain by pushing Plus-X in Perfection Super Speed Developer to 4- or 500 than just using 400-speed Tri-X processed normally.

I've also heard rumors that the new, improved T-Max 400 pushes to 3200 better than the old TMZ P3200, a 1000-speed native stock from circa 1987.

This seems to be more the case when you have an older, faster stock, compared to a newer slower stock, or vice versa with Vision3 or Eterna, because the faster stocks tend to get improved first.

Now that we have '201, this is academic for at least four or five more years, probably, but I could imaging that the '212 or '17 pulled with a daylight filter would have conceivably been finer-grained than the older '45. Or if you were going for a low-con look pulling the '29 somewhat would produce an even lower-contrast look.

Hope I answered your question.


You most certainly did... and went further!! I have another quick question about density. Will a denser image mean that more silver-halide crystals have been exposed to light? If so, would overexposing and creating a denser negative and then printing down in post, be the best option to get as much detail as possible in the blacks and dark areas of an image. (I remember David Fincher talking about density and getting more details in the blacks on the Se7en DVD commentary)
  • 0

#6 Bobby Shore

Bobby Shore
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles / Montreal

Posted 19 January 2009 - 11:25 PM

You most certainly did... and went further!! I have another quick question about density. Will a denser image mean that more silver-halide crystals have been exposed to light? If so, would overexposing and creating a denser negative and then printing down in post, be the best option to get as much detail as possible in the blacks and dark areas of an image. (I remember David Fincher talking about density and getting more details in the blacks on the Se7en DVD commentary)


just to add to what karl said, there's plenty of films that have used pull processing as a creative way to achieve a softer, more pastel look, as the process tends to slightly desaturate the image and reduce contrast some. Requiem for a Dream used slight pull processing with fuji stock for some of the earlier apt. scenes with Ellen Burstyn.

And yeah, a denser image comes from slight overexposure (a thick negative), which when printed down in post (either photochemically or in telecine) will result in an image with blacker blacks, a bit more contrast and slightly more color saturation. With that in mind, quite a few films have actually combined pull processing (or flashing, another contrast reducing method), with contrast enhancing processes such as ENR, CCE, or ACE. These are silver retention processes, that can be done either to the negative or the positive, which result in a denser (much denser sometimes) image, harshly affecting contrast, gamma and color saturation. Darius Khondji with Seven actually combined pulling and either a CCE or ACE process (applied to the answer print) to get good blacks but soften the image on the negative so as not to make the final look too harsh. There's a good article about these silver retention processes in AC called soup du jour, search the archives, someone posted a link to it the other day here.

hope that helps.

Bobby Shore
DP
LA/Montreal
www.bobbyshore.com
  • 0

#7 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 19 January 2009 - 11:26 PM

Howdy,

I'm just curious if anyone can think of some good examples of pull processing. I can think of some good push processing examples, but not many films with pull process spring to mind. Also, would the amount of recommended stops to pull change between 16mm film and 35mm film? I can't think why it would, but just curious what experience other shooters have had.

-Rory


The only examples I can point at are the ones I have generated. If you look at my reel (there's a link at the bottom of this post, in my signature section), all the cop footage is 7205 pull processed 2 stops (rated 50 ASA).

I don't see why pulling 7205 (16mm) would be any different than pulling 5205 (35mm) or any other same-stock film formats (aside from he grain being more obvious in pull processed 16mm than pull processed 35mm and the apparent contrast-change thereof). In my experience it hasn't, but I haven't done specific same-stock, different-size pull processing comparison tests.
  • 0

#8 Daniel Porto

Daniel Porto
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 201 posts
  • Student

Posted 20 January 2009 - 12:15 AM

just to add to what karl said, there's plenty of films that have used pull processing as a creative way to achieve a softer, more pastel look, as the process tends to slightly desaturate the image and reduce contrast some. Requiem for a Dream used slight pull processing with fuji stock for some of the earlier apt. scenes with Ellen Burstyn.

And yeah, a denser image comes from slight overexposure (a thick negative), which when printed down in post (either photochemically or in telecine) will result in an image with blacker blacks, a bit more contrast and slightly more color saturation. With that in mind, quite a few films have actually combined pull processing (or flashing, another contrast reducing method), with contrast enhancing processes such as ENR, CCE, or ACE. These are silver retention processes, that can be done either to the negative or the positive, which result in a denser (much denser sometimes) image, harshly affecting contrast, gamma and color saturation. Darius Khondji with Seven actually combined pulling and either a CCE or ACE process (applied to the answer print) to get good blacks but soften the image on the negative so as not to make the final look too harsh. There's a good article about these silver retention processes in AC called soup du jour, search the archives, someone posted a link to it the other day here.

hope that helps.

Bobby Shore
DP
LA/Montreal
www.bobbyshore.com


Thankyou. You made it clear to me exactly why Khondji combined the methods as he did for Se7en. I have the Soup du Jour article already in my tabs and I will start to read it now!
  • 0


Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Tai Audio

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

CineLab

CineTape

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Opal

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

Tai Audio

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

CineLab

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Visual Products

Broadcast Solutions Inc