Jump to content


Photo

85B vs. 85


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1 Nick Norton

Nick Norton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • Student
  • Chicago

Posted 21 February 2009 - 05:39 PM

So, before i can afford a proper mattebox, i have decided to purchase some screw on 85B filters to use Tungsten Film in Daylight.

I understand Kodak rates the 500T film as 320 with an 85 filter, but how about an 85B?

On Kodak's site is says to rate the 500 stock at 200 with an 85B... is this correct?



Also, i understand the 85 filter is a more common tool to correct Tungsten film to be shot in Daylight... but isn't the correct filtration 5500k to 3200k... which an 85B provides? Why is the 85 so popular?


Thanks-
Nicholas
  • 0

#2 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 21 February 2009 - 05:53 PM

85 and 85B are both 2/3 stop compensation. There's only a very slight difference between the two, which when shooting color negative not really noticeable. You may see the difference when shooting reversal film. I think the 85 is slightly cooler by around 200k.

500T with an 85B should be rated at 320ASA. Can you link to the Kodak site that says otherwise?

Oftentimes, an 85B filter is just referred to as an 85 for simplicity. So you may hear the DP call for an "85" but he may really mean "85B" and the 1st knows what he means.
  • 0

#3 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 21 February 2009 - 06:01 PM

I understand Kodak rates the 500T film as 320 with an 85 filter, but how about an 85B?

On Kodak's site is says to rate the 500 stock at 200 with an 85B... is this correct?


Nick its the 85b that's rated as 200 asa the 85 is 320.

Satsuki the 85 is 500k less than the 85b which is 5500k

Although it's on Kodaks site it seems quite a difference in exposure for those two filters though.
  • 0

#4 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 21 February 2009 - 06:29 PM

Nick its the 85b that's rated as 200 asa the 85 is 320.

Satsuki the 85 is 500k less than the 85b which is 5500k

What - REALLY??!!

I've been using the 85B for years at 2/3 stop compensation for reversal film, you're telling me I've been underexposing by an additional 2/3 stop? I find that really hard to believe...

My Kodak Cinematographer's Field Guide says the 85 is 5500k to 3400k and 2/3 stop, whereas the 85B is 5500k to 3200k and 2/3 stop. Looking at my Samuelson's Manual, it shows slightly less than 0.1 stop more light loss for the 85B, which being a slightly stronger amber filter would make sense to me. That's very close to the 85 not to be noticeable with color neg. With reversal, maybe rating at 250ASA would be more correct. I definitely don't understand Kodak saying 200ASA though, that's 1 1/3 stops light loss! I think it must be a typo on Kodak's part...
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 21 February 2009 - 07:31 PM

Some filter makers call the 85A and 85 the same thing -- it was designed for "Type A" film balanced for 3400K (photofloods) and corrects 5500K to 3400K. (Some filter makers seem to make both an 85 and 85A that are different, or just an 85A or just an 85, but not both.)

The 85B is for "Type B" film and corrects 5500K to 3200K.

So technically the 85B is the correct filter to correct daylight for tungsten stock. However, nowadays "85" is just a shorthand for 85B, though I'm sure both filters are used interchangeably half the time and no one pays attention.

As for filter factor, most people use a 2/3-stop compensation for either the 85A or 85B... however, if you've ever metered these filters yourself, you'd see that an 85B is more like a 3/4-stop compensation (and the 81EF is about a 1/2-stop.) But since meters work in 1/3-stop increments in terms of ASA values, it's hard to program a 1/2-stop or 3/4-stop adjustment.

I've never heard that a 500 ASA film with an 85B would be 200 ASA, that would be 1 1/3-stops.

The old Harrison chart that lists filters by their transmission or density says that the 85 transmits 70% and the 85B transmits 60% -- I assume a filter that cuts the light by one-stop would be one that transmits 50%, and clear glass would be near 100%.

Don't know why Kodak says to use the Wratten 85B gel with White Flame Arcs, at 200 ASA, but use the Wratten 85 with 5500K at 320 ASA.

You can read Tiffen's definition of the 85B filter here:
http://www.tiffen.co...p;itemnum=8285B
  • 0

#6 Jason Hinkle (RIP)

Jason Hinkle (RIP)
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Chicago, IL

Posted 21 February 2009 - 08:56 PM

So, before i can afford a proper mattebox


Hey Nick, have you seen these? http://www.thecineci...ome.php?cat=270

There's obviously a bit cheap and made for video cameras but I have one and it fits on my ACL with a little bit of fudging. I got it mainly so I could use standard 4x4 filters - especially since my collection of lenses are all different sizes and don't take the same filters.

Edited by Jason Hinkle, 21 February 2009 - 08:57 PM.

  • 0

#7 Sam Wells

Sam Wells
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1751 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 21 February 2009 - 09:42 PM

~ 1 printer light point worth of difference I'd bet

You could _breathe_ on the Hue control on a Davinci and turn one into the other

-Sam
  • 0

#8 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 22 February 2009 - 04:34 PM

I've never heard that a 500 ASA film with an 85B would be 200 ASA, that would be 1 1/3-stops.


I've been testing kodak 7219 today and used an 85b with the 54 iscorama anamorph attached to a 16mm mark one prime. Because the anamorph takes a third of a stop and kodak says to rate is as 200asa with an 85b I've rated it 160 asa to include the anamorph. Hope its going to be okay!
  • 0

#9 Brian Drysdale

Brian Drysdale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5070 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 22 February 2009 - 05:25 PM

I believe it was Kodak who recommended using the 85 for their neg stocks and the 85B for their reversal stocks. You can use the latter for both, although to my eye flesh tones did appear warmer than expected in the final prints after the grade compared to just using an 85 filter.

I know some people used to shoot daylight using an 81EF because they felt the neg stocks looked too warm with the 85.
  • 0

#10 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 22 February 2009 - 05:37 PM

I've been testing kodak 7219 today and used an 85b with the 54 iscorama anamorph attached to a 16mm mark one prime. Because the anamorph takes a third of a stop and kodak says to rate is as 200asa with an 85b I've rated it 160 asa to include the anamorph. Hope its going to be okay!



It doesn't hurt to rate 500T at 200 ASA with an 85B, but as I said, the 85B does not lose 1 1/3-stops of light -- you can check it yourself.

Look it's very simple:

85B: 5500K to 3200K
85: 5500K to 3400K

You can do whatever you want with that info. But "photographic daylight" is generally 5500K (according to Kodak) and 500T stock is balanced for 3200K, so the 85B filter is the correct filter to use. Hence why Super-8 cameras, which were built back when we had Type A color reversal stocks balanced for 3400K (photofloods) such as K40T or E160T, have a built-in 85 filter, which is not quite enough of a correction for the new Type B tungsten stocks sold for Super-8 -- technically it should be an 85B.
  • 0

#11 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 22 February 2009 - 06:37 PM

It doesn't hurt to rate 500T at 200 ASA with an 85B, but as I said, the 85B does not lose 1 1/3-stops of light -- you can check it yourself.

Look it's very simple:

85B: 5500K to 3200K
85: 5500K to 3400K


Which is on page 74 of your Cinematography book! Third edition. The 85 also known sometimes as the 85A. I often read this.
  • 0

#12 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 February 2009 - 05:21 AM

I've been testing kodak 7219 today and used an 85b with the 54 iscorama anamorph attached to a 16mm mark one prime. Because the anamorph takes a third of a stop and kodak says to rate is as 200asa with an 85b I've rated it 160 asa to include the anamorph. Hope its going to be okay!

Oh dear I misread kodaks exposure index for 3200 to 5500. I saw the 85 filter and the 85b underneath. I don't think that's altogether my fault though. Kodak should have called the 85 an 85b even if most would know it isnt. I'm new to this and taking everything at face value. So I have wrongly set my exposure at 200 instead of 320 Oh well should be alright and that is the purpose of testing! I thought it didnt sound right but I should have read it more carefully. Sorry for any confusion. At least now I know that many will call an 85b an 85 as shorthand. One to watch then.
  • 0

#13 Oliver Christoph Kochs

Oliver Christoph Kochs
  • Sustaining Members
  • 323 posts
  • Film Loader
  • Germany

Posted 24 February 2009 - 06:36 AM

I remember that i've used / compared the 85A, B and C on 16mm Ektachrome reversal film. I compensated half a stop in addition (A half, B one, C one and a half).
This window scene had a cloudy afternoon in late summer. This is a subjective impression: I found the B and C too warm as a result so I avoid color filtering as good as i can.
Allow me one question to the experts: How important is color filtering when using the newer Neg stocks (like Vision3)? Skip completely and leave it to colortiming?
  • 0

#14 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 24 February 2009 - 06:38 AM

Always best to color correct with filters when needed, unless you're going for an effect in my opinion. This saves you form the possibility of over-exposing one layer of the film which then makes it harder to correct in the Telecine.
Now, that being said, most of the time you'll be fine if you don't. BUT, if you get it right on the day, you save time, which is money in the telecine because you're not trying to balance something to look "right."
That's my opinion at least.
  • 0

#15 Oliver Christoph Kochs

Oliver Christoph Kochs
  • Sustaining Members
  • 323 posts
  • Film Loader
  • Germany

Posted 24 February 2009 - 07:11 AM

Adrian, thanx for your reply. So i better should color correct the Vision 3 500T and the Vision2 stocks when used in daylight with 85 filters?
  • 0

#16 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 24 February 2009 - 07:14 AM

It's always recommended unless you're purposefully not doing it or really need that extra 2/3 stop.
  • 0

#17 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 February 2009 - 07:20 AM

Kodak should have called the 85 an 85b even if most would know it isnt.

Nope still wrong they must mean an 85 for 3200 to 5500 because as Brian pointed out they recommend an 85 for negative.
  • 0

#18 Bengt Freden

Bengt Freden
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 122 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 24 February 2009 - 09:15 AM

Even if 85B is the correct filter for converting Tungsten 3400 K° stock to daylight 5500 K° (or in some cases, to even 'higher'/cooler light, up to 6000 K°), I think it makes good sense to use the 85A filter for the negative stocks. I very often see scans or video clips from negative stocks, that I personally think look too warm or brownish. A difference of 200 K° must be very easy to correct in post if you are deliberately color-grading your footage anyway.
Furtermore, if there is a very slight difference in density between the two filters, negative stock will only benefit from getting a little bit more light. In fact, many experienced cinematographers recommend that you overexpose by 1/3 of a stop to get a slightly denser, richer and slightly more contrasty negative, with a grain structure that is 'tighter', especially in the shadows. Just as David says in his post above (200 ASA exposure for 7219 Vision3 500T with an 85B).

If I am to shoot with Ektachrome reversal films, on the other hand, I would definately choose the 85B filter, as these films often are a bit blueish (especially in the shadows on a bright sunny day) - in fact, in the middle of the day (noon), Ektachrome might even benefit from further filtration (81 series gelatine filters 81, 81A, 81B, to 81EF). In the early morning or late in the evening, though, an 85A (or even an 85C filter) might be better.
To determine this more exactly, the use of a color temperature meter (Minolta or Gossen) could be better than just guessing the values.

Bengt F,
photographer

Edited by Bengt Freden, 24 February 2009 - 09:16 AM.

  • 0

#19 Mark Williams

Mark Williams
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 811 posts
  • Director
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 February 2009 - 10:21 AM

Thanks Bengt

Yes I'm quite happy with the situation. I'm a little annoyed with myself for nearly messing up. But Im happy to say that it should actually look better if the lab correct it! Which of course I'm sure they will.

Mark

Edited by Mark Williams, 24 February 2009 - 10:22 AM.

  • 0

#20 Sam Wells

Sam Wells
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1751 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 24 February 2009 - 10:37 AM

I think the differences are really overstated

200K difference in the target is visible but that's not what you're asking the filter to do, 5500K is a kind of generalization for daylight, there's far more than 200K difference between shooting at noon an 5 PM, there can be 2000K difference going to full shade etc etc

-Sam
  • 0


Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Wooden Camera

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Tai Audio

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

CineTape

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

CineLab

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Ritter Battery

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Opal

Glidecam

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Abel Cine