first time doing an HD to film transfer.
Posted 24 March 2009 - 11:16 AM
Right now I am doing color correction for a feature film shot with Sony F-900R and Digi Primes. We are doing the correction in Avid Nitris. Before we started the post, production cut a trailer, timed it on Nitris, transfered via arri laser into kodak's 2242 internegative stock and printed it on 2383. I saw the trailer screened today and I am very pleased to see how close it was to the digital version I saw at the post house and to see how clean of noise it was. Actually, i little too clean for my taste. Any ideas on how can I get a grainer print?
We'll be printing some tests this weekend so any input now would be great. Also the release date for the film is may 1st so we are kind of in a rush.
Thanks in advance
Posted 26 March 2009 - 09:08 AM
ok, no hard feelings, he he...
so i thought of 2 alternatives that i will discuss with the lab this afternoon:
1. pushing the negative 1/2 or 1 stop.
2. doing a partial bleach by pass, but only a partial since a full one would be too much
I am in turkey and this is turkish film. i live in new york so i am in completely unfamiliar grounds.
Posted 26 March 2009 - 09:23 AM
i don't want to re-post it there. how can we move the thread?
Posted 26 March 2009 - 11:33 AM
Film out to a camera stock.
aha... ok, i like that more than messing around with the developing. i'll tests 2242, 5217 and 5218. i am assumnig that 2242 is tungsten balanced, right?
Posted 28 March 2009 - 06:45 AM
i'll reconsider pushing
Posted 28 March 2009 - 07:15 AM
You can add the grain after CC in compositing software that outputs the DPX's for the Arrilaser.
There are presets that match the grain to a specific stock and that should prevent your piece from looking too clean.
Posted 28 March 2009 - 09:29 AM
so the lab said they wont do that. that the arri laser is calibrated for the inter-negative stock and that it will take the 15 to change it for the technician has to come from germany....
Do labs want to stay in business ?
Posted 29 March 2009 - 10:50 AM
There are several compositing programs such as Shake and Nuke that can add real film grain to a digital image in various amounts. I would look in that direction.
I would be glad to show you a test of your images with various levels of grain added, just send us 30 seconds or so of DPX files on disk or DVDs.
Posted 29 March 2009 - 02:34 PM
Do labs want to stay in business ?
So a lab should fly someone in from Germany to tweak their $100,000 machine to make one client happy?
It's not like screwing in a new lightbulb. Calibrating a machine such as this is a pain-staking, tedious process.
Posted 30 March 2009 - 01:06 AM
Posted 31 March 2009 - 09:25 AM
I work as an Application Specialist for a film recorder manufacturer based in Norway, called Cinevation. The technology we use is quite different to that of an Arrilaser, but the basic recording process is very similar, so hopefully I can be of help.
I think your idea of recording to camera stock would be ideal; you would retain the best recording quality possible, with a very natural film grain structure. As you mention, there are significant time and cost implications for a recording facility that needs to set up this support from scratch, which is why they may be hesitant to go down this path. As Dirk mentions, CRT recorders are often better suited (and more commonly calibrated) for camera speed stocks, so this may be one avenue to explore. Keep in mind that if you go down this path, the colour of the final image will look slightly different to what you have already seen, so I'd recommend you run a short test to check things out before committing to the full job.
From experience, pushing the stock or using a bleach bypass process can be highly unpredictable, and I would steer clear of these methods if possible. Additionally, bleach-bypassed negative does not have a good shelf-life, and over a few short years you will see a dramatic shift in the colour and contrast of the image, so only explore the bleach-bypass idea if you are happy that the negative will not need to be archived or re-used in years to come.
Adding digital grain may be a good alternative. Just remember to try it, and run a quick test recording to check the results on film. If the recording facility are using a sharpening filter in the recorder, this may emphasise the digital grain in a negative manner, and you should check this out in advance.
One last suggestion, although it is a more expensive option... You may try recording the film as an Interpositive, rather than a negative, then produce a standard photochemical Dupe Negative from this IP. It is a more costly option, but could provide the slight hint of grain and jitter that you are looking for. Again, I'd run tests, and make sure you talk to your lab about the implications on both cost and workflow.
Hope this is helpful.
Posted 06 April 2009 - 11:01 AM
thank you all very much for your replies, but in the end, due to several setbacks I have no time to experiment and the deadline to deliver the print is around the corner. I will just go by the traditional method of working the print through the arri laser here in istanbul.
just one more question: how does the arrilaser works? I mean, does it works like the Hazeltine console? Can I control the brightness and basic color temperature or all that has to be done n the color correction suite.
i ask because the previous test we did looked washed out and old, very similar to what happens when one underexposes the negative and the compensates with the print (which i am almost sure its what happened). so i want to overexpose my negative slightly (a 1/3 or 1/2) so that when we print it down we get rich blacks. or should i just do a bright color grading so that the negative will be automatically overexposed?
please keep in mind that i am lost over here because of the language barrier, the disorganization, ignorance and stubbornness of this production and some of the labs and rental houses and of course my lack of experience with this process.
Posted 06 April 2009 - 11:48 AM
Posted 07 April 2009 - 09:46 AM
'Something' seems to be out of order if the print doesn't match your input video to a reasonable degree; I suggest you assemble a 30-45 second reel of typical shots from the film (day-night-exterior-interior) and have it recorded to film and printed to your satisfaction before you commit the entire film. It can save a lot of money and aggravation.
no no no, please dont think i am planning to print the entire film without testing, that is what i am doing right now its just incredibly cumbersome giving, not this country's industry but my production company's disorganization... anyway... the fact is that yes, the 1st test i saw looks different from what we see at the monitors in the post house. time is running out and i dont want to be messing much with the hd color correction since we pretty much consider it done. so my plan is to be able to sit down with the timer and make adjustments in the color lights just as you do in any traditional optical print. is that common when doing an hd film print out? seems pretty logical to me but every one here seems dumbfounded about me wanting to time the print. my plan is to test and then set the printer lights on stone si they can do all the release prints