Jump to content


Photo

redscale


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 kevin jackman

kevin jackman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Other

Posted 15 June 2009 - 06:37 PM

hey folks, has anybody tried to shoot in redscale?
  • 0

#2 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 15 June 2009 - 08:26 PM

hey folks, has anybody tried to shoot in redscale?

shooting what in which?
  • 0

#3 kevin jackman

kevin jackman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Other

Posted 16 June 2009 - 12:25 PM

shooting what in which?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redscale
  • 0

#4 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 June 2009 - 02:43 PM

A "technique?" That my friend is an accident that someone named to save their ass! I did it once when I was just starting out shooting large format stills.:D

I doubt many people do it on purpose. The color is not very attractive. I don't think the still is color corrected somewhat. The color is a much stronger red-orange and is less attractive. It's also inconvenient because you have to set the camera up specifically to do it because the flange focal depth must be changed to compensate for the thickness of the film base you're now shooting through. If you don't do that, the focus will be off on all of your footage. It kind of looks like you consistently focus behind people rather than on them.

Edited by Chris Keth, 16 June 2009 - 02:45 PM.

  • 0

#5 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 16 June 2009 - 02:48 PM

By the way, the wikipedia article's reasoning of why the image looks the way it does is a bit off. It looks so red because you're shooting through the filmbase which is red. The order if the emulsion layers probably has something to do with it, but the very red-orange base is a pretty strong filter to shoot through.
  • 0

#6 Tebbe Schoeningh

Tebbe Schoeningh
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Buenos Aires, Berlin

Posted 16 June 2009 - 05:44 PM

i tried "redscale"... out of accident :rolleyes:
the telecine operator had to search a lot until he found some exposure on the negative ;)
  • 0

#7 kevin jackman

kevin jackman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 350 posts
  • Other

Posted 17 June 2009 - 12:09 AM

ah but it would be an interesting look if the shoot fitted with it and if you could get a handle on it.
  • 0

#8 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 17 June 2009 - 12:13 AM

ah but it would be an interesting look if the shoot fitted with it and if you could get a handle on it.


Or you can just filter your footage the color red you want and have more control over the process.
  • 0

#9 Simon Wyss

Simon Wyss
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1406 posts
  • Other
  • Basel, Switzerland

Posted 17 June 2009 - 03:09 AM

ah but it would be an interesting look if the shoot fitted with it and if you could get a handle on it.

Have you tried to shoot in clear scale? That may lead to very interesting looks as well.

I appreciate any youngster's revolt against normal procedure, that's what I was on 30 years ago. Look, you are confronting yourself with practitioners who are likely to tell you: Shoot the right way first before experimenting wild. The right way is an experience already.

That Wikipedia article is a fart in the wind, my humble opinion.
  • 0

#10 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 18 June 2009 - 11:31 PM

. The order if the emulsion layers probably has something to do with it, but the very red-orange base is a pretty strong filter to shoot through.


Actually colour film has a grey or clear base. (Fuji's Data sheets mention a bit of blue dye) The orange colour is due to a photo engineering trick to make up for non-ideal dyes, and exists in the non-exposed areas of the actual image.

The version of Wikipedia today does have some mention of the effect of the yellow filter not being engaged when film is exposed from the back. If that explanation is correct you would be only using 2 of the three (or more) layers on the film, as most exposure of the blue layer would be stopped by the yellow filter layer.

Depending on the stock, their may be a silver hanti-halo layer back there also which would do a number on exposure by acting as a strong ND filter. Movie stock would have to have the REM-JET removed to be exposed from the back.
  • 0

#11 Richard Lackey

Richard Lackey

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts
  • Producer

Posted 31 July 2009 - 08:26 AM

I've got 200ft of Fuji F500 rolled emulsion out which I'm going to shoot this weekend just for fun. It should be processed Monday and I'll post some results for anyone wondering what this might look like.
  • 0

#12 K Borowski

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

Posted 31 July 2009 - 10:15 AM

A "technique?" That my friend is an accident that someone named to save their ass! I did it once when I was just starting out shooting large format stills.:D


Ditto on what Chris said. . .


This is a mistake that someone who had a minor in marketing at film school came up with a catchy name for.
  • 0

#13 Richard Tuohy

Richard Tuohy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Daylesford, Australia

Posted 01 August 2009 - 08:02 PM

I've got 200ft of Fuji F500 rolled emulsion out which I'm going to shoot this weekend just for fun. It should be processed Monday and I'll post some results for anyone wondering what this might look like.

Surely you will get just blank film because very little light will get through the rem jet backing (fronting!).
  • 0

#14 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 August 2009 - 02:02 AM

I've got 200ft of Fuji F500 rolled emulsion out which I'm going to shoot this weekend just for fun. It should be processed Monday and I'll post some results for anyone wondering what this might look like.


If you do this, I would give it quite a bit of extra light. I would guess that 3 stops might be enough, giving you a rated speed of 64. I don't know how you're going to get anything in focus, though.
  • 0

#15 K Borowski

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

Posted 02 August 2009 - 10:14 AM

I'd recommend plus SIX T-STOPS!

There were some pretty definitive tests done here, I think a year to a year and a half ago where someone did the testing and said it was at least six.

YOu always want to err on the side of overexposure, not under.


If you are reading on the internet about stills photographers recommending only plus three, keep in mind that, with the exception of the now defunct Kodachrome line, all stills film did NOT have the REm-jet backing, they have anti-halo dyes instead.

So, remjet is much more impermeable to light than regular film base.

Expose accordingly to punch through. . .


Good luck!

P.S. Don't have time myself today, but I'd recomend you try to find that thread on here about the guy that tested this technique. It was quite well done when he posted his results. Sorry to not remember more about the parties involved, when or in what forum it was in.
  • 0

#16 grant mcphee

grant mcphee
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 93 posts
  • 2nd Assistant Camera
  • UK, Scotland

Posted 10 February 2010 - 02:30 AM

Anthony Dod Mantle used this technique for some battle scenes on Eagle of the Ninth. Maybe he was inspired by this post.
  • 0

#17 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 10 February 2010 - 07:05 PM

Surely you will get just blank film because very little light will get through the rem jet backing (fronting!).

Fine theory, but in practice quite a lot of light does get through. As otheres have said, the image is several stops under-exposed, and very red, because the remjet layer is in fact a very dark red (hold a bit of rawstock up to a very strong light and see.)

The version of Wikipedia today does have some mention of the effect of the yellow filter not being engaged when film is exposed from the back

That's correct. The construction of colour negative film (from the top) is*
  • blue-sensitive layer (forms yellow dye in the processed negative)
  • yellow filter layer (to stop blue light getting any further
  • blue and green sensitive layer (fomrs magenta dye)
  • blue and red sensitive layer (forms cyan dye)
  • film support (the base)
  • anti-halation layer (insoluble remjet carbon)
(*simplified - in fact most stocks have at least two layers for each colour, and there are other lubricating layers etc)
The reason the red and green sensitive layers are also blue-sensitive is that all emulsions are fundamentally blue-sensitive: the other colours are picked up by some clever trickery with dyes. It's possible to supress the blue sensitivity, but it comes at the cost of quite a lot of speed. SO it's much easier to capture the blue light on the top layer then filter it out.

When light comes through the back of the film first, it is filtered quite heavily, and mostly red light gets through. It exposes the red-sensitive layer first, then that's about it. Any traces of green and blue light that get through the remjet will expose the next layer. Red, and the race of green will get through the yellow filter, but as the top layer only sees blue light, it won't get any exposure atall.

So you get a very dark red image. Red highlights, black midtones and shadows. Out of focus, and mirror-reversed.
  • 0

#18 Jonas Spitzenhuber

Jonas Spitzenhuber
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Student
  • Germany

Posted 17 February 2011 - 12:35 PM

hello everybody! I just shot a short using this technique and did a couple of tests before. It works, but the look it produces is quite exotic, so be sure you want it. I did some test and chose vision3 500T, cause it still shows some colors between the deep warm tones. I overexposed 6Stops. Using Arri235 and 435 the images were sharp without changing the flange focal distance. I don't know why. I used lenses down to 25mm. The remjet back is not even at all, that gives you dark spots rushing over the image. Kind of an antique look. Enjoy, jonas
  • 0

#19 Adrian Sierkowski

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

Posted 17 February 2011 - 01:17 PM

Got some footage of it to share? I'd be interested to see how it looked.
  • 0

#20 K Borowski

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

Posted 17 February 2011 - 02:05 PM

Who said six :-)


Did anyone find the LAST samples posted of this process? Probably six years old at this point, but I'm sure there was a very detailed thread on here.

I still need to figure out the best way to search on here. I need to start a new thread. . .




Jonas good for you for availing yourself of the search function, and from the looks of it using it very effectively. I'm curious what other stocks you tested. Any Fuji stock, daylight varieties of either?

That is interesting that remjet isn't even. I wonder if there are any brand differences, Kodak and Fuji between that "look" as well.



I bet this is a phenomenon that can even vary batch to batch. I doubt this is a component that has much quality control restrictions, other than that it stays at a certain overall thickness.

Please post a sample though. Motion would be better. I think the thread from '05 - '06 was only still grabs.
  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Abel Cine

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

CineLab

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Opal

Technodolly

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Metropolis Post

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Visual Products

Opal

Tai Audio

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS