Jump to content


Photo

7219 Grain Structure


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Michael Giannaccio

Michael Giannaccio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC Area

Posted 09 June 2010 - 06:02 PM

I recently shot a film on Kodak's 7219 and what I did was under expose by a half stop to a stop to make the grain pop out a little bit more but what I got was a ton of grain. I'm not sure if this happened in the transfer or if it happened because of under exposure, luckily it worked very well for the piece and the director loved it.

I am shooting another film next month on the same stock but I want to lessen the appearance of grain. I have heard that over exposing will activate the smaller grain structure in the film thus reducing the appearance of grain. I was thinking of rating the 500T as 320 ASA or 250 ASA but I am not quite sure what this will yield and I'm still trying to get the budget to perform some film tests.


Has anybody had success doing this? If so what did you rate your film's ASA to be?



Thanks,

Mike
  • 0

#2 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 09 June 2010 - 07:14 PM

I normally rate 500T stocks @ 320 which does decrease the appearance of grain. Now, all 500T stocks will be a bit grainy, especially if you underexpose them, and even more, I seem to find, when you're under-exposing and looking @ a lower contrast scene. I will say the '19 structure is a lot better than the '18 structure, and you also have to factor in what kind of post processing grain reduction is done, if any, to the footage. I know the Spirit 2K I normally use for transfer has a variable grain reduction setting, normally not messed with, and other software packages such as the new Arri DI program Relativity, can really reduce grain. Also, when you got it transferred the post house may've manipulated your exposure, brightening it up, which would bring out more grain despite your under-exposure-- did you do a supervised transfer and/or give them specific instructions?
  • 0

#3 Michael Giannaccio

Michael Giannaccio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC Area

Posted 09 June 2010 - 09:47 PM

Thanks for the info, very helpful. When we did the transfer we didn't have the budget for a supervised transfer so we did a best-lite and I failed to give them further instruction not thinking, so it is very possible that they increased exposure to bring it back. I like having a supervised transfer for obvious reasons but hey what can you do on a low budget. The overall look to the last film was a very high contrast look and it had a vintage look to it so the grain really worked well.

I will rate the 500T at 320 and shoot film tests if I can squeak the extra cash out of production, if not then I'll go ahead and shoot the film that way anyhow since it seems to be a common practice.


Thanks again for your help.
  • 0

#4 Michael Giannaccio

Michael Giannaccio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC Area

Posted 09 June 2010 - 10:08 PM

Also if I were to choose at 200T what would be a good ASA to rate that at?
  • 0

#5 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 09 June 2010 - 10:30 PM

I find 200T fine grained enough to rate @ 200. Sometimes, if I want to go a little bit slicker I'll go down to 160 ish. When I'm using it with an 85 I normally rate it at 100 instead of the normal 125, but that's a matter of taste.
A best light will do the best to correct for "normal" exposure, so they certainly would've lifted it up to make it brighter. I had the same issue with a post house over here on some 35mm film and I had even sent them instructions; but that was an issue where I didn't have a relationship with the house for film, so partially my fault. I would see if you can do a cut then go back and rescan the selects supervised to get everything looking fantastic ;)
  • 0

#6 Michael Giannaccio

Michael Giannaccio
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 14 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • NYC Area

Posted 26 June 2010 - 11:20 AM

Thanks for all your help.
  • 0


CineLab

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Rig Wheels Passport

Opal

Visual Products

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Technodolly

CineTape

The Slider

Wooden Camera

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Tai Audio

CineTape

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Abel Cine

Visual Products

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Wooden Camera

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc