I was reading the article about U-Turn in the October 1997 issue of American Cinematographer magazine. As usual, I am quite impressed with Oliver Stone's and Robert Richardson's bold experimentation with the filmmaking medium such as incorporating reversal film and hand cranked cameras with reduced shutter angles. The reversal film in question was Ektachrome 5239, a film stock used by NASA and the US Air Force for ariel surveillance photography. And like any reversal film, the exposure latitude would be pretty slim. It is noted in the article that Richardson overexposed this stock by two, three and also four stops. Surely, you're not going to end up with much of an image overexposing a reversal film by this degree? I would think that with an overexposure of three stops, each frame is going to look almost white!
U-Turn article in 1997 AC
1 reply to this topic
Posted 30 July 2011 - 11:15 AM
There is some conflicting advice about whether cross-processed reversal needs to be rated slower than recommended to compensate for the processing. Some people find that they have to overexpose at least a 1/2-stop to 1-stop, others say no compensation is necessary. Obviously with the semi-desert nightmarish setting of "U-Turn" some of the overexposed look was intentional.