Jump to content


Photo

what Film stock do I choose?


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Vivek N N Rao

Vivek N N Rao

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 22 January 2013 - 12:38 AM

Hey forum,

I am shooting a 5 minute 16mm film for the first time and I need help in choosing the right film stock for my film. My film has an Indian wedding in which the production design is going to be really colorful and beautiful, I'm trying to achieve a soft feel to the wedding, any suggestion ? here's a reference to what I wanna do.




Thanks a lot
  • 0

#2 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 02:31 AM

I've seen good footage come from Vision 3 250D. Of course, you'd need a 80a filter to balance it indoors but the results could be what you're looking for.
  • 0

#3 Steve Zimmerman

Steve Zimmerman
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 196 posts
  • Other
  • Charleston, SC USA

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:40 AM

It would be much easier to just use an indoor/tungsten balanced film like 7213 200T or 7219 500T. The 80 filters take away 2-1/2 stops of light, and that would be a struggle to see through the viewfinder potentially. --Better to expose well for solid, not grainy blacks and make the colors pastel in some other way.

The softer, low contrast look could be acheived with digital color correction in post, or with a low grade (1/4-2) low contrast or difussion filter.

Technically this should be in the film stocks section down the list :-)

Good Luck!

Edited by Steve Zimmerman, 22 January 2013 - 11:45 AM.

  • 0

#4 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 January 2013 - 11:50 AM

I'd go with '13 if you have the light for a good stop, or '19 if not. The thing is, if you get a good thick negative you won't notice the grain as much. I try to overexpose by 2/3rds to at least 1 stop when working with 16mm on anything faster than 200T (which I try to give an extra 1/2 stop).
I'd look into a very very slight diffusion filter, maybe a classic soft; if you don't mind point sources having a bit of a halo. If not, then i'd just tone things down in the TC or DI to taste.
  • 0

#5 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 12:09 PM

The 80 filters take away 2-1/2 stops of light,


8-0
  • 0

#6 John Holland

John Holland
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2248 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • London England

Posted 22 January 2013 - 01:53 PM

If ?? you can still get it Fuji Vivid 160 or second choice 500 and over expose by a stop ,to me is the best option ,dont go for the daylight stock option.
  • 0

#7 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:33 PM

If you shoot 500 1 stop over, you are at 250 anyway. But no point in arguing it bc there are some serious high ISO fanboys on this thread. To me, 500t looks like garbage in 16 but that's my opinion. I've shot Super8 on slow stock that looks as "good" as 500t R16.

Whatever floats your boat.
  • 0

#8 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:41 PM

Yes; but a 250 speed stock is daylight, so for an int you'd need to filter which'd eat 2 and 1/2 stops of your light, so that's kinda moot. And, even then for many they'd still want to over-expose the 250 by about 2/3rds of a stop. The reason why you go with a 500T in these situations would be to get the benefits in shadow detail by over-exposing the film stock, because it has such nice highlight handling, in order to capture more of your shadows, and the 500, despite being grainer, really helps you do that with less lighting, ya know.
Also the over-exposure does tame the grain a bit; and in that case it's almost a wash compared to say a 200T exposed at about 200. But to each their own-- I like 500T in S16mm, sometimes. Not always, but sometimes.
  • 0

#9 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:45 PM

Yes; but a 250 speed stock is daylight, so for an int you'd need to filter which'd eat 2 and 1/2 stops of your light, so that's kinda moot. And, even then for many they'd still want to over-expose the 250 by about 2/3rds of a stop. The reason why you go with a 500T in these situations would be to get the benefits in shadow detail by over-exposing the film stock, because it has such nice highlight handling, in order to capture more of your shadows, and the 500, despite being grainer, really helps you do that with less lighting, ya know.
Also the over-exposure does tame the grain a bit; and in that case it's almost a wash compared to say a 200T exposed at about 200. But to each their own-- I like 500T in S16mm, sometimes. Not always, but sometimes.


Adrian, I've never owned an 80a that consumed that much light. 1.33 stops max. Do you shoot through a welder's mask?

No offense bro, but your reel shots that you told me were 500t look shockingly grainy up against your other shots and I'm viewing them on a modest 23" monitor. Imagine a 22' screen.
  • 0

#10 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 January 2013 - 03:57 PM

None taken; it's a 500T, it's not supposed to not be grainy. If i wanted it grainless i'd shoot digital and/or 35. That's not the point. And yes; an 80A filter for full 5600 conversion would be "2 stops" though I find it much more like 2 and 1/2 which is why it's so rarely used, ever (also the same as full CTB gel for the most part.)

An 80B, however, which is also close, would be 1 and 1/2 stops about.
  • 0

#11 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:02 PM

None taken; it's a 500T, it's not supposed to not be grainy. If i wanted it grainless i'd shoot digital and/or 35. That's not the point. And yes; an 80A filter for full 5600 conversion would be "2 stops" though I find it much more like 2 and 1/2 which is why it's so rarely used, ever (also the same as full CTB gel for the most part.)


I hope Im not upsetting you Adrian. I like lively debate. But I use Hoya so I must post a chart to show you where I am coming from.

80A has 2.4 filter factor which is ~1.33 stops.

http://www.camerafil...hoya_factor.htm
  • 0

#12 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 January 2013 - 04:08 PM

Please Matt, you upset me, never, But I'm sorry:

http://www.tiffen.co...s&itemnum=5280A

2 stops ;) with a FF of 4 which is what most i've seen are quoted @. But again, that's just me and my experience.

(though i will admit wikipedia lists standard 80As at 2 stops as well lol.. but we all know how "true that is." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80A )
  • 0

#13 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1880 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 22 January 2013 - 06:35 PM

80A has 2.4 filter factor which is ~1.33 stops.

http://www.camerafil...hoya_factor.htm


Maybe the Hoya filters are less dense. Can you check or compare with your spot meter? You have to go with what they actually are, or maybe relabel them if the blue density is off compared to a Tiffen or Schneider. Whatever people are commonly using is a defacto standard.

Edit: spelling

Edited by Gregg MacPherson, 22 January 2013 - 06:37 PM.

  • 0

#14 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 06:39 PM

I should have known you'd use a more expensive brand than me. ;)

Yeah, Tiffen is indeed 2 stops. Damn...seems like 2 stops is a lot to lose for any sort of filter. Guess I had better not try shooting 50D indoors, right? :D

I will do camera tests later on 250D vs 200t once I get my Ultra T primes. I don't know how much good it will do but it can at least do a side by side which usually has some sort of merit when comparing "looks."

Hell, I shot K40 indoors back in the Super 8 days, I'm sure I can boost enough room light to get a usable image out of corrected 250D, at least for a camera test. Thankfully Ultra T lenses are super fast ;)

EDIT: Wikipedia once told me Steve Carell was Jewish...never again!
  • 0

#15 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 January 2013 - 06:47 PM

When I used to shoot stills on elite chrome, i never used an 80a inside, i loved the golden tone i got with incandescent bulbs on it; but that was me.
I don't think you'd see too much of a grain diff in 200T -v- 250 but i'd love to see how they hold up inside/outside filtered/unfiltered. Normally I like to shoot '13 with an 81EF filter when i'm outside as opposed to going to a D stock-- though I have no real reason for that aside form trying to save some budget on lower-budgeted gigs which can only afford 1 stock to rule them all.
  • 0

#16 Gregg MacPherson

Gregg MacPherson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1880 posts
  • Other
  • New Zealand

Posted 22 January 2013 - 07:42 PM

Yeah, Tiffen is indeed 2 stops.


I don't know if you are using series nine or 72mm rounds. Years ago I used Hoya 72mm rounds a lot on an old 12-120 zoom and jamed them into a 3x3 matte box in front of schneider primes. But even one 72mm filter can vignette on the 12-120. It's quite restrictictive if you want to explore filters more. . Grads, polarizer, ...so on. If you are patient you will find cheap, good, glass 4x4s. Some rental companies or pro's may ditch their 4x4s cheap.

Instinct tells me that tungsten stock is the way unless you are shooting mostly exteriors. You could as an exercise take an example interior and light it for T2-T2.8 at ASA64 (250 less 2 stops). And you may need more light than that. A lot easier at ASA 200 (200T).

If you are chasing sharp fast lenses. I was watching Zeiss distagons for a while. Sometimes the MKIs go really cheap.
  • 0

#17 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 22 January 2013 - 08:46 PM

When I used to shoot stills on elite chrome, i never used an 80a inside, i loved the golden tone i got with incandescent bulbs on it; but that was me.
I don't think you'd see too much of a grain diff in 200T -v- 250 but i'd love to see how they hold up inside/outside filtered/unfiltered. Normally I like to shoot '13 with an 81EF filter when i'm outside as opposed to going to a D stock-- though I have no real reason for that aside form trying to save some budget on lower-budgeted gigs which can only afford 1 stock to rule them all.


I plan to test all the ideas you mentioned. It will be fun! Adrian, what do you know of the 100t stock from the Vision 2 lineup? Any good or tighter grained than the 200? Or did you ever shoot it?
  • 0

#18 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7116 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 22 January 2013 - 09:09 PM

I really liked the V2 100T ('12?) and weep that it's not longer around. It was very fine grained and i was happy using that whenever I had enough light. it was my go-do ext stock for awhile.
  • 0

#19 Vivek N N Rao

Vivek N N Rao

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 01:32 AM

My initial plan was to use 200T since 500T sounds like a gamble between grainier image and contrasty colors, also most of my shots are Indoors. I may purchase a 250D for a few exterior shot, The Film is also an exercise to better my skills on Film and not rely on Post for CC. I feel using an 80A filter on daylight will limit my abilities for exposure (-2 2/3 stops will Kill me) since I have a limited Lighting budget exactly 6 lights,( 2 Baby juniors, 2 Mini's and 2 Kino's ). Insights?

I am also looking to buy some film for student rates. Anyone ? please hook me up :)
  • 0

#20 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 23 January 2013 - 01:50 AM

I feel using an 80A filter on daylight will limit my abilities for exposure (-2 2/3 stops will Kill me) since I have a limited Lighting budget exactly 6 lights,( 2 Baby juniors, 2 Mini's and 2 Kino's ). Insights?


LOL. I shot 40t with 3-light, 1250W photoflood kit. Managed to still shoot 2.8. To each their own though.

I found a kit that is daylight balanced that I am thinking about buying. Then I can have the best of both world...250D and no correction. Before I buy said kit though, Ill have to do tests of stock.

Best of luck to you OP with your decision.
  • 0


Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Ritter Battery

CineTape

The Slider

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Metropolis Post

Wooden Camera

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Visual Products

CineTape

Glidecam

Aerial Filmworks

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Wooden Camera

Visual Products

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

Opal