Jump to content


Photo

shooting uncorrected


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 jon w

jon w
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Vancouver

Posted 19 May 2005 - 11:55 AM

i know that this topic has been discused many times, but i would like to understand technically.

lets say you shoot uncorrected tungsten film outside... you get your blue image, you decide that you want to correct it in post because your film will stay on tape/dvd.

now i understand that this is somewhat feasable, but not optimal, and that you will have an OVEREXPOSED BLUE LAYER in your film....

can someone talk about certain layeres being over exposed? how it affects the highlights to shadows, the rest of the image / colors?

i appologize if this is a stupid questions, i just like to fully understand why things happen instead of just knowing that they do happen.
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 19 May 2005 - 12:38 PM

It's not like one whole layer is overexposed, only that colors in that layer will be denser than normal (and redder colors will be thinner than normal) and we're not talking about a lot of blue overexposure if shooting without the 85B filter anyway (since that filter only loses 2/3's of a stop of light).

If you consider that a stop correction is something like 6 or so printer light points, it just means that to correct the color, one layer will have somewhat higher printer light numbers while another may be a bit lower than normal. End result should be a normal image on the print, but you may see some slight color shift in the shadows or some slight desaturation in the reds, etc.

It's a little different with video, where I find that shooting a blue image (5500K light on a 3200K balance), especially in a recording format with limited color space and a lot of compression (like 4:1:1 DV) means that there isn't much red information left in the recording to bring back out. It's not like it is "hidden" like it can be on film negative, where there is more information in the other layers that can still be recovered.
  • 0

#3 jon w

jon w
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 28 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Vancouver

Posted 19 May 2005 - 12:54 PM

Thanks David! :D
  • 0

#4 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 19 May 2005 - 02:57 PM

I really second the fact that in the exemple you are giving, the shadows will remain bluish. That's how the correction will be seeingable. In the well exposed areas, you can take some blue off but it the shades, it doesn't work so well.
  • 0

#5 oscar jimenez

oscar jimenez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF PANAMA

Posted 19 May 2005 - 03:37 PM

I never use correction, Im always shooting for Xnsfer. But have always noticed, specially on 45 stock, blacks always have that "blueish" feeling and so do shades in white, lets say a white shirt wrinkle, may that be related to not using correction when shooting? I'd always added it ( 85 ) in Xnsfer
  • 0

#6 Laurent Andrieux

Laurent Andrieux
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1527 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • France

Posted 19 May 2005 - 05:38 PM

Oscar, the thing is, 45 is a daylight stock, so it shouldn't need any correction outside...

Another point being that outside, the color temperature is always higher in the shadows than in bright light...
  • 0

#7 oscar jimenez

oscar jimenez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF PANAMA

Posted 19 May 2005 - 10:36 PM

Im sorry I meant 48, beautifoul mistake. Either way, do you think, imagery would be more pleasant and colors render better if the 85 filter is added on cam? Is something that makes me wonder a little, I have worked a lot with south american DP's which are amazing, they always use an 85 on cam when shooting with Tg stock in daylight conditions and have worked with american DP's, usually dont care too much about having 85 filter on for correcting when using Tg stock on daylight situations. Have worked with London DP's who use 85. And then two senior colorists have told me that actually doesnt mean that much correctiing on camera , It remidns me of an arguement with a DP from south america who wanted to shoot color chart for 10 seconds, anyway, I said ( seen it a million times ) colorist will freeze one frame and start working from that frame,
  • 0

#8 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19759 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 20 May 2005 - 12:32 AM

Im sorry I meant 48, beautifoul mistake. Either way, do you think, imagery would be more pleasant and colors render better if the 85 filter is added on cam? Is something that makes me wonder a little, I have worked a lot with south american DP's which are amazing, they always use an 85 on cam when shooting with Tg stock in daylight conditions and have worked with american DP's, usually dont care too much about having 85 filter on for correcting when using Tg stock on daylight situations. Have worked with London DP's who use 85. And then two senior colorists have told me that actually doesnt mean that much correctiing on camera , It remidns me of an arguement with a DP from south america who wanted to shoot color chart for 10 seconds, anyway, I said ( seen it a million times ) colorist will freeze one frame and start working from that frame,

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Obviously the most accurate color response would be to use the correct filter, but "pleasant" is a subjective concept. The colors in "Barry Lyndon" are pleasant, and that was shot without the 85 filter.

As for shooting at least 10 seconds of the color chart, that's so when it shows up in dailies, it's on-screen long enough to study without having to freeze the tape (or DVD.) Yes, the colorist only needs a few frames to work with.
  • 0

#9 oscar jimenez

oscar jimenez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF PANAMA

Posted 20 May 2005 - 08:53 AM

Thank you Mr David!! and thank you Laurent!!.
  • 0

#10 Phil Rhodes

Phil Rhodes
  • Sustaining Members
  • 11934 posts
  • Other

Posted 20 May 2005 - 09:17 AM

Hi,

Ah, here we go with the "accurate" versus "correct" debate, wherein neither camp is anywhere near "realistic" anyway!

Phil
  • 0

#11 oscar jimenez

oscar jimenez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • PANAMA, REPUBLIC OF PANAMA

Posted 20 May 2005 - 11:06 AM

Maybe is my lousy english, but I didn't get your point Phil. I think there are certain ways to do things, but everyone has his or her own personal booklet on how to do things, for instance: Ive rarely seen a southamerican DP use a incident meter to take his readings, and I have rarely seen an american DP to use a Spot meter to take and decide his readings in the absoulte context of deciding a stop ). Either way, both are correct,depending on your interpretation of things or your personal perception. I guess the best we can do is to learn from the masters two things:
1. the ones that are useful resources, and evolve from them, expand.
2. The ones that we dont want to do or dont want to happen in our job or life.
.
  • 0


CineTape

Tai Audio

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Aerial Filmworks

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

CineLab

Opal

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Technodolly

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Opal

Aerial Filmworks

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

FJS International, LLC

CineTape

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

The Slider

CineLab

Paralinx LLC