Jump to content


Photo

promist


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 Ckulakov

Ckulakov
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 193 posts
  • Student
  • Washington D.C.

Posted 23 May 2005 - 10:36 PM

Dear Filmmakers,

How many of you use a pro-mist filter? What type and intensity?
What do you think of it does it get the job done?
What advice do you have about them?

Thank You in Advance :)
  • 0

#2 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 24 May 2005 - 12:43 AM

I use a ProMist filter when I want a ProMist effect, which is something like a Fog Filter but less hazy, softer with a more neutral halation (Fog Filters can create a somewhat blue-ish halo around lights.) What sort of defines ProMist and other mist and fog filters are the amount of softening and the amount of halation (glowing around light sources) they cause. For example, a Soft-FX and Classic Soft both soften more than they halate, while a Diffusion-FX doesn't halate at all, only softens.

If I go for a ProMist look, I usually use the two lightest grades, a #1/8 and #1/4. However, on "Northfork" I went as heavy as a #1 for some shots, and a #1/2 for much of the movie -- but I was shooting in anamorphic plus using a skip-bleach process to the prints, which "sharpens" the image somewhat, making the diffusion look less heavy.

Generally for anything projected on a big screen, you want to avoid going above a #1/4 unless you want a pretty soft look.

On my last film, I used a #1 and #2 Tiffen GlimmerGlass, which was similar to a #1/8 and #1/4 ProMist but a little more subtle and the two grades are closer together, not as big a leap from number to number.
  • 0

#3 Laurent Andrieux

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

Posted 24 May 2005 - 11:55 AM

You have to consider contrast as well as softness and halation.

I've always found that black particules in the filter make it less "halate" and doesn't break the contrast as much as white promist do (compared to black promist, for instance).

There are basicaly two main uses for Promist, to me : give a "soft" look, you then have to consider the grade according to the focal length. If a CU needs a stronger diffusion than a medium shot, a very wide shot may just need no diffusion at all. Consider using 1/8 on a large medium shot (2 or 3 people standing up) and # 1 only on very big close ups. You then have 1/2 and 1/4 for shots beetween CU (shoulders in it) and "italian" shot...

Remember that constrast is cut by the breaking in the definition as well as by the fact that the light that is spread out from the highlights then illuminates the lowlights, and this how you loose contrast (by loosing the blacks).

The other purpose of use is contrast reducing in ext day for instance when you have a strong contrast beetween the highlights and shadows. It will "light up" the shadows and break definition.

I'ts of a common use on comedies.

Edited by laurent.a, 24 May 2005 - 11:57 AM.

  • 0

#4 Matt Pacini

Matt Pacini
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1246 posts

Posted 24 May 2005 - 01:44 PM

I've wanted to try these, but in 16mm, I'm scared to death because of the resolution issue.
Is there a general formula you guys follow when using ProMists in 16mm, (divide by .5???) or do you abvoid using them altogether?

MP
  • 0

#5 David Mullen ASC

David Mullen ASC
  • Sustaining Members
  • 19761 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 24 May 2005 - 07:28 PM

I've wanted to try these, but in 16mm, I'm scared to death because of the resolution issue.
Is there a general formula you guys follow when using ProMists in 16mm, (divide by .5???) or do you abvoid using them altogether?

MP

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


It depends on the project, like whether it is just for video transfer only or for a blow-up to 35mm. The two problems with misty-types of diffusion are (1) an increase in graininess from the loss of contrast; (2) a decrease in sharpness. This is even more noticeable in 16mm. My solution in 16mm has been to: (1) use a lower-speed stock for scenes to be diffused more; (2) increase the lighting contrast for scenes with more diffusion.

The "sharper" lighting (heavier backlight, for example) combined with slower-speed film allows you to use more diffusion compared to a scene in softer lighting and faster film. For example, I did a movie in Super-16 years ago shot mostly on 200T stock with a 1/8 ProMist (no filter for wide shots), but did two scenes on 100T with more dramatic lighting and a 1/4 ProMist and the scenes did not look softer than the other scenes, but I got the stronger halation effect I wanted.
  • 0

#6 Laurent Andrieux

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

Posted 25 May 2005 - 11:54 AM

The thing is... I think you should better start from the effect you want, then one could tell what one thinks could be the good issue tio achieve the look you want.

Any affect that works on 35 could possibly work in S16. I would grade for 1/2 max to 1/8, for instance...

Edited by laurent.a, 25 May 2005 - 11:55 AM.

  • 0


Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

rebotnix Technologies

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Opal

Metropolis Post

Paralinx LLC

CineLab

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Abel Cine

The Slider

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Opal

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

Glidecam