Jump to content


Photo

Getting a Gritty Look


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Frank DiBugnara

Frank DiBugnara
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts

Posted 24 August 2005 - 06:53 PM

I'm shooting a spot on Monday and the client has started pushing for a "gritty look" late in the game. I don't really have time to shoot test. I was thinking of shooting EXR 500 ASA and underexpose one stop and push it one. I think I'd be fine with the higher contrast and somewhat less shadow detail. Any thoughts? Or other techniques that have been successful at achieving this look? I'm shooting Super16.
  • 0

#2 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 24 August 2005 - 07:09 PM

Use reversal film is one option. Another is as you describe, expose as if 800ASA and push-process it.

If I had time, I'd have shot it with Super8, which naturally is grittier than 16mm.
  • 0

#3 John Hyde

John Hyde
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 24 August 2005 - 09:38 PM

If you are shooting super 16 I would try the Kodak 7285 and possibly push it. But, I have found it has a sufficient amount of grain on its own and would not want to over push. I myself would probably be more conservative and push no more than a stop (keeping in mind that it can always be toyed with further in telecine without risk.)

On its own the ektachrome has a nice look. The highlights tend to blow out on their own and the contrast is quite nice.

I normally process and telecine my reversal with Spectra Film in North Hollywood. They do a great job and are very helpful with obtaining different "looks" in film.

Kodak 7285 16mm Reversal

Spectra Film and Video
  • 0

#4 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 24 August 2005 - 10:12 PM

I'm shooting a spot on Monday and the client has started pushing for a "gritty look" late in the game.  I don't really have time to shoot test.  I was thinking of shooting EXR 500 ASA and underexpose one stop and push it one. I think I'd be fine with the higher contrast and somewhat less shadow detail.  Any thoughts?  Or other techniques that have been successful at achieving this look?  I'm shooting Super16.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I agree. Shooting 7218 one stop under with a one stop push should up the grain and contrast, especially in 16mm. More predictable than reversal or cross-processing.
  • 0

#5 jeremy edge

jeremy edge
  • Guests

Posted 25 August 2005 - 12:21 AM

If you want a real gritty look ,I suggest you give me some of the latest and greatest fine grain stocks and let me shoot it! lol

I've gotten gritty down in super 16mm...It's getting sharp slick footage out of the format that eludes me! lol Somehow I always manage to screw it up.

Being serious though...have you considerd a skip bleach?
Wouldnt that give lots of contrast and more grain?

I'm not as experienced as some of the people on this board,but I have heard this quite a bit.
  • 0

#6 Frank DiBugnara

Frank DiBugnara
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts

Posted 25 August 2005 - 09:38 AM

Thanks.... I think Skip Bleach is a good option--maybe reversal too. Also, if I just underexpose and push, wouldn't it be better to us an EXR stock rather than one of the Vision stocks? I'm afraid the Vision stocks are so good that the effect will be too subtle.
  • 0

#7 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 25 August 2005 - 10:28 AM

Thanks.... I think Skip Bleach is a good option--maybe reversal too.  Also, if I just underexpose and push, wouldn't it be better to us an EXR stock rather than one of the Vision stocks?  I'm afraid the Vision stocks are so good that the effect will be too subtle.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Sure, an older technology stock would have more grain. If you can find some 7298, 7279, or 7289, use them!
  • 0

#8 John Hyde

John Hyde
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 25 August 2005 - 01:00 PM

Though the color reversal films are more difficult to shoot/transfer, and, they are intended primarily for exteriors, they have a totally different look from neg and video. The grain and contrast in 7285 ektachrome is quite beautiful with its nostalgic, dreamy appearance.

Even the older neg films (5298, 5293, etc) tend to look similar to the newer ones (aside from more grain and subtle differences in contrast and color). You may need to take the look even further in post. However, the ektachrome will look totally different on its own - guaranteed.

The 16mm black and white reversal is also worth considering if you do not find color to be necessary. That would be an even greater offset to what you are shooting. Plus, they are more flexible and look great.
  • 0

#9 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1053 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 03 September 2005 - 12:37 PM

Why not use Super 8 color neg for a gritty look.
  • 0

#10 gustavius smith

gustavius smith
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Director

Posted 13 September 2005 - 09:42 AM

Sure, an older technology stock would have more grain.  If you can find some 7298, 7279, or 7289, use them!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Some expired color stock just bit me hard. We shot about 1400 feet of expired stock tryign to duplicate the look and feel of an old Charles Chaplin film on 16mm. Guess what...it worked? The film looks grainy and old but it came out severly underexposed. The lab is blaming it on the film stock my DP admits to not checkign all of the rolls. We made a black and white workprint from the color negative so I could go ahead and damage the film some more but it was way to dark, the color negeative is a bit better but not by much. My last ditch effort to salvage the film is to lighten it in the transfer. Any suggestions for correcting underexposed footage. My first film and murphy's law....

Thanks
Gustavius Smith
718 300 7163
  • 0

#11 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 13 September 2005 - 10:50 AM

Some expired color stock just bit me hard. We shot about 1400 feet of expired stock tryign to duplicate the look and feel of an old Charles Chaplin film on 16mm. Guess what...it worked? The film looks grainy and old but it came out severly underexposed. The lab is blaming it on the film stock my DP admits to not checkign all of the rolls. We made a black and white workprint from the color negative so I could go ahead and damage the film some more but it was way to dark, the color negeative is a bit better but not by much. My last ditch effort to salvage the film is to lighten it in the transfer. Any suggestions for correcting underexposed footage. My first film and murphy's law....

Thanks
Gustavius Smith
718 300 7163

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


If you've severely underexposed color negative film, not much you can do to the film itself once it has been processed. In telecine, you may be able to correct the image somewhat, but don't expect much detail in the shadows.
  • 0


CineLab

Ritter Battery

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

The Slider

Opal

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Glidecam

Paralinx LLC

Abel Cine

Willys Widgets

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Opal

Ritter Battery

Wooden Camera

CineTape

Glidecam