Jump to content


Photo

Vision2 250D - Pretty Amazing Latitude


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 28 October 2005 - 11:16 PM

So I wanted to test an M42 lens someone gave me on my Krasnogorsk-3. It was a 28mm lens and it looked great through the viewfinder. Loaded up some new Vision2 250D and headed out to the park on a really bright day here in Texas.

Brought by new light cine-light meter and took readings on everything before shooting. Most of the readings were about f2.8 to f5.6 depending on the shade. So I carefully set the aperture and shot about half a roll before realizing I wasn't seeing much of a difference in light through the viewfinder as I change the aperture. Then it hit me that the lens was auto and therefore had been stuck wide open on f22 the whole time.

I changed back to the regular Zenit lens and finished the roll out.

So Video Post & Transfer here in Dallas processed and transfered the test on their Spirit. I stopped by and saw them working on it and said, wow, I guess the lens was working, it looks great. They laughed and said, "not really... look at this..." and they showed me the un-corrected stock completely overexposed to the point of hardly seeing anything. I couldn't believe that they could save such a drastically overexposed shot to the point of me only seeing some increased grain, otherwise it was great.

Between the latest Telecine software and this Vision2 Stock, we can sometimes really screw up exposures and see them come back ok on transfer.
  • 0

#2 Stephen Williams

Stephen Williams
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4708 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Europe

Posted 29 October 2005 - 04:28 AM

Between the latest Telecine software and this Vision2 Stock, we can sometimes really screw up exposures and see them come back ok on transfer.



Hi,

However if you compare it directly to a correctly exposed shot, the correctly exposed shot will look much better.

Stephen
  • 0

#3 Luke Prendergast

Luke Prendergast
  • Sustaining Members
  • 491 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Victoria Australia

Posted 29 October 2005 - 04:31 AM

f22 is the other end from wide open
  • 0

#4 Laurent Andrieux

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

Posted 29 October 2005 - 07:34 AM

Yep, did you mean T 2.2, Will ? Otherwise at 22 you'd be underexposed. If it is a problem of manual/auto iris, it should have been wide open, actually. And it wouldn't have been so obvious to correct an underexposed shot as well as an overexposed one...
  • 0

#5 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 30 October 2005 - 12:12 AM

Yep, did you mean T 2.2, Will ? Otherwise at 22 you'd be underexposed. If it is a problem of manual/auto iris, it should have been wide open, actually. And it wouldn't have been so obvious to correct an underexposed shot as well as an overexposed one...


Exactly, sorry, typed without thinking.

The shot was drastically overexposed... totally unusable in its uncorrected state. And yes, it wasn't nearly as beautiful as it could have been exposed properly, but I was just amazed that it could be saved at all. Interesting that there was some information to work with in the lighter areas. Of course if it had been shot in video there would be nothing to work with.
  • 0

#6 Sol Train Saihati

Sol Train Saihati
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 96 posts
  • Gaffer
  • London

Posted 30 October 2005 - 01:08 PM

Vision 2 is a menace. Unless I manipulate the image in post I can rarely get the results I'm looking for. Straight from the camera, the picture is often washed out and flat, even when lighting for contrast. I know we'll probably get used to the idea of shooting for post, but I always loved the idea that I could get the look I wanted in-camera and these newer stocks are often preventing me from doing that. I'm old school. Bring back Vision 1.

Edited by djdumpy, 30 October 2005 - 01:09 PM.

  • 0

#7 Laurent Andrieux

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

Posted 30 October 2005 - 01:32 PM

Do you mean it's not only daylight stock that cause this "flat " look, but Tungsten Vision 2 stocks as well ?
  • 0

#8 Clampet15

Clampet15
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • Student

Posted 31 October 2005 - 01:37 AM

So I wanted to test an M42 lens someone gave me on my Krasnogorsk-3. It was a 28mm lens and it looked great through the viewfinder. Loaded up some new Vision2 250D and headed out to the park on a really bright day here in Texas.

Brought by new light cine-light meter and took readings on everything before shooting. Most of the readings were about f2.8 to f5.6 depending on the shade. So I carefully set the aperture and shot about half a roll before realizing I wasn't seeing much of a difference in light through the viewfinder as I change the aperture. Then it hit me that the lens was auto and therefore had been stuck wide open on f22 the whole time.

I changed back to the regular Zenit lens and finished the roll out.

So Video Post & Transfer here in Dallas processed and transfered the test on their Spirit. I stopped by and saw them working on it and said, wow, I guess the lens was working, it looks great. They laughed and said, "not really... look at this..." and they showed me the un-corrected stock completely overexposed to the point of hardly seeing anything. I couldn't believe that they could save such a drastically overexposed shot to the point of me only seeing some increased grain, otherwise it was great.

Between the latest Telecine software and this Vision2 Stock, we can sometimes really screw up exposures and see them come back ok on transfer.


How is your experience with the post house in Dallas? I know this is a little off subject, but I live in the dfw area and was recently talking with them about pricing for a student feature I'm doing. From the sound of it, they are able to work some miracles, which I just might need when this thing comes around to post time.
  • 0

#9 Will Montgomery

Will Montgomery
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2030 posts
  • Producer
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 01 November 2005 - 01:04 AM

How is your experience with the post house in Dallas?


Video Post & Transfer (VPT) in Dallas is a great and they are student friendly. Terry Hall schedules telecine and he'll be good to talk to about rates. They have several suites, all with great equipment and a very high end HD suite as well.

One very cool thing is that the only charge $.04/ft to process your film (only color negative though) if you transfer there. Glenn Shank heads up the lab and is a great source of info on processing and stocks.
  • 0


rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Paralinx LLC

FJS International, LLC

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

CineLab

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Rig Wheels Passport

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Opal

Willys Widgets

Tai Audio

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

The Slider

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

Opal

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Glidecam

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS