Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm

>Derate the ASA of the film 1/3 to 1/2 stop, which provides a denser
>negative, with less grain.

I usually over-expose a negative by 1 stop. Same ideas as what you
mention? Or you mean in addition to this?

The City of God showing, while certainly not as good as 35mm, was a lot
better than Primer, yet City of God used an HD intermediate and Primer
I think was just an optical blow-up, so it made me think that HD might
be valid. By comparison, Thirteen used an optical blow-up which
presented a set of problems different but equally noticeable to City of
God.. that is I found City of God a little blurry on the big screen,
and Thirteen more grainy.

J
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

<jaxon.bridge.TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1118588290.322393.241000@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >Derate the ASA of the film 1/3 to 1/2 stop, which provides a denser
>>negative, with less grain.
>
> I usually over-expose a negative by 1 stop. Same ideas as what you
> mention? Or you mean in addition to this?
>
1 stop is quite ample. Many would say it's more than necessary. You are
losing contrast by doing so, which might be good for an optical blowup, but
not for a DI.

> The City of God showing, while certainly not as good as 35mm, was a lot
> better than Primer, yet City of God used an HD intermediate and Primer
> I think was just an optical blow-up, so it made me think that HD might
> be valid. By comparison, Thirteen used an optical blow-up which
> presented a set of problems different but equally noticeable to City of
> God.. that is I found City of God a little blurry on the big screen,
> and Thirteen more grainy.
>
Grain isn't affected by doing DI. Sharpness is.
Lab stocks are very fine grained. But whatever method is used to produce the
blowup, there is always some generational loss of information. It so happens
that good scans are sharper than optical printing. I agree with Matt that if
the result is grainy, it's on the original negative.

An HD intermediate is not optimal, because HD, as in HD format, is a
compressed format, with color undersampling. High-end DI processes do not
use lossy compression. They have huge disk farms, use lossless compression,
and they fully sample color at the same rate as luminance.
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

One stop overexposure is more than enough. I usually use 2/3's of a
stop because any more and you might as well switch to the next
slower-speed stock and get TRUE grain size reduction (overexposure
doesn't reduce the size of the grains, just fills in the gaps with
smaller grains.)

Also a very dense negative can produce some noise problems when
scanning for a D.I. so don't overdue it.

You don't really get a loss of contrast until you REALLY overexpose
negative by a couple of stops because then most of your midtones are on
the flatter shoulder of the characteristic curve. Overexposure by JUST
up to a stop and printing down usually increases the density of the
blacks in the print, giving the impression of greater "snap" and
contrast.

HDCAM-SR has a very mild compression and can be 4:4:4 color, so it is
very comparable to 2K. HDCAM, on the other hand, is not a good format
for a D.I. (too compressed with too much color subsampling) -- if you
can't use HDCAM-SR, at least transfer to HD-D5.

General rules for getting a good blow-up to 35mm still apply: use the
slowest-speed film possible and practical, expose it well, use sharp
lenses, use more contrast in lighting for better impression of
sharpness, use lenses at their optimal f-stop, etc.

David Mullen, ASC
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

Thanks David.

With regards to optical processes, are there different ways it can be
done that would affect a 35mm blow-up, just as you mention there are
different HD DI processes?

Or would any optical blow-up be comparable to just about any other?

The advent of HD has proposed an interesting dilemma for those of us
who prefer to shoot on film. With the introduction of the Aaton A
Minima camera which is actually being marketed as an HD-ready camera,
despite its S16 format, it makes you think. A friend of mine just
bought an A Minima which I might use, and as I liked City of God and
how popular it is, I figure, if they can use and HD DI, why not me?

Jaxon
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

<jaxon.bridge RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1118667286.480316.326310@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Thanks David.
>
> With regards to optical processes, are there different ways it can be
> done that would affect a 35mm blow-up, just as you mention there are
> different HD DI processes?
>

One can switch to 35 immediately off the negative, or do the intermediates
in 16mm, with a blowup off the answer.
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

Yes, you can go:
S16 neg --> S16 I.P. -->(optical) 35mm I.N. --> print
or
S16 neg --> (optical) 35mm I.P. --> 35mm I.N. --> print
or
S16 neg --> (optical) 35mm print

But to go directly from S16 neg to 35mm, whether a print or I.P.,
requires finding a lab able to do it, and cutting your negative with
frame handles (zero cut neg). And it's more expensive to make a 35mm
I.P. instead of a S16 I.P.

You can also go directly to a 35mm print at a lab that can go directly
to 35mm I.P., but the cost per print is very high.

The D.I. route, including using HD as an intermediate, is becoming more
popular for S16 blow-ups, partly because it simplifies things like
incorporating titles and efx, transitions, speed changes, etc. I would
just look into using the best HD format you can afford. In Europe, 2K
is actually not necessarily more expensive than HD, whereas in the
U.S., HD is cheaper than 2K generally.

David Mullen, ASC
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

David,

good to see u still posting...




b.
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

<scalz101 DeleteThis @easrthlink.net> wrote in message
news:BED8B36F.60F6B%scalz101@easrthlink.net...
> David,
>
> good to see u still posting...
>
Same here!
David, you have a real public service spirit.
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

BTW - How's Cinematograficuss Opus coming along?

George - Houston
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm 

"Rolls" <BillyBubba.TakeThisOut@LittleRock.Gov> wrote in message
news:42b63068$0$64585$a726171b@news.hal-pc.org...
> BTW - How's Cinematograficuss Opus coming along?
>
> George - Houston
>
Temporarily replaced with a micro project, Cinematograficuss minimus :)
 >> Stay informed about: Shooting S16 for best possible 35mm