[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Who needs B&W anyway???
>On Oct 3, 14:14, Don Hayashi wrote:
>} Subject: B&W neg transfers
>> I'm about to start work as an camera assistant on a B&W Nissan commercial
>> and I have a question about B&W neg transfers.
>> The last time I shot B&W I had the film processed and telecined at Fotochem
>> (two years ago). The Rank (Mark IV?) transfer had midtone breakup or
>> noise. This unfortunately was most noticeable in the facial close-ups.
Lets not forget the all too popular shedding of film particulate due to B&W
film having no rem-jet backing. I cannot tell you how many times I've had to
stop down a session and fully detail and clean the URSA. 16MM B&W is the
worst offender, how can you possibly keep the condenser lens clean for any
length of transfer time. Shuttling the film only makes matters worse.
Flipping the film wind creates its own set of Scanpatch and keycode
problems, gateblast is always useless. It's no wonder we all love color
filmstock so much. Hey, whats a few gray scale steps lost between friends
anyway (especially since our release medium is so insensitive).
On another angle, have you noticed that you still have full individual
secondary luminance control once you have desaturated the overall chroma in
the daVinci colorgrade?
Individually isolated fleshtones, skies, and pack shots can all be brought
up or down considerably without affecting other existing elements if you use
color stocks as your B&W source.
This isolation exposure feature, combined with lack of noise/grain, overall
cleanliness, and keycode readability make color stock my choice in this
insensitive medium we call NTSC.
Unless of course...you really do want it to look that bad.
Bob Festa Festa at earthlink.net
Director of Telecine Festa at holydig.com
Hollywood Digital 213 465 0101
6690 Sunset Blvd
Hollywood, Ca 90028
The telecine mailing list is run automatically by SmartList v.3.10.
It is available as a digest... questions to rob at xyzoom.alegria.com.