[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
no 85, reciprocity failure?
- To: telecine internet group <telecine at alegria.com>
- Subject: no 85, reciprocity failure?
- From: "Rob Lingelbach" <rob at sun.alegria.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:00:42 -0600
- Organization: Altruistic Intentions, Hollywood, CA
- Phone-number: +1 213 464 6266
- Reply-To: Rob Lingelbach <rob at sun.alegria.com>
- Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:01:50 -0600
- Resent-From: telecine at alegria.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"PP5Bp.A.87.n0cs2" at sun>
- Resent-Sender: SmartList account <slist at alegria.com>
- Resent-To: multiple recipients of <telecine at alegria.com>
- Sender: Rob Lingelbach <rob at alegria.com>
I'm working today with some 5293 shot of exterior locations and
exposed without an 85 filter. I think the DP considered that he
needed the extra 2/3 of a stop or so.
I can rebalance to correct for the lack of filter fairly easily, but
I'm noticing that if the film is slightly overexposed, it becomes more
difficult to balance. In fact I think it exhibits a reciprocity
failure, in that the lowlights bias in a direction different from the
highlights --unpredictably. I'm rediscovering my reasoning for asking
DP's to shoot with the filtration recommended for the stock and light.
Rob Lingelbach | "I would give nothing for that man's religion
rob at alegria.com | whose very dog and cat are not the better for it."
www.alegria.com --Rowland Hill, "Village Dialogues", via A. Lincoln
thanks to John Palmisano for support in 1999
No advertising/marketing allowed on the main TIG. Contact rob at alegria.com
1037 subscribers in 40 countries on Fri Jan 29 09:00:48 CST 1999
subscribe/unsubscribe with that Subject: to telecine-request at alegria.com
complete information on the TIG website http://www.alegria.com/tig3/
anonymous messaging now at http://www.alegria.com/HyperNews/get/ubique.html