PRO8 50D, 200T, 250D & 500T CLIPS, PIX & INFO POSTED

[S8 Booster]

Got back the films on MiniDV from PRO8mm and there will take some time to make it presentable for you but it will be done.

This time I will only post 2/4 images that are from clips ending the filming sessions in very low very late afternoon light. This last part in low light were parallelled with a Sony MiniDV cam to compare.

The images posted now are shot in well below f 1.4 with the film camera and the Mini DV did not have a lot to go either. The noise was developing.

What struck me immediately was the incredibly nice colours of the film even at this very low light and far under the cameras lowest light meter reading. The images are appearing birghter than I thought it was there and then. It was really dark.

This was a common factor. Whatever the grain there might be from underexposure on the film the colours remained good and to me noticeably better than the DV cam´s.

The film used here is Vision 500T, shot at 400 ASA but the light was far less than the lowest f 1.4 reading anyway.

To me the grain is acceptable and can be minimized a lot by changing the camera settings. The V500T seem to me as having a very quick reponse to altered settings. More on that later.

So until then, take a look at these images. You will have to go to the big images to get the right impression.

S8 frame, Vision 500T:


Bigger size:
ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictu ... mbilde.jpg

Sony MiniDV Cam:


Bigger size:
ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictures/V500TF.jpg

R

[Cheezy]

What Super8 camera did you use?

[S8 Booster]

What Super8 camera did you use?

Hi Chez´.

The S8 camera used on these shots was a Canon 1014 XL-S.

R

[Cheezy]

Now that you say so, and I have another look at the picture, I must admit it is very Canon 1014-like
It is finally not so far from the results you get with regular K40 and a Canon. Maybe a little more grain...
Have you had a chance to try 200T? I was worried about the grain, but now that I see 500T, I feel more confident.

[S8 Booster]

Now that you say so, and I have another look at the picture, I must admit it is very Canon 1014-like
It is finally not so far from the results you get with regular K40 and a Canon. Maybe a little more grain...
Have you had a chance to try 200T? I was worried about the grain, but now that I see 500T, I feel more confident.

Hi Chez.

Yes I did shoot a roll of V200T too and the grain was quite lower than the V500T. From the stocks I tested I would have chosen the V200T & V500T for my basic stocks.

Some of the grain on the 50, 200 & 500 films are transfer related. I do not know the reason but there are like a matrix of noise all over the images that do not alter or move it is like a ground glass structure on a 35mm photo cam so I believe that the 200 film is better than these results show.

I found the 500 to be able to be "tweaked" in tungsten light so that the grain almost totally disappeared at a slight reduction in contrast but I have to make some research to find out exactly what I did because it was a last second idea that I did not take notes of but the resuts were "revolutionary" and I am able to re-find them.

Watching these images, keep in mind:

The stills from the V200T are taken from a panning part shot at speed travelling on a fast boat so they may not be perfectly sharp. The light was very low on these takes too. Viewed on a Sony 29" TV or on a 1200pix computer plasma screen the film looks very sharp and the grain is acceptable to me. Actually noticably less than the old Ektachrome 160 reversal film.

Sample image from the Vision 200T



Big image sample from iMovie Construction window.
ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictu ... eV200T.jpg


The below is a very preliminary working copy of 200/250/500 film vs the MiniDV video on split a screen. Due to compression, the grain is increased and it hits the film more than the video. MPEG4 format 18.6 MB.
Where there are no split screen it is the S8 only.

Film: ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/video/S8DVx.mp4
Film left, DV video right.

Sample image



R

[Cheezy]

Hey, have you read that new post about Kodak ready to launch a new 500T Vision II Super8 film? They say it will be half the amount of grain of regular 500T!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[S8 Booster]

Hey, have you read that new post about Kodak ready to launch a new 500T Vision II Super8 film? They say it will be half the amount of grain of regular 500T!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, that´s exiting.

Have to say I am very impressed with the current V500T so the new one got have a big potential.

My experience from this test is that it can be about as low grained as the 50D (normally not but still good ) in bright sun daylight (shot at 320 with 85 filter) although it will produce somewhat "softer" or less contrasty images.

I find the 500 very fun to exploit and it is certainly exiting to shoot film that is almost as light sensitive as a "0" lux MiniDV cam and producing much better colors in the same run.



R

[S8 Booster]

Posts of more images.

50D May be Grainy too



Big pict:
ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictu ... Dmolen.jpg

And may not be so grainy


Big pict:
ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictu ... 0DMOL2.jpg

V500T may not be grainy: (but "softer")


Big pict:
ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictu ... 500Tbh.jpg


V200T (this is shot in tungsten mode, no 85 filter in - before the cart was modified)



V250D


V500T



V200T (this is shot in tungsten mode, no 85 filter in)


V250D


V500T


R

[Cheezy]

Is all your material acquired with a WorkPrinter ?

[S8 Booster]

Is all your material acquired with a WorkPrinter ?

No. All of this is digitally processed at Pro8mm from the negative films.

Without having knowledge from transfer with the WP I believe that a "properly" exposed K40 performs as good as the 50D film on this test except from some difference in latitude and colour balance. The K40 is definately sharper than the 50D but that is probably a typical difference between reversal and negative films of identical speed although the K40 is unique.

All the neg films I tested produce richer colours than reality, as processed in this test anyway.

R

[S8 Booster]

Grain reduction via camera settings, a trick the standard professional 16 & 35mm cameras can´t do?

I found the V200T and especially the V500T quite grainy filmed in tungsten light. However, accidentally I found a setting that improved the grain a lot with the 500. Did not test this with the 200.

If the film were slightly underexposed while using the XL 220° shutter the improvement in grain was no less than a minor revolution. The grain were reduced noticably and they were a lot more "uniform" smoothing out the image a lot.

Do not know if a slight undersposure would have done the trick alone but this is what I did anyway.

Check:

150°/24 fps normal exposure on top
220°/24 fps slighly underexposure bottom (tweaking both ends)



ftp://ftp.filmshooting.com/upload/pictu ... RAINTL.jpg

R

[mattias]

to be honest i think the "underexposed" version is actually correctly exposed and the normal one quite heavily overexposed. overexposing negative can greatly reduce grain and improve colors, but really only if you're striking a print. many telecines have trouble with really dense negatives...

/matt

[S8 Booster]

Sure your are right about this.
The bright shot may have been done at 500 or 400ASA setting but the light were only 3 standard lightbulbs of 40w.

But then, as I see it, it actually makes the operating "window" for the 500 quite narrow for S8/telecine purposes when it comes to overexpsure.

I think the 500 worked extremely well in low daylight and offered less grain than I expected under those circumstances so I was a bit surprised with the "grainy" tungsten performance.

R

[Nagaarjuna]

On these last pictures, what would the difference be in f-stop? How much did you underexpose?

Nag

[S8 Booster]

On these last pictures, what would the difference be in f-stop? How much did you underexpose?

Nag

Sorry, I did not take exact notes on this one it was a last minute, not noticed striking idea so I just locked the auto exposure somewhat less of the normal AVR reading.

Anyway, not so much.
I will try to simulate it later to read the numbers.

R