New Vision 200T Stock

[shralp]

Hi All,
Has anyone had a chance to shoot the new Vision 200 negative stock that Kodak is offering in Super 8? I'm considering using it for an upcoming documentary that I am shooting. This choice is not because I need a higher speed film, if fact, I'm shooting it on the snow entirely so K-40 is fine. I'm just wondering if the increased latitude of a negative stock might help me with the high contrast ratios I have to deal with. Anyone have any comments on the graininess of this stock? Also, I assume that most labs that develop the Vision 16mm stock could develop it as well right? If this stock is anything like the Vision 250 daylight stock that I've shot in 16mm, it should be pretty nice.

Thanks for any advice

[Yemi]

Hi.

I've been shooting snow scenes on film for several years. Kodachrome is my preferred choice when using super8. The Vision 200T stock is superb and is a way ahead of Ektachrome VNF. The latitude makes it very flexible and the grain is good especially if you 'overexpose' by 1/2 an
f-stop. This will also increase the density of the negative and give you a more saturatured look.

However, you won't be fooled into thinking that its slow speed Kodachrome. Well exposed K40 super8 can appear to be entirely grain-free. You may also consider EXR 50D which is Kodak 7245 reloaded into super8 carts by pro8mm. I've had some great results with this stock too and it obviously has finer grain than 200T.

As you mentioned, shooting in snow doesnt require high speed film. You can cope with kodachromes relatively narrow latitude through careful metering. I typically open the iris an addition f-stop when shooting snow....
a little less on overcast days. Shoot test footage....Don't forget to use a lens hood. I recommend a skylight filter too.


------
Yemi

[shralp]

Yemi,
Thanks for your input on the Vision stock. I have heard great things about the Kodachrome stock and I guess the reason I wanted to look at the Vision stock was because after shooting 4 test rolls of Kodachrome 40 on my Nizo Professional, (with bracket exposure on identical shots), I'm really surprised to see as much grain as I'm seeing in my image. I've posted questions regarding this on other forums as well and am attempting to figure out if its a problem with bad developing at the Lab, (I used Dwayne's in Kansas for these) or if its something else. Do you use Dwaynes or Kodak? My telecine people are telling me that my exposure is pretty much right on so I don't thnk its that. My Nizo is also in absolute perfest shape as well.

Can you tell me what you typically expose for at 24fps on a sunny, front lit, snowy scene when you're shooting Kodachrome with your camera? I've been using the internal light meter in my Nizo to get a reading and then locking it out at that F-stop so it doesn't wander if I pan to a slightly lighter or darker area. Do you use a hand held meter when you shoot or are you using the camera meter? The reason I haven't been using my hand held meter is because I'm hearing that the F-values in some super 8 cameras may not really correspond to actual real world f values that you get by using a hand held meter. Also, my hand held meter would be giving me an incident reading and the camera would be giving me a reflected reading. You also mentioned that you open a full f-stop higher in these situations. Are you able to do this and not completely blow out your whites when you go to telecine, (if you do go to telecine with it)?

As for the PRO 8mm 7245, I've shot thousands of feet of this stock on 16mm and its by far one of my favorite film stocks. Too bad it costs the same per roll for 50' in Super 8 as it does for a 100' roll in 16mm. Its just too expensive to fit my budget for this project.

Any other metering tips you can give me would be helpful. I've shot a lot of 16mm neg. in the snow with a hand held meter but very little Super 8 in the snow with using an in camera reflected meter so I'm just trying to get as much info as I can.

Thanks!

[shralp]

Just wanted to bump this...

[jessh]

I have heard great things about the Kodachrome stock and I guess the reason I wanted to look at the Vision stock was because after shooting 4 test rolls of Kodachrome 40 on my Nizo Professional, (with bracket exposure on identical shots), I'm really surprised to see as much grain as I'm seeing in my image. I've posted questions regarding this on other forums as well and am attempting to figure out if its a problem with bad developing at the Lab, (I used Dwayne's in Kansas for these) or if its something else. Do you use Dwaynes or Kodak? My telecine people are telling me that my exposure is pretty much right on so I don't thnk its that. My Nizo is also in absolute perfest shape as well.

You have to remember, this is super8 we are talking about, the frame is about 1/4th the size of a 16mm frame, and a LOT smaller than a 35mm frame, so there is going to be grain. K40 is a really fine grained stock, and gives great results IMHO, but you shouldn't be shooting super8 if you don't want any grain.

That being said, you might be getting more grain than you should be, and there might be some things you can do to reduce it. Have you tried actually projecting your film instead of just telecining it? The telecine may be contributing to the apearance of grain, as well as adding some noise. Where are you having your film transfered and what kind of setup do they use?

I have a feeling that the majority of the grain you are seeing is in the snow, and there are multiple possible reasons for this. From what I hear snow tends to overexpose really easily, and anything that is overexposed will be very grainy,with reversal film you will usually get the least grain in things that are slightly underexposed. In addition to that, large areas of solid color tend to be where grain is most aparent, especially in static shots.

Negative stock will be more grainy than K40 in general, but it has a much wider exposure latitude, which may be better suited for shooting snow scenes, chances are the exposure difference between the snow and anything else will be more than reversal stock can handle. Negative stock is also slightly less grainy when overexposed instead of getting grainy real fast like reversal, so slightly overexposed snow should be less of a problem.

~Jess

[Yemi]

To shralp,

I've owned several Nizos and they are capable of producing great footage.
Yes, you're right about external light meters. They should be more accurate but the camera's built-in meter is calibrated to compensate for the reflex prism and light lost in a large zoom lens.

Shooting snow scenes on a sunny bluebird day in the mountains requires a little adjustment. If you put the camera in auto-exposure mode and fill the frame 40% sky and 60% snow, the light meter could read as high as f16, f22 or even reach the overexposure warning zone. The reason is that reflective light meters make the assumption that your subject reflects the same amount of light as %18 gray. It will try to make the snow gray and your subject (skiier? snowboarder? ) will end up looking very dark. The image will be dark and grainy.

To compensate for this effect, once you have a meter reading via auto-exposure mode, switch to manual and open the iris by 1 f-stop. (ie. If the meter say f16, set the iris to f11).

Be careful not to over-compensate or you may overexpose (you will lose shadow detail in the snow and the colors will look weak/washed-out).

Do you own a projector? That's definetly the best way of judging your exposures before getting the footage transferred to video. Slightly underexposed kodachrome will be a bit dark and grainy on projection but the colors will be more saturated (richer). Overexposed kodachrome shouldn't show any grain but the image will look a washed out.

Note that overexposed film may have a grainy appearance when transferred to video because the blown-out whites can generate 'video noise'.

I doubt if theres a problem with film processing. I've used Dwaynes and Kodak for years without problems.

Do you own a projector? It's the best way of judging and perfecting your reversal exposures.

Shoot a test roll and try over/underexposing scenes in 1/2 f-stop increments.

------
Yemi

[Lucas Lightfeat]

Hi Shralp,

I would suggest using the internal meter, for the reasons given by Yemi. They are very acurate. You won't find a finer grained film than K40: not in Super8, not in 35mm unless you hunt around for really specialist stuff. You should underexpose by a third to two thirds of a stop (use the backlight feature on the camera, then use the auto meter to get your reading, then lock the apperture in manual mode, if you so desire a locked apperture.) I am also wondering if you are viewing this as telecined. If you are, you may be having it transfered somewhere unaccustomed to Super8, and so not getting the best job done. Good luck - use the Nizo meter!

OT: In reply to your inquiry about my C8 adapter, it has a 67mm thread only. It may need a 62 - 67 step up ring for your camera, which is a standard thing, says the instructions. However, it is in absolutely pristine condition and according to the instruction leaflet, it takes the 1014XL-s widest 6.5mm and makes it 4.3mm, so it is effectively a .66 magnifier by my calculation. It also states that the 1014XL-s is then the widest super8 lens in the world, with a focal point 4mm from the lens, which puts everything from the lens surface (literaly) to infinity in perfect focus. It is not a zoom through type, though I've never heard of one of those, and requires a macro setting, focus on infinity and a maximum aperture of f2.8 and preferably smaller (f4) which is fine - in the snow you can afford this. The sharpest images are at about f5.6 - f8 on a Nizo. Let me know....

Lucas

[focusgroup]

Perhaps because I use a different camera (Beaulieu 4008 zmII) I find different results.

In my case, the internal meter doesnt even compare with an accurate ambient meter. Im also sure that my internal spot meter is as accurate as as a beaulieu can be. I first shot only with the internal spot meter. The results appeared to be so unpredicatable that I gave up. I purchased a good ambient meter and viola - excellent control over exposure.

Please note that Im unaware of a single pro who would use an internal meter for a feature of any length. Furthermore the issue surrounding percent of light lost is similar to most movie cameras regardless of gauge.

Also re: kodak 200T negative stock. I just cant get the blooming stuff to look good using my workprinter. The grain is awful and the scratches from negative stock look like graffiti when transferred to positive.

My advice - save yourself the time money and hassle - Use K-40. Color time in required in commotion or after effects.

Happy shooting and enjoy.

George

[jessh]

In my case, the internal meter doesnt even compare with an accurate ambient meter. Im also sure that my internal spot meter is as accurate as as a beaulieu can be. I first shot only with the internal spot meter. The results appeared to be so unpredicatable that I gave up. I purchased a good ambient meter and viola - excellent control over exposure.

Please note that Im unaware of a single pro who would use an internal meter for a feature of any length. Furthermore the issue surrounding percent of light lost is similar to most movie cameras regardless of gauge.

I totally agree, when used properly. a decent hand-held light meter will always give better results. The large number of people who have had poor results when trying to use them is most likely due to them not using them correctly, the biggest problem being that many meters have settings that say 18fps or 24fps, and people will set their meter to this thinking it will be correct, unfortunatly it won't be even with many 16mm and 35mm cameras, due to the different shutter angles and other factors. Unfortunatly the infromation you need to use a hand held light meteris not included in the manuals of most super8 cameras, so it takes a little bit of experimentation, but once you get it right it should give you excellent results.

~Jess

[shralp]

Thanks everyone for all the input. I'm just not sure what to think.

I've got Yemi, owner of a Nizo camera just like me with experience shooting in the snow, suggesting that I use the internal meter and to overexpose 1 full stop.

I've got FocusGroup, a 4008 owner suggesting that I use an external meter

I've got Lucas Lightfeat, suggesting to also use the internal meter but to UNDEREXPOSE 1/3-2/3 of a stop.

I do wonder if the light loss due to the zoom lens and reflex prism does have an effect on the metering internally in that the intermal meter takes this into account and an external meter would not. I agree with Focusgroups idea these factors shouldn't change camera to camera but its still a factor in terms of how any of these camera will adjust to compensate for it and this is why using an external meter seems like a bad idea. I forgot to mention that I have shot tests with identical subject matter using the internal meter and my hand held Sekonic meter, (with an actual cine scale, metering at 24fps.) and it seems that my hand held was always underexposed on the reading. Let me note, I've shot thousands of feet of 16mm using this meter so I do know how to use it right. I guess this comes down to the fact that when I meter with my Sekonic hand held and shoot 16mm with my Arriflex I know that when I reach down and set my aperture to f8 on the lens barrel, I know that thats what I' m getting, f8. With my super 8 and I assume most if not all super 8 cameras, I'm turning a dial on the side of the camera body that makes the needle go to the "f8" position and I have no idea if the camera is compensating for anything else to give me that f stop. This is why using an external meter seems strange to me with super 8, with my 16mm rig, its a no brainer.

As for a bad telecine, I've gotten identical tests at MovieStuff in Texas and CinePost in Atlanta and both have done a good job with the transfer. They both do alot of super 8 so I don't think the excess grain in my K-40 is due to an inexperienced operator. I don't have a projector to look at my test rolls as suggested by some of you and I might try to borrow one to see if I'm seeing any difference. All I know is that both telecine houses have stated that my exposure, (mostly using the internal meter doing test shots in snow), has been pretty much right on. Once I start shooting this film, a projector won't be an option as I don't want to touch the camera original before I go to telecine with it.

Well, I CAN say that you have all convinced me to shoot k-40 and not 200T for this film. Since lack of light won't be a problem for me for the most part, the k-40 should be fine. Now if I can just figure out how to meter this properly to deal with the limited latitude. Hmmmm....

Oh, and Lucas, I sent you a private message regarding the Wide Adapter. I'd like to buy it from you if you are interested.

[istvan]

Shralp,
If you have a lot of experience with the sekonic, maybe this is old news to you, but you cannot use the cine-scale when metering s8, as you would normally when metering either 16 or 35, because the shutter angle is most probably not (depending on the camera) 180 degrees, and this alters the way you have to read the scale. I have a Beaulieu as well, and I always use en external meter, (a sekonic studio deluxe II), as it´s incomparably more accurate. What you have to find out, is how the shutter angle on your camera affects the exposure; for example, although I shoot 24/fps, on my Beaulieu, I will NOT get a 1/50 exposure (as you would on your Arri), but more like 1/85 sec. of exposure on the film. As long as I know this, there´s no problem using the handheld meter. There are two ways of finding out how your camera behaves in conjunction with the meter: Either you get some charts telling you the shutter angle/exposure time of your Nizo (probably someone out there should now, maybe even on this forum), or you just simply do a test roll with a person in the same framing (with a grey-card/-scale, if available), camera on tripod, writing down the data, going from wide open to all closed down on your lens (in third-stop increments on all parts giving a reading on the film), putting the lightlevel for a correct exposure on, let´s say, f 5.6, doing all these calculations with your external meter. Getting the developed film back, you will be able to see not only the correction you need to read your skeonic meter readings with, but also how much you can take the film beyond a "normal" exposure. (You might already have done this; but it´s always good to compare).

The only reason I personally can see for using an internal meter, is if you´re shooting sports or documentary stuff, leaving you little or no time/opportunity to take your readings, not to speak of carrying the meter in adittion to your camera (on your snowboard, etc?). Even so, I would use the sekonic as much as possible, and while doing the test, I would carefully watch the internal meter and how it behaves in comparison to the external. It will give you valuable knowledge for how to check your exposure when you don´t go for a "correct" exposure, even when you don´t have time to put it "right" when checking (the once in a lifetime shot is just unravelling in front of you).
And hey, good luck!
Øystein

[shralp]

Shralp,
If you have a lot of experience with the sekonic, maybe this is old news to you, but you cannot use the cine-scale when metering s8, as you would normally when metering either 16 or 35, because the shutter angle is most probably not (depending on the camera) 180 degrees, and this alters the way you have to read the scale. I have a Beaulieu as well, and I always use en external meter, (a sekonic studio deluxe II), as it´s incomparably more accurate. What you have to find out, is how the shutter angle on your camera affects the exposure; for example, although I shoot 24/fps, on my Beaulieu, I will NOT get a 1/50 exposure (as you would on your Arri), but more like 1/85 sec. of exposure on the film. As long as I know this, there´s no problem using the handheld meter. There are two ways of finding out how your camera behaves in conjunction with the meter: Either you get some charts telling you the shutter angle/exposure time of your Nizo (probably someone out there should now, maybe even on this forum), or you just simply do a test roll with a person in the same framing (with a grey-card/-scale, if available), camera on tripod, writing down the data, going from wide open to all closed down on your lens (in third-stop increments on all parts giving a reading on the film), putting the lightlevel for a correct exposure on, let´s say, f 5.6, doing all these calculations with your external meter. Getting the developed film back, you will be able to see not only the correction you need to read your skeonic meter readings with, but also how much you can take the film beyond a "normal" exposure. (You might already have done this; but it´s always good to compare).

The only reason I personally can see for using an internal meter, is if you´re shooting sports or documentary stuff, leaving you little or no time/opportunity to take your readings, not to speak of carrying the meter in adittion to your camera (on your snowboard, etc?). Even so, I would use the sekonic as much as possible, and while doing the test, I would carefully watch the internal meter and how it behaves in comparison to the external. It will give you valuable knowledge for how to check your exposure when you don´t go for a "correct" exposure, even when you don´t have time to put it "right" when checking (the once in a lifetime shot is just unravelling in front of you).
And hey, good luck!
Øystein

Istvan,
How right you are my man! Good call! I realized this the other night while trying to figure out why my nizo internal meter wasn't giving me the same type of readings as my Sekonic hand held. Exactly. It looks like my Sekonic, (L-318B) is optimized to meter in Cine mode assuming that you are using a 180 degree shutter, (which my Arri S has, correct). So here is my problem. If my Arri is going to give me a 1/50th sec. exposure at 24fps with its a 180 degree shutter then this means that my Nizo Professional, according to my Nizo camera manual, is going to give me a 1/57th sec. exposure time at 24fps, (ANYONE CARE TO VERIFY THIS?). The difference between these two exposure times seems pretty minimal. Do you really think that this is going to make that much difference in my readings, or is it mainly due to the difference between incident and reflected exposure readings? Here is what I propose, instead of using my cine scale on the meter set to 24fps, what if I switch my Sekonic meter to standard photo mode, dial in my ASA and set the shutter speed reading in the meter to 1/60th of a sec, which is pretty darn close to 1/57th. This way I'm getting the exactness of an incident reading AND I'm calibrating my meter to the supposed exposure time that my Nizo will give me at 24 fps. What do you guys think?? Thanks.

[Lucas Lightfeat]

I'm pretty confused as to why people are trusting their handhelds over their camera's internal meter. I have a Nizo 6080 and a sekonic L398 Studio Deluxe handheld. The camera always exposes well in automatic mode, and I can obviously lock it if needs be.

Both have a selenium cell, and so measure with the same system, but the camera's meter is more like a spot-meter, so yes it will give different results. I still haven't used the handheld properly, as I don't know whether to trust it, or else my use of it, because it is giving different readings to my camera. I know what the shutter speed is - at 25fps it's 1/44.4 of a second, which takes into account for the prism etc. This is so close to the 1/48 cine line on the handheld, which is derived from 180 degrees and 24fps, it isn't even worth considering. I'm going to do the aforesaid experiment, because I don't know what to trust....

Shralp - trust your manual, I'd say. It will have taken prism and multi-element lens light losses etc into consideration. The beaulieu people don't have this problem, as they don't have prisms, so it's a bit simpler for them.

Lucas

[andy]

Hi, thought i will add this... when i use any super 8 camera (except a Beaulieu or a leicina special with 10mm lens) on manual i always have trouble getting the exposure spot on, i wonder whether cameras without a proper iris actually lock onto say f8. take my 1014xls, the viewfinder read out says f8 but is it really on f8, there no way on knowing.. least with a iris ring you can actually see the thing is on f8. i have had a lot more success in achieving correct exposure with a proper iris......

[Guest]

Im at the office so I cant check but I swear my 4008 uses a 180 degree angle as stated in the manual that came with the camera which should give you approx 1/50th shutter speed at 24fps. How did you compute 1/85 second on your beaulieu?

thanks

George