I have a Bolex Rex 5 loaded up with some 500T, to shoot a test with. I am going to shoot at night, and capture all the neon lights, car lights, reflections in water, etc.
However, I only have a reflected/ incident light meter, not a spot meter. Given that there's such a huge contrast between black night, and coloured neon, how do I take an exposure reading?
Or should I just open up the iris to maximum, regardless of whether its fast/slow motion, or timed exposure, and wing it all?
I have a Bolex Rex 5 loaded up with some 500T, to shoot a test with. I am going to shoot at night, and capture all the neon lights, car lights, reflections in water, etc.
However, I only have a reflected/ incident light meter, not a spot meter. Given that there's such a huge contrast between black night, and coloured neon, how do I take an exposure reading?
Or should I just open up the iris to maximum, regardless of whether its fast/slow motion, or timed exposure, and wing it all?
Thanks in advance
A test roll is a great opportunity to "bracket" - start wide open and alter the iris by half-stops for each subsequent shot. The shots will match the fstop scale in order. If you shoot the same scene at different stops, maybe leave a short burst of black between shots in case the changes are too subtle to visually spot at projection time.
I believe the Bolex H16 can do time exposures in single frame mode, right? When I do time exposures in still photography with my 35mm slrs, I generally use 100asa film, set the aperture to f11 and bracket with exposure times of 15, 23 and 30 seconds. Since you're using 500asa film, you could still bracket with those same exposure times but you would have to close the aperture to it's smallest setting - f22. Alternatively, you could use a larger aperture and decrease your exposure times - eg f16 with exposures of 12, 15 and 23 seconds.
Obviously, if you're not using time exposures but filming with more conservative frame rates instead, you would be using considerable larger apertures. In these instances, take a light reading from a variety of different light sources and shadow areas up close, find an average and then bracket.
To reduce costly mistakes, it might be better to do some test shots with 400 iso 35mm slide film first (rated at iso 500 and get the lab to push process) at the night locations where you want to film and take notes of all your aperture and shutter speed combinations. Then you can see which exposures work best and use those same settings on your Bolex. This would eliminate making exposure errors in 16mm which would be quite expensive. Though remember as the prism in a Bolex reflex viewing system steals a small portion of the light, you may have to increase your exposures by about a quarter or half a stop to compensate.
Patrick wrote: ...you can see which exposures work best and use those same settings on your Bolex. This would eliminate making exposure errors in 16mm which would be quite expensive.
OTOH, a test is just the place you want to make "mistakes", in order to avoid making them on the day. Any good race car driver leaves the track now and then during practice, so they can stay on it during the race.
Making the test with the exact gear to be employed in the real thing avoids miscalculations which might arise from projecting the performance of "A" onto "B". Definitely worth the money invested...just don't hit the wall. ~:?)
Well the principles of exposure remain the same, regardless of what camera is used. I would still recommend bracketing in 16mm, whether you use the 35mm slide test or not - which was meant to be used as a rough guide for determining the ideal exposures.
Patrick wrote:
To reduce costly mistakes, it might be better to do some test shots with 400 iso 35mm slide film first (rated at iso 500 and get the lab to push process) at the night locations where you want to film and take notes of all your aperture and shutter speed combinations. Then you can see which exposures work best and use those same settings on your Bolex. This would eliminate making exposure errors in 16mm which would be quite expensive. Though remember as the prism in a Bolex reflex viewing system steals a small portion of the light, you may have to increase your exposures by about a quarter or half a stop to compensate.
I like that idea, i've never thought of doing that before. it would lot easier for me to visit a few locations with a 35mm camera rather than lug my bolex around, and i'd get the result within a few hours from my local photo lab.
Patrick wrote:Well the principles of exposure remain the same, regardless of what camera is used. I would still recommend bracketing in 16mm, whether you use the 35mm slide test or not - which was meant to be used as a rough guide for determining the ideal exposures.
Principle/theory is not practice.
"Bracket" is the ninth word in my original response.
You cannot get "up close" to the headlights of cars in motion, which would clearly blow out at any fstop anyway.
You cannot get "up close" to neon signs 20 feet up the side of a building.
Bolex Rex5 is spring-wound with an inexact frame rate. You cannot match it exactly to the shutter speed of a 35mm SLR.
Two identical cameras with identical settings can give different results.
Shooting 35mm tests to test for a 16mm test roll is a "costly mistake" right out of the box, especially with the added cost of push-processing.
IMO you have complicated this issue enormously - if one is testing a certain filmstock in a certain camera under certain conditions, why on Earth would one use a different camera to test for the test?
The cost of a roll of a 35mm slide film is insignificant compared to that of a roll of 16mm cine film (especially if that roll is 400 feet though we don’t know that - it may well be 100feet which is still considerably more expensive than 35mm slide film.) Additionally, the cost of push processing a film less than half a stop is not going to make too much of a difference cost wise. I’m not sure about film costs in the US but in Australia, we normally pay about au$11 for a 36 exp. roll of 35mm slide film and about au$60 for 100ft of 16mm film. Incidentally, the purchase price of 400feet of 16mm film is over au$100 here. Developing of slide film is about au$15 and developing of 100ft of 16mm is about au$25 - $30.
“you have complicated this issue enormously - if one is testing a certain filmstock in a certain camera under certain conditions, why on Earth would one use a different camera to test for the test?â€Â
I’m not really complicating the issue. Slide film has an extremely narrow exposure latitute. In other words, a transparency will reveal if your exposure was spot on or slightly off or way off by a mile. Hence testing with slides will indicate if your in the right ballpark with your exposures so to speak. Negative film on the other hand, in this case negative cine film, has a lot more exposure latitude and can even be given a one stop overexposure with acceptable results. So if your slide exposure is spot on, using that same exposure in negative film, as well as bracketing over and under that same exposure, is not really going to throw your exposures off as you suggest. Furthermore, as I have learned in doing night city photography for over 10 years, there is no one ‘correct’ exposure for this particular subject matter. The average city scene at night contains a wide variety of light sources with huge variances in exposure. Bracketing slide film in night photography will give you a choice (though limited) of different but acceptable exposures to choose from - as well as undesirable exposures as well. Negative film will give you more choices of exposures but slide film will give you a good reference point of where to start from for optimum exposures.
“Bolex Rex5 is spring-wound with an inexact frame rate. You cannot match it exactly to the shutter speed of a 35mm SLR.â€Â
True, the shutter speeds on most 35mm slrs don’t exactly match the shutter speeds utilized by the frame rates on a Bolex H16 though taking light readings at say 60th and 30th of a second with a still camera and then finding the average of whatever two aperture readings you get, and compensating for the slight light loss in the Bolex’s beam splitter prism, is going to gave you roughly the equivalent exposure as the 45th of second shutter speed utilised by the Bolex running at 16 fps. Obviously, this is not going to be exactly the same exposure 100% but considering that we’ll be shooting negative film in the Bolex and exposing it in a typical city night scene, as well as bracketing, any slight variances in exposure between the still camera and the Bolex in the original determined exposure are going to be all but meaningless. Additionally, 33rd of a second on a Bolex is not too much of a difference from 30th of a second on a still camera, and again of little concern considering the factors mentioned in my previous sentence. By the way, Ive used my 35mm still camera to take light readings for my spring wound Krasnogorsk 3 for general daylight filming (both cameras use the same shutter speeds however) and exposures are spot on. I also use a 35mm still camera to take light readings for my medium format camera.
“You cannot get "up close" to the headlights of cars in motion, which would clearly blow out at any fstop anyway.â€Â
You’re welcome to get up close to a car in motion to take a light reading of the headlights if you wish! Of course no one would really. And it’s not necessary to take a light reading from a neon sign 20 feet above you anyway. There are usually a variety of light sources within easy reach such as floodlit fountains and monuments, windows, shop displays and also dimly lit areas (which would obviously indicate readings of aperture wide open though these are still important when trying to determine an overall ‘average.’) Some estimation will be necessary for some exceptionally bright light sources up high - neon lights as you say - which would require a smaller aperture setting. As I mentioned before, the contrast range in light sources in a typical city night setting is enormous and you can generally choose from a few bracketed exposures which is the most ‘desirable’ or ideal exposure for whatever ‘look‘ you‘re going for.
Bracket widely with the light readings you get with the slide film in half stops, take notes and see which exposures work best for you. Utilizing those same 'ideal' exposures with the 16mm test film, and bracketing also, is going to mean less film wastage - and provide you with more useable footage that you can analyse and refer to. Then oneday when you are exposing the same film stock in similar conditions for a critical shoot, you‘ll have even less film wastage.
By the way, Mitch, I’m not saying that my tactic is superior to yours or vice versa. Your idea of rolling film with the aperture wide open and then closing down the aperture in half stops for each following shot is a very good one. I admit that when I do long exposures in still photography for shooting city night scenes, I hardly ever use a light meter - I keep the aperture the same and vary the exposure times. Some people however prefer to use a light meter for night photography - going right up to various light sources and taking readings. These are all merely different choices to obtain the same result - to each his own, or her own.
Peace, brother. Funny: it is not even we who are doing the test, and sonickel has left the building...just one of those threads I guess.
Outdoors at night, I always shoot wide open anyway, in the hopes of providing the lights with some context, as opposed to having them float disjointedly in a sea of black. I think this would work with 500T.
If it is twighlight you might shoot unfiltered for a blue atmosphere with hot white auto and neon lights. Maybe you can get away with an F4 then ask the colorist for contrast during xfer so that some of your shadows go to black- if that is what you like. (I don't like milky blacks)
Mostly you will probably want to shoot wide open. Shoot at 16 or 18fps instead of 24fps to gain a stop...
You might also consider pushing your film a stop in processing.
EDIT: It's 7217 not 7218 as typed before
Here is an example you might find useful:
It is 7217 shot at night,processed normal and transfered and graded on a Thompson Shadow with grain reduction applied. The scenes are b-roll material that I have decided is not usable, but you might find it useful to look at as a reference. I hsot this stuff with a Nikon R 10 wide open and made the mistake of shooting at 24fps rather than 18...
