A quick question in regards to single frame shots. I noticed if you blow up a frame from a strip of film you shot at 24fps the frame will not be crisp it has a slight blur. If I shoot 1fps will it come out crisp?
My end goal is still not a motion.
I am pretty sure it will but I would like to know someone elses experence before I go and do it.
Ian
shooting stills
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
Shutter speed has nothing to do with how to gain sharp stills from a motion picture film. Even blow ups from 35mm film looks crap, hence the need for publicity stills being shot with a stills camera. I do not know the technical explanation for this. Only that motion picture cameras where designed for... motion picture, and not for stills.
I have done a few still from motion picture film, and found that out of a few seconds of film you have a good chance of finding a sharp frame. Grain is more evident with stills than in motion. Even though I do projects that are made for pulling stills I allways end up with watching the film.
Ian, are you doing digital blow ups (scans) or prints directly to paper?
michael
I have done a few still from motion picture film, and found that out of a few seconds of film you have a good chance of finding a sharp frame. Grain is more evident with stills than in motion. Even though I do projects that are made for pulling stills I allways end up with watching the film.
Ian, are you doing digital blow ups (scans) or prints directly to paper?
michael
some suggestions:
- motion. Actors move, camera moves = unsharp image
- shutter time is VERY long at some 1/40 second depending on the shutter angle and fps, hard to get sharp images with this. Regardless, with camera on a tripod and nothing moving, should deliver an useable image.
- tiny frame needs huge magnification for printing, 35mm still is twice as big as 35mm motion, 16mm is half that of pocket 110, and s8 is just tiny. With such magnifications, the negative needs to be absolutely perfect to get a useable image. Usually it is far from perfect, as I mentioned above..
sharpness fetishists use tripods, stop down to optimum aperture for the very expensive lens, and use the biggest format they can have. 35mm is not considered enough for many of those, and they prefer medium format.. while I think these folks go way over the top, basically they are right, of course - and a film camera is not really the tool for good stills.
- motion. Actors move, camera moves = unsharp image
- shutter time is VERY long at some 1/40 second depending on the shutter angle and fps, hard to get sharp images with this. Regardless, with camera on a tripod and nothing moving, should deliver an useable image.
- tiny frame needs huge magnification for printing, 35mm still is twice as big as 35mm motion, 16mm is half that of pocket 110, and s8 is just tiny. With such magnifications, the negative needs to be absolutely perfect to get a useable image. Usually it is far from perfect, as I mentioned above..
sharpness fetishists use tripods, stop down to optimum aperture for the very expensive lens, and use the biggest format they can have. 35mm is not considered enough for many of those, and they prefer medium format.. while I think these folks go way over the top, basically they are right, of course - and a film camera is not really the tool for good stills.
have fun!