What would you suggest as the best film format for filming in black and white, and more specifically, what camera? When I say format, i mean DVCAM, MiniDV, Super 8, etc.
Posts: 12 | Location: Washington | Registered: March 07, 2005
(not including HD in this discussion because it doesn't seem like you would be able to get a hold of an HD camera)
Video isn't good for black and white because it doesn't have the latitutde that film does to get the right balance of grays, and the right contrast between the whites and the blacks so that they really pop out.
DVCam and miniDV aren't different in resolution, only in durability and how they store information (more of a technical difference than an aesthetic one)
Hi8 is very poor quality and you shouldn't shoot in it if you have something else available.
Posts: 842 | Location: Oakland | Registered: January 13, 2004
35mm film will obviously give you the best black and white. MiniDV (which is most likely in your budget range) will yeild a much better black and white image than Super 8mm will.
Originally posted by E.C.: How much would it be for an actuall FILM camera? It seems to me that theyre kinda tough to get a hold of.
There thousands of bucks. If you know you have a great script and great actors, try to rent one. I haven't tried one out, but they are essential to know about. But not as much nowadays with the HD. I still want to learn how to use a 16mm and 35mm, as well as HD. That would be able to get me off the right foot, and you too.
Mini DV can turn out some great black and white images if you just work with the light. Black and Whtie NEEDS shadows to make teh image interesting, otherwise you just get a big grey mass. you want a lot of BLACK shadows. Thats my tip for the day.
________________________________ "If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are rotten, either write the things worth reading or do things worth the writing." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1950 | Location: Milkyway, the earth, USA, Arizona, Chandler | Registered: June 25, 2003
jsut because everyone seems to think that the word "digital" = "easy":
HD is more complicated than film because you have to do your post and location adjustments during production, instead of just shooting in a range that a negative can hold and then fixing it in the print.
so it actually takes a little longer and more people to shoot with HD than it does with film, so learning it is going to take just as much as learning a film camera would.
Posts: 842 | Location: Oakland | Registered: January 13, 2004
does anybody know where I could find a film camera (35 or 16) on the internet for renting or buying? Whenever I look for one I get all of this stuff about photography.
Posts: 12 | Location: Washington | Registered: March 07, 2005
Originally posted by E.C.: does anybody know where I could find a film camera (35 or 16) on the internet for renting or buying? Whenever I look for one I get all of this stuff about photography.
Check out your local film center,they normally have some to rent. Ebay is easiest when it comes to buying cheaply, and the only other place that I know of is bostoncamera.com .
Originally posted by E.C.: does anybody know where I could find a film camera (35 or 16) on the internet for renting or buying? Whenever I look for one I get all of this stuff about photography.
Panavision is a dominant brand in 35mm. You can only rent them though. (They do not sell them)
Arriflex is another leading brand in 35mm, and unlike Panavision, you can purchase them. All the Arriflex 16mm (with extra lenses)that I have seen range in price anywhere from $4000-$20000. Arriflex 35mm prices start at around $25000.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: braininabox,
"Important dialog is only in Hollywood films" - Kyle Phillip Johnson
Posts: 1278 | Location: Indiana | Registered: May 23, 2004
From my experience its always smarter especially with video to shoot in color and change it to B&W in post. That way in case you do not like the look, you can always go back. The minute you shoot something in B&W, your stuck there. Also B&W should be used wisely, if your film doesn't have a need for B&W, than don't use it. I know some people that shoot B&W simply to give it more of an artistic feel, and that is completely foolish.
Posts: 15 | Location: savannah,ga | Registered: June 13, 2003
I wish I had a black light to try it. I may have to run to the dollar store and get one. Do you have any grabs?
________________________________ "If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are rotten, either write the things worth reading or do things worth the writing." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1950 | Location: Milkyway, the earth, USA, Arizona, Chandler | Registered: June 25, 2003
EC - it depends on what film you want to use. Your choices lie between either reversal or negative film, each with their own sub-categories (pertaining to asa in tungsten and daylight). I'd recommend a negative stock, mainly because of the leeway it will give you with latitude (I personally like to use the Kodak-Eastman Double-X Negative 250 Daylight 200 Tungsten).
But keep in mind that whatever you pay for each roll (a 100 foot roll should cost you anywhere between 15 - 30 dollars) you'll also have to pay for processing (and transfer, if you want it, to a digital format). Colorlab in DC or DuArt in New York would be your best bet for that (you can check their websites for cost and transfer information).
(By the way, all this above information pertains to 16mm).
Also, if you're planning to make a quick jump over into film be aware that sync sound might be a problem (you'll need to at least rent a separate sound recorder). And you'll have to get a light meter, and calibrate it correctly pertaining to the asa on the film (and whether you're shooting indoors or out).
Posts: 8 | Location: Philadelphia | Registered: April 18, 2005