INTERIORS AND B/W

[PITIRRE]

Probably this subject is done before, but here is it. I was planing to shot a short film completly in interiors, the only set will be a living room, I wanted to do in b/w to avoid too much lighting set ups but at the same time I wanted a rich blacks and whites with contrast.

1-What types of film is better, plus x or tri x or are there any other one?
2-What type of lighting do I need and is there any filter also that I need?

Thanks again for any suggestion.

[mattias]

i'd go with plus-x. i've shot a couple of shorts on that stock, although in 16mm, with just a vip-kit and a blonde. plus-x looks great pushed one stop too if you can afford it. maybe even better than normal in many situations.

/matt

[mattias]

hey, let's not confirm what's strange with this board so obviously. pitirre posts two things at about the same time, one about the future of super 8 and one containing a specific question on shooting super 8. now which one gets all the replies? and which *should* get all the replies? my reply hardly covers his entire question, so there's plenty of room for discussion. come on.

/matt

[jean]

well, mattias.. just talking about filming is one thing, actually filming something (albeit closely related at first sight), in the end very very different, somehow like talking about beckham's penalty and actually shooting one yourself.. I try to keep it balanced

No you don't need any filters, fortunately! That's why I LOVE b/w. All that hassle with light tempererature - gone. No color casts, just black, white, and a lot of gray in between. Ideal for low budget and beginners, somhow like driving a vw beetle. Nothing is there that can break down, so it just keeps running.

Plusx or trix, that's a tough call. I'd opt for trix however, since it would spare you a lot of that lighting trouble. I have not yet used the new plusx, at 100 iso it could be fast enough depending on your lens and lighting - if it's feasible (check the schene with a light meter), give it a try. Burning one cart of each for testing would also be feasible.

[Scotness]

On a similar thread recently someone mentioned shooting K40 and turning it to BW in post on your PC to save money on stock and developing - that'll give you rich blacks! - but you'll have to watch the lighting

Scot

[christoph]

hey, let's not confirm what's strange with this board so obviously.

true, but the problem of questions like "how should i light it?" is that they take so much time to respond, as there is no "yes" or "no".. and i sit in front of the computer too often anyway. if anybody wants to come over and discuss things over a cup of coffee, i'd gladly talk about b/w lighting for an hour or two.

the short version:
1. shoot tri-x if you like big grain and/or dont have enough light
shoot plus-x if you have enough light and like the tighter structure.
2. get something that gives you a bit of punch and use directional lighting. try to keep the lights off the wall and dont use too much fill light.
no filter is needed, it will look nearly the same. to really change the look you'd need a real b/w filter, but they eat up lots of light and you'll probably be tight on exposure anyway,

in fact, i think i'll go for a cup of coffee anyway :)
++ christoph ++

[Scotness]

Here:
http://www.filmshooting.com./scripts/fo ... php?t=8462

Scot

[mattias]

That's why I LOVE b/w. All that hassle with light tempererature - gone. No color casts, just black, white, and a lot of gray in between.

that's the main reason they shot clerks on b&w according to some kevin smith interviews i've read. they had to mix available light, which was fluorecents and daylight, with tungsten movie lights, and there was no way they could keep the color temperature constant. (i don't quite agree though. mixed light is cool, especially in a suburban setting. look at primer or punch drunk love for example)

Plusx or trix, that's a tough call. I'd opt for trix however, since it would spare you a lot of that lighting trouble.

if you have lights and want a low key look anyway i'd go for plus-x. tri-x will be easier to light for, but it's super grainy. i even avoid it in 16mm because of the grain, unless that's what i'm after of course.

/matt

[mattias]

the problem of questions like "how should i light it?" is that they take so much time to respond, as there is no "yes" or "no".. and i sit in front of the computer too often anyway. if anybody wants to come over and discuss things over a cup of coffee, i'd gladly talk about b/w lighting for an hour or two.

i fully agree, but we don't have to cover everything, right? the color temperature thread this has turned into seems like a good sized chunk, don't you think?

/matt

[sunrise]

Plusx or trix, that's a tough call. I'd opt for trix however, since it would spare you a lot of that lighting trouble.

if you have lights and want a low key look anyway i'd go for plus-x. tri-x will be easier to light for, but it's super grainy. i even avoid it in 16mm because of the grain, unless that's what i'm after of course.

We used tri-x on "nowhere near alright" to be able to get that natural lighting look. We only used a small kino as a fill light and extra powerfull lightbulbs in excisting lamps. The grain issue was mentioned, but it really didn't seem to bother people.

Also the low contrast scanning helped a lot.

michael

[ccortez]

look at primer or punch drunk love for example)

haven't seen primer, but i agree re: punch drunk love, a much cooler looking movie than it was given credit for.

i've been shooting plus-x and tri-x lately and really like them both. there is more difference between the two besides grain size/quality isn't there? i see the grain difference of course, but there are other quality differences that i recognize but don't have the lingo or knowledge to explain... :oops:

[mattias]

i haven't used the new plus-x, but to me the main difference besides the grain is that plus-x has deeper blacks (i'm not sure how since tri-x is even contrastier, but it's still fairly obvious) and a smoother curve before burning out. and edges seem cleaner too, a little like the fuji color negatives. hey, i'd even say that tri-x looks like kodak and plus-x like fuji. would anybody understand what i meant then?

/matt

[paul]

no

[jean]

hmm, giving it a second thought, after reading the replies, I'd opt for plus-x in case you are looking for less grain and more tonality. As said before, I haven't used the new emulsion, so I can only tell how the old one looks - but the increased speed could help a lot for indoor use.

For the lighting itself, well that of course depends entirely on the look you want and the rooms you're going to film in. If you haven't much experience I'd recommend to experiment with the lighting until you have the look you want, and make proofs with a camcorder or digicam, either in a similar room or if you have access to it, in the location before actually shooting. It's also a good idea to check exposure with a lightmeter (contrast!) at that point, so you can be sure that the film can handle it. That way you know what youre doing and save your crew and actors a lot of time, and focus on the acting and story.

If it's the first time you do b/w, don't forget that its b/w! Sounds silly, but the color contrasts we take for granted ad see through the viewfinder like red/green, yellow/blue are now gone,and you have to compose in terms of light and shadow, textures and shapes.

[mattias]

no

with all due respect i said anybody and not everybody, and the only possible answer to the question is yes, or you can't really answer at all. i sort of figured that not everybody in the whole world would understand. :-)

/matt