Correct tungsten stock to daylight

Hi guys,

I have a straightforward question which might sound dull but since I will have to correct my stuff on resolve myself here it is : I'm shooting a little test shoot on film on my Arri IIC and I didn't want to spend more in new stock as I have tons of tungsten-balanced in my fridge, so I decided not to use an 85 filter and color correct the tungsten-balanced footage to daylight in post.

Is that possible in resolve, and how is the color rendition ? Are the skin tones strongly affected by this process ?

I love Resolve but usually do LUTS and basic color grading only, so I just wanna know what would be the best workflow to grade this tungsten balanced footage.

Thanks in advance for all your help !

I've done it many times, but it doesn't look as good as shooting it with the correct filter. What happens is that one of the emulsion layers gets hit harder than it should, so you wind up getting a kind of lopsided color balance. Even when you even out the exposure, the resultant flesh tones are not as good.

It does help if you shoot a grayscale chart or a color reference chart with a known standard. But it's not ideal. Can it be acceptable? Yes. There are $50 million movies shot on film that got away with it for some scenes. (I can think of a few I've worked on where filters accidentally got left out on B and C cameras, and somehow we made it all work in post.)

I would look at the Offset controls for initially balancing out whites and blacks, then use curves and possibly some Primaries to fine-tune the correction. That's assuming the actual exposure is reasonable.

Thanks so much Marc ! What about a simple change of color temperature in kelvin in the raw settings ?

film does not have raw settings, it has a scanner operator.... but if one layer is underexposed, and the other two slightly overexposed, then all a scanner op can do is minimise the damage, the damage has already been done in camera...

Marc has a good suggestion - use a filter and get it a close to right as you can in camera

even if the neg was scanned in some kind of theoretical RAW format, it would still have to be relative to some baseline color temperature. As it is, we can only work with what the DMin/DMax values are for the cumulative stack of dye layers.
Its the same argument as the Kelvin slider for non-RAW formats.

use of an 85 to correct back down to tungsten-biased stock makes a difference of around a stop, but unless your freezer-cache of film has really lost its snap, one stop should almost be irrelevant for some of the later 250 - 500 ISO EASTMAN Vision emulsions. An almost constant scenario for golden hour shots was where the crew lost the light on about take three or four, threw away the 85 to get the T-setting back, and relied on the telecine artist to match the takes. Pretty routine.

jPo

An almost constant scenario for golden hour shots was where the crew lost the light on about take three or four, threw away the 85 to get the T-setting back, and relied on the telecine artist to match the takes. Pretty routine.

Yep, that happened a zillion times to me in the 1980s and 1990s. "Oh, we've lost the light, so pull the filters!" And the color goes to hell. My memory is that blue/yellow balance got hit pretty hard, and the blue channel would get very noisy whenever they shot it wrong. Nothing you could do in those days could really bring it back to normal. We could pound on the settings, even with charts, but the resultant picture looked a little "odd."

Even with curves and keys today, I think it would be dicey. Art Adams did a terrific essay on the problems of using Red Cameras (which are optimized for daylight) with tungsten lighting:

http://www.dvinfo.net/article/ultra-hd/ ... rence.html

The color chart photos show precisely what I saw on film in the 1980s and 1990s: you can force the image to look normal on a scope, but the color balance is kind of "lumpy" and unnatural in some ways.

Thanks so much for all the details guys. I will actually get DPX files and I've never been working with them before. Could you help me on which is the best workflow to work with them going the roundtrip from Resolve to FCPX back to Resolve ?

Thanks very much in advance !
Looking forward to hear from you guys.

Best,

Ben

Ps : and can I apply cinnamon LUTS ?

LUTs ain't gonna hack it. You need an experienced colorist, time, experience, and (preferably) charts. LUTs are not the answer.

LUTs ain't gonna hack it.

I've floated the opinion a couple of times that every correction, in a sense, is a LUT. Its just a transform.

A pre-built mired shift down from tungsten-exposed-under daylight would still have to take into account what Marc was talking about, which is that the already-lumpy spectral response of the dye layers has also been slightly burnt. For OCN, the minus-blue layer (which can be indistinguishable under some circumstances from the amber backing layer) is just going to be uncharacteristically dense all along its response curve, pushing it out of its normal relationship with the other layers. How far depends on so many factors, it would be more probable to win a power ball lottery than have a LUT pull it back in.

Starting with the age of the stock, how far the exposure was from the LAB aim points, lens flare, actual ambient color temperature, processing chemical accuracy, temperature, bath speed...

jPo

I've floated the opinion a couple of times that every correction, in a sense, is a LUT. Its just a transform.

Well, what I mean is that if they try to go out and buy a LUT online for a low, low $29.95, it's not going to solve the problem. Yes, a color-correction is a LUT in a sense, but I prefer the strict definition that it transforms the color space and/or gamma range of the material. I'm not sure a LUT could be made that would automatically simulate the lack of an 85 filter under any circumstance, because too much changes in an unpredictable way depending on how far off the exposure is. My theory was always that because the blue emulsion layer was at the top, it got overloaded the fastest in camera negative. Blue certainly went to hell first, that much I can say for sure.



I can recall several conversations back in the day with some of our top Technicolor engineers, and they pretty much agreed that -- when backed into a corner -- a LUT can be anything you want it to be. In effect, a color-correction system could be regarded as an infinite LUT... depending on your intentions.

I want the "Bad Lighting -> Good Lighting" LUT. That would make my life much easier.

and then add to that the variables brought on by whom ever is scanning the neg...

i also have had the fun of correcting late in the day w/o filter shots, heat fogged shots, lab bath temp off shots, old stock fogged shots...

i keep one shot around from 2004 just cause it was such a PITA, scanned at Deluxe, London the DP paid for himself it to be re-scanned at Technicolor LA under his supervision... came out nearly identical

spoke to the scanner op in London and he said it was one of the worst shots he has had to work with, and wished the scanner op in LA luck... he was not going to try to get it any better.. that was a roll that the production had shipped to India for second unit, and then accedently sent the un-exposed roll on to main unit in Ireland when it should have stayed in Mumbai... heat fog and probbaly xray damage as well

anyway... yea i'd still shove a filter in there, and get it right in the first place..

and don't expect much stability out of perfect Arri2c, a worn one will wiggle the film around like a hula dancer.. so take care on shots that might need stablisation, with the amount of warp in the gate of that camera getting a stabilier to work in post is dicey

Hi guys ! Two things.
First, sorry for writing cinnamon when I meant cineon ! (Damn you iphone autocorrect !)
Second, thanks for all your input, but I just wanna let you know what I shot is just a test shoot so I could have an idea of the Arri 2C. Even though for larger projects, I ask Fotokem to color it for me, for this test shoot I will do it myself on Resolve. But I never worked from a DPX scan.
So that's why I was looking for your advice. Also on this test shoot, no matte box so no 85 possible for my Angenieux 20-120.
So here is my question again, and please, send your knowledge my way : how to deal with the daylight dpx shot on tungsten stock ?
Thanks so much !

@Dermot : hopefully the 2C is stable enough to tell the story.

sure you can put a series9 85 on there... tape it on (carefully)

so my advice it to get the 85 on there and don't back yourself into a corner in post that you had no need to

was a working DP and operator for a years and years before switching to post and i've shot millions of feet of 35 neg... and loaded millions more as an assist...

we often shot all of splinter and second unit on features without a mattebox, as recently as 2009 i shot second unit for a feature, had a 435, Cooke 10-1 and no matte box, i got the filters in everytime.

and as much as i love the combnation of arriflex and angenieux, the 2c is a bit of a pig to operate due the viewfinder being dark and can be hard to get to, but the real deal is the motors not keeping speed, and the movement wearing and the already dodgy registration going across the line into visably annoying...

if it was me, i'd beg/borrow/steal a 435, do a fog test on every roll of the stock before comiting to useing it, but i'd keep the angeienux, those lenses look great at a 4/5.6

So that's why I was looking for your advice. Also on this test shoot, no matte box so no 85 possible for my Angenieux 20-120.

No screw-on lens filter possible? You could always use a different lens and a different camera. Trust me when I say, they're giving away film camera packages dirt cheap in LA, NY, and Chicago these days. Pennies on the dollar. Far cheaper than almost any digital package. You will always get better results shooting with the correct filter.

Or just get daylight film when you need to shoot outside, and tungsten film when you need to shoot indoors. Get a DSC color chart, which will help in the process.

So that's why I was looking for your advice. Also on this test shoot, no matte box so no 85 possible for my Angenieux 20-120.

No screw-on lens filter possible? You could always use a different lens and a different camera. Trust me when I say, they're giving away film camera packages dirt cheap in LA, NY, and Chicago these days. Pennies on the dollar. Far cheaper than almost any digital package. You will always get better results shooting with the correct filter.

Or just get daylight film when you need to shoot outside, and tungsten film when you need to shoot indoors. Get a DSC color chart, which will help in the process.

Thanks Marc, I actually own the Arri 2C and the Angenieux and the reason why I shot this test shoot on tungsten balanced stock is because I had a lot of recalls on my hands, and most are 200T and 500T. I dropped my rolls at Fotokem so I'll let you know when I get my 2K DPX. Thanks again for all the advice !

Good luck! The guys at Fotokem in Burbank are terrific and will know how to get the most out of the scans. Don't forget to shoot color charts if possible.

Good luck! The guys at Fotokem in Burbank are terrific and will know how to get the most out of the scans. Don't forget to shoot color charts if possible.

Thanks! (too kind.)

Thanks Marc, I actually own the Arri 2C and the Angenieux and the reason why I shot this test shoot on tungsten balanced stock is because I had a lot of recalls on my hands, and most are 200T and 500T. I dropped my rolls at Fotokem so I'll let you know when I get my 2K DPX. Thanks again for all the advice !

If you pass by check if I'm not supervised, We can chat few minutes if you like!.

w.


(I'm San Andreas finishing rush ATM...)

I have a similar issue, I've been handed a scan of an IP that was on negative stock, it has the heavy orange cast. The scanning company doesn't exist any more, so all I have to go on is the files, no LUTs no information, just an image sequence in glorious orange-vision.

Rebalancing is going to be a lot of fun I think...

it's been a long time, but from memory - if it's an ip then you have to invert it, i think in resolve it called xsfx or something similar... that orange thing is to be expected

I don't think inverting would work, as it is a positive image on negative stock.
But if there is a fast way to handle it, I'm all ears!

I don't think inverting would work, as it is a positive image on negative stock.
But if there is a fast way to handle it, I'm all ears!

again from memory, IP stock is diffrent from IN stock.... man it's been far too long - maybe a decade since i had to think about this last!

Some like to shoot tungsten without filtration...

"Lubezki shot Tree of Life with two tungsten-balanced Kodak Vision2 negatives, 500T 5218 and 200T 5217, going to the faster stock when the light was low. He did not use an 85 filter because it “homogenizes” the complex color. Instead, he prefers to color balance in the timing."

To change the white balance and exposure of flat scanned film in Resolve, you'd use the offset control, it simulates the printer lights process. Turn on "Printer lights hotkeys" in the color menu, so you can use the numpad to dial in your "printer points".

Some like to shoot tungsten without filtration...

"Lubezki shot Tree of Life with two tungsten-balanced Kodak Vision2 negatives, 500T 5218 and 200T 5217, going to the faster stock when the light was low. He did not use an 85 filter because it “homogenizes” the complex color. Instead, he prefers to color balance in the timing."

Thanks for the quote Jussi ! The funny thing is that I shot it all on 200T 5217 and was looking for these creamy highlights and pale but naturalistic skin tones. I'll let you know as my grad of it evolves.

Good luck! The guys at Fotokem in Burbank are terrific and will know how to get the most out of the scans. Don't forget to shoot color charts if possible.

Thanks! (too kind.)

Thanks Marc, I actually own the Arri 2C and the Angenieux and the reason why I shot this test shoot on tungsten balanced stock is because I had a lot of recalls on my hands, and most are 200T and 500T. I dropped my rolls at Fotokem so I'll let you know when I get my 2K DPX. Thanks again for all the advice !

If you pass by check if I'm not supervised, We can chat few minutes if you like!.

w.


(I'm San Andreas finishing rush ATM...)

Walter ! I just saw your message. Thanks for the offer, the scan was actually set up for today 3pm. What about trying to catch up and talk when I come by to pick up the hard drive (tomorrow or friday) ? And good luck on San Andreas (which is, unfortunately, the only film I won't be able to see in theaters because of my fear of earthquakes haha !)

I have a similar issue, I've been handed a scan of an IP that was on negative stock, it has the heavy orange cast.

It's trivial to do. I used to pound on the scanning guys and say "BALANCE OUT THE SCAN!" when they were doing scans for me. No way should anybody just thread up the film and push go. You have to adjust the red, green, and blue levels for that particular piece of film when it's scanned. It takes about 1 minute to do. The key is that DMIN (low signals in the toe) and DMAX (bright signals in the shoulder) are all still preserved in the log scan.

If it's a "lop-sided scan" (at least, that's what I call it when it's not balanced), you'll have to dig in with the offset controls and/or curves and/or primaries and balance it yourself, then color-correct in a subsequent node. Not impossible to do with time and skill.

Good luck! The guys at Fotokem in Burbank are terrific and will know how to get the most out of the scans. Don't forget to shoot color charts if possible.

Thanks! (too kind.)

Thanks Marc, I actually own the Arri 2C and the Angenieux and the reason why I shot this test shoot on tungsten balanced stock is because I had a lot of recalls on my hands, and most are 200T and 500T. I dropped my rolls at Fotokem so I'll let you know when I get my 2K DPX. Thanks again for all the advice !

If you pass by check if I'm not supervised, We can chat few minutes if you like!.

w.


(I'm San Andreas finishing rush ATM...)

Walter ! I just saw your message. Thanks for the offer, the scan was actually set up for today 3pm. What about trying to catch up and talk when I come by to pick up the hard drive (tomorrow or friday) ? And good luck on San Andreas (which is, unfortunately, the only film I won't be able to see in theaters because of my fear of earthquakes haha !)

Once at Fotokem, go in the main building and ask the girls at the door of me: if I'm not supervised I will pop up for a chat.

I'm out from 300p to 430p tomorrow (dentist...)