What will be interesting for me at least is seeing a print from Ortho 80 Plus and the same print from say FP4+ with an "ortho" filter. Will they be noticeably different or close enough to make Ortho Plus not worth the bother and expense of buying it?Here is the filter they made for us. Luckily, double-X is dead before 700nm.
Jarin
On the strength of this thread we went to the movie today. While the story line was not to my wife's taste the cinematography and lighting was outstanding. I am quite chuffed that you asked for our help two years ago. I hope you get well deserved recognition for this. This movie really should be up for best cinematographer.Thanks guys. The film comes out Friday, and expands to more theaters on the 25th.
Eventually, Schneider optics made a filter to my specifications! 4x5" and 6x6" sizes for our camera's matte boxes. It passes light at >95% from UV up until 570nm, then suddenly hard cuts down to nothing. I got a true Ortho look and it cost me only a stop of light (actually 5/6ths stop).
Jarin
Any other suggestions? Maybe compare blue vs. green sensitive x-ray film and see which is closest to that old ortho film look?
+1Jarin -- Congratulations on the Oscar nomination for best cinematography for your work on The Lighthouse.
Still interested in this if anyone has two examples to compare and contrast ThanksWhat will be interesting for me at least is seeing a print from Ortho 80 Plus and the same print from say FP4+ with an "ortho" filter. Will they be noticeably different or close enough to make Ortho Plus not worth the bother and expense of buying it?
pentaxuser
For some reason when I go to that site the pictures don't show.You mean like this?
http://www.ottogreule.com/blog/2018/4/4/revisiting-ortho
(Though no attempt to match the panchromatic film to the ortho.)
For some reason when I go to that site the pictures don't show.
For some reason when I go to that site the pictures don't show.
...unfortunately not a comparison between Ilford Ortho Plus or any Ortho film and FP4+ or any Pan film with the ortho filter that Jarin uses...
Go buy some respooled 5366/2366 or 5302/2302 Kodak from the Film Photography Project.
...
It's blue sensitive; not strictly Ortho, but close enough...
Or I could get some "real" orthochromatic film and not have to shoot on ISO 1-6 blue sensitive film, right? Note that the goal here is to find a filter that most closely simulates the vintage orthochromatic look using panchromatic film, nothing else.
Obviously Jarin has already done an excellent job on this and is being recognized by his fellow cinematographers for it. I don't want to hijack this discussion--my goal is to simply find something that is within the reach of most photographers.
Right. In addition, the FP4+ was shot with a yellow filter so it is already going the opposite direction of where we want to go. So never mind that example.
Or I could get some "real" orthochromatic film and not have to shoot on ISO 1-6 blue sensitive film, right? Note that the goal here is to find a filter that most closely simulates the vintage orthochromatic look using panchromatic film, nothing else.
Obviously Jarin has already done an excellent job on this and is being recognized by his fellow cinematographers for it. I don't want to hijack this discussion--my goal is to simply find something that is within the reach of most photographers.
I was doing some further research and found this:
The Kodak publication pointed out by @alanrockwood makes this easier to visualize, note the dip in the 500 nm area:
Now let's look at some of the off the shelf filters starting with the Kodak Wratten 44A that has been mentioned several times.
A couple of issues with this filter are the cutoff in the UV portion (I'm still not sure why this is a problem) and even at the peak sensitivity it is eating up half the light. Still, this is a relatively common filter worth checking out.
Schneider does have some shortpass filters but I couldn't find one that according to Jarin is, "a hard chop of all wavelengths longer than about 580 nm."
However, Edmund Optics does have one:
It is available in 50mm size, unmounted. Not ideal but doable. However, the issue here is the cost, $465.00 plus tax and shipping. That's a bit too much for my little amateur experiment.
Now let's take another look at the filter Jarin ended up using:
This has some dips and bumps, though not in exactly the right places but maybe it doesn't need to be a super precise shortpass filter? I found a very close match:
This one is priced within my reach, $35 plus tax and shipping for a 50mm sized filter so I went ahead and ordered one. Once I have all the filters and film in my possession I'll run the test. Hopefully something interesting comes out of this though I doubt it will be an Oscar nomination.
BTW--I also contacted Schneider to see if it is possible to get a piece of the same filter they made for Jarin. I am located in the Los Angeles area so maybe they'll let me borrow it for this test?
To be continued...
Sorry our suggestions were no spot on for you; you may have a refund at any moment.
OH and you DID hijack the thread, as Jarin did find a solution which is available to all (despite the cost), so how about starting another thread to keep from confusing the issue?
Thanks and in the future, I'll know not to make suggestions to you on your exacting posts.
Cheers.
Considering that Double-X film is not sensitive to the far red and infared spikes of our Schneider filter, it worked perfectly. (In the end, they combined it with a hot mirror so conceivably Panavision could rent it to clients who shoot digitally.) In pursuit of the most ragged skin tones possible, I wanted to utilize as much UV light as I could. Unfortunately, our filter’s base glass itself cuts out UV light shorter than 350nm so I figure our spectrogram was as good as it gets.
The biggest restriction is that motion picture equipment requires either 4x5 or 6x6 inch filters. 50mm filters from Edmund are thus a non option. However, we did basic tests with the little guy taped inside the lens while we waited for our filters to be made (1 month).
I also had a mandate that the filter could only cost one stop of light, so a hard chop was mandatory. Movies require 1/48 second exposures (faster for slow motion), and Double X is not a fast film. No wavelength gets close to 100% transmission with the 44A, so that was another reason that the inefficient filter was a non-starter for us.
J
In the end, they combined it with a hot mirror so conceivably Panavision could rent it to clients who shoot digitally.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?