Re: [Frameworks] Editing negative

2017-10-23 Thread Dave Tetzlaff
The old school workflow of workprint/conform/let the lab do the rest was premised on making a number of release prints from the conformed original. I’m assuming Esperanza asked her question because she wants to project the work from photochemical film for some reason, not digitally. The

Re: [Frameworks] Editing negative

2017-10-23 Thread Esperanza Collado
Yes, that could be a problem. I actually have a workprint, so I could perfectly work that way and avoid altering/dusting the negative. Cheers 2017-10-23 4:42 GMT+02:00 Fred Camper : > > On 10/22/2017 8:46 PM, Jeff Kreines wrote: > > We did “cull” our original (usually

Re: [Frameworks] Editing negative

2017-10-22 Thread Fred Camper
On 10/22/2017 8:46 PM, Jeff Kreines wrote: We did “cull” our original (usually reversal, back in the day) before workprinting, to save every last penny. As did big-budget Hollywood films -- that was the difference between the director ending a take with a call of “cut,“ or “cut print.“

Re: [Frameworks] Editing negative

2017-10-22 Thread Jeff Kreines
We did “cull” our original (usually reversal, back in the day) before workprinting, to save every last penny. Bob uses the word “timing” below, but be aware that that word means both the pacing/duration of shots and how the lab color-corrects a shot when printing — the person who did that

[Frameworks] Editing negative

2017-10-22 Thread Robert Withers
Esperanza, What we used to do in the old days was make a print from the negative, then edit that print changing order and timing, then match the negative to the edited print. Negative is fairly delicate and picks up dirt easily. Though in theory I guess you could rearrange takes. What would be