New Film Online

Frank DiBugnara · August 29, 2006

I finally got a cut of a short I've been working on and thought I'd post it. I'm always grateful to those on this forum who are willing to share advice and knowledge, especially when projects are in pre-production and important decisions are being made.

www.filmblu.com

Here's some technical specs:

Camera: SR3 Advanced

Lenses: Mostly Zeiss MK2 prime set (9.5 to 85) and a Zeiss 12 to 120 zoom

Stock: 7218 process normal

Transfer: Standard Def Spirit/DaVinci to DigiBeta

Shoot length: 1 Day (12 hours) with actual darkness/shooting time of about 7.5 hours

I also learned quite a bit about creating Quicktimes to post online. Simply creating a Quicktime file from a Final Cut timeline for example will greatly milk up the blacks and reduce chroma saturation. I created a horribly crushed and oversaturated version in FCP from which I created the Quicktime. The result was a much more accurate QT, but still a bit brighter than the original intent.

Patrick McGowan · August 30, 2006

Very nice sound design.

But have you seen this? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0312843/

or this? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0249172/

Frank DiBugnara · August 30, 2006

Very nice sound design.

But have you seen this? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0312843/

or this? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0249172/

LOL...thanks

I haven't seen those other films....looks lilke from the descriptions on IMDB that the plots are pretty different....

Emmanuel Lariviere · August 30, 2006

Good work, Frank.

August 31, 2006

ƒrank,

Great work!

Would you mind talking more about what sort of units you were working with, lighting set-ups, filters and gels, how to expose for your background lights, what stop you were woring with, and all that good stuff.

Also, any complications with working on a rooftop? Lighting restrictions, or did you have units on adjacent tops, etc.

Thanks.

Chris

Edited August 31, 2006 by Christopher Wedding

September 1, 2006

Very nice Frank - What stop were you shooting at?

Frank DiBugnara · September 2, 2006

I think I decided from the beginning that shooting 13 pages in 7.5 hours would require putting up some big sources to light large areas and let the talent move within those large pools. With actors constantly moving, we ended up controlling the light by changing the position of the actors to get the fall-off more where I wanted it rather than moving the instruments. That saved a lot of time. If I could change one thing it would be creating more time to get closer with smaller instruments rather than large ones and be a little more exact with where light ends and shadows start. But overall I think we chose good places to put the big sources where the ?moon? was a back edge for one actor and a fill for another, then when they switch position the tungsten became the key, etc.

The general idea is that tungsten came from the screen right side (as you face the city) and the moon was screen left. The tungsten came from two Maxi Brutes up as high as they could go on a mombo. I would have loved to make those 20K?s instead, but I had to deal with what the gaffer carried in his truck and 5K was the largest fresnel, I think. Since I had between 4 and 8 bubbles going on each Maxi at any given time, I felt as though I needed at least Opal in front to hide the fact that there were so many sources. That ended up being a bit too soft for my taste?I would have gone with something like Hampshire on a fresnel so it would feel more like a hard street light. The Tungsten had ½ O on it also and a bunch of flags and nets to shape it as best as I could. I must say though, it is nice to be able to quickly pan a bank of globes on a Maxi or turn one on and off to instantly adjust stop.

The roof was only 30? off the ground so the basket of the 60? condor was about 30? off the roof top. We hung (2) 12K space lights which I had a hard time finding in LA ironically so I brought them from Arizona. We wrapped the space lights in ½ Blue and they ended up at 100% most of the time. They even threw a little bit of light on an adjacent building. They made a nice cheap moon?but all that gel can be noisy in the wind.

Other than that, we had a 2K chimera on a squeeze which was a quick fill when needed and a back edge for Jack when he was seated. I had a few 1K fresnels we made very soft to get into the eyes when needed. I think the general philosophy when working at such a mad pace was to make sure that the faces were on the negative. That resulted of this was leaning more toward a brighter look. The night stuff I?ve done in the past where there was more time ended up a lot moodier.

As for stop, I spot metered some of the larger lights in the skyline and it was obvious that we needed to shoot the super speeds wide open at a T1.3 and adjust everything else to that. (Side note: this is why I love my variable-degree spot meter. I can?t believe Sekonic has gone back to a fixed spot meter in recent models!) I?ve never pushed the ?18 stock, but hear others talk about the success they?ve had with that in 35mm. If I had the time, I probably would have tested a 1 stop push to get just a bit more sparkle out of the city but there was no time or money for that so I played it safe to keep tight grain. Every shot but one insert is on the superspeeds. I added the 80mm from the 35mm set and I loved it. If I had stopped at 50mm, we would have never been able to shoot tight toward the city with the T2.4 zoom.

There were really no lighting restrictions?it was an industrial part of town and we did not really spill off the roof too much. I did have about 9 par cans with VNSPs and NSPs which was a quick and easy way to pound light on some factory buildings a block or so away when they were in frame. This was basically for Jack?s background when we looked at him near the skylight.

Sorry for the long-winded response. I?ll post some production stills later this week if I get them.

September 2, 2006

Sorry for the long-winded response. I?ll post some production stills later this week if I get them.

Long winded? That was great! Thanks very much for your detailed response.

Best,

Chris

September 2, 2006

Long winded? That was great! Thanks very much for your detailed response.

Best,

Chris

Agreed, thanks Frank.

Toby L Edwards · September 11, 2007

Frank'

I cought this at the Phoenix Film Fest last year. I thought the cinemotography was amazing and by far the best short. It was nice to see an amazing picture among all the washed out Digital stuff. Not sure what Digital projector they used but based on the link you provided it did you no justice.

I hope to see more of your work next year. The acting was pretty amazing to.

Toby