Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 (edited) This is the first time I've considered shooting on film... this would be for an effect shot, where the rest of the film will be shot on Dalsa and Red (Epic - 2009 shoot) (both shooting 2:1), If I shoot 3-perf 35mm what would be the aspect ratio? I'm sure you can tell I have no experience with 35mm (or film at all), so if this seems like a simple question or makes no sense at all, sorry. From what I was reading on the Arri website, it seems like it's 1.78:1? What if I shot 3-perf super 35? would that get me 1.85:1? Edited June 23, 2008 by Andrew McCarrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Wessberg FSF Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Hi Andrew! if you shoot 3 perf in super35 you will have the aspect ratio 1.78:1 With standard gate you will have 1.57:1, andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 Hi Andrew! if you shoot 3 perf in super35 you will have the aspect ratio 1.78:1 With standard gate you will have 1.57:1, andreas Thanks, for the response... now my question would be where do I get 3-perf 35 stock from... I can't find anything on the Kodak website. Also, I'm looking at either scanning this in for DI at 6k or 5k and then cropping to 2:1 to match the Dalsa footage. Can anyone figure out my effect resolution after the crop? I came up with 5385 (from 6k) and 4488 (from 5k) but that doesn't seem right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Thanks, for the response... now my question would be where do I get 3-perf 35 stock from... I can't find anything on the Kodak website. Also, I'm looking at either scanning this in for DI at 6k or 5k and then cropping to 2:1 to match the Dalsa footage. Can anyone figure out my effect resolution after the crop? I came up with 5385 (from 6k) and 4488 (from 5k) but that doesn't seem right. 35mm stock is 35mm stock, the shooting format is only related to the camera and how its set up. The stock can be purchased directly from Kodak or Fuji, but otherwise the camera rental firm will be able to provide stock with the rental. You will have to speak to your local Telecine facilities about scanning options and prices - 6k may turn out a little pricey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 Now... since I've never dealt with film before; I'd like to know the process of loading and unloading (step-by-step) if any one knows of any websites that covers this or anything, that would be great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Brawley Posted June 23, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2008 Now... since I've never dealt with film before; I'd like to know the process of loading and unloading (step-by-step) if any one knows of any websites that covers this or anything, that would be great. Just get an experienced loader. Why would you want to do it yourself ? It's something that can be taught in a couple of hours for a specific camera (you won't really be able to learn online or through here) but it'll take some time and practise before you become proficient. And again..why would you. That's what loaders are for. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 Just get an experienced loader. Why would you want to do it yourself ? It's something that can be taught in a couple of hours for a specific camera (you won't really be able to learn online or through here) but it'll take some time and practise before you become proficient. And again..why would you. That's what loaders are for. jb We're going to end up running 12-16 cameras so I was thinking it be cheaper (and faster) if I could do it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 (edited) We're going to end up running 12-16 cameras so I was thinking it be cheaper (and faster) if I could do it as well. Sounds expensive! I've never heard of someone running so many 35mm cameras in unison, you may have a hard time getting that many kits together! Arri magazines are very easy to load but experienced loaders will do them perfectly and swiftly and as far as I know about this, the production's insurance will be expecting a loader to be loading the magazines (though its not unusual for liberties to be taken there). If you need to learn, let the loaders talk you through it. Edited June 23, 2008 by Andy_Alderslade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 Well that's the easy effect shot... there's another one that would be upwards of 60 cameras. Would you know of product catalog from Arri that has prices in them? The 2008 catalog doesn't have prices for whatever reason. I may purchase some cameras, just because of the fact I doubt we can rent that many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Max Jacoby Posted June 23, 2008 Premium Member Share Posted June 23, 2008 You want to purchase some Arri cameras? Do you have some spare millions lying around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 Well that's the easy effect shot... there's another one that would be upwards of 60 cameras. Would you know of product catalog from Arri that has prices in them? The 2008 catalog doesn't have prices for whatever reason. I may purchase some cameras, just because of the fact I doubt we can rent that many. Also, are there any units to trigger start/run on more then one camera at once? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Wessberg FSF Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 What can I say? This sounds like an interesting shoot. 60 cameras, are you for real? I´d love to be on your set. Had five 35mm cameras once, thought that was big. Is it gonna be highspeed as well? Good luck and money,.you need it!!!!! Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 (edited) Is it gonna be highspeed as well? yep... either 48 or 72fps... It's kind of like the Matrix Style 360 camera moves in the fight sequences. I know there are easier was then using so many cameras... but I want to roll cameras in every step in the move so we can decide on the speed and starting point of the move (from camera to camera) once we have it shot. They also did something similar in Shrek.... http://youtube.com/watch?v=g3EbLlNk3kA - at 4:20 and the original in the Matrix film: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ImTs2bhmAsU - at 0:01, 0:12, 1:50, and 2:30 (I don't support piracy but, it's the only way I can think of showing what I mean.) Edited June 23, 2008 by Andrew McCarrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 yep... either 48 or 72fps... It's kind of like the Matrix Style 360 camera moves in the fight sequences. Weren't those sequences made using high numbers of 35mm stills cameras? Of course you could certainly use digital stills cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Hello anyone there ? Shrek was computer cartoon !!! . As for the yawn "Matrix" those now over used effects were done using 35 mm still cameras . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 (edited) Weren't those sequences made using high numbers of 35mm stills cameras? Of course you could certainly use digital stills cameras. Right but using still cameras forces me to decide which order to fire them off in.... instead of having the choice to pick the starting spot in post, and then having every frame of the other cameras to choose which way the move should go. Hello anyone there ? Shrek was computer cartoon !!! . As for the yawn "Matrix" those now over used effects were done using 35 mm still cameras . Yes, I know shrek was animated, but it had the same camera movement... was just using it to elaborate the physical movement of the shot. Edited June 23, 2008 by Andrew McCarrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Hello anyone there ? Shrek was computer cartoon !!! . As for the yawn "Matrix" those now over used effects were done using 35 mm still cameras . I thought they were still cameras, I have a behind the scenes picture here somewhere, I'll scan it when I get a chance. Why would you need 60 motion picture cameras? You can only see so many different camera angle at a time. The only people I imagine who would have that many 35mm motion picture cameras would be an animation company like Aardman, I here when they're not in feature production they have about 50 Fries Mitchel's pilled up in storage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 (edited) Why would you need 60 motion picture cameras? You can only see so many different camera angle at a time. Put each camera right next to each other, and jump cut from one to the next but with motion picture cameras, as opposed to still cameras, I have all the cameras having the same frames.... so I could freeze frame and rotate around, or slow motion and rotate around.... I can change the speed of the rotation and the direction of the rotation. Edited June 23, 2008 by Andrew McCarrick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Holland Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 This is so silly i really think you ought to go away have a big think about what you are saying !! . Do you think huge budget films like "Matrix" , might have had thoughts about what you are suggesting ??? . This is to stupid for words . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Put each camera right next to each other, and jump cut from one to the next but with motion picture cameras, as opposed to still cameras, I have all the cameras having the same frames.... so I could freeze frame and rotate around, or slow motion and rotate around.... I can change the speed of the rotation and the direction of the rotation. But wouldn't digital stills cameras (set up to take a quick succession of frames) do the job better for a fraction of the price. Not only do you have to source 60 35mm motion picture cameras, which is no small feat, you will have to source 60 identical lenses. It seems for great special effects shots, you need to know exactly what you want before you do it, there is no room for choice or even coverage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 But wouldn't digital stills cameras (set up to take a quick succession of frames) do the job better for a fraction of the price. Not only do you have to source 60 35mm motion picture cameras, which is no small feat, you will have to source 60 identical lenses. It seems for great special effects shots, you need to know exactly what you want before you do it, there is no room for choice or even coverage! This would mean that we need a still camera capable capturing 6 frames a second for the shot with 12 cameras because it's suppose to be a 6 second slow motion shot. As far as I know most stills cut out around 3 or 4 frames a second at any decent resolution. And 12 still cameras would have to be rigged to capture 12 frames of 144 in two seconds (6fps), so that we get two full seconds of 72 frames. And I guess the thing I left out is the first camera in the sequence needs to ramp from 24 to 72 (for motion picture cameras). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Nikon D3; Canon 1DMkIII, (in JPEG fine: buffer limits in RAW are 17 for D3, I think 30 for the Canon) -Sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 Nikon D3; Canon 1DMkIII, (in JPEG fine: buffer limits in RAW are 17 for D3, I think 30 for the Canon) -Sam The D3 would be the only option, the 1D doesn't have enough rez. It's just the D3s are $5k each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew McCarrick Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 It's just now this is concerning me: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=21692 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Alderslade Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 This would mean that we need a still camera capable capturing 6 frames a second for the shot with 12 cameras because it's suppose to be a 6 second slow motion shot. As far as I know most stills cut out around 3 or 4 frames a second at any decent resolution. And 12 still cameras would have to be rigged to capture 12 frames of 144 in two seconds (6fps), so that we get two full seconds of 72 frames. And I guess the thing I left out is the first camera in the sequence needs to ramp from 24 to 72 (for motion picture cameras). To be honest what your explaining is complicated to follow without a diagram. Either way though you need to speak to an experienced special effects supervisor and if you do need to source 12 MP camera kits and 12 identical lenses, then needs be - but it will be a challenge, not because there aren't a lot of camera's and lenses out there but because these camera and lenses are so expensive and so in demand they don't sit on shelves, they're constantly being used. And the general rule of special effects is that shots are designed down to the millimeter not just hours before shooting, but weeks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now