your personal preferences...

[David Mullen ASC]

The older Hawk "C" Series ("C" for "compact" now) are at Clairmont. The new Hawk "V" Series are twice as large and heavy, but with less barrel distortion. It's the new Hawk V Series that are about the size of Primo anamorphics (and Arriscopes.)

[Max Jacoby]

The 50mm Primo is about 7 kilos. That's basically like shooting with a zoom up front <_<

The 50mm Hawk V-Series is definitely lighter than that, around 4 kilos 'only'.

[Eric Steelberg ASC]

Maybe they felt as heavy as the Primos because they were on the front of an LT. Anyway they're huge. And if the Vs are supposed to have less barrel distortion than the Cs, I'd hate to see the Cs. It was such a problem that we had agency people asking of the curvature was going to look the same 'on film.' The director, who is also a DP sometimes, begged me to try out these lenses though I had been pushing for Super35.

 

A couple of Brits kept talking about this one uber anamorphic set of lenses that Joe Dunton (?) made that is supposed to technically be the best anamorphs in the world. Any one know about this?

[Max Jacoby]

Well there is this 'Mini Crystal Set' that he has on his website which appeared only recently, in addition to the Millenium Set (adapted Cooke S3s) and Speedstar Set (adapted Superspeeds). I have no idea what those lenses are, I heard rumors a couple of years ago that he was adapting Cooke S4s, but never had any confirmation.

 

An Arricam LT with Hawks V-Series is going to be frontheavy and definitely uncomfortable to operate in handheld mode.

[David Mullen ASC]

Today I was shooting with the 35mm Primo anamorphic, which definitely bends things on the extreme sides but I don't always mind that -- sort of reminds me of a pseudo-Cinerama effect... Other times, I switched to the 40mm Primo anamorphic, which is fairly undistorted. I was shooting a shot of the Delaware River and the 35mm Primo anamorphic created a slight smiley-face curvature which bothered me, so I switched to a slightly longer lens.

 

"Best" anamorphics is a somewhat elusive quality considering the clearly there's a connection between size, weight, distortion, etc. Some will value one quality more than another, depending on the project.

 

Anamorphic lenses have just unique visual quirks that if you aren't fond of them, you're better off with Super-35. To me, that's almost too easy!

[Max Jacoby]

Anamorphic lenses have just unique visual quirks that if you aren't fond of them, you're better off with Super-35.  To me, that's almost too easy!

I too prefer anamorphic over Super35. A Super35 frame looks wide, but flat. To me it doesn't have any real character. Anamorphic feels much more 3 dimensional, it makes you feel more part of the action. I supppose the improved grain and sharpness help as well.

 

On 'Girl with a Perarl Earring', which was shot on Super35, the printed rushes looked incredibly nice, but when I saw the film in a theatre, I was a bit disappointed, because there is a noticeable quality drop-off due to the blow-up.

 

Of course setting up shots is completely different depending on which format you use. I think Michael Mann is one of the few people who really exploits the possibilites of Super35 framing. He does things that you just couldn't do with anamorphic.

[David Mullen ASC]

I've been watching "Heat" again recently because it has so much low-light anamorphic photography. There is some visual inconsistency because of that but the movie is so visually interesting it doesn't really matter. Mann and his DP's really push the limits of anamorphic, Super-35, and HD photography, breaking a lot of the "rules". I think he basically wants a certain shot and doesn't want to hear things like "but these lenses perform best at T/4" or "but I'll have to push-develop this scene and it won't match the previous scene" or "but we'll get some noise and compression artifacts"... Sort of proves the point that it's better to be interesting than to be perfect.

[Max Jacoby]

That's why I am looking forward to Mann's next film, 'Collateral', which he shot mainly on the Viper. I am not a fan of HD at all, but I am curious what he will do with it.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> Sort of proves the point that it's better to be interesting than to be perfect

 

This is the assumption I've always worked under. Shooting mainly DV, I'd always much rather that it looked right and looked interesting, and deal with noise and artifacts, than have it be technically perfect but dull. This may be a violent counter-reaction from the vast majority of dramatic film shooting in the UK, which is ex-BBC, grey-haired, 2K-over-camera, utterly colourless and uninteresting.

 

Phil

[DanStewart]

Agreed! Unfortunately we also now have too much 'kind of like Dogme' DV crap too, where people think the answer is to go to the other extreme - no lights, no design.

 

I may be up for a C4 show that does precisely this, so I shouldn't throw stones, but it is so nice to see shooters with the confidence to do what is right for the story without having to resort to gimmicks or generic approaches to justify the work.

 

But I should note that some of the people I most respect in the UK are indeed grey haired and in at least one case ex BBC :D

[Eric Steelberg ASC]

Despite it's quirks, the anamorphic format is still the ultimate in HD, save for 65mm. I was talking to one of the ACs that was on Collateral who said they were having alot of problems using that camera in a real world situation, part of which led to the departure of the original DP well into the shoot. Aparently Mann is known for being extremely hard on his DPs. And yes, he does like to take advantage of different formats, even within a film if he thinks even 1 shot can benefit from it, such as the night exterior HD stuff in the beginning of Ali. It'll be interesting to see.

 

The best print I've ever seen was of True Lies, which was Super 35, on opening night at the Mann Village in Westwood. Absolutely flawless.

[Mitch Gross]

The best print I've ever seen was of True Lies, which was Super 35, on opening night at the Mann Village in Westwood. Absolutely flawless.

When I saw the restored "Lawrence of Arabia" at the Zeigfield in New York it brought tears to my eyes. And when I later saw "Far and Away" at the same theater the image seemed to just peel off the screen. Just lovely.

[Max Jacoby]

I was talking to one of the ACs that was on Collateral who said they were having alot of problems using that camera in a real world situation, part of which led to the departure of the original DP well into the shoot.

The same thing happened on 'Last of the Mohicans', where Dante Spinotti replaced Douglas Milesome after some 4 weeks.

 

Emmanuel Lubezki didn't exactely have the greatest time on 'Ali' either, but I felt his cinematography in that film was extraordinairy nonetheless.

[Kevin Zanit]

When I was on Collateral (just visiting) things seemed tricky due to the car rigs, and the new formats . . . but at the same time, everyone (in camera) seemed to be pretty happy with how things were going. Big show.

 

I came in after Paul Cameron left, and Dion Beebe steeped in.

 

I to agree it will be very interesting to see the mixed media.

 

 

Kevin Zanit

[Mitch Gross]

The same thing happened on 'Last of the Mohicans', where Dante Spinotti replaced Douglas Milesome after some 4 weeks.

I believe this had something to do with the film going union during production. Who would think anyone could get away with a $35M production in the US without being union?

[Max Jacoby]

I believe this had something to do with the film going union during production.  Who would think anyone could get away with a $35M production in the US without being union?

Really? What is the reasoning behind such a move? I have no experience with American union rules, but it sounds incredibly narrow-minded that if your film goes union, and your Dop isn't in it, you cannot keep shooting with him.

 

And if they had $35M, why didn't they go union from the beginning?

[David Mullen ASC]

It seems more likely it was Mann, not the union, that caused the change in DP's. One rumor I've heard was that Mann insisted that the woods be shot in available light but when he saw the footage, thought it looked boring. Dante Spinotti later arrived with a bunch of Dinos and lit up the woods with strong shafts of light, etc. That's just one story. I've talked to Doug Milsome -- a great guy -- many times but it's never seemed appropriate to ask him what happened on that movie.

[Max Jacoby]

It seems more likely it was Mann, not the union, that caused the change in DP's. ... I've talked to Doug Milsome -- a great guy -- many times but it's never seemed appropriate to ask him what happened on that movie.

That seems far more likely, especially since Spinotti was supposed to do the film from the beginning, but had to step down because of a scheduling conflict.

 

I have yet to meet Douglas Milesome, but he worked several times with Stanley Kubrick, who was one of the most demanding directors out there. That deserves respect. I know several people here in the UK who got offered jobs on Kubrick's films but were afraid to take them.

 

One other famous Dop that I have worked with freely told me that he quit a job, because the director, who started out as a Dop and still lights features, kept on telling him how to light the scenes.

[Mitch Gross]

The union issues on the film were well documented and reported in the trades. It was a choice by the producers as Noth Carolina is a "right to work" state. But the production was picketted and shutdown for a few days. I don't think Milsome particularly got in trouble with the union as much as it became an unsavory situation and combined with other factors he felt it best to leave the production.

 

DPs being replaced on features is far more common than most realize. Some of these are top flight DPs who are nice people and friendly with their producers and directors, but for whatever reasons the situation just isn't working out. I know that Roger Deakins is generally considered to be a very mild-mannered fellow who gets along with everyone very well, especially talent. Yet when there were production delays and issues during the shooting of "Nobody's Fool," Deakins was replaced by John Bailey. And the director even noted that it was especially hard because he did and still considers Deakins a friend.

[Jayson Crothers]

While AC'ing for Jack Cooperman, ASC, he told me "You're not a success until you've been fired off of at least three big shows." A number of cinematographers I've spoken with tell about being fired off of shows for reasons that had nothing to do with them; the proverbial sacrifical lamb - so here's to all of us being fortunate enough to be fired a few times in the years to come!

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

> And if they had $35M, why didn't they go union from the beginning?

 

I have no idea, but I'd guess that they wanted to have a significant portion of that left to spend on something other than below the line crew?

 

I don't understand this at all. US productions seem to run under the union system only if they can afford it. Doesn't that suggest that the union is doing nothing more than hoovering a big chunk of wages off into its own coffers? Well, okay, it's not really in question that it absolutely does do that, I'd just question why it suddenly becomes worth putting up with this once you have a certain amount of money.

 

Phil

[David Mullen ASC]

I don't get the logic here -- you're seriously asking why big-budget films should worry about going union??? You mean, the union should be reserved for only small-budget films?

 

Why do you think someone with 35 million dollars should be prepared to deal with the union -- because in theory they can afford to pay union rates. Unless you think a 35mm million dollar film should pay the same wages as a 1 million dollar film.

 

Unions don't survive if they follow the principle that ONLY abusive producers who pay unfair wages should be forced to go union. The idea is protection from potential abuse by the power of collective bargaining, which isn't possible if every crew person is working as a free agent. Then it becomes every man for himself and ultimately, anyone who complains is just fired and replaced by someone who won't complain.

 

I just qualified for the health plan in the union, the first time in my career (mostly not in the union) that a health care plan has even been possible on my own (I've relied on my wife's health care plan up till now.) If I were still outside of the union, and not married, I'd either be uninsured or paying through the nose for basic coverage. And finally I have a pension plan in place because of the union. It's not really the top DP's in the industry that need a union -- they all make huge salaries anyway -- it's the average worker who spends their whole career being a grip or camera assistant.

 

In a country like the U.K. where you have more social services like national health care, it may seem less understandable why people need unions still. You've got the government providing a basic fallback system.

[Max Jacoby]

A couple of Brits kept talking about this one uber anamorphic set of lenses that Joe Dunton (?) made that is supposed to technically be the best anamorphs in the world. Any one know about this?

I spoke to JDC today, they only have adapted Cooke S3s and Superspeeds. Although they are hoping to adapt Cooke S4s as well, but they need the cooperation from Cooke for that.

[Mitch Gross]

On a union shoot the production has to pay "fringes," which are the payments to the Pension & Welfare funds of the union organization. That pays for people in their old age, or when they need medical assistance. So someone can be working non-union and getting the same wage as on a union picture, but money is not going into his or her P&W fund, which is a very important way in which the union benefits its members.

[Eric Steelberg ASC]

Hmm. Maybe it wasn't JDC they were talking about then. Or it was and they don't know what they're talking about...probably the latter.

 

Anamorphic S4s would be interesting. I wonder if they'd still retain the spherical's awesome resolution and contrast at T*2.

 

Again, unions benefit the industry all around.

 

David: I thought being an active member (industry experience roster) qualified one for benefits, no? I hate the people at contract services.