Tony Brown

You'd be surprised. I shot some running footage for the Lexus ISF at the Fuji Speedway a couple of years ago. It was jointly commisioned by Lexus in Japan, US and Europe. The Americans requested we shoot it on mobile phones....... We shot 35mm :)

Sorry to be thick but why do you need a colour chart when shooting.....? or any other time for that matter unless trying to calibrate two monitor In 35 years I've never seen one used

Soho is so sterile these days.... ;)

Karl.... I think Johns tongue was rather obviously, firmly, in cheek....

Thats very funny Stephen.... my era also I was often instructed to rip off 30' of 5254 or 5247 beacuase the emulsion number was different to the existing batch and could NEVER load it until the tests had come back. Just what i needed at the end of an 18 hour day.....strip tests..... I think Humphries folded, Studio Film Labs became Soho Images (there was a brothel in that (meard?) street and the girls once chased me down the road - I was terrified).... But they seemed only to do commercials in the main, mostly I dealt with technicolor and ranks.... wish I could remember the contact names....Les....?

Thank you gentlemen - good info I'm familiar with sending in strips in the old days to check for different emulsion batches being usuable ....anyone else remember doing that? Or to check for x ray damage, but never knew that Kodak supplied strips for checking the processing side Excellent - thanks again

Thanks Robert. The 'local' reps in Mumbai and Istanbul are not as helpful as they might be, this has been an ongoing issue for some time. When you say "have them send you a sensiometric test strip"....wouldn't that just involve sending them 30' of MY unprocessed stock? Thats what I've done in the past.... And could you / anyone please explain 'target gamma' Thanks

If I suspect that a particular lab is not producing results that are quite what they should be, is there a test that can be done on unexposed processed neg (in other words completely clean) that I can request and the results be compared to known specs on line? I use two labs in Mumbai and Istanbul that seem to produce consistantly 'muddy' looking negs compared to labs in other locations. Any advice, particulary from Kodak would be appreciated

Maybe it in someway compensates for the terrible processing I've experienced in Mumbai.... :rolleyes:

Hi Steve. They explained repeatedly that the cameras were set up by the suppliying companies in any way that was deemed by the accompanying techs to be to the benefit of the system, but once the test had been shot, then all files were treated equally. But surely this is the whole point with HD, you cant do that. Each system must use the workflow that optimises that system, other wise just what is this 'level playing field' that the cameras testers adhered to? At least then, the valuation is personal opinion/choice/taste and not opinion based on a flawed end product as happened yesterday

The other 'issue' with RED was the discrepancy in field of view. It was clear that the FoV was nowhere near the equivalent of 35mm ... it was almost what you'd expect to see in 3k mode I shot my first spot on RED a few weeks ago and have to say I was pleasantly surprised, after grading in Baselight at MPC in London.. it looked like film. Certainly anybody walking into the session would never have known it wasn't I'm sure. Much credit was heaped upon the film passes (repeatedly so) when the source bulb in a practical light in shot was visible as the film held the highlight which was not evident on the digital formats. However many of the digital formats saw into the shadow areas better than the film did - implying, at least in part, that this was due to exposure as much as lattitude. A thankless task this but a great deal of time and effort went into these tests and it was much appreciated. I learnt a lot, or at least learnt what I need to learn about! Workflow, workflow, workflow....... and dont shoot without an optical VF - I will choose the D21 on that fact alone for future projects the raw 16mm stuff by the way was shockingly poor, until the new Arri grain reduction process was show. That was very impressive, at least on the Kodak.

I was a little disappointed f I'm honest. Whilst i didn't expect any firm conclusions I did expect a slightly less biased slant on proceedings and I think the digital players at the gig felt a little miffed. 18 different systems were shown The base for grading was taken from Macbeth charts, which I feel was a mistake. I would have prefered the grade to match skin tones as closley as possible and let me see where the rest of the image goes. I dont go into TK and start looking at charts, I look at skin. Generally the the film shots seemed to be a little red, the digital was green, not in every case but pretty much RED was virtually laughed out of the room though the issues I saw with it seemed to be based on under exposure. It was rated at 320, but I've heard many people rate it at 160. this I think would have sorted most of the problems I saw there today. The colourist said that RED was the most difficult to match to the Macbeth chart SI 2K had some workflow issues which caused some discussion with no real conclusion The Canon 5D stood out as the wierdo. Very nice look for certain standalone shots or projects but you'd never cut in the footage to a scene shot on any other system. Almost a bleach bypass look IMO. I want one. There are no plans to make this available for download though the consensus was that this would be very useful, if only a series of stills. I agree It was pointed out by somebody who had seen the ASC tests in LA that the BSC test were far more informative.

I considered the VR glasses for my project, but it was a live pit lane at Snetterton Race Circuit. Its beyong my ability to switch from the camera image to my own eyes and back as necessary. i'd have fallen over or been run down! Also when 'acting' the 1st person trying to take (in my example) a pen to sign an autograph or a pair of race gloves from 'my' mechanic using anything other than actual vision would be a disaster. So for my project I opted to guestimate the framing, which was actually very easy. The only option was to be wired to a Panasonic Gear being worn by the Grip who was helping to guide me and watch for cars entering the pit from behind us, so the exposure was set by my assistant (and a rather over influential Post Supervisor!) at the head of the take and off we went.

Just used the iconix last weekend going onto a Panasonic Gear P2 card thingy....(?).... lenses supplied were no great but C mount so there must be options not great, very sharp and harsh. I also made the mistake of wearing the unit myself which meant monitoring the exposure was very difficult. Mistake. But for what it was, very impressed and the ability to run at 50 was useful

Whats a 'look'

Use a DIT. If the production get away with it this time they wont next. Chances are they dont have a clue what they are asking you to do. Its in all our interests (ESPECIALLY Productions) that this new workflow is handled correctly and continues to be in a professional environment Just my opinion......

If you've booked a one light you'll get a one light (therefore a waste of money)..... best lights you'll get best lights..... dont worry until the fine grade..... Never shot a grey scale in 10 years, better to get your best lights done by somebody who knows your work and call them. If a colourist cant get white white then you're using the wrong person. If white is supposed to be something else then you should call them.

Sorry to buck the bandwagon but Slumdog looked awful I'd argue its essential

Its the same as the 435... trying to quickly turn over without taking my eye from the eyepiece I'm always hitting the wrong button A lock button or sliding cover is a pretty basic requirement isn't it? My old Motorola used to switch to silent mode because of those outside buttons. Its at the bottom of the River Thame now

But right.....!

If you try to keep correct eyelines for the cut you'll go nuts. you'll sweat blood (and money) trying to get it perfect and this will have two major drawbacks. Any error will jump out and more importantly, even if you get everything 100% spot on, it will be sooooo boring. Using backs of heads as cutting points is dull and predictable I would embrace the problem and take advantage of the confusion, utilise the erratic nature to enhance the scene. If the scene is strong enough it will carry through. If in doubt then limit the angles, dont do something just because you can, it will end up like a student film exercise and consequently.......a dogs dinner. Good luck

Why would you want to use a sync camera underwater.... get an Arri 3

You're not trying hard enough. I shoot loads of Super 8 for UK productions to cut into 35mm - love it, the cheaper and naffer the camera / lens the better. Speak to Alan - he has high end and low end stuff. Super 8 Camera Company 10 Granville Gardens, Ealing Common, London W5 3PA Contact: Alan Doyle Tel: 020 8992 6451 Fax: 020 8992 6451 Mobile: 07973 225 506 Ebay's full of them. The problem is finding a Super 8 gate to get it TK'd, I think Soho Images did it for me last time

Had Lasik 5 years ago. Do it No Halos

I had the pleasure to work with him on Superman as well as his son who was operating. Jack's book was very interesting..... I envied him, despised him, liked him, respected him.....chapter by chapter. A Cinematographer and Playboy from the Golden Age Great innings Jack