Hal Smith

A good website to lurk is Shane Hurlbut's, he's on the cutting edge with respect to the Canon HDSLR's http://hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/ Pay great heed to what he says when he talks about shooting with the Canon's as if you were shooting color reversal film. That's the "trick" to successfully using these cameras, with their heavy compression you don't get to "fix it in post", you've got to get it right to start with. There is a movement among the high end professionals using the Canon DSLR's to get Canon to modify the cameras in some fashion so one could record RAW information ( in effect record direct information off the sensor). That would make a huge difference in what one could accomplish with a Canon but also mean having to use a lot larger recording media like direct to hard drive.

I bought the EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM for my 7D and love it. It's not an "L" series lens but has close to "L" optical quality. It's really great for shooting from moving vehicles, the IS is bulletproof. I've shot from cars, trucks, and even a Eurocopter and got phenomenal footage. I shot video driving down the Las Vegas strip after this year's NAB that my movie fan stepson volunteered looked like something in a Hollywood movie. I plan on buying the 70-200mm F2.8 "L" lens eventually to complement the 17-55. I've got the prosumer EF-S 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS and it's a piece of junk compared to the EF-S 17-55mm. Lensrental.com rents just about all the Canon lenses which would give you a good way to thoroughly check out lenses before purchasing them.

It could also be done with a double exposure. Shoot the boy walking down the hall and seeing himself chasing her at the end of the hall as a double exposure. Careful blocking and lighting will help to sell it. I can't think of a good example right now but this sort of gag was used by Hollywood in the 1930's for dream and fantasy scenes.

What's labor law like in the UK and Canada? Down here an intern is not permitted to replace a paid employee and the intern to employee ratio is not supposed to exceed 1:1. Obviously there's a lot of places where the employer cheats but if they get caught they owe the intern back pay and the Internal Revenue Service an assortment of various taxes and penalties for money they failed to withhold and pay to the IRS. I know of companies that were such flagrant cheaters that the IRS would have filed criminal charges against them if they had caught them.

As a rule, still camera zoom lenses are not parfocal, they do not hold focus as the focal length is varied. The Canon EF/EF-S series zooms seem to be better than many others but still not absolutely parfocal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parfocal

From Kodak press release issued June 1 "KODAK VISION3 5213/7213 is a 200-speed, tungsten-balanced film. It features extended latitude, enabling cinematographers to record more details in highlights, and delivers finer grain for natural-looking images in the darkest areas. The emulsion is optimally designed for both controlled interiors and challenging high-contrast exteriors, and is available in all formats (65 mm, 35 mm, Super 16 and Super 8)." http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/about/news/2010/Jun01_1.htm

I agree that there certainly are video pros who are every bit as thorough in approaching their work as the "film guys". I too have run across a couple of film shooters who were about as prepared as a teenager with a miniDV shooting his buddies in the back yard. One cost the production a ton of money fixing things later. The other probably is bragging about how great he is to this day, completely oblivious to the fact that it was his AC, gaffer, and grip that really brought the film in. They just didn't have their eye on the viewfinder when film was rolling. I propose a new title for such people...Cinemaframer.

It's becoming apparent that the professionals shooting with the Canon DSLR's who are producing the best work with them are those who have a lot of film experience. The discipline of shooting film teaches one to check gear out, test, and then expose and frame properly on the set. In general you have to accept that you're not going to know for absolute certain how good your footage is until you see some dailies. Since the Canons have limited monitoring capability on-set the cinematographers (and AC's) who are shooting great work with them seem to be the ones who know how to focus, meter, light, compose, check out gear, etc. with film cameras. The Canons have very demanding exposure windows due to using 8-bit MPEG4 compression and the "fixing it in post" possibilities are limited as a result. I've read some horror stories of just how much time (and money) it takes to fix so-so Canon footage after the fact. My point is: When you shoot film you learn skills that will transfer nicely to what is happening today in the digital world. I've got a 7D and have been working overtime transferring what I know about shooting color reversal to the 7D. I worry about color temp, exposure, what picture quality and ISO settings (similar in effect to different film emulsions) to use, etc. One thing I love about my camera is its IS lenses, I get great shots from moving vehicles with no need for any stabilization gear other than making certain the camera is securely held in place and has some minimal vibration padding.

The Cooke Speed Panchro's come in three generations Series I, II, and III. The Series III was only made in the 18mm and 25mm wide angle lenses. The Series I's are quite a bit older and the general opinion is they're not as desirable as II and III's. For visual reference: In recent years "Milk" and "Golden Door" were shot with Speed Panchro II and III's. They used lenses rehoused in modern PL mounts but the glass is the same as Arri standard mount Panchros. They were used for their unique "old school" look. They're a bit soft by current standards (compared to lenses costing thousands and thousands of dollars) but still plenty good enough to shoot a movie slated for wide distribution. There were hundreds of movies shot with Speed Panchros "in the day" that with good prints and/or DVD/BluRay transfers stand up well against anything shot today.

I'm certain the cameramen who in the past were comfortable shooting major account commercials on 5285 aren't bothered in the least shooting with Canon HDSLR's. If they knew enough to get it in the can on the first try with color reversal they know enough to keep it between the ditches with a 1D/5D/7D. I've shot enough with my 7D now to have a pretty good feel for where its sweet spot is.

1. Used Copy of 5th Edition Elkins' book $30.00 2. New copy of 4th Edition of Elkin's book $20.10 3. Used copy of Doug's book $42.50

There are three variables in a given shot's DOF; Focal length, aperture (f-stop), and sensor (film gage) size. Angle of view is a function of focal length and sensor size. For a given shot from a given distance at a given stop you might choose a 30mm lens for a 7D. For the exact same shot from the same distance you'd put a 50mm on a 5D (31.25mm on the 7D for an exact match). Therefore the 5D shot is going to have a shallower DOF.

I got some beautiful sun flares with a 7D/EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM shooting towards the setting sun in the desert east of Las Vegas. The images had a nice balance of scenery, flare, and multiple sun images. That lens is very close to an "L" series lens in terms of glass and design so you might be best planning on using "L" lenses. You mentioned you were planning on using primes but zooms give a much more complex and interesting flared look since they're a more complicated design.

Depending on one's interpretation of all the data; If the Canon Rep said 160 one might assume that slower ISO's are the result of reduced gain. All this is getting sorted out by the pros using these cameras. Sooner or later someone will come up with the definitive native ISO for the sensor which will clear up a lot of these issues.

Two different points of view edited from cml: #1 "So yes, ISO160 has less noise than any other ISO setting BUT the dynamic range is shifted (highlights clip earlier). If the test was to compare film vs HDSLRs and we all clearly know that they suck in terms of resolution, the key point for many people watching the video was to see how close in terms of DR SLRs are compared to film. But if you started by throwing away 1/3 of a stop in order to get cleaner shadows the results are going to be misleading." ISO 100 = ISO 100 ISO 125 = ISO 100 + digital push --> more noise ISO 160 = ISO 200 - digital pull --> less noise, less dynamic range ISO 200 = ISO 200 ISO 250 = ISO 200 + digital push --> more noise ISO 320 = ISO 400 - digital pull --> less noise, less dynamic range ISO 400 = ISO 400 Miguel de Olaso Macgregor™ DP #2 "I was the one the certified the Zacuto test, we tested the image the same manner as I would for any video camera, I used a hardware scope. The only exception was that when we evaluated the content from the DSLR's we had to playback the content via the camera from the previously captured content as the live video out from any of the cameras was not ever full HD signal." "We tested both the 5D and the 7D cameras and played back the content via an aja hi-5 converter (HDMI to HDSDI ) allowing us to view the full 1080 HD signal on a Leader LV 5330 where we evaluated the content. Signal noise was examined and based on that decision that Bob Primes and I made we handled all of the cameras at their lowest ISO rating of 160 and used this number (on a suggestion from Canon's onsite rep) as the interval for all of our ISO ranges." "So we did not have some secret sauce or something special to handle the files, we just treated the signal as we would any HD Video source, our only issue was getting a proper signal out of the cameras in the first place." gary adcock Studio37 <Sarcasm ON> OH NO! You mean I have to TEST in advance of shooting? Just like the people shooting film have done since the days when Men were Men and the Movies were Silent? <Sarcasm OFF>

The whole damn world is becoming increasingly re-entrant and recursive. James Cameron now will have a personal Avatar on Mars in the form of a NASA rover. "Are you ready for your closeup now Marvin?"

Another possibility is the Mole and the Arri had bulbs with nominally different rated voltages. In some bulb sizes it's possible to buy bulbs with different voltage ratings. A bulb rated at 130 volts will last a lot longer on 120 volts but it also will put out less light and will have a lower color temperature. I'm most familar with the above principle in the HPL series bulbs my Source Four's use. I can get 120 volt HPL575WX's that actually have 130 or so volt filaments and will run 2,000 hours and put out 12,360 lumens at 3050K color temperature. I use them on theatre productions where it's nice to have bulbs that will last for a long run. But obviously I have to design for the reduced lumens per fixture. But for movie and video work I use 120 volt HPL750's that are rated at 300 hours, put out 21900 lumens and have a 3250K CT. I have some true 120 volt HPL575's that last 300 hours, put out 16520 lumens, and have a 3250K CT. Bottom line is I suspect your Mole might have some type of long life bulb in it. See if you can still read the ratings printed on the bulb. If it has an ANSI number it will be easy to research what you've got. http://www.bulbconnection.com is a good place to research bulbs.

I find it very easy to be sleazy when I portray a lawyer <_<

I do but I learned it from someone at NAB who asked that the company's name be left out of any discussion (I guess I'm under a voluntary NDA :blink: ). They've got working prototypes but have run into a snag that's probably going to be fixed. I think I know some of what they're dealing with since I've spent some time playing around with the Canon EOS Remote software and its wired version of remote focus. One issue is I found is backlash where when you try to return to a previous focus the lens doesn't quite match the earlier focus point. That's not unusual for still lenses and one of the many reasons why motion picture lenses are one heck of a lot more expensive than still lenses even when the basic optical quality is similar.

Hi John, Could you point me at a reference for this information? I know that your day job is why you know this sort of fact but I'd like to research the subject a bit.

I had the incredible luck to run into Bob while waiting for a Monorail at the Mirage stop and chatted with him on the ride, and walk into the Convention Center. He's a very good example of a "been there, done that" seasoned professional who has adopted the HDSLR technology with open arms. He knows the drawbacks and pitfalls but he also is staying at the cutting (bleeding?) edge as these cameras evolve in hardware, production technique, and post. He's in constant communication with the boys in the backrooms developing new toys and tweaks for the cameras. Damn those NDA's. PS: At the risk of sounding like a stuffed shirt, Bob is a member of the ASC and it's customary to add those initials to the member's names. It's quite an honor to be invited to membership and I think that needs to be acknowledged.

I can easily tell the difference between ABC/Disney's live 720P HD and CBS and NBC's live 1080i on my 58" Samsung plasma. The ABC footage just doesn't have the sharpness of CBS and NBC's. I making the above judgment from off-the-air, no satellite or cable service's compression and/or bandwidth limiting between me and the image. PS: The "City of Lakes" clips in the large screen Canon HD Theatre at NAB were jawdroppingly beautiful, I don't think that footage would suffer a 35mm filmout in the least.

I shot Canon 7D footage from a helicopter out and back to the Grand Canyon on my NAB "Tourist" day (I always take a day off to play). I was onboard one of Maverick Tour's smooth riding Eurocopters Eco-Star EC-130's on a perfectly clear day with light winds. I got good footage from the right front seat and only so-so footage from the left rear seat. I brought both my EF-S 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM and EF-S 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS lenses with but quickly discovered the 55-250 handheld was just about useless. The 17-55 footage was good so the lesson there is stay with pretty wide lenses handholding in choppers, even one as vibration free as an Eurocopter. Maverick keeps the windows on their machines polished and absolutely immaculate which certainly helped getting pretty pictures. The trip was a "spur of the moment" thing to do based on the glorious weather with zero planning and research. One thing I learned is that if you want to be able to shoot through windows wear 100% black clothing. I've got way too much footage shot through the front window with me in my red shirt and tan shorts reflected in the glass. I'd have done better wearing black sweats, shoes, and socks. I reviewed the footage on my 58" Samsung Plasma and I'm pretty happy with most of it. I'm putting off editing until Avid Media Composer 5 is out, it's going to handle 7D files natively. I'm eligible for a free upgrade so on June 12th I'll be downloading it.

FedEx Office (formerly Kinkos) supplies copiers for individuals to use to copy copywritten materials under the fair use doctrine. They'll even set the machine up for you but you have to press the "Copy" button yourself. If there's a reasonably computer savvy person in the bride or groom's family I can imagine setting up a copy of Avid or FCP in such a way that the family actually dubs the copywritten music on to edited video and they cut the first DVD or BluRay to use as a master. As long as you're not merging picture and music yourself I think this idea might be copywrite legal. Disclaimer: "I am not actually a lawyer, I only play one on Cinematography.com"

The recent book "Outliers" makes the point that people who are extremely good at what they do spent around 10,000 hours getting there. That's certainly true for my strong suit, engineering. I started off with a ham license at 13 and eat, slept, and drank ham radio for years. Then I went into the Navy, went to their schools for Electronics Technician, came out worked in industry then went back to school and ended up with an MS in Teaching Physics. Everything I've ever done, work in theatre, film-making, automobile racing, industry, teaching Physics, and radio engineering for twenty-five years in one way or another has revolved around electronics. In film and video I maybe have 1,000 hours of direct experience so that's why I'm a "Somewhat DP", I just haven't spent enough time doing it to get facile, I always have to think about what I'm doing. Read some of David Mullen's posts about how he got started as a kid shooting Super-8, going to art school, then working in the industry. I'll bet David has 10,000 hours and more around cameras...which is why he's damn good at what he does. So school is important, it's one way of getting some of those 10,000 hours but grab every chance you get to shoot something if only with a cellphone. I'm a big fan of the new Canon HDSLR's (I own a 7D), you might seriously think about getting a T2i which gives you one heck of a lot of camera for $800 or so. And wear it out shooting anything and everything.