Rory Hanrahan

Its tough getting started as an AC, when much of the money you're going to be earning will be sunk into gadgets & gear to get further AC jobs. Murphy's Law is that whatever tool you need is the one you don't have, which isn't to say buy one of everything (I think I did suggest that on another thread concerning AC kits though), but means that even after years of working, you'll still come up with tools that will help you work better and faster on the next gig. But I digress. The most important tools to have at hand, and the most basic kit you should walk onto set with will have the following: -Tape measure (both soft and metal) -Lens fluid, microfibre cloth and/or tissue -Air, be it in blower or Dust-Off form (or both...) -All-purpose rain cover (can be sheets of clear plastic, as long as you have something quick at hand for those productions who insist that it won't rain/locations are clean) -Color chart/white card/gray scale/focus chart -Slate (even if you're not clapping, good to have one) -Camera report (!!!) (On HD shoots, where nothing is being sent to a lab, I ususally make my own w/ production info on it, that I can just photocopy. You can buy books from FilmTools though...) -Various paper/gaff tape for marking actors & camera positions (this stuff can run up in cost quickly, get what you need but don't go overboard) -Misc tools: Leatherman or MultiTool, flashlight, pens pens pens, whatever you think will make your job easier Hmmm, I know I'm forgetting A LOT, but for a short you can probably get away with something like that... Remember to have a good bag to keep your stuff in, something that won't rip open as you're running to catch a train (hey, it happens). I use a belt pouch, but many AC's hate that and keep a ditty bag handy or use a front box when possible. I spend a lot of time at Home Depot, just browsing and grabbing things that may come in handy (cannot live without bungees and ratchet straps, for instance). You'll quickly figure out what suits you, and what can be adapted for your use. Good luck, and don't let your lack of a magic hat filled with goodies discourage you. Its the person that does the job, the gear just makes you look cool (kidding. somewhat.)!

I hear that! One night I was waking up every few hours and freaking out because nobody had a hand on the camera, which was dangerously balanced on a chair in my bedroom... Turns out piles of clothes look just like F950's to the sleep deprived!

I would also bring up a point about the size of a DVX. I'd rather go into a documentary looking as inconspicuous as possible, and nobody would notice (or probably hassle) a filmmaker using a camera of this size (Hell, as I was walking home today I saw 3 film-student types blatently tresspassing to shoot doc footage with a GL2 -- the cops nearby didn't seem to mind!). Using a Varicam or an HDX900 in a doc situation (arguably the DVX's big brothers) would make the filmmaker appear more like a news crew, and probably stand out a lot more in the subjects' mind too! As a side note, wasn't the recent Academy Award nominee Jesus Camp shot partially on DV? I seem to remember one of the camera ops getting caught on screen and they were holding a tiny palm-corder size camera...

Many of Aaton's cameras feature the "two rod" handle, rather than the one-piece molded metal one I suppose many people are familiar with. The rod handle doubles as a holder for small Aaton tools used to change the shutter angle and pitch. The extra rod in the upper right is intended to hold either a follow focus or (more likely) a zoom controller. There is reference to this on Aaton's website.

I got my hands on a Pixelvision around the age of 10, but didn't have the forsight to organize stagings of Star Wars or Richard III, so I shot random bits and pieces of nature footage and shot from moving vehicles. The heavy image compression in that camera made everything sort of abstract, so I suppose that's what kicked off my interest in experimental filmmaking. A couple of years later I got a hold of my parents' VHS-C camcorder (they still haven't gotten it back!) and began working on stop motion videos. After a couple of years of this, I finally began to collaborate with friends to make narrative videos, which were usually comedies or Tarantino-esque crime capers involving car chases and pimps. Kept doing this throughout high school, editing on two VCRs and earning my geek wings in the AV Club (neeeeeerrrrrrd!). Went to college for graphic design, thinking that nobody would ever pay me to make movies (which is only half true...), then got frustrated with that and went full steam ahead into a film school where I focused on doc/indie-style production. Worked a few crap jobs post-college and eventually convinced some gullible suckers, er, producers to put me into cam. dept. Now I'm working as an AC full time. I also didn't know the difference between the director and, well, anybody else in production when I was a young'un. I was lucky enough to find a copy of Ascher & Pincus' Filmmaker's Handbook when I was 15 or so, which really prepared me for shooting film a short time later. Eventually realized that I'm way better talking to equipment than I am with actors, so my tech skills pretty much sealed my fate. I was also lucky enough to grow up in the '90s, when "Indie Film" was blowing up. Robert Rodriguez told me I could make Die Hard in my backyard (and I believed him...) and Kevin Smith had shot Clerks 30min away from where I grew up, so everything seemed really possible to me at that age. I'm glad I stuck with it. Realizing that I've been applying myself to this for 15 some odd years now is incredible, and there's no other field I'd rather be in (other than International Playboy, but its really hard to break into that industry)!

Hey Annie! No sweat, the camera has changed a couple of times since we spoke anyway! The article about the kid huffing air is actually what led me to the questions about differences in propellants. And the cost of the metal nozzles is about $12, IIRC.

Well, you can spray from any angle with the newfangled "Vector Valve" nozzle (or whatever its called), but the old-timey chrome valve (which I prefer) is more like the plastic straw nozzle some cans come with, and should be sprayed upright. As Michael noted, they're for cans that need to be punctured -- that have no nozzle included. Why use these? Durability is an issue with the plastic nozzles. I've broken tons of these over the years -- if I'm using this type of can on a job at least one or two will go kaput. Ol' Chrome-sides keeps on ticking though. As a side note, I've heard claims made that many office supply/typical consumer brands of condensed air (like Staples brand, for instance), contain propellants that are much more harmful than Falcon's, and may cause damage and other funk-like happenings to the lens & coating. Can anyone confirm or deny this?

You may want to rethink using the PD150 for audio capture. The pre-amps on the camera are noisy as hell, and any audio you get will definitely suffer. I don't know that the DVX sounds any better, but after using the 150 to teach a class for a couple of years, I can assure you that sound is one of its weakest points.

You guys are creating the Rube Goldberg method of focus pulling! Why doesn't the signal bounce to a decomissioned NASA satellite, then relay to a secret bunker in Munich, then be sent by bike courier to the studio, then the 2nd AC can bring you a wax-sealed envelope, then you can open it (finally feeling like you're on-stage for the Academy Awards) and finally, nudge the dial the half-inch necessary to find your subject. I swear to God in twenty years we'll all be replaced by robots. And in conclusion, the answer to your question (which was, I believe, "Why don't we use automatic follow focus?")... Robots don't pay union dues.

Pulling focus has been discussed multiple times in the Camera Assistants forum. I suggest reading some of the threads there and posting any more questions you have within those threads.

There's a slightly different set of concerns when shooting HD rather than film, but the responsibility is the same. You don't have to worry about checking the gate, for instance, but now backfocus becomes an issue. There's no film to load, but now you may have to coordinate with a DIT. If none of this makes sense... it'll come eventually. Its all too much to go into detail about here, but I suggest browsing through old threads to pick up as much info as you can. There's no better learning experience than being on set though, so start where you can and work up from there.

Its hard to say what an "average" AC makes and if you could live off of the job or not. Ultimately that really depends on you, and if you are good, hard working, tenacious and pleasant to work with then you very well may climb up to bigger shows and be successful. You may also end up working on no-budget student films while scrounging change from between the couch cushions to pay your rent and posting on Cine.com all winter because production is slow... Some folks complain that working in film is all about networking, its who you know... but really its who knows you! Your rep precedes yourself. Its a personality-driven field, for the most part, and your success is ultimately dependent on yourself... But I'm sure you know this already. As for a definition of the job: Kenny pretty much nailed many of the various responsibilities, but to make a broader statement, the AC is 100% responsible for everything that happens with the camera + cam gear (except, of course, for operating, which will fall on the Camera Operator or DP). You need an in-depth knowledge of your gear and how its used in order to set-up, maintain and troubleshoot on set, and keep production flowing and ensure that the DP's choices are put into effect (within the boundaries of your role, obviously). In terms of gear, look on the AC Supplies page of the Film Tools site and pick up one of everything (Kidding. Sort of.)! You'll find that the tools you need may change with each job, but eventually you'll build a decent kit and be prepared for any situation. If your final goal is to be a DP, then camera dept. is the place to start. I have to say though, doing G+E work alongside being an AC is beneficial. The more you know about other jobs and responsibilities the more you'll be able to gel and work well with others on set. Oh, and don't tell people, "I'm really a DP, but I just AC on the side." Its really annoying and endears you to no one. Best of luck!

Apologies for the double-post, but there are also some great extras on the Sin City DVD (the 2-disc version, although I'm not sure if its the same in the UK) that show how the film was made, what the real lighting conditions were like, and even some cool FX using fluorescent colors (like Marv's bandages and Hartigan's glowing white blood). Check it out if you get the chance!

Remember that most of the backgrounds in Sin City were created digitally, so photographing something that emulates that look perfectly may not be possible. In terms of working with what you can shoot practically though, you may want to look into software like After Effects, or creating an automated effect in Photoshop and running the film thru this as an image sequence. The latter can be time consuming, but I've worked this way in the past and was very happy with the results. I haven't worked w/ Premier since 2001, so I'm not sure if the current version is robust enough to properly handle what you want to do, but as a user of Final Cut I would go with a higher end software. MiniDV has some limitations in terms of how far it can be pushed with CC and effects, but if you embrace the fact that it probably won't look like high-end HD I'm sure this will come out great. In fact, a friend of mine did an effect like this to a short he made 3-4 years ago and the results were very cool. Are you going to be doing all of the post work, or are you collaborating with an editor/effects person?

There is a dupe thread on this topic running concurrent w/ this one. More info can be found there.

Video does contain electronic noise though -- which (while both technically and aesthetically different) is the equivalent of grain. Chance does bring up a good point though: I don't know if you already own your own gear, but depending on how you go about acquiring an S8 camera, renting 16mm might be a fairly close price-match. (Good thing this isn't in Super8 Only, or I'd have the dogs released on me for hyping 16!).

This doesn't directly answer your question, but I find doing any type of color grading or digital effects in FCP -- even with 3rd party plug-ins -- results in a lot of compression in the image. Any type of grain reducer will be flatening the image anyway, so if this is a route you're seriously considering, do some tests before moving full steam ahead. You may be better off shooting w/ slower stocks and possibly even pulling a stop or so during processing to achieve finer grain. Good luck.

Publishing a full-size glossy mag about anything is a difficult undertaking for anybody to attempt (sort of like making indy flicks and hoping for Hollywood attention... hmm, maybe there's a corelation between your creative outlets). It sounds like you have the background and the passion to put out something like a 'zine or (the aforementioned) web-zine though. My advice: screw advertising, screw credibility, find yourself access to a free (read: hijacked) photocopy machine and knock this out as a garage operation. Hook up with a young talented graphic designer who will benefit from doing this kind of work for free (as a student you should be able to find like-minded people). Adopt a POV or slant for the mag, even if it goes beyond film -- since you're not going to be the "NAB/product development/interview with Altman's corpse" magazine (which would be f'n brilliant by the way), you really can do anything that interests you/kinda sorta relates to your interests. I do believe that there is a gap between film mags aimed at beginners (Kodak Student Filmmakers mag, for example, which Kevin Zanit writes for occasionally) and film crit/trade mags. Giving a voice to up-and-coming, innovative young filmmakers should be encouraged (if you can find any worth listening to that is!). Good luck with whatever creative venture you decide to pursue, but beware the many pitfalls of each seperate one. Also, don't be afraid to fail. Take it all in stride and do what you can do when you can do it.

Yeah Annie, I remember. It was exactly what I had in mind when I mentioned the candy. I still tell horror stories about Camera Dept. rolling in with bags of groceries! Good times. And as for the Pana Elaine, I knew something was up when I asked you how the job went and you replied a short, simple, "Fine. It went fine." Brilliant.

While its not cool to blow up at other people on set (especially PA's, who should be trained to be your unholy army in preperation for the end times), I can understand folks getting upset at others doing their work. Most of us have a system, whether it be in setting up/breaking down gear, or just in loading a truck, which can sometimes be more complicated than expected, considering any given case can hold tens of thousands of dollars in lenses or camera gear. The offer of help should always be appreciated, but sometimes it just can't be accepted. A comment was made earlier about vegetarians bringing their own food, and while its always a good idea to be prepared and have some grub to get you through the day, production should always take peoples diets into account at the brginning of the shoot. Consider the plight of diabetics who are offered nothing but candy, or people who are allergic to something only to find out later that much of the food contains that ingredient. I've seen it happen plenty of times, and it can bring production to a halt. Complaining usually doesn't get anybody anywhere though. If something needs to be done talk to the right people and help make it happen.

While we're on coffee (maybe there should be a new section)... If you're doing crafty, turn off the cappucino machine during takes. Nothing ruins the illusion of a post-apocalyptic wasteland like the sound of frothing milk.

There's definitely a different look between real grain and adding it using a filter. Grain via stock and processing looks orgainc, for lack of a better term. You're seeing a real photochemical reaction based on your shooting conditions, and the grain reacts accordingly. Adding grain digitally, I've found, looks very artificial due to its uniformity, as well as being independent of exposure and processing (for example: adding lots of grain to a slow or normal stock thats properly exposed/not pushed seems fake to my eye). Plus, lets say that you have noticeable grain in your negative, then you add more grain later digitally. The new grain will not interact with the image the way the original grain does, and this might look quite funky (funky good or funky bad -- that's your call!). If the product will only be seen on TV or DVD, you might be able to get away with it. Projected... probably best to do it the real way. It's a good idea to always test, and see what works for your aesthetic.

Hmmm. Probably. I think its in the box marked "Jeff's Stuff" that keeps getting filled with random goodies (Kidding! Sort of. I still owe you that microfibre I promised on the last shoot...). My biggest problem with LensPens is that they tend to lose bristles easily, which find a home on the edge of the glass. In fact, I think the pad fell off mine while I was cleaning a lens with it years ago... Good call with the FF wheel though. I'm still using my thumb like a caveman.

The only thing I use the padded side for is cleaning the viewfinder glass. Do yourself a favor and get a static-free brush and a microfiber cloth instead. Your un-scratched lenses will thank you.

This is like asking if the first time you climb on a motorcycle you should try to jump a tank full of sharks. Seriously though, all could go well, if you're prepared and can keep your cool. The important thing is to be prepared, so try and get some time with the camera and become comfortable with it. Even more important that pulling focus is your comfort level with the gear, as you will have to check-out, set up & build and maintain the camera and accessories for the duration of the shoot. If you are completely new to this, it can be... daunting. On the other hand, if the DP knows your experience level, he or she will probably be good at helping you learn what you need to and make this a successful shoot. Fortunately, HD is an easier pull than 35mm, as long as you're sure of your backfocus. Try and get as much prep time as possible before the first day of shooting. Don't be afraid to ask questions. Most importantly: if a shot that you are pulling focus on is soft tell the DP!!!. Be honest, because they're going to see the results later on anyway, and ther's nothing that can be done about it then. Good luck!