Phil Connolly

I've been seeing these sort battery powered up lighters being used at events: http://premier-event-services.com/area-pages/234-battery-powered-led-uplighter-hire Some can be pretty bright and they can change colour by wireless DMX control. That might be something could be put to work on a large night exterior - to provide splashes of light and colour in the background. Your main problem with wide night shots is the time taken to run cable - so anything that allows you to avoid that is good. Also pick your locations well as you can do a lot with available light and a fast camera. I directed this shoot: and its mostly available light (and video projectors). This was on an Panasonic SDX 900 and F2.1 lens - which is quite a bit less light sensitive then more up to date cameras. Lighting wise we he had a 1.2K HMI and a 575W HMI and a couple of red heads. That was more to provide coloured glows and give the walls some texture. We did spend a lot of time looking for a location that would do the work for us in terms of layout and available light

Hi Raj You'd want to re-do the titles in DaVinchi, it has a title tool or you can import graphic titles. Titles produced in your FCPX offline edits are likley to be HD and I guess you want to work in 4K for the grade. I would just use placeholder titles in the FCPX edit for timing purposes. Most transitions can be re-created in DaVinchi - some will be pulled across in the XML and others you'll have to remake in DaVinchi using the internal tools. For complex titles or transitions you might resort to after effects or similar anyway. For sound you can import audio into DaVinchi and make your final deliverables from there. I'm not sure if it handles multichannel audio - but you can at least add a stereo mix. For a feature I'm guessing you might do the mix in pro-tools or similar rather then FCP anyways. The audio should just line up as your exported sound file "should" be the same duration as your video project and plonking it on the DaVinchi - timeline will do it (you can of course nudge it about to tweek sync if needed). I would still used ProRes HQ for the master export over LT - although on a monitor you won't really be-able to see the difference. For VOD/DVD/Broadcast delivery its going to be compressed down to a very small file and its always best to start with the highest quality original. If your working at 4k your going to need something in the order 15-20+ terabytes of space for the camera rushes, backups and transcodes if you've got a reasonable shooting ratio. So the difference between HQ and LT for the master file is not going to make a huge difference to your overall storage needs. Your laptop should be able to cope with the project, it might not be particually fast when working at 4k. Having lots of fast storage space is going to be key. One thing you could do is work in sections - e.g cut it as 20min reels, so you never have a massive timeline open at any one time. I have a BM 4K at work and all the projects I've done on it so far have just been shot in HD Prores, because the 4k data rates have been unmanageable and too expensive in storage. The in camera HD has been good enough for my purposes as 4K distribution is pretty rare

Are you planning to do 4K Raw or Prores? I would use DaVinchi Resolve rather the doing everything in FCP, as theres a decent free version or the BM cameras come with a full version and its good for making proxy files, reconforming and much better then FCP for colour correction For either format my approach would be to: 1) Transcode the footage in Davinchi Resolve to Prores LT or Proxy HD 2) Edit Prores Proxy files in FCPX 3) when edit is complete export XML from FCPX 4) Load XML into Resolve - conform with original full res footage and grade in resolve There are plenty of online tutorials explaining the process of round tripping between Resolve and FCPX in more detail

The BFI south bank has a single (sold out) 70mm screening of 2001 next month. I guess its an old print as all the other screenings are digital. The new re-release should look pretty good, the main issue for me is the poor contrast ratio of DLP projection - not so good for the muddy grey of space

It could have been - maybe it screened in London first, we were told at the screening the new(ish) print had come directly from a screening in Germany and had the english audio re-dubbed over the Mag. I'm not sure why they didn't use DTS for the audio as it would have made it easier to use the print in different territories. It did sound good in Dolby SR though. After the Bradford film festival the print was screened in London later in the year as part of the wider 2001 re-release.

2001 was reprinted in 70mm, in the year 2001 for the European release. From memory I think only one 70mm print was made and quite a wide 35mm release. The print initially had a German sound track, but because it was magnetic they were able to re-record the English track over the top for the UK release, allowing the expensive print to serve 2 countries. I saw it at the Bradford film festival in 2001 and it was pristine with good colour. It had the original 6 channel Todd-AO mix, with 5 screen channels and was projected on a deeply curved Cinerama screen. I'd only seen the film previously on VHS and never much liked it, on the big screen it was something else. The Cinerama curve really helps with the immersion even if it distorts the image a bit. Problem with 5/70 these days is finding the operators to project it as the skill-set is leaving the cinema industry. In London the 70mm print of the Master got scratched early into the run, for instance. Hopefully the 5/70 prints of Interstellar will fare better.

I'm working on a short film shot on the Ikeaskop now - I found the same thing AE transcode time's were unworkable and I had 2 high spec power Mac's to throw at it. In the end we used resolve to do the transcodes, the full version not the light version. From what I remember it worked fine and was vastly quicker then AE. I will ask my editor if he had to do anything special. But as far as I was aware the workflow of using resolve to make pro-rez proxies and reconfirming the DNG in resolve worked ok. The main resolve problems we had were due to clashes with OS - it can be picky. So it can be made to work - if I find out any other tips I'll report back. We are still battling through the grade and trying to fix some of the cameras quirks - such as the way it segments the sensor into 4 quadrants with different black levels. Personally I would be wary about using the Ikon again for import projects - the workflow is quite clunky and we got quite a few ugly image artefacts - such as vertical flairs that stop abruptly at the centre of the screen and strange green artefacts on high contrast scenes.

I have BM 4k and one of these rigs on order: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tilta-BlackMagic-Cinema-Camera-rig-15mm-system-Cage-Follow-focus-4-4-Matte-box-/230904068297 Will report back once I've had a play - looks good on paper. I also got a set of the new cannon EF cinema primes, which are fantastic and a good match for the BM camera - if you need nice lenses. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/893499-REG/Canon_EF_Cinema_Prime_Lens.html

There are plenty of other small fresnels in the 100w-200w range that would have similar output and look. Either by Arri or Mole, they would be simpler on the electronics front and cheaper to rent.

I'm a big fan of the voigtlaender f0.95 25mm prime. http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_f0_95_25.html Its a great lens - the look is a bit extreme fully open but a nice lens stopped down a bit. I did a music video on the AF101 almost entirely on that lens: (although youtube compressions killed it a bit) Also I've heard good things about the SLR magic 12mm: http://www.slrmagic.co.uk/slr-magic-12mm-t16-hyperprime-lens-mft-new.html

Depends on the size needed but I've often found the big roles photographic backdrop paper to work quite well. Doesn't crease too much if your careful as much as cloth and make a quick infinity curve if needed by bending and its cheap: http://www.photography-backgrounds.co.uk/Photography-Background-Papers/2.72-x-11-metres/111254-Chromagreen.html Lastolite backdrops are good but expensive and only big enough for small things. Or you could try some purest green:

I'd also check out the Arri Amira - if you don't need RAW it gets you Alexa quality for a lot less. Also in the sony stable is FS700 + RAW recorder. I believe thats to cheapest sony way to get 4K Raw, thats an option I'm considering right now. Since I need a high frame rate camera and the option to spread the cost: buy the camera now and the RAW recorder later - is tempting. Otherwise, I've heard very good things about the F55, a friend of mine intercut an F55 and Alexa on a project and they were able to get a very close match. Really depends on your clients as well and if they are going to demand a particular camera system. In that case Amira might be the best. I'm a bit fan of the Cannon C300, it has its limitations, but for music video and TV stuff its easy to deal with in post and gives a great image.

Doing this in your edit package is going to result in less the ideal results. Ideally you want to use something that will do a motion compensated conversion - that can tween between frames and make a smooth result. Either Twixtor, a Snell and Willcox or Teranex converter would give you the best results. It might be a idea to get a post house to do the final conversion rather then buy the kit yourself - since the really high end converters can get pricy.

I think Phil Rhodes has the right idea with and optical pattern. Something along the lines of a turntable strobe trick: http://petapixel.com/2010/08/17/creative-optical-illusion-animations-using-a-turntable/ A cheap camera that allows you to adjust shutter speed to something fast, attached to the dolly pointing virtically down. Then a patten strip running along side the track - the patten on the strip designed to make the marks look static when then dolly is moving at the correct speed. Theres probably some maths involved - but nothing too scary.

Channel 4 in the UK have commissioned a couple of drama series in 2.35:1 Top Boy - shot with 1.3 Hawk anamorphics: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1830379/ and Utopia: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2384811/ So it does happen, its just very very rare.

NFTS is hands down the best place to study cinematography in the UK. The facilities the school has are amazing: Alexa's etc.... and the tutors are very good. The challenge is actually getting a place on the course, its very competitive and difficult to get in.

Thanks Frank I'll try that - hopefully that will fix the green noise thing. Phil

Da Vinchi on paper looks like the best option as it has a good round trip workflow from DNG files. But I also encounter some weird artifacts on Ikonoskope footage - basically odd green noise over most of the images. I'm going to try davinchi again as the project I'm working needs conforming and grading. I think the other option for transcoding DNG files is adobe after effects but this is painfully slow. When you transcode RAW to prores from the Ikon your always going to get strong colour casts - you usually need to do a one-light type grade during transcode to get your footage in the ballpark of looking normal - or your not going to have enough information to edit. I'm really hopeing I can make davinchi work or its going to be a painful grade on my current project. I hugely regret using the ikon - its been a complete pain to work with so far and the post process is problematic and clunky.

You can ride the Indi-Dolly, however its not the most stable feeling in the world. When I use it, I do tend to stand most of the time.

Agree that small LED or fluresent fixtures could work - I've use camping fluresents in the past and I quite like this fixture: http://www.litepanels.com/language/pages/micro.php but its expensive for what it is... Or maybe use gas camping lights if audio is not an issue: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Campingaz-Lumostar-Plus-Piezo-Lantern/dp/B001P80GT6/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363268973&sr=8-1 Small generators are very small these days and could perhaps still be considered: http://www.seddondirect.co.uk/Generators/productDetails.asp?productID=638

Yes they will work - but you might find the focal lengths availible quite limiting. The ikon is quite low resolution - sub 1080 by the time you debayer, so with a big crop your going to be looking at rather soft images. Combined with the general problems associated with the ikon, its not the most stable camera in the world. I would look into using another camera.

The problem with the Hague dolly is the PVC track isnt particually stable - not sure I'd be keen to ride it. This is similar money: http://www.indiedolly.com/ And its really good, with smooth running metal track and gives the option on longer track runs and curves.

I used to work with one of the VT editors of Fraggle Rock, I believe he told me it was shot and edited on 1'C format. It looks pretty soft compared to SD digi-beta let alone HD or 4K. I doubt there would be much point remastering in higher res formats. Different countries had different VT inserts for the sections featuring humans. These may have been shot on different formats in different countries and there may be some film material. Since is was more practical to shoot EXT's on film then video in the 80's.

Either way works, normally you go for whole takes and put them on individual tracks - but once you get into lots of takes and angles, you might find that you have too many video tracks to be manageable in the edit. Sometimes you don't want to do a full take of the track for a shot you know your only going to use at a certain time. So I normally go for a combination of the 2, full takes and shorter bits where appropriate. I just record atmos sound on the camera mic, so it can hear the playback and usually thats sufficient for sync. One option is to make a mini-timecode slate using an ipad or similar, create a video quicktime of the song with burnt in timecode and use that quicktime as the playback for the shoot. Then you have a sync timecode ref on the ipad screen. Some people swear by this method, I tried it but found it to be a bit clunky in the edit and not really a bit time saver. In the end its not that huge of a chore, eye matching the thing in the edit, so don't worry if you have to resort to shorter takes of sections of the track. Sometimes a good idea if you don't want to over tire the band.... Also if the performance isn't totally on it, your going to be nudging shots into sync to tighten it...Plus maybe robbing shots from different sections of the song and cheating sync. For instance a close up cymbal hit could come from any section of the 'take' and be cheated into position. Also if your doing any motion effects such as shooting at 50fps and playing back at 25fps, your probably going to have to eye match to nail the sync. Or investigate Pluraleyes - that should do a lot of the hardwork for you. One thing make sure the artist is miming to the final final version. One video I worked on wasn't, mid edit the final masted version of the track was delivered and somehow it was about 2 seconds shorter then the version I was working with. Nearly every shot needed to be adjusted to sync. I think I got away with it: Also some shots were 30fps, played back at 25 and a lot of the close ups were cheated, just matching to drumming or strumming speed, but taken for different sections to patch holes in the coverage... All of this is academic, since if you get your vimeo settings wrong that can through everything out and ruin your carefully produced sync...

Hi Andy I've not used the Wally Dolly, but on the cheap portable dolly front I've been really impressed by the Indie-Dolly http://www.indiedolly.com/ I've used a few portable dolly systems and they have usually been a bit hit and miss, even if they track smoothly, you can get audio problems with creaks etc... But the indie dolly is pretty decent in that regard - I perhaps wouldn't put a mega heavy rig on it. But for the AF-101 I use with it, its perfect. It is a bit of a pain to set up, with lots of fiddly bits to put together. But for the price I've been very impressed. Phil