hugovillasmythe

I just saw 28 days later on TV. It hadn't come out in Mexico and I had only seen it at the theatre. That day I was impressed with the image quality, specialy when I realized they had gone HD. Before the TV screening this weekend, there was a "featurette" where I saw a bunch of XL-1's (I have to think they were) being used on the set. Is this right? Does anyone have more tech info on what cameras/lenses/processing/color correcting they used?

I'm about to shoot a shortsubject for a talented director. It's my first collaboration with her and I want it to be as good as I can make it. The script calls for two completly different visual environments. One, a lower class, stagnant and bleek "permanent twilight" shot in interiors. Pretty much straight forward. 35mm, some handheld work, standard develop, maybe some flashing... the second environment needs a lotta punch. It involves a kidnapped (horribly, painfuly, eyes shut with duct tape, hands tied with wire, etc) child. The first environment intercuts with isolated shots of the child in captivity. In the end he is rescued, his captors trown in jail and there's a bitter plot twist that shall remain secret (go see it). Anyhow, I was thinking on ways we could visually transmit the horror and pain of the child (essential to the plot twist). I was thinking of using a handcrank camera, maybe shoot the kidnapped child on pro8mm and then I remembered "Three kings". Since I've never shot cross process I need to know: 1) Which stocks to shoot? 2)Does Kodak make them in super16? 3)Are there "levels" of cross processing? Can I tell the lab "go this far"? or is it a 100% thing, once you're in, you're in for keeps? 4) If I go pro8mm will cross process be "way too much" grain on the film for it to be discernible? 5) Do I flash the cross process stock or not? 6) Any and all relevant info you may want to volunteer.

If you don't plan on doing a lot of steadicam work on it I think BL4 are great cameras. Virtually maintenance free, you can get ccd colour video taps, all kinds of accesories, PL mount so you can fit 20 years of lens technology into it, etc. Even hand held is great because of the 400ft mags. The steadicam part is (maybe) the only drawback. If I was in the market for a 35mm package I would certanly put finding a good BL4 package at the top of my wish list. Since I'm not a steadicam operator-owner the weight drawback woulnd't mean much to me.

By the way. If anyone is interested on this camera, the seller´s contact info is: Monica Uribe (+5255)55 43 32 86 She lives in Mexico City.

Thanks for the input. I have decided against purchasing the cameflex. My decision is based mostly on what I've shot for the last 2 years which is super16mm for either direct to video applications or for digital intermediate for blow up to 35mm prints and HDTV or DVcam or other "high-end" video. Actually, the last time I shot 35mm neg for 35mm print was 3 and a half years ago and I can't think of a good enough reason I would have told that director that it was better to shoot with older lenses, a noisy camera, no video assist, 100ft loads, etc. No, not even price. Instead of spending 2,400 dollars on the cameflex package that I saw, which I'd never be able to use simply because I haven't been in a situation to do it, therfore I don't believe I will, I think I'd rather save up some more (a lot more) and go for a competent Arri SRII super 16 package or even an Aaton S16mm. I already own a set of legs and a satchler studio 7+7 head, a bunch of filters on 5X4 ans 6X6 so I think this is a smarter choice. I'm thinking I'll end up needing to invest about 10 to 12 thousand US on the whole lot but last year alone I rented similar packages 25 days so, I think I'll be able to make it back soon enoug. The video realm is also a possibility but I haven't jumped in because I hate the fact that camera manufacturers seem to come up with "the cat's meow" camera every 3 months.

There's a very cheap eclair cameflex for sale in Mexico. Packaged with a set of legs (normal, baby, hi hat), an o'connor 50 head, 25mm, 40mm, 50mm and 100mm. It belonged to a news cameraman in the 60's but it's very well cared for. All gear is in original cases. I still have to roll a test to see if reg si good and lenses still hold focus. What is it good for? I'd buy it if I knew I could make small features with it... Let's say ti would be my ultra low budget package. Any help?

A long time ago a frined used to brag that "in the old days" Panavision would make special eyepiece glasses for certain D.O.P.'s This would mean that they would grind the eyepiece element to a particular eyeglass prescription. In the end I figure that, if this was ever true, the "customized-eyepieces" came with a large price tag attached. I never gave it much thought but now I wonder if there's any truth to this "urban myth" and, if so... Is there a similar "courtesy" available for arriflex cameras? Anybody know where I can have one made?

I was and always will be a nikon man but my photo equipment had stayed virtualy untouched for a good 5 years. All of it is compatible with the Nikon D-50 and D-70. I've already checked. I'm no longer making a living out of still photo but I enjoy the odd assignment every now and then and doing my own portraits ans other still work. How many megapixels does a standard 35mm SLR camera negative produces. I just want to compare. I know that moving into the digital domain implies printers (and the endless supply of cartridges) and a good handle on photoshop or similar but I was very happy with the results I was getting from my old nikon gear. Should I go with the big boy N-70 or the "barley pro" N-50? Or even worse... should I start thinking about the N-80?

This one seems like a job for Mr. Pytlak. Some friends just finished shooting with Vision320-35mm. All bought directly from Kodak in Mexico under a "Government supply contract". After developing all rolls (about 15 between 400ft, 1000ft) all of them appeared to have a "stripe" on the right side of the frame. We had it checked and it seems it is silver nitrate buildup. To make things more clear, the build up is very similar to the one you'd get if you layed a roll of masking tape on it's side on a lightly wet table. Barley a line but percievable on the transfer and large enough to force both projects to "creep in" 5% into the frame. The options were reshooting (couldn't afford it), digitally remove by hand (couldn't afford it). All neg was developed at the same lab. This lab has been turning into a famously "fumbling shop of horrors" latley but I don't want to crucify them in advance. How could this have happened?

A variance on the wavy line black board is the local TV sports. I switch on my tv, choose a football game. Set up the head with the laser pointer and start following wnatever is on. If you own a collection of DVD's you can slip one in and catch a "subconcious" class on framing and lighting watching "The Godfather" for instance, and follow with your laser pointer on frame.

Again, for my two cents, having a "all-in-one" light meter just seems unnecesary. Maybe if it is your first meter it's ok because you would be saving money not buying an incident and a reflected. But still, you'll find yourself using the incident far more than the reflected. As far as a photo-cine meter I think seconik makes attachments for flash and other photo goodies. However, the minolta IV I've had for 9 years also has them, and they're cheaper.

Not exactly... Many MOS cameras (both 35mm and 16mm) can be outfitted with crystal sync motors and/or camera control units that make them run crystal sync. All Arri35III's, Panaflex X, Panastar Arri IIc's from Panavision and, later models such as Arri435's are crystal controled. Of course you can get away with using an MOS camera and record dailogue. Your sound person will probably have a nervous breakdown but it might work. Thick padding such as furniture blankets might be helpful. Also, something I did with a BL2 that wouldn't shut up is use longer lenses. A sound man friend of mine, very savy of post sound gadgets placed a microphone right next to the camera and was able to cancel the specific frequency. To be honest, if you need to do sync sound, try your very best to have an MOS camera because all else is just sloppy fixes for lousy preproduction. And, even if you use a quiet camera, always be nice to your sound person and have furniture blankets aroud so your electricians can throw them on HMI ballast or even on some odd functioning blimped cameras.

Kinos will get greener if there is too much heat building up around the fixture, like when people box in the ends with blackwrap, etc. This seems to be one of the probable causes for the mess I walked into. I did place the tubes inside celling mounted fixtures and then boxed in the lights further by black wrapping the long sides so they would fall off the walls. However, I had done this before and never experienced such problems... or I did, but it didn't matter because the only light source I had in that shoot were two 4ft 4 lamp kinos... The "mix-n-march" tubes seems more like it... Thanks for the input, will be more picky about tubes next time around...

I just wrapped a horrible shoot. I had an Aaton XTR 16, used vision 320 and a 1/8B. Pro mist. It took place in a hospital hallway with no windows and I decided to use celing mounted kinos as my main light source. It worked well with the set dressing and looked like hospital lighting (which was the point). I used 3 banks of 4 lamps 4ft. long, all 3200K. It was a mess since none of the tubes looked Ok. Some appeared to the aye oto be "pinkish", others looked "blueish". I also used two 4k PAR (DeSisti), two Joker 400w and one 1,200w PAR. I checked all ligths for frequency (since we shoot 24fps and 75fps) and for color temp. with my colormeter. All HMI's read fairly close to spec. and I corrected them to from their origin to somewhere between 3200K-3800K. When I went to correct the already messy Kinos I remembered they're "unreadable" with standard color meters, therfore, I read them anyhow, combined the lamps and they ended up looking (aparetn to the eye) and reading (minolta color meter) 3200K-3800K. Yesterday, at the telecine room, I almost had a heart attack. All light from the kinos was green, I mean green as in "martians on earth" green. We managed to correct the first shoot (an actor walking under the first kino bank) but, when it came to the actor walking under banks 2 and 3 on the same shoot things got much harder. Each kino was greener than the other. Fortunatley the colorist was great and we had time, so we managed to match, dissolve, paste, gamma block, power window, diffuse and correct the hell out of the stock and it worked. I proceeded to call the rental house, they're good friends and have a huge stock of kinos (about 100 4ft long lamps and 50 2ft plus some mini flos). The owner was very nice and concerned about it -after all, I've been involved with his gear in some way for more than 14 years now- so he volunteered that maybe all his tubes need checking. He asked me if I could do it and I said yes... Is there an instrument, way, method, etc. that can correctly evaluate "discontinious spectrum" sources such as Kinos. I think this could be helpful to others, not just me...

Copyright for DOP's. Now that the ball is rolling on this interesting subject. In Mexican legislation DOP's are considered as creators of intellectual content on movies and, therfore, have to express consent of use and release of material shot by them for a movie. As such, you retain some very vague "blocking" rights on the material so you can prenevt their missuse. It is forseeable that you might object to some producer using "non corrected" rushes of your material to "nip-and-tuck" into someonelse's flick, or you might (I would) want to prevent release of a film you did on a DVD version if you can prove that "image cropping" devices prevent the full dramatic power of the images you shot to be seen. As I said, issues dear to our hearts, but mostly vague and hard to sustain in court. So far no one has filed a complaint on this matter. It sounds better then it actually is because you're not entitled to additional "residuals" for your credits such as DGA directors or even Mexican Director's Union members. Does anyone know of similar statutes on other countries and how they work.

I think either format is good as long as you shoot it with care and profesionalism. Be reminded that most clients look at a reel and tend to decide they want you to work for them based on whatever they saw and liked. Therfore, I believe that as you increase the variety on your reel you have a better chance of geting more work from it (point 1 of a Demo reel) and getting more interesting work at that. Also, a reel is not "a reel". I think that, as you progress in the industry, and with the advent of tools like final cut you can come up with tailor made reels for specific targets.

Interesting tech fact Mr. Pytlak. In my experience, shooting with oil lanterns has proven not so easy the first couple of hours because I (and my gaffer too) am not a very outdoorsy type and I don't know how in bloody hell to get them to stop smoking. Light is good, though. I've tried them with Vision 800 and pushed one stop. I must have been at my favourite t. stop on S166 Zeiss 10-100 which is between 2.3 ans 2.8 Ended up looking nice. I was never able to get the fc. that John talks about but I'll take his word for it. There are some very nice coleman hand lanterns that work on LP Gas or Natural gas. They work well too and are less cumbersome that oil lamps which means you can slide them ever so close to actors. I've had some chance to work with cheated oil lanterns and candles using all sorts of bulbs inserted into them and I have to say (only used Kodak neg., never Fuji) that I'd rater go "natural" because stocks can take it, it looks more believable, actors have a more comfortable way to relate to their subject and all the wiring, batteries and contraptions you have to use make the chances for failure grow. Thank god for fast negs., good telecine colorists and noise supression circutry on telecines.

I agree with Kevin. Gaffers are outstanding professionals but the final responsability rests on the DoP. I don't remeber ever been asked for a gaffer's reel though I made a living as one for a couple of years.

The insider. Yes, the focus puller gets fired faster than you can say hyperfocal circle of confussion. Also, in some instances, the camera operator will get a bum wrap, though, as far as critical focusing via a view finder, I can't cast the first stone, that's why I only work with one focus puller and always will remain faithful to him.

Not more difficult than other H.O.D.'s on a movie.<_< You have to realize that the responsabilities of a D.O.P. are very grave. In the end his/her expertice, knowledge, artistry and care reflect deeply on how a movie is precieved by the audience. Not only that. Since the only technician/artist job left in movie making is that of a Cinematograper the demands are enormous. Besides, if you notice, his/her work is seen (therfore judged) all the time a film goes on, conciously or subconciously. Granted some coleagues are as pleasant to deal with as a kick to the balls but that is true of any profession. Producers and prod.mgrs. have head butting contests with D.O.P.'s because the equipment we handle is incredibly expensive and it looks very easy to slash a swolen budget by ridding yourself of some of those expensive 18k's and geared heads and, of course, firing two grips, a gennie operator and a couple of sparks. But I have shot movies where the worse budget infractions have been incurred by wardobe or construction depts. and, in the end, the problem is usualy the same: producers will try to shoot a budget and, somehow, they expect a movie to come out of it. Also, picky, of course we're picky. Just remember the last 10 D.O.P.'s demo reels you've seen. What do you remember them by? You get to see them on the LCD screen of your lap top.java script:emoticon(':blink:') What do you think of them? Probably most of the shots you saw could be easily judged as run-of-the-mill, nothing to write home about cinematography and then, some other shots,, may look like the devil took a crap ad it was smothered on the negative, no? We (D.O.P.'s) know this and, the ones that stay on the game play to it. You're only as good as your last shot.java script:emoticon('B)') So, before you call us difficult, just imagine if we asked to see your company's banking record... do you think we'd work with you? Would you show us your financial statements? Because that's what we do every time we send a demo reel. We lay our work on the line for any Tom, Dick or Harry to judge on any piece of crap screen and take our lifes in their hands. Would you let me look at your overhead costs? ;)

I'm looking to buy a used arri head 2. Best if seller is within continental Mexico, Continental US or Canada because that would save me a bundle on shipping and handling.

I don't know about the rest of the world but in Mexico Cinematography is considered an intelectual property and you do need a signed release specifiying the intended applications for the project. In comercials and smaller projects this is never an issue but on features a DOP can claim righs to intelectual protection of his-her work. There's a good book I've read on the subject. "Media law for producers" Also, keep in mind that intelectual property protection laws and practices are different from country to country. I think there's an international convention signed by a huge ammount of countries, however, to my knowledge, the US is not a subscriber of this convention, therefore, special precautions have to be taken.

I wouldn't use standard household fluorescents because of the possible flickering, the incomplete spectrum (I'm almost positive they have incomplete spectrums, that's why, when read with a color meter they'll read out weird numbers) and because you hacve to carry a huge ballast everywhere. A nice way to get soft even light is to get a soft light (like a 4k soft) or something similar or meybe vene use a 5k with a Chimera. You can even get a great soft source using a 5k and placing in front of it a light box made of white foamcore. All this options, of course, have pros and cons. The pro is that there is no mistakie possible as far as flicker is concerned and color correction is easier. Some cons are the huge light demands a 5k or a 4k soft places on a household circuit.