Mike Panczenko

I don't completely understand the first question, but if you exposed the film in the spool transfer, depending on how much light under the door there was, it would be either the flashes, or it would be completely white. If you could see yourself working and winding the film, it will be completely white. Either way, it will be unusable. But- I would still get it processed. Sometimes people get lucky and strange things happen. I was not there in the room with you, so I can only guess as to how much light there was coming under the door, etc. From what you describe, it sounds like it was normal hallway light on outside seeping in under the door crack, which would be more than enough to completely ruin the film, but, like I said, if you can afford it, get it processed, and see what happens. Good luck!

That would be if he loaded the spool in the light, but he transferred the film from one spool to another, so all of the film was off the spool at one point and exposed to light. Keycode is a system of markings that Kodak uses, and I believe Fuji has their own version, don't know others, but it is a system of markings outside the picture area on the film that scanners and telecines can read that allows you identify where in the roll you are, so that it can be logged and identified for editing purposes.

I think there will probably be a prevalence of both interactive movies in the future, along with traditional narrative film. Audiences don't always want interactivity- we have choose your own adventure books and we have narrative literature which has been one of the staples of human culture. While I think the visual medium may be better suited to interactivity than literature, I don't think traditional narrative film will ever die out. I suspect there will be room for both when the technology catches up to the idea.

Do you mean that you transferred the film from the spool that it came on onto one of the spools that came with the camera? If that's the case, your film is ruined. The light leaking under the bathroom door is more than enough to fog it if you did the spool change. There is no need to use any particular spools with the K3, just use whatever daylight spools they give you. And, if the film comes on a daylight spool, you can load in dim light without problem normally- just the first 3 feet or so will be fogged. The film is wound on the spool in such a way that it overlaps itself sealing the interior of the roll from light fogging. But if you unwound the roll and respooled it, every bit of film was at one point exposed to the light seeping in under the crack, so it is ruined. Also, when respooling film, I'm not sure if Fomapan has keycode, but you need to make sure the Keycode orientation is correct, which requires an extra step in spooling.

Hi Marc, Good to see you on here. I 2nded for you when you were in Baltimore for the food network ad. Hope you've been well. There's a thread from when the movie came out originally here: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...cience+of+sleep It was shot on mostly Eterna 8573 500T, and also used Fujji 8561 250D, Kodak 5245 50D, and, apparently for animation work, 5274 200T. Shot using Zeiss G.O./superspeeds, along with a 100mm canon macro. An Arricam LT was used because the sound recordist felt that the DPs preferred Aaton 35s were too noisy. Hope you're well!

I have not worked for them, but I know all the usual suspects who do the Charles St jobs. No one can argue that they do great work! Probably one of the best places in the area to intern at, if this is indeed where are working ;) . Mabe I will run into you someday soon around Bawlmer!

Would this be Charles St Productions?

East coast members can work as locals in NY as well as where they are located. West coast members can do the same in LA. Central region members get the choice to choose either city, IIFC.

Well, the K-3 only takes daylight spools, so you can use a little light and be safe.

Phil, I always enjoy your posts because of their biting sarcasm and bitter wit, but I think here you are out of place. This is an international forum, and while English is in many ways the international language, it is to many people a second or third language. Mr. Dola is very earnestly asking for advice, and I think that it is unnecessary to bring up his English skills- how many people do the world over use abbreviations in typing? And it is nothing new, going back to telegram days and, one could argue, back to the shorthand system of the Romans. Speaking in colloquial shorthand is nothing new and should be entirely besides the point here.

I did an anamorphic show recently where we had some Arri 3s and the baffles were visible in the finder and videotap. Is there any way around that, or are you stuck with that doing anamorphic on a 35-3?

I'd call your local lab and try to arrange for a snip test, where you cut maybe 2 or 3 feet off of each roll and have them throw it on a densitometer. That will tell you whether it has been age fogged, xrayed, whether all the color layers are where they should be, etc. Film that's older or improperly stored can have damage ranging anywhere from some fogging, or, if left in extreme heat-say, a car in summer sun- can be completely unusable. If there is some age fog, you can try overexposing, which will minimize the age effects. How much to overexpose depends on how bad it is.

I like the hot toplight and the crushed blacks, but I think that the zooms you have in there don't really fit. For a snap zoom, they aren't fast enough. I think it would have been better if edited more traditionally and intercut with more coverage. The acting, though, is pretty brutal :P

It becomes a domino effect. I did a feature last year- 186 hours in 13 days. Call time on my first day was 9am, and by the end of the week call time was becoming 3pm because of the turnaround.

Yeah, it seems I was mistaken. I'm a non-roster member, and apparently I misunderstood what some roster members I know had told me. You can be on the roster, which is necessary to work (preference is given to roster members, so unless everyone else is working, you need to be on the roster) in the 13 western states under the basic agreement. But even if you are on the roster, you need the safety courses as well to work. So they are separate bodies, but both are necessary to work in California, and, I believe (but am not positive), the other Western states. But the roster is separate from the safety classes, but, in some areas, both are required for you to be able to work.

Having the 7-56mm is saying that it is a zoom lens that starts at 7mm and can zoom in to 56mm at the tight end. The f1.4 is its widest aperture, and the Macro refers to its ultra close focus ability. So for a lens that says 65mm f2, it's saying that its a 65mm prime with the widest possible aperture of f2.

It's a quirk of our brains that we can only see virtual images and not real images. The rays must enter our eyes, but it seems that our brains filter out real images. I once asked an optometrist why that is, and he suggested that because real images are upside down and backwards as opposed to how they really are, our brains filter them out so that we would not be confused to the true orientation of things. The purpose of the ground glass in a film camera is to have a textured surface for our eyes to focus on. Because it is ground and textured our eyes are able to focus on that surface and see the image. But regardless of whether or not the screen is there, the rays are still refracting in the same way. The rays would still meet and the focal plane regardless of the film or the ground glass being in the optical path. And once it gets past the ground glass, they diverge. In many ways it's identical to the actual object the that is being filmed. The photons are emitted in all directions from one point. The lens then brings them back to a point at the focal plane. After they converge at the focal plane, they diverge again. So coming from the actual object, the rays start at a point and diverge. Coming from the focal plane, the rays start at a point and diverge, so either way, a lens can be used to focus those rays, regardless of whether a material object is in the optical path. And I don't think he wants to affect the depth of field, but rather get rid of the "grain" the 35mm adapters have on the ground glass. I think they reason that the adapters use the ground glass is because it is mechanically easier to troubleshoot. If the ground glass is out of place, it is easier to fix in some ways because you know where it should go, or at least the general vicinity, whereas if there was no ground glass, if the focus was off, it would make fixing it much more difficult as there is no place where the image actually can be seen. You would have to spatially measure the elements of the optical system. I can't think of any other reason than that. I'd be curious to see if anyone has other ideas. Edit: Beat me to it Mitch. Thanks for the explanation!

Well that's what I was saying, it would open up a whole new can of worms, I was curious more from a physics/optics perspective. Continuing on that topic, why would the image be larger if the ground glass was removed, but the focal plane remained the same?

I think what he means is to remove the actual ground glass, but leave the optics set up to focus where the ground glass would have been, so you'd lose the grain of the glass, but still be able to focus on the rays. I've wondered sometimes about a similar situation, and while I suspect removing the ground glass would open up all sorts of other problems, from a physics standpoint I'm curious as well as to whether a ground glass is needed in this setup. It seems like it would work, but I've never been able to get an answer.

The most important thing to base the decision on is whether or not you are going to be getting union jobs. Joining 600 is a big chunk of change to put down, so make sure that you are going to be working those jobs, otherwise it won't be doing anything for you. If you are in a position to be getting union jobs, then I would say tha at a certain point, it is necessary to join to further your career. All of the big and mid level shows are union, and a fair amount of low budget shows. Most movies $2 million or greater are union, and many that are between $1-$2 million. As long as you're working even a few days a month, the dues will be recouped very quickly. I have had the union go to bat for me over payment issues, and having the 10 hour turnaround is a wonderful safeguard. If you work 600 or more hours in a year, and 300 hours a qualifying period after that, you get health insurance, and after 20 years of qualifying for insurance , you receive a pension. I am on the East Coast, so I cannot speak for the West Coast roster system, but out there you need to take safety classes to get on the roster, and you need to be on the roster to work out there. The classes are only held every so often, so it can take some time after joining for you to be eligible to work, so that would be something to consider if you are West Coast based. I am speaking from an AC standpoint- many DPs have been able to be successful and make a living being non-union, but there comes a point where the vast majority join their respective unions for the benefits and protection (monetary and safety). Certain regions also have a plethora of non-union work, and others have barely any, but, like I said, most jobs over a certain size are union. I would base your decision on these issues. Good luck with the decision!

I thought it looked fantastic as well. I was annoyed with the film itself, though, because I felt what could and should have been an extremely powerful story was cheapened by the use of melodrama and Hollywood cliche- it was still okay, but it could have been amazing. Did anyone notice in the first sequence in the hut with the family some horrible matching? It almost looked like they the closeups were shot normally and the wider shots were pushed, or cranked up in the DI. Visually, though (except for the above-mentioned scene), what an incredible looking movie- had moments that reminded me of David Lean and Freddie Young!

The Lab @ Postworks, and also the transfer house @ Postworks I cannot recommend highly enough.

If you didn't hear it on set, I'm wouldn't be as worried as you are. Without hearing it, I can only guess as to what it may be, but it could just be a mag "rubbing." This is where the film is slightly dished and rubs against the side of the mag- usually a smack or two can settle it back into place, but this is not usually a problem unless the rubbing is very severe. It's hard to diagnose what it is without hearing it, but all I can say is get it processed and you'll know- hate to say it, but that's really the only way to know. Congrats on your feature, by the way!

It can leak inside the lens, and lead to fungus growth over time and some nasty issues. It's best to spray it on a lens tissue, and start wiping from the center outward, so that by the time you reach the edges, there is less solution that can leak through. I have sprayed Panchro directly on a lens at times, but the best thing to do really is to spray it on the lens tissue. Once or twice won't destroy your lens, but I wouldn't make a habit out it it- better safe than sorry, you know?

I was always taught to put 7 things on the mag labels, so that my labels looked somewhat like this: 400' (or whatever lengt) Emulsion number: (52xx-xxx-etc) Date: "Title" (always in quotes) Mag: (the serial #) MP (your initials) CR: (the camera roll number) This is the minimum amount that the mag tape should have. Some people put more, like the production company or the amount exposed- I leave those for the camera report. But this is the minimum amount of information that is acceptable. Exposed film always gets black, and and recans and short ends always get white, unless you are using multiple stocks, in which case the recans and short ends get whatever color you have assigned that particular stock. Tungsten film is usually red- in the event you have more than 1 tungsten stock, the high speed is normally the red one. Daylight films get blue normally. Other than that, you can assign the colors as you will, but it helps to keep a basic color scheme for the tungsten and the daylight- don't give tungsten film green because that is more of a daylight color. Give it yellow or orange. The blues and greens are more for daylight film. I always box up the cans for the film break. If it is being flown, make sure you pack it with bubble wrap or paper so that the cans will not dent- I sometimes even use the cardboard holders that the 400' cans come in. I label the box "Do Not Xray" and with a piece of tape on top, put "Exposed Film, the production company, the title, the date, and the production phone number." Then I seal it with packing tape- make sure the box is closed well if its going by air. If it's being driven, you can seal it with gaff or something not quite as heavy duty as packing tape, but make it look nice, and make sure it's sturdy. Most importantly- have fun! Daniel Mindel man, thats quite a job! Congratulations-