A. Whitehouse

Why would he want to do that? Those Auto motion features are poop. It isn't 48p, how could it be? You wouldn't believe how much misinformation there is out there in the minds of the public but more worryingly coming from the mouths of salesmen. It took a long time to start watching things in Progressive and now manufacturers want to throw it all away. On a reverse note, does anyone else find some of the motion artifacts from Blu-ray and HD-DVD distracting? I can't really put a finger on it but there are times when Ive been watching things side by side (Casino Royale, Transformers) and I've liked the way the uprezzed dvd moved way more than the HD discs. This could be entirely due to a bad setup at my local JB hifi but something was definetly odd. Maybe I was standing too close. I feel like early this year might be a bad time to buy a moderately expensive TV because OLEDs seem just around the corner and LCD prices might plummet even further (if thats possible) making a 3k investment look very obsolete quickly. I saw a 50" Bravia with a PS3 for $2500 AUS from the Sony store just after Christmas, it was a promotion but still. 2 years ago that would have been unimaginable. Check out the prices on secondhand HD Rear projection sets on ebay. How the mighty have fallen.

Well at 1 fps thats 60 in a minute. Since the end result needs 72 frames then its about trying to cram as much movement into those frames. Rolling for 4 minutes real time (at 1fps) means 240 frames which I think will give you more than enough to put something together in post but the problem is if the clouds are moving slowly and not much happens in that 4 minutes then it kind of eliminates the time compression from the time lapse because theres no indication of motion or time passing. In that case you will need to extend the period of your time lapse in real time and shoot more frames. Ideally, using something like a digitach, you could space the time out between exposures (like 1 frame every 4 seconds) and compress time even more. It really depends on how much you want the clouds to move through frame and that means you'll have to judge it for yourself on the day. It could well mean that in the end you do have to wait for 40mins so that the clouds have enough time to change and move for your shot. In terms of footage, I don't think having 2400 frames is going to help you more than say 240 but because the camera can only do 1fps you may have to shoot that much and edit out every tenth frame to make it usable. I would do the time lapse at the beginning of each take but if you had too you might be able to fudge it in post. Do you know anyone who's handy in After Effects? I would suggest something similar even you weren't doing the ramp.

Yeah I get the math but my point is that for a 3 second shot, of say clouds, to be created from 1:40 of footage you're not left with much in terms distinguishable action. From my experience doing this in the past, compression of time and frame blending (which is the sort of process this will go through in order to achieve the shots projected length in post) mean you require some handles to work with but too much and the action just turns into a transparent blur. I mean we're talking about compressing 2400 frames into 72. If they start to go about the process of removing every odd frame or something then the gaps in time become problematic and the frames are too dissimilar causing jitter. Apart from all that if this is low budget then we're talking about burning through 20% of a roll each take not to mention the amount of time out of the schedule. If the directors certain they want roughly 3-5 seconds of time lapse I would look at shooting for 3 or 4 minutes real time or 200 frames ish. If the clouds are moving so slowly in that space of time that not much changes then do as Chris suggests, it would put the most frames down to work with. I don't think a digitach would be that much to rent and they're very easy to use. Even book rate is probably well within your reach. I think you could use it to get a better result, more time between exposures and experimenting with bursts. Have you thought about changing the shutter angle on your Sr3? Maybe a shorter exposure could help? Good luck, these types of things are really good fun. Maybe instead of changing aperture you could pull out the appropriate amount of NDs before ramping to Sync, that way there'll be less of a shift in DOF and make the two shots more seamless. If you get the opportunity post your results here, Id be interested to see them.

20 minutes is a lot of footage at 1 fps. How long does the director want the shot to be 3 seconds? A half minute time lapse in the middle of a short film sounds pretty indulgent but speeding up a lot of time lapse material into a quick shot might ens up with so little detail in anything moving that it looks nearly static . You can get external digitachs from a local rental house which at the flick of a switch will return you to sync or even a ramping device for your camera which can be programmed and incorporated into your move. How were you going to handle the exposure change or was it going to be a 1/48 exposure during your initial 1 fps run? Depending on how quick the reflected clouds are moving you might find that 1/48 exposures might be to jittery and require some work in post or even in telecine. Ive done a lot of time lapse on 16mm using digitachs and they're great devices. You could ramp down using different combinations of intervals and numbers of exposures. It could even be incorporated into the move with practice. Don't forget to tape the view finder.

Hi Johnathon, I was never that impressed with the Z1's lens but I loved its ergonomics and it was designed with a shooter in mind. How did you find it compared to the Z1 and aren't Sony Cams generally Zeiss glass? What was the flip out LCD like and did you notice a shallower DOF with the new slightly larger sensors? Thanks Sasha

I think part of the fun of Jim Murdoch was his picture, which turned out was of a Scottish landscape painter and stolen from his website (I believe the painter was genuinely called Jim Murdoch). It seems every once in awhile a new persona crops up in these forums who is obviously posting under a false name and generally starts with some very inflammatory remarks designed to get a response. Whatever happened to that guy who ran a digital rental house in Germany? Jan Van Kroph?

While this is obviously not something any of us are going to buy. http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/07/hands-o...-inch-behemoth/ Thats big. I always thought DLP projection looked great. I saw a demonstration of the Sim Domino (I think thats what its called) and it looked very good. Is there an issue with DLP projection and some people experiencing a rainbow effect in their peripheral vision? If I was in the market I think the Panasonic AE900 looks very good at its price point.

Leno might be able to keep the show going in the short term but I think overtime its going to be difficult for him to maintain a watchable show without writers. The fear is that he'll start to repeat himself or worse. Are SAG boycotting all the late night shows? Can Letterman attract guests that wont cross the picket lines, so to speak, on other shows? I watched the Daily show and the Colbert report, wow, they were really flat.

You mean like Short Circuit? Actors can be so phony... Do all versions of the DVD come with the little hologram toy?

Great, Anyone seen any good 3d films lately? Ive seen a couple and I didn't think it added to the film or was anymore enjoyable at all. I guess for some people 70mm projection seems a bit last century, despite looking fantastic. Just because the 3d images will be easier to achieve doesn't mean it will be anymore engaging.

Thanks Mitch, Yeah a Green to Magenta shift is exactly what I've seen. From packages rented from a few different rental houses. Thanks for the heads up.

Ive seen some pretty dramatic shifts and vignetting using the pro 35. Severe green vignetting and dark corners. I don't know anything about the white shading settings, could you explain them further? Is this something which will happen over time and needs adjusting regularly during a production or is it something I could test for at check out and feel secure that it would stay in place for the rest of the shoot? Is it in the spinning mirror optics or something else? I don't know much about the mechanism of the pro 35 and my experience with them has been limited to short productions, week long rentals at the most. I also never have a decent monitor on set which would only expose a problem further which I don't know how to fix. Could this misalignment effect sharpness and focus as well? Sasha

Cinema is a 2d medium. Much of the language relies on this lack of depth. Ive never seen anything in 3d which helped advance the story rather than the "experience". If I see another 3d film were a monster leaps out of the screen or a branch passes overhead then I might just throw my copy of Freddy Krueger 6: the comic in 3d with the red and blue glasses in a fire. What 3d might do is help bring people back to the theater, but I don't see why it would be a compelling option for most films and film makers. I don't find it any more immersive and from a direction point of view it seems to be another headache to worry about now that all the action must be staged with depth in mind. Are we talking about the same style of editing and coverage we've always had? Is that appropriate for 3d? Id rather have larger screens and better sound and projection at my local cinemas. Thats immersive. Sasha

This link should help. http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...=minima+shutter Sasha

My understanding from having worked with the camera is that there are two versions of the shutter (or revisions of the camera). One is fixed at 172.8 and one is fixed at 180. From what i remember one of these revisions is far rarer than the other but I might be entirely wrong. The shutter is fixed (unchangeable) and you would have to look elsewhere for an adjustable shutter S16mm package. This has been discussed before on this site and a search of the forums should produce some results and answers. The A-Minima is a fun camera to use.

Its a pity Martin Campbell isn't directing this one. Both his Bonds are excellent and managed to brief new life into the series.

Well he must like more than just the look he gets from shooting digital. At a guess he might appreciate the work flow and immediacy of shooting digital. He shoots a lot of takes so there would be a lot of film flying through that camera and maybe re load time wears on his nerves. Although I never really got this 'advantage' as you're rarely waiting long on a load especially on a film as big as this with truck loaders and full camera crews. It is impressive how much of that night glow is visible in Collateral and Miami Vice. For my money (and I'm a really big fan, "Manhunter" and "Thief" FTW...) I enjoyed "Collateral", which had a lot of 35mm in it. But "Miami Vice" was let down by its script long before its look bothered me. What was the story with Paul Cameron on Collateral? I really like his work and it seems to me that they would have a natural dialog judging from their styles but it didn't work out?

Well Orson Welles made ads for wine (he was in them)...

Hi Lavern, I haven't heard any recent rumors but in the past it was always meant to be a Chris Cunningham project. From what I remember, which could be wrong/scuttlebut, there were problems because Cunningham and Gibson couldn't see eye to eye about the script. It could have been a wild film. I love the book, but I cant imagine it as a film.

Interesting topic. There are lots of good examples but Id like to throw my two cents in for the episode in season 5 of Sopranos which is entirely a dream of Tony's. A little left field maybe but so much is revealed about the character and it was very rewarding to people who had followed the show since the beggining. Also, and this has to do more with memories, I liked the way that dreams were treated in "The Limey" which used a misaligned shutter effect to create a great smeared high lights look which I found very convincing. But there are lots of great examples.

Went to the screening at the Astor on Friday night. Very packed theater must have been close to 400 people. Its not a vastly different edit from the directors cut but they have played with the sound a lot. In fact my biggest complaint was the sound which was very wrong at the Astor (usually pretty good, big auditorium sound). My friend wondered if it had been mixed for home theater? Lots of instances of the speakers giving out. They screened the trailer for "Cars" before hand which was very impressive and overall I thought the projection looked really good. Jitter-less, clean and sharp and all the way to the edges of the screen but weak blacks and maybe the throw was a little long for it because it was very pitchy in the blacks as well. The image would just drop off to nothing (well milky nothing) very quickly and overall it had much more contrast than I remember. But it did look very good and the touch ups they'd made were welcome. Something I noticed, and I could be wrong about this, but the blues through the film which I remember as being very thick and vivid seemed to have been re graded to more of a cyan and some of the other instances of white light seemed to have more green in them. Now this might just be a subjective thing and I haven't seen a print of this for 6 or 7 years so my most recent memories are from the dvd but the colours did look different to me. Have they given it a kind of simulated modern grade? Did anyone else go? I was impressed and enjoyed the new edit and its touch ups (no skycar wires!) but Im interested as to what other people thought of the projection at the Astor.

I have a ticket for Friday, looking forward to it. The Astor screen is pretty big, good test. Cant wait.

Sorry, Im not sure what you meant here. Are you saying you unloaded the camera in daylight? Im not sure I understood you correctly, but this could obviously be the source of the problem. If it was a light in the eyepiece then there wouldn't be fogging between frames as the shutter would be closed during the film transport. Ive come late to this conversation, sorry you might have already covered this.

Good point.