A. Whitehouse

Just to add (and thank you for relating this for me, it got quite convoluted) that part of the scandal was over the way the story slowly leaked out and over the fact that RED techs removed the camera and equipment from set claiming that the RED camera team (a third party rental company) had been ridiculed and that the firmware wasn't up to date. It was reported afterwards (as I understand it) that the firmware had been up to date but the story got somewhat fuzzy after awhile. For my part, and understand I don't know anyone involved so this is just my two cents, it seems that Kodak should be allowed to conduct whatever tests it wants. In particular if they are internal like they claimed. It seemed like a bad move to remove the camera from testing and then leak the story yourself in a public forum but then I don't really know what happened. I can understand that they would feel fairly attached to 18 months of hard work but its on sale and being delivered. If its in camera peoples hands and things are being shot with it then we shouldn't have to wait for future firmware upgrades before we can test it, that seems obvious to me. But then who knows what really happened. Ive certainly seen comparisons between RED and Kodak stocks on the RED website. On a side note, in relation to that, I wonder how people feel about the idea of a manufacturer being involved like this at a point of production. Why should a manufacturer have any say in whats being shot with their gear once its been sold. If the third party rental company did ask for intervention why was it necessary? If they were upset with the production why couldn't they pack up and go home? Maybe by years end some of the slowly released cameras will make their way to Australia and Ill get to have a look at one. Perhaps by then all the cameras abilities will be unlocked by firmware upgrades, I wonder if people will try hacking the RED for their own, impatient, purposes...

Theres been a lot of debate here and on CML. Not all positive and without scandal. I don't know if the issue of the Kodak comparison test has been discussed here or on Reduser but it has proven to be a big issue on CML. Now no one will discuss parties involved by name for fear of being sued.

I think the laser is only to give an idea of the direction where as the actual detection is done by a sonic finder like radar. I'm not totally sure of this.

I haven't used them but I tried to get them for my last job and they were unavailable, so I hesitate to suggest something I haven't used but have you looked at the Elite primes. Ultra primes aren't available here in Melbourne (that Ive seen) and nearly everything I've worked on has used Superspeeds. I understand they rent for quite a competitive price (at least here) so they might be worth testing. Again, I don't work for them and haven't used them but I am planning to test them against superspeeds on my next gig in November. I hope this helps and maybe you should have a look at them, they caught my attention.

Hi Mathew, I'm happy to send you a roll of 5293 and 0217 (try finding that stock in a catalog! I assure you its real) and you can have the bragging rites of owning genuine LOTR recans. The only thing is I'm in Melbourne and I don't think the shipping would be worth it but I'm happy to do it if your happy to pay. The stock is unexposed, naturally, and has been in a fridge for a long time. Both are 300'+ (I have heaps but I figured since you aren't actually going to use it length isn't an issue). If I were you Id go looking for print clippings from your local cinemas as thats much more informative than unexposed film. Just a thought, I might even be able to throw in some '18 or '05. I really need to clear out my fridge.

Just be aware that the dip tests are very precise and Ive shot whole shorts with few problems on stock that was declared unusable and no good at the lab. If your going a TK or Digital route it isn't as much of a big deal. On my own project I made sure to shoot the first 30 feet of each roll for make-up, filter, lens tests etc. It was a pain in the ass but my stock had been in a fridge for 5 years +. It was interesting shooting on 5293 in a world of V2s. While I knew that the stock had been well taken care of before it had hit my fridge (i scored it from a really large production) age does take its toll and it showed up in grain on some rolls. Anyway, don't give up hope if the tests come back negative but go into this with your eyes open. Sasha

They aren't robots...

At a guess, something Ive seen students do wrong when loading SR2 mags is fail to properly attach the take up film to the core so it eventually comes loose during shooting. Its usually about 2 minutes in but you can hear the problem before you see it if you know what I mean. The take up side is then like spaghetti but its surprising how often the footage is largely undamaged and usable. Im not sure if that is the issue here but its something Ive seen several times.

Wow, thats a very specific rumor. Now where's a 800T V2...

I think the issue isn't money but access to the location which was a major issue between the production and the local and state governments. I agree, as I understand it, the lab is always the first blamed in order to secure the insurance when in fact it could something quite different. I wonder if the footage is 'lost' or damaged or what? Could a complicated photochemical process have been messed up? How could that much footage have been lost without someone spotting it in dailies? I really don't think sabotage is very likely at one of the largest European labs. I was surprised that Singers new film wasnt being shot digitally considering the amount of praise heaped on the genesis (even comparing it to 65mm tests they did) by him and the producers of Superman. Is this a project of his own? Has he been hired to direct? How much influence would a director like Singer have on the shooting format? How much would Tom Cruise have?

I saw the film and I have to say I was fairly disappointed. It was pretty under written for a 2 hour film. It is very beautiful and masterfully directed but the story is very thin on the ground and, without giving anything away, was anyone else surprised by the anti dramatic climax? I love slow, contemplative films but it feels as if the Man from London was channeling Melville without much of the tension. I liked it but left the cinema pretty disappointed. It really split the audience.

My favorite film. Im a huge P. K. Dick fan, the book is quite different. As far as incongruities in the film goes Ill give my own perspective. In the directors cut Deckard is clearly a replicant and Ridley Scott has said as much. There are several clues. The Unicorn Dream, Deckard's "Theme" animal. This is taken somewhat from the book where humans are distinguished from Replicants in their ability to emphasize with one another and animals. They participate in a religion in which they use a machine to share the experience of their Martyr who is stoned to death at the hands of his community. In the film characters are related to animals but not in a literal way. When the Blade Runner at the end makes a match stick Unicorn it suggests an awareness of his designed memories. Similar to this there is the scene between Rachel and Deckard where he exposes her intimate memories and she becomes resigned to her existence. She then turns on Rick and tries to pick holes in him, she plays a tune on the piano which seems familiar to him and lets her hair down like the picture of his relative. She looks nearly identical and this suggests something about the pool of memories which their designers draw from to build the individual. Reflective eyes. The Voight Kompf exposes Replicants by triggering an emotional response and unconscious dilation of the pupil. Several Replicants have reflective eyes in the film, you'll spot it even in the animals. Even Tyrell their "creator" wears reflective glasses which can be read into in a variety of ways. Also when the Replicants arrive on earth they murder the designer of their eyes in his shop. Their is an un filmed scene in the script behind Tyrells bedroom which explored some of his motivations for creating the Replicants. The vulnerability and performance of the human characters compared to the Replicants. Look at the human characters in the film. Genre based caricatures from detective stories or film noir, the Replicants on the other hand behave quite differently. Detached, aloof, cold; nothing really bothers them except death which they seem unable to cope with. Deckard behaves in much the same way as Roy Batty. He fights just as hard to stay alive. The reason I enjoy this film so much is because these are clues to a mystery which the audience is never really asked to participate in. It operates on the level of a novel which is a unique and difficult thing to achieve in a script and while its botched together and feels as if the edit has been abandoned because of the sea of ideas. And doesn't it look good, still stands up today effects and all (even the cables lifting the skycars). Its one of those films which is an entire style and genre all on its own. The book "Future Noir" is a great and detailed read about the production. Contrary to popular belief Ridley Scott was not forced to include the voice over for the theatrical release, it was something he had pushed for a one point. He and the producer were fired at one point in the production but they just continued to show up for work. Yes the Unicorn is from "Legend" and the Theatrical ending is from "The Shining". There was a pan Atlantic stoush between the English crew and American crew during the production. I really encourage fans to have a look at "Future Noir". There is an extra chapter of the book available online which deals with the camera work. Ill try and find a link somewhere in my bloated bookmarks tab. I'm a huge fan, made me want to make films. I cant wait to see and get the new cut.

Hi Matt, Try Cameraquip in South Melbourne. I might be wrong about this but I believe they have quite a bit of 16BL equipment out back, or at least they did. Try and speak to Malcom and maybe they can help you out. Are you based in Melbourne?

I don't know if Kodak would bother developing a 'Look' stock like the vivid. I don't know if its too early for a Vision 3 line. At a guess I would imagine its an update to their "look management" system or perhaps an expansion of the expression range?

Something that comes to mind is also shot on location (though not strictly adhered to) and shot on the streets amongst the public. I think an indie spirit with light compact equipment is definitely in the right vein. Although a lot of the films are clearly not only shot with available light. There are some great films which you can draw inspiration from.

Spike Lee has made mini dv films before, two from memory. There are plenty of other mini dv features if that is what you were asking? Or were you looking for upcoming mini dv productions?

Hi Richardson, Can I ask why you would have your footage transferred in NTSC and not PAL if you are in Canberra? Otherwise Im not sure I understand your question. I haven't heard of Colourlab, are they based in ACT?

Its funny because it is an ad for a video game. I wonder how often this stuff looks good in a post suite (projected or not) but once its been touched up and output it looks awful on the big screen. I sometimes think that a lot of the bad keying you see in films is a result of it not really being monitored in an ideal environment.

Oh, and does anyone have an opinion about the Elites? Angeneiux zooms?

Hi Brad, Are the Primos available as PL mount? I must admit Id always assumed panavision mount was incompatible but Ive never used a primo (or panavision specific anything). Is there an adapter? Or is PL the same? Are they S16mm lenses, whats the widest Focal length?

I might be wrong about this but I seem to remember that "Speed racer" was being shot on the F23. I think I read that in a CML post somewhere buried in a discussion about depth of field. Are there many available in the US yet?

It wasn't very good. A sophomore release from a good director who has yet to find the success of his early films. It was a mix of digital character and actress, though bits were very well done. Why would any director not want to work with cameras and actors ( This is inherently the plot of S1m0ne)? Its like saying theater was on the way out the day they invented the puppet. I knew the marketing for RED was effective on the weekend when I heard a safety officer and stunt coordinator explaining to a producer about its imminent release and the earth shattering ramifications for the local 'industry'. Two different sets of people on a very small low budget crew had reservations. In a town like Melbourne even if theres only 7 of them it'll be a glut making for a very competitive rental market and my understanding is that several rental houses are getting at least that many. It would be a good time to own a set of PL superspeeds as there's not a limitless supply of glass to attach to the front end here. I find it amusing how much excitement there is for what really remains an unknown quantity for 99% of the community. Lemach (a local rental house) must be running a RED night soon and that would be the first opportunity for most of us, reservation holders included, to actually see the thing. After nearly two years of intense internet speculation.

Been looking forward to this for a long time, it seems to have been in production for years. The western might have returned, we should be there to greet it.

You could try shooting through a glass object which is right up against the lens. Ive seen it done with a thin square vase and as you turn it the distortion moves across the frame. If it helps it was also shot with an sr2. Easy to test as well. I'm not familiar with the squishy lens but this might be a simple budget soloution.

"Tigerland" I remember a lot of that was hand held too, and S16mm. Millions of short films...