Timothy David Orme

Okay, total newbie question. What's print down mean? I'm assuming it's a different thing than pull processing.

I think each film size definitely has its own character. 16mm has GRAIN, if that's what you're into. 35mm can be cheap, if you want it to be (buy recans or short ends). I'm not 'dissing' super8mm, but the only things I can think of that are beneficial to shooting on that format is that loading is super easy (pop in a cartridge and you're done), and that cameras can be very affordable. The problem with the latter is they can also be cheap.

New, from Forde/Alpha Cine, it goes for $32 a cartridge. Make me an offer.

Super Duper 8: can also be called Max8 or Ultra8 if SD8 sounds dumb to you. can be faulty in that some of cameras need a bit of a repositioning of the lens. Example: the Nizos tend to vignette a little. shoot with a apsect ratio is 1:66 at the largest, a little bigger on others. To get a 16:9, just cut/crop the image. If you're interested in more info check out the webpage for SLEEP ALWAYS: http://www.friendlyfirefilms.ca/. You can even talk to the filmmakers directly.

I don't have any qualms with planning for a little sound work in post, but I'm really not a fan of ADR. Foley I can deal with, but ADR not so much. It just never seems to me that ADR has the same depth to it and it usually ends up looking like a foreign film with the voices dubbed over. That's less believable I think.

So yesterday I was finishing up shooting on location on my newest short when I realized how much of a pain the project was in general because we shot the majority of it on location with no control over the environment, the sound, etc. Thank god we shot on mini-DV and weren't burning film. On my next project, however, I won't be shooting on mini-DV, I'll be shooting on 16mm with sync sound and we won't have a budget that will allow for too many takes (or so I'm imagining at this point). Anyways, this makes me wonder how most people deal with these sound issues when they're shooting on film. Do most people just build a set (when possible), or deal with it in post? I ask mainly because I like to deal with as few 'problems' or potential problems in post as possible. Any tips, advice, words of wisdom?

I was just curious what people prefer when it comes to filters. What are the advantages and disadvantages of screw on filters or 4x4 filters, etc.

Ah, the old film vs. video/digital dialogue. It is a great dialogue, isn't it? Sure it's tiring, but really it's a dialogue I think we should embrace because no matter how we approach it, it helps us look at things differently and become more tuned in to our filmmaking beliefs. Sure there are no set answers. That's fine. That's actually what makes the conversation so interesting, the fact that there is no answer. If the there was an answer we'd simply move on without thinking about it. So, here's my answer. As for super8 goes, I'd avoid it for anything you're shooting sound on. I worked very hard to get a Nizo prepared for a shoot only to discover it was still going to be a lot more trouble than it should have to link up sound. Having a crystal sync motor is something that's important to me and aside from the quasi-sync motors provided by the film group, that's not an option. It's much easier to just step up to 16mm. As for film vs. digital in general, I'm currently voting film. However, I'm not a film snob. If digital gets better--ie, as good as film--and is as easy to shoot as it is now, I'll have no problem shooting digital. Also, if digital loses the 'fake' image I always associate with digital images I'll shoot digitally. Until then, I'm a fan of the best picture you can get. 35mm or even 16mm is still a better image than even the best HD cams. Plus, I'm just a bigger fan of grain than pixels and digital noise.

Hello everybody-- Well, at the end of a long and grueling bit of fighting with a camera I came to find out my super8mm camera was not going to be up for par for the film I was shooting in just a few days. Needless to say, I had to do something, so I resorted to my backup camera, a Panasonic DVX100B. So much for film on that project. So, I'm stuck with 50 50ft cartridgesof 7217 200T Kodak Vision2 and 2 50ft cartridges of Kodak 7285 Black and White Reversal. It was all purchased with prepaid processing through Forde/AlphaCine labs in Seattle. I thought I'd offer it to the people who've helped me most (this message board) before I went to ebay. If you're interested, email me, Tim, at bornmadfilms@gmail.com. Thanks.

This sort of brings up a general question for me, but a question much along the same lines. A new project I'm going to be working on in a few months is going to involve some major set building on my part. How much light do you need for windows? I don't have any HMIs--in fact I was looking to use tungsten lights with daylight correection gels over them--and I know they put out more light than tungsten, but is there any kind of scale you can use to judge how much l ight you need for a given window? What kind of experiences, practical application examples do you guys have? Whenever I read something in a cinematography magazine it always seems as though the people have 20k HMIs or something and I was wondering if there's options for those of us on a slightly smaller budget.

As a fairly new independent film maker, I've concentrated normally on short films where I could pay the actor at the end of a shoot and it'd only be a few days after we began. As I prepare for a feature that is going to take a while longer to shoot, I'm wondering when is the best time to pay the actors. Is there a standard or accepted method of doing this?

I think Michael has a good point that a lot is going to depend on your shooting ratio. 5:1 seems okay, but I've seen many productions do it for much less. I think that depends as much on your shooting environment as it does your crew and experience. If you're shooting in a studio and your sound is controlled, that's a big help. Shooting on the streets of Chicago is a little different. Also, rehearsing really helps.

So, I was planning on shooting a short on super8mm and just found out the camera isn't up to par and we can't just bag the production (we're way too far into it), so we're resorting to our backup, a Panasonic DVX100B. I had chosen super8mm to get that grainy, gritty look, because quite frankly it just matches the character. Now I'm left wondering what I might be able to do to get a look that's something like that on the Panasonic. I was doing a little experimenting yesterday and I liked the white washed look of raising the Master Pedestal to about +10, and I thought the Gamma should be Low, but I wonder if there aren't other things I can do to make the image look a little less flat. I guess that is the problem with digital cameras though, isn't it? Any ideas?

I know I've asked questions like this similar, but I've just about figured everything out. So, the most common prime lens for a 16mm camera is a 25mm (or so they tell me). How much bigger do that do people go? I've got a 12.5 and a 25mm and I'm looking to get a 9mm and 16mm. How important is a 50mm or a 75mm lens for your everyday, standard production (I know, whatever that is). Also, I currently don't have a zoom and I was wondering how important people think that is, aside from when you're actually going to be zomming during a take. Would that be a good way of me getting a longer lens, by getting a zoom and using it for longer/wider shots?

You know, I've been debating whether or not to go uncompressed or not, and your post really makes me think about it. Besides the fact that it'll cost me a lot more money, I've only heard that it'll help give me more room for color correction. Well, someone did tell me there's 11X more data uncompressed than on miniDV, and that's a huge difference. Right?

I'm shooting my next film (about 50 rolls) on Vision-2 200T Color Negatives (Kodak). Does anybody know of anywhere that does dailies? I haven't had much luck. Also, I'm wondering if there are any super8ers out there that have a particular lab they like to use. I'm looking to go from film to an uncompressed image on a hard drive. Any ideas? Thanks a million.

How do I check that information? I'm shooting with a Nizo6080 and the manual I have is in German.

Most super 8 cameras are set up to shoot 18fps standard, right? So, if I'm shooting 24fps, does that mean I have to compensate my light readings/f-stops in order to get an accurate reading because 24fps lets in less light than 18fps? So, if I do compensate light, how much? Thanks again for all your help.

If you're an independent film maker that uses 30 year old cameras to shoot films, dailies are just as much about checking how the camera's running as they are checking the focus, framing etc. I always make sure the cameras are properly serviced, but over longer shoots I never know what to expect. I've never shot with a video tap, but I've thought about it quite a bit. This forum is making me wonder what good they actually are...?

You CAN get a blimp for the Arri S, I wouldn't really recommend it, unless you mind adding about 100pounds to the weight of your camera. Here's a good link with info on the blimp: http://owyheesound.com/owyheesound_instruc...x-16_blimp.html. Having said that, the blimp does make the camera about as quiet as can be. If you're dead set on an arri, you have a few choices. Any of the SR family are great, but they're quite spendy. If the BL is more your style, it'll shoot sync sound, but you will have to blimp the lens.

I'm looking to get a few primes for my 16mm and I'm trying to figure out which sizes would work best. I've already picked up a 25mm, but I'm not sure which other lenses I should get. I can see getting a 50mm, but I'm not sure if I need both a 9mm or a 12.5mm , or both? Any suggestions?

If you're sticking with super 8, there's no reason to get anything really heavy duty, unless you plan on blimping your camera. I use a Manfroto 503/525 combo. It's good for shooting with the lighter super8 and digital cameras. The fluid head's nice because it allows for very smooth pans and tilts, assuming you have an operator that takes the time to work it properly. If you were going to shoot any type of heavier camera I'd suggest a completely different type of setup. A fluid head would still be fine (although much more spendy), but you'd have to get some heavy duty sticks, like the Ronford Baker set, or even a nice old school set of wooden sticks (which I love).

Looks great. So, here's my next question. I'm planning on using these arri standard mount lenses with both an arri s, and an adapter from arri standard to a cp-16r. Does anyone know how well that adapter works? Ie., if it's worth getting?

Thanks for the clips, those are really hlepful. I definitely have an idea what I'm looking for.

I'm looking to get a set of primes (16mm, 25mm, 50mm) in an arriflex standard mount. I'm wondering what are the best lenses or what people like to work with the best? Zeiss, Angenieux, etc?