Tim O'Connor

I love it. Independent filmmaking is like racing against the factory team. Racing and filmmaking are often about what can you do to succeed when you have almost no budget compared to others in the race.

Hi Ben, You haver asked a question which is so broad that it's likely that many others on here might feel that they would have to write a book length response to begin to answer you. That is actually a common occurrence on here; the "How do I light my movie?" question without a lot more detail. You have come to a good forum though. I would suggest reading some of the many good books on film lighting that are around (there is a list on this forum elsewhere) searching the archives on here and subscribing to magazines such as "American Cinematographer". That could take a long time but if you enjoy it then you'll have fun. In the meantime, if you can formulate some specific questions, then you'll find some good help on here. For example, consider if people asked you what they needed to do produce good writing. "Good lighting" can mean properly exposed images but it also can mean much more. If you haven't had even properly exposed shots on previous productions, then getting that could indeed be your number one goal for "good lighting" and could mean getting somebody who knows what he or she is doing, or waiting until you have the skill, gear, and crew to light and shoot it yourself if you have that inclination.

P2 footage uses log and transfer but if you recorded to Mini-DV tape with an HVX-200, are you using straight "capture" ? Check your capture presets; DV NTSC should work. Have you done this before and it worked and now it isn't? If this is your first go, maybe you just have to choose the right capture and sequence settings. Is FCP seeing the HVX-200? Are you using Firewire, not USB? Is your capture camera on VCR and menu items set up okay?

Talked for an hour tonight with a guy in Dunkin' Donuts parking lot driving a steel body (not a kit) '32 5 window Ford Coupe. He said that that guy who made "American Graffitti" got it exactly right; that things were exactly like that. I've heard that from lots of people. It's funny. "American Graffitti was actually a fairly low budgeted studio picture that got made because Francis Coppola agreed to work as line producer and make sure that it came in on budget. It did come in on time and on budget although it was a grueling shoot. For a while it was the most profitable movie made in terms of production dollars spent vs. box office dollars. We talked about how the movie still holds up and also how much we both detest "The Fast and the Furious" which could have been great if it left out all the stupid hijacking stuff and told a story about the racers. There is an audience for a good car movie I'm sure.

Thanks, that's a good start for me.

It seems sensible to me. I think that it's a helpful comment from somebody who put it nicely and who offers a lot of helpful commentary on here. I do think that it's ridiculous that you would respond contentiously. Oh, by the way, you said "it's the same as if you were to go into the shop and rent $14,000 worth of equipment." I thought that it was the same as a $15,000.00 rental for $14,000.00.

Your script sounds great. We have New England Dragway in Eoping, N.H. and I've shot up there many times. Bracket racing levels the field for a lot of people without endless $ but with great skills and passion. We need more good drag racing movies!

Would you be able to say what printer(s) you have found to give the best results as well? Thanks.

Cool link, thanks. All great cars. Any of them make it into one of your productions?

Thank you, I greatly appreciate the advice. If I do come across a really good deal; I'm going to start putting a lot of short ends to good use!

Hi David, hope that you're doing well. Why would the IIC be the camera to own if you were to own one camera? Speaking of which, I see them for sale from time to time at decent prices. I would love to have one. If I ever did pick one up, and could start off with one lens only for a while, what lens would you recommend? Is there a particular zoom for that camera that would be the best lens to look for to use as a v. prime for a time? As far as sentiment about cameras, I have a pretty good collection of cameras that I have picked up because they mean something to me. Most of them I have got really inexpensively because I have bought them in nonworking but good cosmetic shape. Most are film cameras but I came across a JVC three tube camera a couple weeks ago of the type that I used 20 years ago. I have no desire to use a tube camera now but it's a blast to have. It's bright orange and it reminds me of fun times and I enjoy having it, plus it's a good 80s prop. For that kind of fun, it was worth 25 bucks to me. If I could have one thing that appeared in a movie (going way off thread here I guess) it would be the '32 Ford from "American Graffitti".

can understand if someone has a new take on a classic story. I can understand if you want to remake a movie that did not quite work. I can understand if you want to reboot a franchise to make some money. I don't understand why you need to remake Bayona's excellent 2007 film El Orfanato, a very visual horror a film that can play anywhere if the powers to be gave it the chance. so we have to remake it because it's in Spanish! -- It's simply ludicrous. I have immense respect for Spielberg, the thing is I love Harvey and I can't remember there was anything wrong with that movie. Sure the original will always be there, and I am sure Spielberg's version will be fine probably even great. But still the "Imaginary friend idea" could have been taken in lots of different directions without directly remaking Harvey, I'll be happy to write an original for him, for free. So is it just me? Or are my fellow cinematography.comers also as tired as I'm, of the current remake craze? I know this post may seem similar to the original post but I think that more people will look at this because it's in color. People just won't watch black and white posts.

Thanks Robert, I'm going to parts store tomorrow; I'll check it out.

"Once pitting has begun there is no going back." I know! I had to keep a car outside for a couple years and if I had only taken the wheels off or at least coated them with wax or something I wouldn't have pitted chrome reverse wheels (the old type that you can't even find anymore) now.

There are many good points made here. I would add that if you could be satisfied with a relatively light camera(s) you might look into using a Sticky Pod product. I bought this Sticky Pod pro a while ago after seeing an advertisement on here and have used it a lot with good results. I've driven on the highway at good speeds and it is relatively unobtrusive so that it doesn't draw a ton of attention. I was using it once mounted on an old Caddy and a policeman in a cruiser asked me about it out of curiosity. We had a friendly talk and he didn't say anything else about it. Here is my Sticky Pod Pro which I modified by drilling a hole in it to accommodate the head and thus mount a heavier camera. I snapped this picture for illustration purposes (when a car is moving I would have the mount heavily saftied!) Also, I have taken lighter cameras on the highway but have gone slower with this set-up. It would probably be okay but this mount definitely works well for lighter cameras.

Hi JD, I hope that you are doing well. I have a project about which you gave me a good suggestion last year that I hope to post some info. on soon. (Yeah, last year, I know!) I think that Robert may have been referring to Simple Green the cleaner that comes in a spray bottle rather than an abrasive pad. Simple Green

This guy, Dwight Cody, might be able to help you in some way. His mission statement says that he's dedicated to helping "Traditional Cinema Filmmakers" and while he is based out here, he advertises nationwide service. I'll bet that he at least could give you same names in your area and that he would be glad to do it. This is a nice guy who is on a mission. Movieola The above link goes to his website. Here is some more info. www.CUTFILM.com P.O. BOX 1835 COTUIT, MA 02635 Tel. (617) 908-6258 E-Mail bconnect@cutfilm.com Fax (508) 428-2036 from website: "We also sell and service splicers, Moviscopes, Moviola flatbeds and most other editing equipment."

That's a funny interview, Scott (again, probably unintentionally.) In the audio clips on that link you can detect the challenge the interviewer seems to be feeling in getting answers to fairly ordinary questions. Chris, there doesn't seem to be any part of this project that makes sense. You know how people used to talk about watching "Plan 9 from Outer Space" ? It's kind of like that in its own way and it then goes beyond with DVD extras.

Yes...sorta. On a DVD extra, there is an interview with producer/director Mr. Wiseau. He says that he hadn't fully understood the difference between HD and film. "At the time I did not have sufficient information and I was confused about these two formats" so he says that he chose this two camera two format method as a means of finding that knowledge and that, with the abundance of side by side footage the has now, he plans to share that information regarding "What is the true difference between these two formats?" He says "I'm planning to release a DVD documentary about HD and 35mm. film comparison, and also write a book about it." Serge, you're great at writing pitch lines but beware your competition here. The movie is introduced on the DVD with the unattributed quote "the best movie of the year." Oh, the movie was shot in L.A. with some scenes in San Francisco. There is a 2nd Unit credit but the names are of the actors who went to S.F. and nobody else, no crew.

There is a movie called "The Room" out on DVD, produced in 2002. It has developed a cult following among those who find its unintentional hilarity in ostensibly serious moments to be so extreme that there are midnight showings at theaters across the country, much like there has been with "Rocky Horror" with people dressing up and yet different in this case in that fans shout improved dialogue at the screen. The movie is clearly shot on video, although there are two trailers in the DVD extras, one of which is presented as the 35mm trailer. In the DVD extras, the director Tommy Wiseau says that the entire movie was shot simultaneously in HD and film. There are many pictures in the behind the scenes featurette on the DVD of a an Arri 35BL mounted side by side with a Panasonic DVCPRO HD camera. How would you like to frame for two cameras like this?

I simply do not get to enough movies to give a solid recommendation. I wanted to tell you, although perhaps you know, that the Somerville Theater in Davis Square goes back to the days of vaudeville. That's certainly before my time, but it was a kick to feel its history when going to the movies there. Some of my best movie experiences were there back before they modernized the theater. In the 80s it had a repertory schedule that showed four different movies a day! That lasted for only a while but it was great. The movies were classics and offbeat that weren't generally shown anywhere else. It was great to be able to see big screen movies (one big screen back then) from the balcony. i haven't been to the Brattle in Harvard Square in a while but that is run by movie lovers. I'm sure that they're paying attention to how things look on screen. Also check out the Coolidge in Coolidge Corner in Brookline. For big release mainstream movies I'm not sure where to tell you but the Coolidge is probably your best local chance to see "Lawrence of Arabia" on a big screen. They bring classics like that around every once in a while, as well as a lot of funky independent stuff.

Had a chance to snap these while quickly walking by the lamp/bulb section at my local Lowe's. Some of the fluorescent fixtures have now added color temp. values to their packaging. Didn't get a chance to investigate so I offer no opinion other than this marks some kind of cultural/consumer info. change, I guess.

Here are a couple pictures of reset button on DVX-100B (got it last fall.) Haven't had a chance to look/find manual but as I recall, it's a back to the way it came out of the box reset.

This has happened to me a couple of times before out of hundreds of hours of shooting, usually when I've been tired or rushed and inserted a tape too quickly. It seems to be a reaction of the camera to not being treated politely. I don't have the manual in front of me but there is barely anything about it in there, just a one line definition that is sort of circular. The putting the tape in too quickly part isn't even mentioned; I've just noticed that as a common denominator. (Incidentally, I say too quickly as a relative term. It's more like popping a tape in to catch something happening, like anybody would do, not any brutal loading, but sometimes it just must be a bit too fast and the camera says no.) It has mostly happened to me when inserting a tape, I've been able to rectify it by the things that you did, powering down and removing the battery, then putting the battery back and powering up. Why removing the battery makes a difference I don't know but it does. This problem with the same error message in red letters on a blue screen happens also on other Panasonic Mini-DV cameras, such as the DVC-30s, again with little help in the manual. Seems like you've made valiant efforts. All I can think to add is to maybe post on DVXuser.com, if you have time, because there are people on there with thousands of hours spent with these cameras. It also seems to me that many Panasonic Mini-DV cameras, such as the DVC-30 series and I think the DVX-100s, have a reset button on the panel where the switches are when you open the LCD. It's a button that is recessed to protect from being hit inadvertently and is supposed to reset everything back to day one. It's more of an emergency button I think than simply a way to ditch scene files and go back to default settings. I've never used it but it might work, although if you have time to post on the DVXuser forum, maybe you could ask there first. Good luck.

Hi James, Thanks, just saw this. That's hilarious. I appreciate your posting the pictures. I also like the idea of minimizing the destructiveness of a gag involving items people may want to collect. It makes me think that it would be great if more filmmakers would find ways to apply the cassettes not decks approach to movies that blow up classic cars.