Michael McIntyre

http://imdb.com/title/tt0401383/ Hate to be the IMDB dork but this is what I found. Very cool that they were in your neighorhood. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2008) Directed by Julian Schnabel Writing credits Jean-Dominique Bauby (novel) Ronald Harwo Cinematography by Janusz Kaminski Film Editing by Juliette Welfling Filming Locations: Berck, France Lourdes, Hautes-Pyrénées, France

Helping put together an interview kit for ongoing independent doc. Started with 2 Lowel DP's and 1 Tota and now accessorizing to put together a somewhat solid but road-ready package. Exclusively individual talking head interviews shot on BetaSP. I'll admit to not being the biggest Tota fan though I have seen many posts here in its defense. My 1st purchasing stumble for these guys came just deciding on the speedring for the softbox (thus committing to the interview key light). Not exactly a deal-breaking head-banger, right? DP for key.... end of discussion. Place the order. Not necessarily. Maybe I've jst never had much luck with Tota's broad throw. Though counter-intuitive, I'm leaning towards putting the Tota in the softbox as the key. Maybe I just don't know how to control that lamp. This needs to be a highly portable kit short on stands and flags (unfortunately). Then, snoot and barndoor the 2 DP's as back / background lights. Lower wattage bulbs, scrims, dimmers, maybe (even with the color temp shift). Get some bounce from the Tota (in the Photoflex or Chimera) for fill. Is that crazy? Or what? I'm just having a hard time committing to this approach - Tota as key and then 'toning down' 2 DP's (one of Lowel's workhorses) for other purposes. Would you endorse this Tota-as-key plan? If not, why would you argue for buying a speedring for one of the DP's instead? Any and all input greatly appreciated. As some of you know, much of my time is spent sitting in the dark punching buttons (editing). That's not a bad thing. It's just that I don't get along with Totas and haven't since college. Many thanks in advance......

Personally, I have little to no interest in seeing "Apocalypto". I don't know why. Maybe I should. I don't know. My brother specialized in this area of history. Maybe he can motivate me. Saw the trailer and I cut some promotions as well. Same old 'invented language' / foreign issues with relating the story in trailer/promo format. "Epic... big.... forests.... otherworldly...... Academy Awards...... lots of smoke.....no dialogue.....white on black bold titles". I'm not paying to see a film because eveyone thinks it's "important" and they spent some bank to get it made in the Amazon. That's because most Hollywood films suck and people do too. Me & Mel Gibson included occassionally. It's called being human. You got a problem with a drunken tirade then don't pay to see his films. You know - cast the 1st stone, all that good stuff. Freedom of choice. Video or not, I'll admit the images are striking and I will probably HAVE to see it after typing all this. I just can't believe we've devolved into participating in this celebrity-obsessed culture and debating what happened in Malibu that night. People are freaks. Some of our most celebrated directors and elected officials are whacked. Get over yourselves and grow up. Planet earth is crazy. Deal with it. You don't like him, don't pay. Simple as that. I would've expected this maybe over at Entertainment Tonight. com or US magazine but "cinematograpy.com"? Please.........

I actually really enjoyed "The Departed". Regardless of the many jabs back-and-forth in this thread, I will own up to liking the film. It proved a twisty plot with interesting characters and, like others here, I found it a compelling story. I don't know that Ballhaus' work needed to draw attention to itself either. The dolly work alone was amazing (for the tech-specific). The crew may have had some fun with them but I don't know that the "X" patterns were necessary foreshadowing gags. Maybe I'm a sucker for Scorsese but I endorse this picture.

Very nice (as always)...... And, again, thanks for sharing. Amazing how much mileage that barn provided. Odd question - I realize the daylight footage was 3 stops over but how wide were you? Also for the night stuff. Just curious with all that dollying how much of a focus-pull nightmare it was or if you just let it drift occassionally in&out. Great work.

Very good point, Ryan. I'd heard about the same head / same stock before but not explained further. I guess my Sony pitch still applies since I shoot Sony but I could see the need to match brands for other cameras. I also feel Josh's pain thanks to those meanies at "Pooston Camera Exchange"....

I'm not a rep or salesman and have no axe to grind but simply put, Sony has never let me down. I have had weird issues with other brands that never surfaced with Sony tape. Consistently, Sony has always proven best (for me) across the board.... DV, DVCam, BetaSP, DigiBeta, D2, D5, 3/4" even...... I actually almost typed Hi8 but couldn't bring myself to add that format to any list of any sort. You truly do "get what you pay for".

MPEG Streamclip rocks. Just had to chime in on that one. I've also had a lot of luck with Cinematize. It has more features as far as in's & out's which makes a big difference.

I realize that. Simple math. You miss my point - still counting pixels. Shot well and with the right camera, I doubt a well-told story will hinge on whether it's cropped in post or not. If it does, you've got bigger issues at hand than resolution.

Interesting that this process (cropping in post) always gets referred to as 'losing resolution'. I guess counting pixels really matters when you're shooting with something like the DVX. I feel like you're 'gaining' the aspect ratio and its aesthetic benefits rather than 'losing' much. I have also posted elsewhere on here and heard similar things about the 16x9 adapter. There don't seem to be many fans of that contraption. A lot of issues: focusing, filtering, mounting, etc. Good luck with the short. I've also resigned to cropping in post for my next shoot.

Thanks for sharing that set-up info, Jeff. Rather than start a whole new thread, I thought I'd keep this going with set-ups in general (hope that's okay). It's old-school Sony but not too much of a stretch. My camera menu / head's definitely not as deep as the DSR450. I'm speaking of a Sony DXC537. Did some tests today and happy to keep this camera going. It's old and used but new to me. This combo seemed to look pretty good on the monitor / scopes.... A. Iris -1 (used only as reference for manual exposure setting) M. Pedestal -4 Detail -20 EVS OFF DCC OFF Hi_Sat Matrix ON That's the 1st pass set-up I did. The Hi Sat. just adds a little chroma to primary colors. No need for EVS or DCC. I don't wanna crush the blacks too much and the next shoot is pretty run and gun with not much time for tweaking in-field. So, this is not Sony-specific. My question reveolves around 'detail' and how far people take it down. Values range from +99 down to -99. -15 -> -30 looks good. Beyond that, it becomes a question of how 'soft' is safe and whether focus becomes questionable. After all that rambling....... What pedestal / detail lsettings are you happy with most often? Thanks - Michael

I'd be way into that screening (if I were in L.A.). I'll keep my eyes peeled for its continued success. Must've been tough to always be referred to as "Nat's brother". Ouch. The workflow you describe is exactly the direction where I was heading for my next project. I haven't used one but most people I've talked to seem to dislike the wide-angle converter for the DVX. The squeeze function dosn't seem to have many fans either. For me, it's sort of a moot point now. I won't be shooting on the DVX anyway. To that end, I'm curious if you've considered AspectCorrect inserts for viewfinders. I realize they're presently designed for flip-put LCD's and CRT's but have you considered a 'clingy' small piece that might go into an eyepiece (i.e. the DXF-501 for the Sony DXC 537)? Just a thought. Again - good luck and best wishes.......

Rather than capacitor issues, most likely tape-transport / tension / pinch rollers or any combination therein. Worst case is the heads. My description of "highlights / edge tears" is what's referred to as 'bearding'. Nothing too revelatory in this post I realize. To that end - anyone got any PVV-1A heads / drums lying around? Thanks as always......

My bad, Alessandro. See what this thread has driven me to!?!?!?!?! I don't even know who to be mad at anymore. Sad but true. I gladly retract any and all grumpiness from my posts. The more I think about it, the more I can see the frustration with copping and/or chopping a DP's vision. Can't we all just get along? I haven't visited your site in a while and might PM you (if that's cool) on some Super8 info for an upcoming project. It's safe to say I'm done debating 'The Omen'. Happier times.....

Congrats on the regional emmy and thanks for not calling me a dumbass. Er.... I think. I just find it interesting that anyone would really care that much about a DVD extra with an editor's soundbite. Care enough that they'd actually create a topic thread on Cinematography.com to voice said opinion. Kudos to the DP! Fight the good fight.... He shot it with a specific shutter angle. I was just standing up for an editor's voice actually being heard for once regardless of crew politics or due credit. Shame on that editor! I guess there's something to be said for wanting the last word but this is so tired.............. I'll go back to cutting shows, making sure to give credit for each and every effect or manipulation that gets brutalized onto someone's precious photography.

Thanks, Keith, for the response. I think you're right. I did some digging around after posting that and have seen similar problems elsewhere. I'll take it in. Anyone else have the same issues? I think we're looking beyond the old head cleaning (obviously). Ideally, the drum's okay.

You mean "striping". You are stiping and coding a tape when you lay down timecode and black onto a blank video tape. Blackburst is a video signal (of black) that provides reference to all of the components of a broadcast or edit-room set-up. You do not need to stripe a tape to SHOOT on it with consistent timecode. You do not need to stripe a tape if you understand and are using assemble editing for your record master. You do need to stripe a tape if you are going to use it as an insert-edit-only record master.

Very cool. Thanks for the heads-up on 'AspectCorrect'. Chalk it up to another "D'oh! Why I didn't I think of that?!??!?" product.

Hey, Bob.... Maybe if you gave more info on the dub flow. PD150 -> RCA (?) -> DVD Recorder (?), etc..... Also, are you just shooting with the in-camera letterbox (black bars inserted on top & bottom) or does it do a squeeze effect? Sorry to ask - I don't know the 150 all that well but I have a close friend that does this all the time and he could probably cut to the chase. I'll forward this thread along.

Do you mean running 'house sync' to all your components in an edit / broadcast set-up or something totally different? I guess I don't understand the question. Clarify what exactly you mean by 'blackbursting'.

Feedback = good. Obviously. Great-looking stuff. I don't really know what response you need other than keep it up! Beyond that, you might want to group the clips rather than mix-and-match.... desert, city, people, campus stuff, etc. I'm also curious about the movement shots and whether you manned those or had some makeshift motion-control.

DXC 537 showing flaring end edge tears on bright objects (see attached). Highlights / edges flare to the right. Stills don't do it service as they literally dance along edges during playback. Issue will be addressed by a tech soon. I just thought I'd ask if anyone has seen this on older cameras and if I might be over-worrying about capacitors getting weird. I realize it could be the record heads too (older PVV-1A) but it's so light-specific that I can't be sure. Beyond this simple yard test, I have re-tested with varying tape stock, playback decks and lighting. Soft, flat light and everything sings. Colors pop like it was a newer head. The deck has the occassional dropout / hit to be expected from its age. Add one hot spot or hard, contrasty edge and it just rips to the right with little lines zipping along. Take a look and let me know if you've seen or had to have this repaired. This will be handled by a Sony tech and I wanted to have a better idea before handing it off. I'd like to see more life out of this camera so I'm doing some research. Plenty more frame-grabs if these aren't clear or representative enough. Thanks..... Any and all input appreciated.....

Not a 450 owner - just a wannabe owner. Thought I'd chime in on 'bridgin' the gap' before HD takes over and people getting grief for buying SD. I just confounded several colleagues by snagging a used DXC 537 with a Beta back. I like the notion of shooting on Beta for $1,500. That's almost equal to one 8 gig card for the Panny HVX 200! Call me cheap but I like to romanticize it as good business. I'll be more than happy to pick up the pieces from someone else's camera package when they feel the need for the next 'best thing'. Picture's great. Audio's still solid. No complaints here. What caught my eye was this thread. The DSR_WS series looks really interesting. I am jealous. Enjoy your new purchase! Sounds like most everyone here will be primed and ready when our clients / networks are 'really' ready for HD.

Having said that, maybe you do want to take blame for this one. As LondonFilmMan mentioned, don't be afraid of dialogue. The 'experimental' angle has limited staying power with an audience. Maybe a few "Well, that was weird" comments but we don't know anything about the girl or her situation. I'm guessing abortion-related but you can take it further. You've got the camera placed well and can cut, now take it to another level.

Still watching - 1st red flag though. I point this out only because I made a similar mistake while still in school. Very nitpicky but something to use for later on maybe. Try using "A Film By" or "Created by" Andrew Thorley. I don't know that you're winning over any fans by trying to impress them with the fact that you wrote, shot, directed and cut it. This is not meant to dismiss your skillset but rather to avoid the laundry list approach. Should someone find fault with one attribute of your film, they can still be somehwat interested and forgiving. Right off the bat, you've armed them with the knowledge that you did EVERYTHING. The viewer now has one and only one person to blame if the smallest detail takes them out of the story for even an instant. "If he shot it, why didn't he edit around that camera booble?" "Well, he cut it too, so maybe he didn't shoot anything better." "That line was weird. Was it because he wrote it that way or directed the actor poorly?!!??" I realize you worked hard and it feels good seeing it up there, knowing you can do all those things but have the confidence to go with 'less is more'. They can either be surprised to learn, later on, that you did everything or sufficiently underwhelmed that you 'almost' did everything. I guess I should probably watch the rest to know more. Best wishes.....