Chris Walters

Is it possible to capture a good image of a rainbow? Is it possible to make one in camera that is controllable? Can't remember any films that I've seen that have done this but, just wondering if it can be done with out going directly to post. Thank you for the responces.

Chris Walters

The WGA strike doesn't really affect you in the sense of risking being called a "scab" worker -- it's not an IATSE strike afterall, so crossing the picket lines to work is not issue if you are an electrician, only a writer. In fact, if you are a member of the electrics' IA local, it's against your contract to strike alongside the writers so in some ways, you have to cross the picket line...

Thank you for the response David... I'm surprised that the contract is against striking along side. I would have thought unions would be together but I suppose this was something the studios worked out to not lose everyone at the same time and really be screwed. Thank you again. Btw it was a pleasure meeting you in the theater at Panafest a few weeks back. Hope you enjoyed the presentations as much as I did.

Chris Walters

This is a little off the mark of this discussion, but as a non union electrician and aspiring DP would it be smart to fill the positions if the studios start going nonunion until they resolve the strike. I would get work but then I would be crossing the picket line of the very union I would want to be a part of? Its a catch 22 really. Does anyone have an opinion on the matter?

Chris Walters

I'm planning on going to a 4 year university & I wanted input on which school I would benefit from the most: USC, LMU, or UCLA. Those are my top picks but if you know any other place let me know!

I highly recommend those programs, but don't forget there are many other schools out there. Cal State Northridge for instance is where I'm about to graduate from. Yeah it doesn't have the long list of alumni or great name like the schools you listed but we have the same professors as SC, but we only pay 3000 a year. So that first paycheck you make actually goes to you and not the loan shark... Not to mention you own your own films unlike SC. Don't be dissalusioned by the big name schools. Almost all undergraduate film schools are the same. You learn the same material but how much are you willing to pay for it. The Masters class at SC is what it really has its name for! That is something to think about when you want to spend the dough. Northridge has really come along recently in terms of quality and quantity of working graduates. We put more people in the industry right after graduation than any other film school. Yes given they are not all directors, but its a one in a million that you're going to be the next Spielberg fresh out of undergraduate school. Good luck and what ever you choose never let anything sidetrack living your dreams.

Chris Walters

I only have one exterior location and two shots to get there and I have about two hours at the end of the day when it's in a building shadow, so I'm not too concerned about getting in the right range with an 85B and some ND.

 

As far as nothing but white on film, what I'm looking for is a compressed exposure range where it's maybe two stops to white from middle gray, so a decent amount of white is part of the objective.

 

Wouldn't I want to shoot the grayscale at 2 stops under if I were going this route? I would think that transferring as if the two stops over exposed grayscale were middle gray would increase my exposure range above middle gray.

 

The reason I wouldn't expose normally would be so I would be getting film white instead of video white. But maybe that's not worth worrying about.

 

I'm not sure that I communicated what I'm going for effectively. I want to end up with an unnatural-looking exposure range above middle gray. So white is only a couple of stops above middle gray. I wish I could think of a movie I've seen this in to better explain. Maybe it will come to me.

 

Thanks for the response.

I'm not sure you can physically compress the latitude of the film, but you can always give the illusion of this by limiting the amount of grey tones you have in front of the lens. Meaning light the areas of your scene with a middle grey, dark and white instead of a dark gray light gray. Good luck though

Yikes! two stops over in daylight is quite radical. Even using Kodak **17, with its incredible latitiude, I think you are taking a huge risk. This assuming that you would filter your lens to compensate daylight on tungsten film, right? 125 ASA after 85b filtering is still blazing fast (and hot) at 24 fps. Especially since you haven't done any testing, but maybe you'd like the look of nothing but white on film. With 200T you would want to bring the ASA down to 40 from 125 after your tungsten to daylight compensation, unless you are shooting in dusk. Otherwise you probably would see nothing but white and some vague shapes.

 

What I would do is: shoot your grayscale 2 stops over and the rest of the footage exposed normally, even underexposed 2/3 of a stop. I would also shoot with a polarizer -ND would help a lot- and plenty of backlight, so your mids and lows are nice and contrasty to your over-the-top highlights, exposing for the mids. My guess is trying not to keep the highlights blasting on someone head on, unless that's what you are going for: the post-armagedon your-skin-and-everything- else-is-frying look.

 

If you shoot that way you can ask the telecine/ DI operator to compensate in post for the grayscale only (set-and-forget) and the rest of your footage will be two stops over mostly on the highlights: but only because it was telecined/DI'd that way. Your actual camera original footage will have the right density, for future tweaking. If you do that your footage won't be ruined should you feel 2 stops were too much, which is likely.

 

That's what I would do anyway.

 

Good luck keep us posted . . .

I think you might have things reversed here. The lower the ASA the slower it is and requires more light. If he overexposes his grey scale 2 stops the operator is going to bring the whole scene down 2 stops and if he exposes it normally than his entire scene would be underexposed by 2 stops. Not sure what good that will do...

Chris

What I mean: is print up from properly exposed footage instead of printing down from blown out footage. The detail that you lose in your camera original is gone forever, so printing up form proper density negative is a lot safer. The last thing you want is to realize later your investment and hard work is ruined.

Its actually safer to overexpose slightly than underexpose a lot. There is more latitude on negative at least on the shoulder part of the curve than the toe. Meaning you have more room for error on the overexposure side and printing down than underexposure going up. By printing up you are also increasing the apparent grain structure... which unless you like that look is not usually a good thing and I say usually for a reason.

Chris

Hi.

 

I'm shooting a sci-fi short this weekend on super 16mm (no time for a test) and I'm wondering if anyone can give me some tips on a look I'm going for in the exteriors.

 

The story takes place in the near future after a global catastrophe that has made the climate colder and the sun more dangerous because of a thinned atmosphere. So I'm looking for a lot of blown-out highlights both to "show" the danger of the sun and hide some background details.

 

I forget what this is called, but what I was thinking I would do is overexpose the highlights and then in the video transfer, "print" down so that middle gray is middle gray, but there are only a couple of stops between there and totally blown-out white.

 

I'm shooting Vision2 200T. I was thinking of over-exposing two stops. Am I on the right track here?

 

Any suggestions?

 

Thanks,

 

- Bruce

If you want the highlights to be blown out on the finished film then you just overexpose those places compared to your middle gray in the scene. If you over expose them and then print down you are just bring the whole light level down, essentially bringing the highlights back to normal, but crushing/darkening the grays and blacks. So it depends on the result you want. I print down to lessen the visible grain and boost the saturation slightly. For instance I overexposed my entire movie by 2/3 of a stop and then brought it back down in post to crush the blacks and reduce the grain because I was shooting 500T.. Hope that helps you understand it a little.. Btw overexposing 200T by 2 stops is like shooting at 50T. Thats a lot of light!! A T4 is 800 footcandles.... Good luck with the project and have fun!!

Chris

Though 3-perf S35 has very little room for re-framing in post.

Very true kevin, I guess you better get it right in camera lol... Btw glad you posted the genni jumping all over the place. I really hope they serviced it the next day or some poor best boy gonna go crazy.

Chris W.

For the shots that are looking through binoculars or a sniper viewing sight is that something that is done on the lens at all or is it all done in post. If it is in post is there anything in front of the lens that acts as a guide for the operator for framing?

Chris Walters

Oh, I thought Super 35mm was strictly for 2.35. But it makes sense that it doesn't have to be.

 

Thanks,

 

Jon

Thats what I love about super 35 if I have a common headroom ground glass I could get away with 2.4 or 1.85 if I change my mind later. If your going to shoot super35 I suggest 3perf if you can because you are going to have to DI or optical print anyway might as well save money of film that will go to price of the DI.

Chris Walters

If your shooting on two perf does that requre anamorphic lenses to get the 2.39 image or can you shoot with spherical lenses.

Chris Walters

Thanks Tim.

 

The 40-80mm has been around for a while already actually. Front anamorphic zooms are very nice, they are faster and give you that scope look. The 40-80mm is an adapted stills lens, I would suppose the Nikon 17-35mm T2.8. No idea what the 70-200mm is based on though.

Hey max you mention front anamorphic zooms. I was wondering how other anamorphic lenses are put together and what the difference between the two are. I went to Panafest today and saw the new anamorphic lenses and they looked like matted fisheyes. Look very nice though and much smaller and lighter than previous anamorphic lenses I've encountered.

Also in regards to the 2 perf I'm wondering how common that is among post houses? Is an optical print or DI required for the release print or does it fit right on to normal 4 perf? Is it possible to extract a 1.85 image out of it I guess by matting the sides? Is there a noticible difference in the grain structure since its not using the whole film.

I know I asked a lot but thank you for any advice you can share.

Chris Walters

You are correct sir I actually looked it up in the Box book the other day before reading this post. Thank you for straightening that up for me.

Chris

Sorry about the double posting and maybe I should read more clearly what you asked... 500 watts! Sorry about that! Thats getting closed to having to use an actual quartz lamp and you're better off using a 650 watt light with a chimera ball instead of a paper lantern cause it will burn up after extended use. Let me know if you find anything practicle of that size.

Chris Walters

You really can use any kind of globe that you would put in a household lamp in the china balls or lanterns. There are practicle globes called 211 212 and 213 that I use a lot because they last longer than photofloods and depending on the number it alters the wattage and color temp. 211- 75 watt 2900 K 212 150 watt 3200 K and 213 300 watt 3400 K. They are 5 bucks each at filmtools in burbank.

You really can use any kind of globe that you would put in a household lamp in the china balls or lanterns. There are practicle globes called 211 212 and 213 that I use a lot because they last longer than photofloods and depending on the number it alters the wattage and color temp. 211- 75 watt 2900 K 212 150 watt 3200 K and 213 300 watt 3400 K. They are 5 bucks each at filmtools in burbank.

The blue layer is slower and thus finer-grained on daylight stock, which is one reason why 50D stock is so good for shooting clouds & sky.

 

Otherwise, the main reason for using daylight stocks is not having to look thru an 85 filter, which can be misleading and distracting for a DP/operator, plus you have 250 ASA for interior scenes lit by HMI's, versus 125 ASA from using 200T stock with an 85 filter.

Great point David thank you very much. I most likley will go with both daylight stocks because I want a blue sky instead of it being blown out. How do meter the sky to ensure it will not be blown. Would I just spot meter the sky? Same question about shooting into the sun for sunsets and sunrises. Thank you for all the advice its always much appreciated.

Chris

I'm preparing for a senior thesis project on 35 and I'm trying to decide on which stock to shoot on. Most of the film is shot outdoors with a few interiors. One of my major decisions is to shoot tungsten or daylight and I'm having trouble understanding why to even bother with daylight if I can just throw a 85 filter on it and only loose 2/3 of a stop which would actually help me not have to use as much ND. Is there a cleaner look to the daylight stock? On that note is there a noticible difference to shoot with out the 85 and have it timed out? The look I am going for is an color change through out the film from saturated to unsaturated and possibly back to the same saturation. In terms of kodak stock (Kodak because it might be free) is it wiser to go with one stock and let everything in front of camera change the color or use multiple stocks to show the change. For instance I know the 5229 is low contrast and slightly muted however I'm not sure I want the grain of a 500 stock... Since a majority is outdoors I was thinking about shooting 200T (5217) Does that sound resonable? I appreciate anyones input on the subject to help solve my confusion... I understand that art and costume help aid the look and will work coordinate with them. Again thank you for any and all advice...

Chris Walters

Hey Tim, I might be wrong on this but I thought that line voltage only had to do with distance and not the load your pulling. That's the amps being drawn. The only reason you need to worry about having the right size of cable is because of the amps it can handle and the distance you need to travel. Because of the line loss you need to turn it up at the genny depending on what your reading is at the Dbox given that you have no loads ahead of that d-box. Again I might be wrong but that was my understanding of it. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Chris Walters

hey Chris,

 

Simply checking your voltage may not be good enough. It depends on the distance of your set from your power source, the cable you have run, and also your load. You may get 120 volts but when lights starts turning on voltage can drop quickly.

 

Generally speaking, a voltage drop starts to occur after a few hundred feet. But again if you run banded # 2 cable instead of 4 ought you are going to have problems as your load gets higher. In that example a couple of kinos and small tungsten will be fine on the #2 banded, but if you wnat to use a few more powerful HMI's, you start to see the line loss. It happens this way: You turn on one HMI and your fine. Maybe you turn on a second one and everything seems fine. Then you try and turn on a third and the first two go out. The amperage draw on the third tries so hard to strike the voltage drops the below what it needs to keep the others on.

 

Another thing that is done often is that one can double pump cable runs and sometimes when using a lot of dimmers or square wave ballasts, the neutral is double or even triple pumped due to harmonics. But normal double pumping increases one abilities to operate lights at farther distances reducing the effects of line loss.

 

I would say if your generator is at the base of your five story building you will be fine. You just have to calculate the right cable amperage for your job.

 

Best

 

Tim

you don't say what your budget is, so it's hard to know what to reccomend. For rough terrain, Chapman has a vehicle called a Raptor that is basically a gator with a crane mounted on it. That in conjunction with a gyroscopic head would work (try the Lev head). or a steadicam operator on a 4-wheeler.

Thank you for the advice. In terms of the budget its secondary to finding ideas for how to accomplish the shots then we will narrow down what we want to what we can actually do financially and logistically. But I will look into your suggestions thank you again..

Chris

I'm trying to figure out a dolly or crane rig that can go on rough terrain and be relatively smooth. Were shooting people on horses sometimes just walking and talking, but other times it is a full gallop. What kind of rig do I need to follow that kind of fast moving action smoothly. If anyone can point me in the right direction or have used or heard of such dollys or cranes please let me know. Thank you

Chris Waltes

That was great work. Lots of cool camera moves and very nice lighting. Seems much better than some of the videos i'm seeing on MTV lol.. Best of luck with future projects.

Chris

Personally I like the 18 stock but always overexpose by at least 2/3 - stop over just to get tighter grain structure and bring it back down in post to get nicer blacks. Always safe to overexpose than underexpose too. All thats my opinion and it really matters how you want it to look. I think the skin tone would be better with less grain and with the amount of lights and power you say you have its better to overexpose 18.

Chris Walters

I'm still in school, and far from professional, but I've noticed what really helps getting called back is attitude. Someone else stressed it before, but I believe it is the most important aspect. Having a personable attitude with the "client", director and other crew makes the set much more enjoyable and that really helps people work harder on the long 14+ hour days... You should also realize that the film is not about you (like Michael was saying) You're just one bolt that holds the movie together. I would also recommend working as a electric, gaffer, or part of the camera crew to pay the bills because there is always more of those jobs than DP or directing. This will also allow you to see what other shooters are doing which you can take notes from or even say I would have done it another way (obviously to your self and not to the other DP) There are so many jobs in this industry that you can learn and practice your trade while learning and networking with those who have already found their path. Best of luck to you. The best advice I got from all the DPs I've talked to is to never give up. If your serious about making this your career never lose sight of your dreams and goals. Again good luck and happy shooting.

Chris Walters