Jon Rosenbloom

I had the pleasure of working a few days on one of Micheal Ballhaus's shoots. Everyone knows, Ballhaus doesn't "care" about lighting, but I think anyone who thinks they are ever going to command a lighting crew should observe this guy in action. You think you need an 8x8 book light for your key? How 'bout a 2k zip, at 45 degrees to the actor? You think you need to move that huge soft source a little to the left, no, a little to the right, no add a maxi and tape a kino tube to the diffusion??? How 'bout a 2k zip, 45 degrees to the actor? Forest of grip stands? How 'bout, a lenser, maybe. Ballhaus has no ego about lighting, no need to prove his genuis by re-inventing motion picture lighting, or showing how complex he can make a setup. Key, fill, back light, and something for the background. He keeps it simple, and I try to take that with me every time I get behind a camera.

You're right about anamorphic 16mm; I'm confused. What is the unsqueezed aspect ratio? Also, am I correct in guessing that you did not have an anamorphic viewfinder which unsqueezed the image? Is it not possible to extract a less extreme aspect ratio if you use the full width of the negative? What size matte-box and filters did you have to use? I think another piece of advice would be to make time to shoot a frame chart. (Better yet, a full blown test.) That's an instant where you can use your DP's prerogative and just say you're not ready until it's done. Thanks for any info, and good luck!

Is that Duart in New York that has the Spirit? Technicolor has a Shadow, which is kind of the kid brother to the Spirit. Transferred two s16 shorts on the Shadow, and was very pleased; grain was not an issue. Just a note, I saw some reg-16 I shot which was transferred on Spirit to digi-beta, and frankly, I thought it "saw" the grain a little too well. This might just have been the mark of an inexperienced colorist, but it is something to look out for.

Have you tried over-exposing by a third to half a stop? Maybe you haven't been protecting the lens from stray light. Maybe you need to be more precise w/ your exposures. Otherwise, I can't understand how vision 2 film can be criticized for being too grainy. Also, you might want to re-apportion the budget by doing a best-light transfer of the dialies on the Rank, and then supervise a Spirit transfer of the selected takes.

Thank god someone's not taking this discussion too seriously. The point is, say you want to have the sun as a backlight. You want to go on a scout, find East, and say "we're pointing the camera over here in the morning, and over there in the afternoon," which you can do w/ a $25 compass. Is there any reason, other than impressing the girls and gadget geeks (and the agency reps), for spending $300 on a compass?

Hey Tony, Nice website. Do you use the compass for anything other than general orientation in places where you're not familiar w/, or don't have, any landmarks??

How 'bout THE SHOT from "Vertigo," when Jimmy Stewart has finally remade his lost love.

I think it's a really pretty light; it's defintely soft, as advertised. Maybe this isn't why some people aren't impressed by its punch. On the other hand, it is a freakin' monster; it helps to have a forklift to mount the light.

7218 can be underexposed a long way, like 4 stops, and you'll still get an image. Moot point, probably ... 99% chance the shutter was 180. Did you shoot a test?

I remember years ago going on scouts for indie movies and being very impressed by the DP's use of this system ... on the scout. But, as a practical matter, during filming, doesn't most of that kind of planning just go out the window? I suppose you can whip out the suunto to emphasize "we're losing the light," but, I'd say the vagaries of production render the kind of planning you do w/ it largely irrelevant.

Are you going to accessorize the cameras? You know matte-box, follow focus? (I remember Nancy Schrieber ASC saying she added the accesories so the actors would take the camera more seriously.) How 'bout that P/S Technik 35 adapter?

"24"

Well, if you want to see bad lighting, go to some short film programs at an indie film-festival. At least one of the films will be instructive as to what happens when there's no time, money, crew, equipment, or skill to light properly. (Just hope it's not one of mine!)

Splicing isn't the worst idea in the world. I've done it, but only because we've run out of whole lengths of wood. By splicing, you're adding weight and "inelegance" to the rig; somehow or other, you'll be making it tougher to work the rig if you splice it. Of course, there is some loss of structural integrity, though I have no idea how to quantify it. Other advice: Use a speed square when cutting the 2x4; you'll want the edges nice and straight. It always helps to lay out the entire rig, feet, hardware, and lumber as it will hang, in order to measure where to cut the lumber. If you measure everything seperately, and add everything together, chances are very high that you will cut the spreader too short. Ask me how I know that B)

Don't get two 8' pieces and splice. You can get 2x4's in 12' or 16' lengths, and then cut them down to size. Most important, you will need to cut a 16" piece of 2x4 to attach as a "foot" to each end of the spreader. When it's up in the air, the length of the feet will be horizontal. The reason to put the feet on is that vertical studs inside a wall are generally 16" apart, so your 16" "foot" gives you a reasonable chance of applying the force of the spreader to something solid. A bit of rubber mat on the outside of the feet always helps. After you get the spreader in position, hand tighten it. Make sure it's running straight and level; you can knock the wood gently w/ a hammer to position it. Once it's in a good spot, and you can't turn the nut by hand, you should give some more turns w/ a crescent wrench. You will know when it's time to stop when you can practically hang from it, or when you see the wood begin to bow, or when you hear the wall crack. If you hear the wall crack, it might be best to abort the project. Chances are, the spreader will work fine. If it's up for a while, YOU MUST CHECK IT, due to the natural expansion and contraction of the wood and the walls. If you're worried about it coming down, you can try to hide a support out of the camera's view, like a c-stand w/ a cardellini. Or, you could support it w/ a vertical 2x4 that's painted to match the wall, or set dressed in some way. Of course, you should look for places to safety the spreader itself. If you're in a dark bar, they may not care if a couple of nice beefy screw-eyes go into the cieling. If you have any doubts about it, just take it down and go to lighting plan b, which I'm sure you've already formulated! Good Luck J-Ro.

Well, "Distant" does contain some comic relief: Remember that the movie the older cousin puts on the TV in order to get his guest to leave the room is none other than "Stalker." I really like "Distant;" I think it's very visually witty. Remember when the young cousin heads out to look for a job on the docks, snow's falling, and the camera pans across a ridiculously huge, rusting, abandoned frieghter? But is it Tarkovsky-esque? I don't think so. Is every film that's slow and pensive influenced by The Master?

Wasn't Tom Stern Conrad Hall's gaffer? The "signature" light of the Godfather is the baylight. According to Willis in his interview on NPR's Fresh Air, he used the soft, even top light to accomodate Brando's makeup, and to allow the actors freedom of movement on the set.

I saw The Return on the big screen last year, but I have to say I'm not all that enthused by it. Kind of felt like "Tarkovsky-lite." Sorry. (No one ever replied to my posts about "Nostalghia," or "Distant," (Turkey 2004).)

Keep in mind that credits are given at the producer's discretion. Some just don't want to spend the money to give more than two credits per dep't. (Somewhat irksome if you work 4 months on a movie.)

Yes, I suppose it makes sense to just flow w/ the tide. I just don't want IMDB to get in the way of my being able to even send my reel to a potential job. One thing that annoys me is looking at the credits for a movie I worked on the whole way, not seeing my name, but seeing the name of someone who worked a day or two at most. On the other hand, if they accept credits for every film I've worked on for only a day, then I could have one hell of a bloated IMDB page :)

I went to update my listing, and I quote: "You may report errors and omissions on this page to the IMDb database managers. They will be examined and if approved will be included in a future update." Who elected these people, who don't get things right on their own, the validators of my career? Why in God's name do I have to verify my eMail so I can get more freakin' spam and BS advertising, just so some know-nothing producers can check me out in totally misguided fashion before they will deign to ask to look at my reel?!! I find it objectionable to have to include this third party of "database manager" vultures in a process that's between me and a potential employer.

I don't know, we all have reels, and resumes, and a lot to say during an interview. I'd rather be judged on "Me," rather than on a website listing that any given time is missing a lot of info. I'd rather not feed the myth that IMDB is more accurate than my resume, or that IMDB is the definitive word on my career. One of the credits on there is as Key Grip of a freebie I did 12 years ago and left after two days (one could even say I got fired from it); Another Key Grip credit is for one day on a feature on which the union forced the production to hire a grip on a day exterior w/ no equipment! (I have had other, real jobs.) That's what I mean by inaccurate. (How do they get this info??) Doug Hart, the distinguished camera assistant, did me a great favor and worked on a student film I shot. So, the kids checked him out on IMDB, and all they seemed to care about was not all the films he did w/ Gordon Willis, but his "Gilbert Grape" credit, which he got by doing a week of second unit work. That strikes me as a "disconnect" between IMDB and reality. I understand producers have to wade through a lot of job applicants, but if someone gets hooked on the IMDB listings, I would have to think that he's either shallow or naive.

Make room in the budget for the batteries for the sure-fire flashlights!

JT? "Tomcats" or "Premier"?

You do realize there's no way anyone is going to read through your entire post?? Immigration issues aside, a common career start is to get a job in the camera dep't of a rental house, endure that for a while (1 to 2 years) and then start going out on jobs w/ the AC's whom you've met when they've come in to check-in and check out their jobs. No, we don't have crewing agencies over here. I'm curious, can you go and work in any of the "commonwealth countries?"