Mathew Rudenberg

I've heard the difference described as the silk reduces contrast by adding ambient light, whereas grid removes contrast by softening shadows. Personally I prefer grid for beauty work. Silk also allows some air to pass through which can be good if it's windy. Grid can be very noisy if it's windy so it's better to try to get silent grid. Grid is not permeable though, so it's more prone to being blown away.

There's not a big difference but there are many small ones, I think it really comes down to personal preference. For small/location dollies I prefer the Peewee III or higher to the Fisher 11 for two reasons - one being that the boom is sturdier, has more travel and switches into low mode more quickly, and two because the wheels can run directly on round (tubular track). The Fisher square track system has always confounded me - why use the same surface on the track as you do rolling around on the floor? Surely it's going to get messed up. Of course many people just use skateboard wheels, but then you can't get as low... For big/stage dollies I think the Fisher 11 is maybe a little better then the Hustler or Hybrid, the capabilities are similar but the pieces go together smoother. Another option for location is the Panther dolly. Super lightweight since it's battery powered and the batteries can pop off to move it around. Also very flexible and I like their slider design. Low mode sucks though - very unstable with any camera of a reasonable weight. DP friend of mine loves it because you can put the boom control on the tripod pan handle and control it while operating (as well as program start and end points for a move) - good if you have an inexperienced dolly grip. Of course every American dolly grip I've worked with hates the thing.

This all sounds like fairly standard stuff, you should have no problem handling a day exterior with what you're using. And it seems like you understand what needs to be done - use the frame as an overhead if the light is too toppy, use it as a fill if it's low enough to be pleasant. I'd say you could comfortably go up to a at least a 1/2 silk depending on the range of your camera, 1/4 silk was only something I found necessary in the bad old days of rec 709. You can go thicker if the sun isn't front lighting anything white in your bg. Vegetation is always your friend as green eats up a lot of light. As for the bounce, you should get plenty of return from a 12x ultrabounce 10 feet away provided it's aimed right - just bring it in closer if you need more. at an educated guess I'd say you'd get about 2-3 stops under sunlight.

Where do you guys draw the line at calling a film a 'bomb'? How much more must it make then its production budget? Pacific Rim was #1 internationally and has already made over $180 million - surely it will make it's money back and then some in the end? If you look at box office mojo's list of recent sci fi flops they all made their budget back and more. Do international returns not count?

I'm pretty excited - reminds me of one of my favorite movies when I was a kid - Plus Legacy Effects did a great job building all the cockpits, suits and interiors. It's great The GdT supports all those talented craftsmen when so many other films just put the actors in green spandex with tracking markers.

I like the Red, more so now that it's the underdog - Their marketing is still obnoxious, but they're not alone in that. The Alexa is nice too, producers like it a lot, probably cos it's harder to mess up :) 13 stops are plenty for me considering there'll be 7 or so at the end (unless they want one of the super low con/low sat looks getting popular) AC's like it cos it's easy to use. What I like least about the Epic is the fans kicking on at bad times. Stops the dir from endlessly rolling though. I'm sure Dragon will be nice, albeit probably less fantastical then some of the claims More excited about the proxy module - if it can create dnx proxys for avid or prores for fcp that'll make post much happier. Poop if it can output 10-bit DNX175 in redlogfilm I'll probably do certain shows without redcode. Did I mention how nice it will be to have a HD-SDI bnc the AC's can actually reach? Also, just noticed cinematography.com changes 'poop' to 'poop' Edit - any fecal related curse word to 'poop'

So, I'm lighting a 40x20 greenscreen coved into a 20 foot floor, and I'm looking for thoughts/suggestions. The stage doesn't have a cyc so I'm hanging a 40x20 rag, coving it at the bottom (18' high ceilings) and painting 20x40' of floor. (open to suggestions on this rig but that's more a question for grip) The plan is for it to be a standing and lit greenscreen to visit over a 3 week shoot. First question is digi vs chroma green. I lean chroma because there's less bounce back from the floor, and since chroma is darker it tends to naturally read at a stop under key (which i believe is optimal for keying) and I believe chroma is more common painted on built in cycs. However I am curious if any of you find it harder to key since the color is less saturated? Then there is light selection and placement. Super green kinos are nice, but I imagine problematic if the light falls on the actors. Also I don't want there to be a difference between the back wall and the floor. So I'm leaning towards a row of spacelight (prob 2k) I should mention I'm shooting on the c300 - so the native iso is 850. The primary question I have is: Is there an easy way to calculate the spacing between the spacelights, as well as the height/distance from the wall and the floor? If I place them 16 feet up and 16 feet from the wall, what math I remember tells me they will be 22 feet away from the cove, which drops the intensity by more then a stop - do I have to fill in the cove with additional units? Thanks in advance!

What David is suggesting is that you basically have the singer sing at double speed (this is done frequently in music videos, however it's success generally depends on the skill of the singer and the speed of the song) Frequently 1.5 times speed is more achievable. If the singer is willing to practice it tends to be very helpful. In this case you would leave the shot in slow motion. If you want one part of the shot to change frame rate and not others you are talking greenscreen. Alternatively you could try starting the song at regular speed and have it slowly ramp to double speed (if you're shooting 48 fips) thus having the singer appear to ramp into normal speed, even though your whole shot would stay at 48 fips.

The safest would be to use a process trailer, if you can't afford that a car mount (hostess tray or hood mount) is a good option, although it could be argued that it is inherently dangerous for an actor to split his/her attention between acting and driving. That's not to say it isn't done all the time.

The only one of these I've used is the Optimo - that being said I've used it a lot (3 seasons, 3 movies) and it's pretty reliable/sturdy. Softer then a prime of course, little cooler then a Cooke S4. Definitely a little vignetting on the wider end (if you play with the iris between 4 and 2.6 you can see that only the center of the frame gets brighter) Of course I do kind of like a little vignetting although that's easy to add in post. All of that is pretty much what you would expect from a lightweight zoom. I would prefer to use other lenses if I could but if you need a zoom you can hand hold or to put on a 3d rig it's a good choice.

With all due respect, it seems silly to make the argument that any format is better then another. Selection of the screen shape is a complex decision made by the cinematographer and the director in order to best tell the story through visuals. For example, Gus van Sant and the sadly departed Harris Savides chose to shoot Gerry 2:35, and then the following year shot Elephant 1.33. To appreciate a cinematographer's work one should watch a film in the format it was shot and framed in.

I've noticed this becoming increasingly common in commercials, take a look at the Samsung S3 spots for example - http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=wHmYIYe3BcE&NR=1 - it looks pretty close to Alexa log to me. I used to worry that directors wouldn't understand the 'log' look but lately I've heard them asking for it as it's a hot new style. If this does become prevalent what does it mean for the future of lighting and color correction?

The red safety light is only for photographic prints, as photographic paper is not very sensitive to red light. I always loaded the film into the developing canister in total darkness or a changing bag. The same applies to loading film into a mag. Edit - that being said there's no reason not to practice with dummy roll under normal light until you're comfortable enough to attempt it in the dark.

Lekos would probably be good - if you go with a much brighter source as the spotlight then the ambient light you can stop down as you bring up the leko to let the restaurent fade into the background - otherwise you'll need to be able to control and lower the ambient light. Of course a leko is tungsten so you may need to gel it if you're shooting during the day,or use a joleko (which cannot dim). of course if you're using electronic lenses you'll see the steps as you stop the lens down - a manual iris may give you a smoother transition.

Shooting offspeed is the easiest way to get a fast constant flicker. This looks to be what happened in the video you referenced. Many flourescent/ LED / and arc lamps will flicker if you shoot off speed. The slower heat up and cooldown of tungsten lights tends to hide the flicker until you get up to about 100 FPS. The best way to know is to test of course. If you don't have access to the power supply of the lights you basically have two options: shoot off speed or flicker the lights in post. If you do have access to the power supply you have a couple more options. A standard dimmer does work, but in my experience I find it tricky to use because there is a very narrow point that flickers between completely on and off. Not only that but it varies, and you'll kill the ballast after a certain period of time. I've had the most success just using a flicker box so you can dial in the exact level of flicker you want. Have fluorescent tubes and fixtures though, because this also kills them sooner or later.

Seriously, DSLRs are reasonably good when you're on a longer lens and throwing the background out of focus but they are notorious for having a fairly low measured resolution (just under 720p), which means on wide angle shots where everything is in focus it frequently looks like nothing is. Also you're going to get a lot of repetitive details (like windows on a skyscraper) that are prone to causing moire. Finally, if there is vibration the image will wobble due to the rolling shutter and you won't be able to stabilize it. Wouldn't you be better off putting a couple of extra bucks in for an F3 or a C300, or failing that even an EX3?

Every DP will could have a different approach to the scene. I would use a lot of neg fill and let the soft light coming through the window act as key. Then use a little redhead boounce for eyelight/fill as necessary. My other advice would be not to throw the word 'retard' around. It's unpleasant, insensitive, and should not be part of a reasonable discussion between peers.

The term 'film look' is kind of unquantifiable. You describe it as glossy vs matte, which to me sounds like mostly the difference between saturated and desaturated. Certainly film has some other qualities which digital is yet to match (although the Alexa probably comes closest) But I'm a pragmatist and I would say the truth is simple: If you can afford to shoot film and you love film then shoot film. If you cannot afford to shoot film but want to shoot the movie anyway then pick the best camera you can afford to shoot with and use that. The 5D II is cheap and there aren't a lot of options in that price range. the most filmic looking camera (color wise) in that price range will probably be the new black magic camera based on shooting raw and the tests I've seen - but that hasn't been released yet. If you do choose to use the 5D use the technicolor profiles to maximise your post color correction potential. Use the TVlogic VFM-056WP so you can pass through to HD-SDI and monitor your exposure with a waveform. Use cinema style lenses with an EF mount - the Zeiss CP.2s are the best bet. Be aware that you will face moire, rolling shutter, and only 720p true resolution. Test the cameras available to you and choose the one that looks best to you. Some people love the DSLR look and some people hate it, you will have to decide for yourself. I think the 5D II looks good for the price range, but you can't expect to squeeze water from a stone.

Use a night vision camera or get an Astroscope attachment for the cameras you are using

Just saw TDKR in IMAX at the Universal Citywalk. Here is a link to a list of IMAX theatres playing TDKR on true 15/70 film It is phenomenal to see - the complete immersion of being surrounded by such a pristine, detailed, bright image is incredible. If only the powers that be had decided that this is the future of movies - not small multiplexes with 3d glasses that create more separation between the audience and the screen, not 60 fps footage that looks too real. I'll happily pay a premium for it.

I think if you could post a before and after image to demonstrate what the problem is and what you're working with it would allow people to help you better. One issue I have frequently encountered with the 5D is that there is often a lot of vignetting towards the edges of the frame. I believe this is due to the size of the sensors and the corners that are cut in order to make a lens that covers that frame size but is still cheap. I find this to be more pronounced on wide shots with even backgrounds (green screen/ white cyc) If that is what is occurring you may be able to remedy it with a sort of a reverse vignette power window - lightening the edges of the frame separately.

What does a satellite rig look like? - I've never used one and I'm curious. I imagine it is what was used to create the vertical circle move around the actor. It looks like a second part where the actor was possible standing on some plexi was cut in. Where would one rent such a thing? Thanks,

The bokeh at 0:40 - 0:47 is quite nice, a result of the mirror I would assume?

For creating a amount of smoke nothing I've seen beats a lawn fogger which is sort of a hybrid lawn mower/ fog machine. Then you need to control the smoke, because if the wind is blowing the wrong way all that smoke is for nothing. A small efan probably won't do to much for you outside - you're better off with a couple of these Ideally I would have several smoke stations, each consisting of 2 x lawn foggers and 1 x big fan. Make sure you let the fire dept know what you're up to otherwise they will be there pretty quickly.

It's a good multi-purpose older zoom. Nice flares, not the flattest image, tends to have darker edges on the wide end and gets soft wide open. It's not as sharp or contrasty as modern lenses but has a nice feel, I've used one for several music videos and been pleased with the results. The 18-100 revised version is somewhat sharper and nicer all around if you can find one. From Cooke's website It is fairly heavy and will need bridge support. I have gone hand held with it before, but probably wouldn't again.