Keith Mottram

Phil, which process was used to scan the film, I have noticed a massive difference in scanned negatives between Spirit and Northlight, the grain management on these and other systems is extremely variable. Keith P.S. Daniel, can you please stop pointing that gun at me, it's both inappropriate and offensive.

David, Just out of interest why do you apply the promist or soft fx in camera rather than applying a diffusion effect digitally? Is it because of lack of post budget or do you think you get a better result by filtering in camera? I'd have thought that with all the compression you could achieve a nicer look in post. In my experience a bit of work in shake/ discreet or even after fx can create really beautiful and accurate diffusion. Keith

"normal" is 1.33:1 or 4:3, there are markers for 2.40:1, on the groundglass. What you want and what you can do are incompatable, as a test make yourself a piece of card with both aspect ratios cut out of them, then draw a picture of a mid shot of a person (head to waist) now put your card over the top. You'll quickly see it is not possible to frame for both, try this test over pictures of landcapes etc. This is why you have to pan and scan - if for example you look at a film in 2.40:1 with two people on either side of frame then work out where your 4:3 image would be you'll quickly see the problem. Keith

i think it is sometimes easy to forget how much emotion and story telling can be told in the static frame, people are so inclined to have cameras thrown around using the action to dictate the story- I'm not saying it's necessarily a more educated form of fimmaking, but this considered aproach dictates a level of skill that very few directors have. Who else but Woody can keep you gripped as you follow a conversation where half the time the actors are out of shot (the scenes in the flat, with the brilliant use of frame within the frame, for example)- Annie Hall is another example of this. Keith

Just watched Manhattan for the first time for ages in its full scope glory. Every frame is stunning, cant remember the last time I saw Black and White photography this beautiful. One shot that just blew me away is when Woody walks down the spiral staircase on the right hand of the frame and converses with Mariel Hemingway chatting to him on the far left- absolute genius. Gordon Willis is a god. Keith

I've had good results shooting clean and then diffusing in post with Genarts and/or Tinderbox plugins. This gives you increased flexability if you do not have the ability for tests. The plugins work in Shake/ Discreet and even After Effects, so if your doing a DI this could be an option. Keith

It seems to imply from the pdf that it can output in raw (to S2 or CineRam) and 1080p at the same time this raises the possibility of shooting with scope lenses and recording the monitored output to get a 2:35 image recorded at 16:9- this would be great. I'm hoping to get some information from IBC if I do I'll post it. Keith

"Not true. You're confusing him. If they bring in HDCam, which is 4:2:2, they will output the same. Having a 4:4:4 dual link card won't change that. You can't export more than you bring in. The BM HD Pro card will only benefit you using an HDCam SR format which IS 4:4:4. He COULD lay back out to SR, but it won't be any better quality. He has no need for a dual link card" Eric, I have to disagree on this as you will end up recompresssing compressed rushes if you output to HDCAM. Also if you were to alter the image in anyway - colours, blur effects, transitions, titles you would certainly be wise to hold onto your new 10bit version in the highest possible master. Your argument would be the equivilent of a tv show shot on DVCAM then posted and outputted back to DVCAM for TX- that would be idiotic. The same applies here. Keith

in film mode the pdf states that the native format is 4:3 as this camera also takes film lenses does this mean it would be possible to shoot scope with anamorphic lenses? Keith

I've always been a bit anal about mixing film grammer and I tend to think of zooming alongside hand held/ sticks docu style filming. The zoom for me tells the audiance that the camera is a character which is fine if that is the effect your looking for. Therefor I wouldn't think of, for example, using zooms in a film where everything is filmed in a more composed way (i.e. never use a zoom- instead use a track) the exception to this rule is the perfectly composed zooms in Barry Lyndon which still fit with the beautifully composed style. Now though I'm not so sure, I love the use of zooms in Rushmore (which I watched last night) and I'm eagerly awaiting Wes Andersons latest. He seems to throw the grammer book out of the window- due to his fondness for the films of the seventies. I also watched The Graduate recently and again the use of zooms were integral (a big influence on Mr Anderson I think). Anyway just wondering where zooming fits with other peoples idea of film grammer. Keith

If Thomson can give a 2.35:1 option with the viper (which Michael Mann says was a deciding factor in using the camera) why is it that Panavision are not including this option, it seems to me that this is an important distinction between the Genesis and its ENG Sony siblings. Keith

Has anyone heard when the Genesis is going to be available to rent- specifically in the UK? Also does anyone know whether it will have 2.35:1 ratio option or whether there will be the option to shoot with scope lenses and compress the information to 16:9. thanks, Keith

It is stupid but your beard idea is not that daft, when I was directing commercials I know that in the meetings where I looked older and more haggered I gained more respect. I actually stopped turning up clean shaven for meetings after finding out that a client thought I looked young (I was 27 at the time). Its up to you if you lie, most people wont ask unless you act "young". The other thing to remember is how many actors do you think use there own age? Finally the irony of course is that SOHO (London) is filled with middle aged directors dressed like teenagers to act "hip and cool" for the advertising and music promo commisioners. Keith

If you want to do the offline and online yourself in the simplest way I'd forget about Keycodes. Spirit can work happlily with timecodes so keycodes are one extra hassle unless you are scanning individual shots for FX purposes. Assuming your working at 24fps I'd recomend TK to DVCpro at 24fps, firewire this into your computer and do your offline. Then on Spirit re-TK the select takes onto HDCAM, D5 or SR with the same timecodes as your original TK (you'll end up with blank spaces on your tapes) reconform to your project from the new tapes and your good to go on your HD online. Keith

all these questions really come down to budget. To offline at 1080p would be crazy unless you had already done a pretty accurate paper edit, otherwise your storage situation would be a complete nightmare. You need about 2.5 tb for a feature online (allowing for a certain amount of effects, titles, tests etc), and so I'd recomend doing an offline first - perhaps by downconverting straight out of a Sony HJ-3, they are cheap to hire (although I have not tried this personally). The next thing to consider is the card both the Blackmagic and Kona cards are pretty good, but if you are going to a film out and can afford it, I'd recomend a dual link card (such as the BM HD-Pro aprox $2500- a single link which will allow HDCAM mastering will be around $1200) this will allow you to finish at 4:4:4 10 bit which is significantly better for filmout and will give you a solid archive master. Personally I think that however much post you do the Panasonic HD route is far too compressed for a film out, unless you are going for a DV look. Keith

It would be perfectly possible to edit on FCP to create an HD master, but it might not be cost effective. I'm conforming a feature for Sony currently on FCP. The system that I am working on is not a 'home system' though. HD monitor, HD card, a couple of terabites of storage, studio monitors, plus a top of the range G5 with four gigs of ram. Your into tens of thousands of dollars. Whereas you could offline on FCP and then conform elsewhere for considerably cheaper. The other option would be to TK to Panasonic HD this would be only 720p but you could do it over firewire. The options that your budget alocates will basically dictate the quality of your master. Keith

I assisted on some pick-ups for a feature that I'm the FX editor on yesterday. It was the first time that I'd come in contact with the Viper and I must admit I was very impressed. The shots were simple (we only used 2K's and Dados) but the images were really nice and grade very well with the 35mm footage that make up the rest of the film. We recorded onto the S2 system- which worked very well (the kit came from Motion FX in London) and all in all it was a great experience. However there is a problem with handheld work - due to the weight issues, plus the fact that the viewfinder was also problematic. We had the Accuscene finder which although was very sharp and easy to focus with had a horrible strobing effect with even the slightest pan. It was also so ungainly that it made life very difficult when pulling focus. It was also obviously horrible for the operator/ DP to work with. This wasn't a problem when we were on legs and I doubt that it would be too bad on tracks or stedicam, but handheld- forget it. Is this a problem anyone else has experienced with the Accuscene? Keith

I've been resisting adding my ten pence to this forum, but hell I cant help it. Landon, be honest this is some very obscure practical joke isn't it? I've been enjoying it but it's gone on far enough. On the plus side after telling colleagues about your postings I have managed to introduce a lot of other professionals to the site. If you are for real, which I doubt (Chris Columbus was a nice touch, that made me laugh out loud), then you are getting the kind of advice that I?d have dreamed of at your age. I think that George said it best when he said you expect comments like, "What the hell do you know about life, kid? Why should I trust your judgment, why should I respect you as a professional?". You will come up against this even if you are a complete genius. This is a fact. I myself came up against a very similar line when I was shooting a medium budget drama in my early twenties. By this time I?d been around the world, been drunk, doped out of my eyeballs, screwed around, arrested a few times and had the misfortune to have close people and family die- and I am not proud of these facts, but I figured that these gave me a little amount of life experience to reflect on. But to be honest I still don?t feel I know much about life (I?m only 29 and have been working since in the industry since 16) and this is a legitimate question. If an older actor screams it at you thirteen hours into your thirteenth day of shooting, what?s your answer? ?I?m mature for my age? or ?this is only a film lets have some fun? or maybe ?but it works on my storyboard?. Trust me they?ll walk, along with half your crew. And why rush into making films? Why not enjoy being young. Make films yes, but at the expense of the experiences life can offer you at your age? At the moment you can get away with things that in your later life you will only be able to dream of. Landon, I implore you go out and have some fun, lose yourself, get laid, travel, get arrested. Those life experiences will enable you to earn respect- filmmaking happens as much off as on set. I don?t know how it works over the pond, but I would hardly be working if I couldn?t make a meeting and tell a story in a pub or bar. But most of all your energy and your misguided attitude is right- filmmaking should be fun, but, and this is a big but- it is also a job and a means to pay for children to go through school, put food on the table etc. It will also never be ?fun? unless every person on set can trust each other and feel to a certain extent like equals. Keep your dreams, Landon and I apologise if at any point I come across as patronising. Keith P.S. I?m extremely dyslexic, so I use a spell check. It?s really no that difficult to use.

thanks for the link, I'd already read it- I'm really looking for people's personal opinions of the camera and its capabilities.

has anyone had experience with this converted camera? interested in how it performs especially when blown up to 35 ano via 2k DI. Also interested in any problems technically, with the camera accesories and lenses. thanks Keith

Tell him the varicam doesn't have the resolution, nor the color space and is too compressed to handle a heavy grade. Now a 'balanced' lighting setup would allow for a flexable aproach to grading. If its flat doesn't matter what system your using to grade you'll never get the image back (10bit full HD, would give more post options). I know this from experience as a effects artist/colorist as well as a director (and as an ocasional DOP). keith

does anyone know when this product is going to be able for hire in the UK? also will it effect the DOF? Keith