Matthew W. Phillips

Why don't you guys come help us clean up the glass? I can't believe I stayed here this long to put up with this crap.

 

Last post.

 

Jim

Jim, why dont you look after your project man. If I had reserved one, I would be pissed right now. But not at the burgler but at you for not protecting our interest. Sir, it all comes down to you. You are the leader and the praise and the blame stops at you. I assume 20+ years in business taught you that much.

Glad I'm not the only one.

 

R,

Richard, you already know my opinions of the "break in" so I guess that makes three.

If you mean experienced DOPs get irate over the hoards of kids who think they'll be shooting Lord Of The Rings just because they have an HD camcorder, then yes, you'd be correct.

I think the thing kids need to realize is that film is the benchmark, whether they like it or not. I know people try to bullcrap and act like not all video shooters are trying to be like film, but comeon man, lets get real. I have seen forum after forum and threads with these kids shooting on DV or HD and talking about techniques to get their footage to look like film. There even comes a time when the whole point about video being a value becomes moot. I mean, if you purchased the best video camera you can find and all the acessories and every extra that might help you look just a little more like film, you might as well have shot it on film to begin with. I actually have seen kids who will edit frame by frame on digital to tweak each frame to look like film. Do people consider their time important? If you are pro, that time you are wasting to tweak those frames is money and that all factors into the ill perceived "value" of video, at least for narrative.

When the time comes that video camera users, by and large, stop trying to make their medium look like film, maybe video will become an artform instead of a cheap imitation.

I had an XL2 for awhile and they are quite stable on your shoulder if you have the endurance to carry them for long periods of time. The interchangable lense system is a cool concept too.

I agree. But someone was.

Someone was what?

I'm a bit confused, so I'll ask you who follow Non-Confusius instead:

 

1. At which asa does the nizo professional read the vision 2 500t? Is it at 320? Some say 640, some say 320.

2. At which asa does the Nikon R10 read the vision 2 500t? Some say at 400, others at 640. I need to know so I can set my external meter correctly, as the internal meter isn't working.

 

Again, thanks for all your help so far! Hope someone will bare with my basic questions for a little while longer :-)

 

Regards, Bjarne Eldhuset, Oslo, Norway.

Ok, Im a bit confused about your question. If you are using external meter, Im assuming you have manual exposure right? And if you have manual exposure and external meter, why does it matter what the Nizo thinks the film is? You just plug into your meter what speed your film is, the shutter speed, and gauge the available light and you get your exposure. It really doesnt matter what the camera thinks the film speed is if you use manual exposure and external meter.

I suggest you call the US Attorney's office, they may be intriqued by the possibility that the perp(s) could be an offshore company since several of your potential competitors are overseas.

LOL, not to be rude but all of you folks are getting way ahead of yourselves. Not saying that industrial espionage doesnt happen, but you have nothing to go by to even make that sort of accusation. It seems far more plausible that someone who has clearance "stole" the information and whatnot. As far as finding a culprit easy by if someone puts out an equivocal product, you oviously know little about business. Reverse engineering has been around for decades and thats all thats really needed to copy another product. How do you think all the IBM PC clones came to market? Certainly not from a break in.

This really adds an intriguing dimension to the whole Red story. I mean could this have been done by people engaged in corporate espionage?

 

It sounds like the thieves knew exactly what they where looking for, quite possibly an inside job then.

 

I assume your offices are in a secure building, it's not like you have a retail store downtown with glass windows.

 

Very, very, strange.

 

R,

Yeah Richard, I think it is very strange indeed. I caution those that say Sony or whatnot as you can actually be sued for saying that. I would believe Richard that this is an inside job as well. Perhaps someone who is very trusted in the organization?

I wish I could find who did it Jim, I could make enough to fund my first feature on 35mm ;)

Maybe Jim would pay me in RED camera packages...I could get at least 3 packages with 100k.

Available digital technology for cheaper moviemaking?!

 

Emanuel

I totally agree with Stephen. Why would you want one medium to imitate another? If you only buy the RED because its "cheaper than film" or at least you assume it is, that doesnt say a lot about RED. I would hope that RED is trying to be unique in its look and not just be "poor mans film substitute" but people still shooting on film if they can afford it.

To me, that is like buying a BMW so it can be like a Mercedes. Its a strange and futile concept.

Wow, one would think that by your unwavering loyalty to RED, a camera that hasnt even been released yet, that you are on Jims payroll. Seriously though, I think that what has bothered me more than anything about this RED business is just the amount of arrogance put forth by the RED organization. The bloody camera hasnt even hit market yet and people have film declared dead and even have Panavision going out of business and DALSA cameras sinking and all sorts of ridiculous scenarios. You men sure do get excited at some women lighting cigars and blowing bubbles.

You've an arrogant opinion of yourself if you think everyone is thinking the same way as you

Tim, am not arrogant at all. Just know that there are some people who arent fooled so easy is all. Some of use know the difference between video and film. No matter how slick the video is, it is still video. Thats not bad for most but Richard is right that is doesnt look like what we typically associate with movies. At least not the way things are now. Maybe in the future, people will lose the intrinsic ability to discern with everything being mixed together. But for now, the RED does not look like what is typically attributed to movies.

What is confusing me is when you say "I am rolling over here from laughing so hard."

Well, I was laughing hard because that statement was classic Richard and we needed that kind of bold truthfulness here. I think everyone has kind of thought what you said but didnt want to actually post it. I hope that clarifies what I mean.

Holy smokes those look like video! Not even remotely close to the look of 35mm. I mean they look "good" as in the same as what you'd expect from a digital stills camera, but nothing like a "feature film."

 

Question: on the Red home page there appears to be smoke coming out of the Red camera. Is this what one can expect when they start using it, spontaneous camera combustion?

 

R,

Good grief Richard, I am rolling over here from laughing so hard. I was wondering when my film mate would pay a visit here and make a comment. We may not agree on Steve Irwin but with this, i have your back entirely. The images look great, but nothing like 35mm. Also, the images prove that we could use black as a set background if we wanted to.

A gal who I have taken my Super-8 to in the past at Walmart did some checking on the possibility of processing the T64 movie film. She asked the corporate if Walmart would process E-6 super-8 film. They said ,"Yes"! That's all I have for now. Next step is to shoot some and see if it really works and they charge me $4.88 plus tax.

You kidding? This gives me some incentive to stick with Ekta 64T.

12. 5000+ Watts of lights in the room

13. A person holding up bounce cards

14. Someone with a boom stand above my head everywhere I walk

15. $3,000 cash for 3 days.

well jim, with that shot of the ladies, you at least proved it isnt CGI footage. CGI doesnt make ladies that look that good. Looks great Jim, just need to make sure us poor folks can afford it.

Matthew... again I ask you. What the hell are you talking about? Do you always jump to conclusions this quick, build a picture in your head and convict? Come on, man.

 

Jim

No, I just hear about business folks suing each other all the time over ridiculous things so it wouldnt surprise me a bit if another rich businessman sued someone for making them mad. Not saying you did it, just saying that it happens all the time.

... or written by you?

Ah comeon Jim, please dont tell me you are the one pursuing legal action against Keith for being a dissenter. That would seriously damage your credibility as someone seeking input. Not to mention it would just be lame. I dont see why anyone has to resort to lawsuits with a forum. Its not like he put illegal pictures up of someones spouse or something. Its just technical jargon and speculation.

Sadly if it comes to lawsuits, no one is going to want to talk about RED anymore on this forum unless its yes man type comments and that really doesnt help anyone. We need to remember, this is just a product...its not going to rise or fall based on some differing opinions. There will always be those in the extreme RED camp, those in the other camp, and those who are in the middle trying to sort out the BS, which quite frankly, is somewhere between the two camps opinions.

I wasn't aware of the sync drift being an issue. The longest take we took was 1 minute and it was a wide master shot. The audio synched up fine in post. Is this issue dependent on the camera used? We shot on Canon 1014.

See, I go back and forth all the time with people who talk about the whole crystal sync vs no-crystal sync and I personally am in the camp of feeling that crystal sync isnt necessary on 24fps Super 8 cameras. I also usually do rather short takes so that may be part of it. I think you could get away with doing 1 minute takes and still syncing up in post. I dont know if I would roll out the whole reel on 1 take and expect it to sync without a little pain though.

Many people who mention the need for crystal sync on Super 8 @24fps, I often wonder what camera they use or if they have ever actually tried syncing with it or just assume its like hand cranked 16mm. Im not saying some havent had legitimate issues with it, but it seems like many people just say it because its cliche to do so. I will be a believer in syncing with Super 8 until I have a legitimate issue with it.

Holy cow, that looks amazing.

Super 8 is amazing, thats why.

Why does it look so flickery? That wasnt RANK, what type of service was that?

I am a student, so my budget it limited.

 

My film is intended to be 30 minutes in the final cut. I am purchasing an 90 minutes of film vision2 200T.

 

This is a full musical with lip synching.

 

Now, my question is, would i be able to shoot 18fps to save on filmstock and in post speed to 24fps? Is there any resolution loss or strobing when changing this frame rate? Also, will I have any issues with syncing my prerecorded "sync sesitive" sound track in post?

 

I am working with Avid Xpress Pro, if that matters.

 

Also, when my video is transferred to digital tape, will this be recorded onto the tape as 29.9 fps?

If you film at 18fps and change it to 24fps in post, it is going to be like undercranking and the footage will sped up looking. Only way to avoid this is to have it telecined at 18fps but most houses will charge more for 18fps so you are offsetting your film savings. I think its better to film at 24fps because then its much easier to sync and your costs are upfront.

Kevin Smith was not the DP on Clerks, or any other film.

I stand corrected, David Klein was the DP for Clerks. Nonetheless, the choice of storyboarding was boring and far too static. I think Spielberg did better stuff on his Super 8 when he was young.

???

 

If film is not static you will get a vertical ghosting effect - especially noticeable at 1/48 of a second (24fps at 180deg)

 

or do you mean if you were simply looking at the film running through the gate (ie. exposed film) - like a projector ??

I was referring to eyeing it.