Jim Feldspar

I noticed that there is a similar post from yesterday but I'd like to ask for help with some specific questions. I've shot 16 mm before with a 16 BL and an SRII. For this project, the director would like to shoot Super 16 mm with an Arri and video tap. Will an SRII take a video tap? Anybody have strong feelings on pushing for an SRIII or non-Arri camera (and why?) The rental house (not a school project) has an SRIII for $425.00/day, an SRII HS, 10-150 F.P.S. manual variable shutter, that can do Super 16 for $325.00/day and a non Super 16 SRII for $250.00/ day. It seems to me that the $75.00 difference between the last two options is not that big of a hurdle in order to do Super 16. Are there other big factors in the cost of shooting Super 16? We'll need lenses. Zooming during shots is something we can do without if that makes a difference. Of course we're on a budget but this is a place to consider prioritizing spending (lenses vs. limos.) Here is what is available: 16 mm. PRIME LENSES Minimum Focus RENTAL RATE 6mm Century *(PL mount) T 1.9 1' 80.00 Century 4.2 Adapter * (Works only with Century 6mm) 30.00 12mm Zeiss * T 1.3 8" 60.00 16mm Zeiss * T 1.3 10" 60.00 18mm Zeiss * T 1.4 10" 50.00 25mm Zeiss (PL Mount)* T 1.3 10" 65.00 25mm Zeiss * T 1.3 10" 60.00 25mm Zeiss * T 1.4 10" 50.00 35mm Zeiss * T 1.4 10" 50.00 50mm Zeiss * T 1.4 2'4" 50.00 85mm Zeiss * T 1.4 3' 50.00 (Covers Super 16 format) Zeiss Super Speeds Set (9.5, 12, 16, 25) T 1.3 220.00 Zeiss Super Speeds Set*(9.5, 12, 16, 25) Super 16 PL Mount T 1.3 250.00 35 mm. lenses for Super 16: (18, 25, 35, 50, 65*, 85) T 1.3 $390.00 (*Superspeed sets without the 65mm lens ) $ 320.00 16 mm Century Double Aspheric 40.00 Century Fisheye Adapter 40.00 Aspheron 40.00 Century Precision Snorkel T 5.6 350.00 Mesmerizer 100.00 ZOOM LENSES Minimum Focus RENTAL RATE 8-64mm Canon* T 2.4 1'2" $160.00 11-165mm Canon* T 2.5 $110.00 12-120mm Zeiss* T 2.4 5' $110.00 25-250 Angenieux HR* T 3.7 5'7" $275.00 25-250 Angenieux HP* T 3.9 6' 15-150 Angenieux* T 2.5 5' * (Covers Super 16 format) This project is intended for festivals and is a short. Perhaps a print will be made someday but first it will be posted on an NLE and then onto DVD and I guess tape (HDCAM?) for digital projection at festivals. Yes, choosing aspect ratio is an artistic choice but if the director wants to crop and go wider, do you have any opinions? It seems to me that doing that would use less of the negative but then again would still be more (or would it?) than cropping on regular 16. I get a bit confused there. This project is set in cafes and apartments, not any big desert landscape shots, so without reading the script, and knowing that it aims for festival screens and probably televisions, toward what aspect ratio would you tend? I'm considering shooting Kodak 7201 50 ASA for Day exteriors and pondering 7212 100 ASA Tungsten (said on Kodak's website to be sharpest color neg.) vs. 7218 500 ASA Tungsten. I like to use realistic looking light levels. With 7201, I could get a 2.8 with 20 footcandles, whereas with 7212 at 100 ASA it would take 100 footcandles (really brighter than your average night interior cafe booth) to get a 2.8 If 7212 is indeed the sharpest Kodak color negative, what are the considerations/concerns in using a less sharp color neg.? We won't have big lights but certainly enough to get 100 footcandles so I'm asking more in terms of the look of the two stocks. I'll ask to do tests but not counting on it and haven't used these stocks before. Thanks!

Exactly! Couldn't she have modeled holding the camera? On the other hand, for many of us, a cool camera is most likely our date for Saturday night.

What made you choose 90 degree shutter, instead of say 144? Won't 90 give more strobing of motion (like in "Saving Private Ryan" ?)

Thanks so much. You are the professor emeritus of this forum. When I saw the numbers...! Also, the way you explained the lens is a lens really clarified the question for me. Everything else too! Chris, thanks, I couldn't reply directly to your post. I found a movie by that title on Amazon with DMX in it so that should be fun to check out. I really learned a lot from both your responses. I hope to apply this knowlege. Meantime I may be shooting a small project with a 16 BL but I'll be glad to do so and like so many have said, quit worrying, and make the best of the best gear you can get. I agree. I think that the film costs are scarier the smaller the production. If it's possible to have a full crew and a big grip truck(s) then the film costs probably become a smaller piece of the pie. Also, it sounds like you researched, Chris, and that paid off with a great deal. I just got in from a shoot with an HVX-200, two actors and me doing lighting outside (Omnis with CTB) audio (shotgun on a mike stand) and everything else. I joked that it would be nice to have a crew but I have to say, although I was up at 4:00 a.m., am slightly frozen and tired; it was a blast. There was indeed one shot where it would have been nice to have the latitude of color negative (a car interior close-up of a face with a hot background) but the HVX-200 720P 24P DVCPRO HD is so cool that I definitely love that I got to shoot with that.

I have some questions based on statements in this article on the Kodak web site about : "Just Like the Son A road movie with a sense of grandeur Morgan J. Freeman His latest venture is an independent feature called Just Like the Son." http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/16mm/why....3.12&lc=en "The filmmakers considered whether to shoot in the Super 16 film format or in high-definition digital video. They opted for Super 16 film in part due to cost savings in post-production." If both film or HD would go into an NLE, wouldn't HD be cheaper? No developing, telecine, cheaper stock...? "Orbach envisioned a road movie with a sense of grandeur that communicated the wide-open spaces through which the characters travel. He suggested framing the images in a widescreen 2.4:1 aspect ratio." Is 2.41 an unusual aspect ratio? I thought that the standard around there was 2.35:1? "Freeman and producer Jamin O'Brien requested to see some tests before approving the proposed aspect ratio. "The script called for a simple, organic visual language based on natural, available light," the cinematographer says. "We wanted to focus attention on the characters and not the cinematography. I knew that we'd be on the road, capturing all these environments, and HD would not work for such a filmic story with so many day exteriors.' " Is HD not so great in day exteriors? Is that because of dynamic range, less latitude? " 'The question became how to give the film widescreen scope while shooting in the Super 16 format," he says. "I shot tests with a couple of stocks, and did DIs of about a minute's worth of film at PostWorks in New York. They did a bit of color correction and made an anamorphic print on 35mm film. When we saw the print, we knew there wouldn?t be a problem making the film that way. There was virtually no loss in the quality.' " Is that hardly any loss compared to Super 16 but it still looks more like (really good) 16 as opposed to 35 mm ? Otherwise, why wouldn't LOTS more people be doing this? "Orbach ordered a ground glass with the widescreen aspect ratio. He exposed the full frame, however, which allowed reframing later if necessary or desired." Is ordering a specifically marked ground glass a choice of rental items or a special made to order item that must be purchased? Is it a lot more expensive? "After testing a range of films, he chose KODAK VISION2 500T 7218 film, "because of its grain structure and consistency. I used that stock for the entire film ? day, night, interiors and exteriors. That was partially for simplicity and also because the slightly grainy look gave the film an extra little bit of character.' " Wouldn't the film be "slighty grainy" anyway from the blow-up to the anamorphic 35 mm print? "He covered the action with an ARRI SR3 camera mounted with T2 Zeiss 35 mm lenses. "It was important to use the pristine glass," he says. "The speed and resolution helped us.' " I've heard people say that a lens is a lens but if say a 30 mm focal length lens is wide when shooting 35 mm and relatively more tele when shooting 16 mm, then how does it work shooting 16 mm or Super 16 mm with lenses for 35 mm cameras? Thanks.

Hmmm...sounds like it's one way to do something that people probably already get done another way anyway, perhaps with some pros and cons. Thanks for clearing up that it is a camera stock! Maybe I was a little slow at the end of the week but I wasn't sure. Appreciate it!

From Kodak site: "FILM-TO-VIDEO TRANSFERS KODAK VISION2 HD Color Scan Film 7299 is intended exclusively for telecine transfer using the KODAK VISION2 HD Digital Processor." I don't understand this. It says on the site that cinematographers can expose this 500 ASA (Daylight) 320 ASA (Tungsten) so do they shoot with this film when they absolutely are going to video/DVD and never going to project? It sounds like this goes through a camera but then it sounds like maybe it doesn't. I looked but couldn't find a picture of the HD Digital Processor. How does this workflow work? Thanks.

I know a woman in her 30s who works as a D.P.. Makes probably $50,000. a year. She started out as a p.a., volunteered at the local camera rental house for two years, learned how to become an a.c. based on that, worked her way up from 2nd to 1st, got a chance to operate on a feature directed by a woman director who liked their rapport, and now shoots corporate pieces, documentaries and low budget features. She's not getting rich but she's shooting. Rent the DVDs of "November" and listen to Nancy Schreiber, ASC on the commentary track and DP Sandy Sisson on the "Salaam, Bombay" commentary track. Maybe you could write to them for advice. Of course you have a chance. Build a reel and hustle like everybody else. In some (rare) cases you'll have an edge as a woman; in many you'll have to work twice as hard to prove yourself. Unfair? Yeah. However, I met an extremely competent 120 lb. woman gaffer on a Hollywood film where there were a lot of big 12Ks to push around. Some of the guys laughed...until she told them where she wanted them to put the lights. When you have kids, see where you are. If you have a supportive partner, maybe it'll work. Maybe you'll break through and be shooting a sitcom and can go home every night at a decent hour. Worry about it then. Read about Annie Leibovitz. Not a cinematographer, but in a similar field she's at the top. Maybe it's hard, but I suggest drop the "male perspective" opinion. Couldn't the reverse be true, that you have a significant other who believes in you? Not every guy on here has a supportive wife or even a wife. I wish that I'd have a girlfriend who believes in me. Hah, I wish that I'd even have a girlfriend. Believe in yourself and work hard. Good luck.

I have a dedicated Lacie onto which I copy my 8GB card in the field. Currently I have 6 partitions. The Final Cut Pro system to which I have access requires that we bring in our own drive(s). Now I know that if I connect this Lacie, I can open Final Cut Pro and edit right away. However, when I go to store the Final Cut Pro project, can I save it to this same Lacie (250GB) or should that drive stay exclusively a repository for the P2 cards? In that case, should I bring in another Lacie and would I daisy-chain that to the first? The computer is a G4. Thanks.

Nancy Screiber discusses shooting "November" on the DVD commentary track. Quite interesting.

Hi Toby, I too hope for the day when we get a report from somebody with Glidecam/HVX-200 knowledge. Yeah, I've made out great flying down the highway with a mini-DV camera on the Sticky-Pod but I'm proceeding cautiously with the bigger camera. I think that it can work but I'm working out the extra support/safeties that are definitely needed.

Cool and cool! Thanks!

Some of the footage I shot in 24p seemed to be a bit out of focus where the stuff I shot in 60i with the same settings was nicely focused. I had the camera was on autofocus most of the time, so I'm wondering if the difficulty with focus is because of the slower shutter speed in 24p? Or some other factor related to 24p? Or using auto instead of manual focus? I was doing street shots, so it seemed easier to just put it on auto focus while shooting these tests. Any illumination here greatly appreciated. Thanks! I believe that autofocus responds more slowly with slower shutter speeds because the camera is getting information less frequently and thus takes longer to adjust/update. I'd be careful anyway with autofocus anyway. I like Panasonic cameras but I've had a couple of soft faces because the autofocus grabbed onto the lines in the brick wall behind the person. Some of the footage I shot in 24p seemed to be a bit out of focus where the stuff I shot in 60i with the same settings was nicely focused. I had the camera was on autofocus most of the time, so I'm wondering if the difficulty with focus is because of the slower shutter speed in 24p? Or some other factor related to 24p? Or using auto instead of manual focus? I was doing street shots, so it seemed easier to just put it on auto focus while shooting these tests. Any illumination here greatly appreciated. Thanks! I believe that autofocus responds more slowly with slower shutter speeds because the camera is getting information less frequently and thus takes longer to adjust/update. I'd be careful anyway with autofocus anyway. I like Panasonic cameras but I've had a couple of soft faces because the autofocus grabbed onto the lines in the brick wall behind the person.

Sir, the man offered his help. If it doesn't give you exactly what you need, why not thank him and ask (everybody) for greater clarification? The tone of your reply is that of a director dressing down a p.a.. Maybe you're under a lot of pressure, I don't know, but there may be people who could help you and are declining to get involved based on your sharpness. I don't have any answers for your technical questions but good luck with your productions.

I heard somebody say something about shooting macro with the HVX-200 but I don't see any way on the stock lens. Does anybody know? Thanks.

I've been wanting to check it (them, I guess) out. Have a lot of interest in Kennedy/Johnson, having heard a lot here in Boston. With your strong recommendation, I'll get started as soon as I finish my books about the Boston mob. It'll be a change (I hope.) Since this is a cinematography forum: I think that Randy Quaid played LBJ in a t.v. movie or miniseries in the past 10-15 years or so. Didn't see it though. "The Astronaut Farmer" is next on my list when I go to the theater. I haven't been seeing as many movies or finishing my reading other things because I tend to spend that time reading the postings and archives on here.

Wow, thanks! Will do. Hey Gunleik, Maybe you shouldn't shoot anything new until you do some editing! Although it sounds like you'll be editing for a long time. Good luck!

The book does look good! but 1232 pages? How long did it take you?

David S. , you're always a great enthusiast of film. Stick with it. You're an asset to this forum and your enthusiasm will make you a great filmmaker (just stop doing handheld shots on the hoods of moving cars with nothing securing you!) David M., can't wait to see the film (it's first on my list; I haven't been able to get to the theater since October!)

Thanks, Michael. I'm shooting different modes for different projects and storing them until I can edit. My first project is all 720P 24N in two partitions and today is for a different project in DVCPRO 50 so I'm glad that you mentioned that I should have a separate folder for each Contents folder and LASTCLIP.txt. (although I'm using one 8 GB card so I guess that I won't be using the LASTCLIP.txt.) It's great to be able to check Cinematography.com on the way out to a shoot. Thanks again!

I think that it looks cool, Jeff! 1. On the close-up of the eye opening, where was the camera and focal length? It looks a little soft which doesn't bother me but I'm wondering if you accepted the softness to get in that tightly and fill the frame. 2. How do you get that effect of having the red balloon in an otherwise black and white picture? I use Final Cut Pro and would love to know. 3. "I like it, apart from the filter used in the beginning shot. The one that blurs the edges." -------------------- Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Kent, UK I read the above quote and looked at the first two shots and couldn't really notice this. At one point I thought that the mask in the street was getting softer edges but it seemed so subtle that I wondered if I imagined it. Is this effect in there and what kind of filter did you use and did other people see it or miss it?

I have shot three 8GB P2 cards at 720P 24N and copied them to a Lacie hard drive. I guess that means that I have 12 partitions left. I want to shoot DVCPRO 50 24P tomorrow onto the P2 card and store it on the same Lacie. I'm just getting started at this so I want to know if it's okay or if since I started storing 720P 24N do I have to stay with that only for this drive? My guess is that they're all P2 files but I don't want to screw anything up. Thanks!

That's fantastic help. You made it extremely clear. I've got a shoot coming up in April and I'm going to test this method out so that I have it down. I would never have known this otherwise. Thanks a lot!

If I understand that first paragraph correctly, then the number of footlamberts you get with a spotmeter is equal to the number of footcandles? It says that the number of footlamberts is equal to the incidence illimination of footcandles but footcandles are footcandles, right? It's not like a meter that gives you an f stop but has to be interpreted depending on whether you took a reflected or incident reading, is it, despite the that text's use of incidence ?