Ryan McMackin

There are some extreme problems with this transfer, you can't possibly judge your footage from this.

 

How on earth did you shoot a feature and not catch this ???

 

-Sam

No dallies, would be the short answer.

Would you be willing to elaborate on, or, care to speculate what these, "extreme," problems might be?..

I just completed production on my first feature as DP and all is looking good thus far with the exception of a noticeable red vignetting in the transfered footage.

The problem is persistent throughout the 24,000+ feet of film that we shot, though, it varies in severity and, at times, is not apparent. The project was shot on an Aaton LTR54 w/ a set of Optar Illumina lenses. The telecine was done on a Rank Cintel Turbo II.

Originally, I thought this might just be a lens issue as we did not extensively test the lens package prior to production, however, I'm not confident in my own analysis and that this might be a problem that can be remedied. I would certainly appreciate any other advice or opinions.

I've attached a still that illustrates the problem pretty well, and, since attachment space is so limited, here's a link to a Flickr page with many more stills from the transferred material...

More Photos on Flickr

Thanks, ryan

You just have to try different combinations of oscillation speed and frame rate to find the "sweet spots." Unfortunately there isn't a precise RPM control on the P+S Technik, so it's probably a bit of trial and error.

alright, i'll give that a try and get myself a larger monitor! thanks michael...

My set-up: HVX200, P+S Mini35, Zeiss Superspeeds, Century Swing/Tilt

When shooting at 48fps and 60fps the occillation of the ground glass becomes apparent in the image. The problem seems more exagerated with longer focal legnths. Has anyone else experienced this problem? I'll be shooting with this same package next week and curious to know if there is any way to avoid this issue. Any thoughts, help or otherwise would be greatly appreciated...

-ryan

Anyone have experience or advice for shooting a 24fps 8mm projection!? I'll be shooting 16mm @ 24fps and concerned that I'll have sync issues with the projector. Any thoughts or guidance would be much appreciated!

_ryan

Anthony,

What were your results? I will be shooting some tests this coming week cross processing 7285 and would love any info you, or anyone else, might have to offer...

_ryan

I ordered four 100' rolls of Kodak 7285 Ektachrome 100d from Kodak on Wednesday for 2nd Day Air delivery thru DHL. Unfortunately, DHL failed to deliver on time and now I'm without the film I need with a shoot planned for Monday (01/01/07)!?

Does anyone in the Seattle area have some Kodak Ektachrome 100D that they would sell to me or trade me for the stock I'll be recieving on the 3rd? Or, know where in this area I can buy that stock tomorrow?

Please let me know ASAP!

Thanks, Ryan.

a couple of weeks ago i compared sided-by-side fuji's 10x10 cine-style zoom, a fuji 17x7.8 cine zoom, a pro35 adapter with a set of zeiss superspeeds, and a fuji eng zoom. there was no percievable difference in dof between the 10x10, the 17x7.8, and the eng lens. the pro35 adapter, however, provided a very shallow dof in comparison. the 10x10 is huge and pretty expensive; the cost of renting the pro35 + lenses was slightly less expensive. personally, i liked the look of the pro35 the best. if anything the 'cine-style' zooms rendered a sharper image though, these were on a varicam and cinealta respectively, while the pro35 and eng lens were on an sdx900. if a shallow depth of field is really what your looking for you should consider the pro35 if you haven't already...

_ryan

Anyone know or want to speculate what frame rate/s Mr. Doyle used for the slow motion sequencesin this film?

Here is an example: http://youtube.com/watch?v=z8OGH_7oChk

To me it looks like it's 60FPS or so, though, I don't yet have an eye for this...

_ryan

Since were talking about Christopher Doyle, does anyone know why two DPs are credited for "In the Mood for Love"!? It's one of my favorite films as far as the photography is concerned and I'd really like to know what each of the cinematographers, Christopher Doyle or Pin Bing Lee contibuted to this picture?

Last night I shot a registration test with an SR3. This was the first time I've done this and the first time I've encountered the need to rewind a magazine. Unable to find any specific instructions on how to do this I just went for it and I encountered problems.

On the first attempt (at rewinding) I put the mag in the changing tent, released the film from the guides in the magazine throat, opened the feed side and slowly rotated the spool clock-wise pulling the film back into that side of the magazine. The loop size never changed and after awhile the film came taught. Assuming I had successfully rewound all of the exposed film I pulled the magazine out of the tent and opened the take-up side to make sure all was good. To my disappointment there was still 20+ feet of film on the core and it seemed as though the film had flipped on the core! As if I had threaded the film the wrong way (counter clock-wise) onto the core. I have no idea how this could happen, keep in mind I never opened that side of the magazine while it was in the tent.

My second attempt involved removing the core and exposed film from the take-up side whilst rewinding?that was a disaster.

On my third attempt, I was successful. I just kept my hand on the exposed film in the take up side the entire time. Though, the same "flip" occured near the end of the process!?

If anyone knows of an easier/better way to do this, I would love to know. Also, please tell me if there is something I was doing wrong or missing here, I am still perplexed by the films apparent change of direction!

Thanks.

Thanks for the thought y'all!

I'll probably tinker with a little of "all of the above" to come to some conclusions for myself. I think for contrast ratios I'll probably shoot on neg. and look at the negative itself to see when I loose detail...

this doesn't contribute much to this thread, however, it is apocolyto related and good for a laugh...

watch this trailer (the "teaser" version) http://www.apple.com/trailers/touchstone/apocalypto/, when you see the cu of a screaming monkey, approx. 2/3 of the way thru the clip, step back frame by frame and you'll get a bearded suprise! you'll know it when you see it...

-ryan

You've defined an exercise without explaining what the exercise is for. Is your goal to see what format is the most forgiving in the highest of contrast situations, or is your goal to come up with the prettiest images in the highest of contrast situations.

 

What is the constant that is driving the lighting exercises?

Fair question. I was vague because I have multiple "excersises" in mind. I'm not out to compare mediums (digital vs. film) in this instance I only want to experiment with light. For example, walking a single source 360° around a subject taking photos at 15° intervals and repeating this with a variety of instruments. I would also like to compare contrast ratios, and color; the list goes on.

My question is really what would be the best format for evaluation? Should I shoot on 35mm neg. and make prints, shoot transperancy film to look at w/ a projector/light table or shoud I shoot digitaly and examine files on a computer?

Hope that helps...

-Ryan

$1500?really! Guess, I'll be calling the rental houses first to see if they got what I need.

Thank you both, very helpful.

-Ryan

I am going to be shooting a series of lighting excersises in the coming weeks and I'm not sure what format would serve me best as a tool for aquisition and evaluation. Would I be better off looking at hi-rez files on a computer, or prints/slides from film? It seems that most consumer labs to today make digital prints regardless of the source, resulting in prints with a very limited latitude. So, in some ways just working with digital files seems like a comparable or better option.

Any advice/opinions would be much appreciated...

Thanks.

Where does one go to order/purchase a ground glass for an ARRI SR3 and other cameras for that matter?

A few of mine are...

Buffalo '66

In the Mood for Love

American Friend

Chinatown

I haven't seen Half Nelson yet, but I too found the handheld camera work in The Squid and the Whale to be a bit much. I think it worked well for the story, however, at times the movement seemed very deliberate and in-organic to the point it became distracting. I wonder if the movent was ever actually intentional? Does anyone know did Robert Yeoman operate on this film as well?

Regardless of what brand you choose, I've been told is that it's a good idea to stick with one tape manufacturer for a particular piece of equipment because of the differences in lubrications that the tape manufacturers use. It's my understanding that there are basically two types of lubrication; wet and dry. When mixed, these can cause build up in your camera or deck resulting drop-outs during recording and playback.

Maybe it's just clever marketing on behalf of the manufacturers...I don't know. What I do know is I've used only Panasonic's "Master Quality" tape stock in a DVX100 for more than a year and a half now and have had far fewer issues than ever before....

-Ryan

Back when there were many "get free film with every processing order" you could get a roll of movie film at your requested ISO speed for a dollar or two in a 35mm cassette. Often, you didn't know what emulsion, exact speed, age or quality of film you would get. I switched over to buying short ends from Dr. Rawstock, got some Watson daylight loaders and saved some empty film cassettes (which most labs would give you or buy new ones). The Watson and other brand loaders take 100 (some take 200) foot loads, have a number-counter/clicker for the number of exposures you roll; wind about 40 exposures. The first and last of the roll gets exposed to light during the process so you can't take pictures all the way to the end of the roll (about two frames unusable at the end). Loading 36 exposures plus the head and tail makes a cassette almost tight. This is about five or six feet of film.

 

RGB Labs had a one to one printer which made your workprint on positive stock and then each frame was mounted as a slide. We used a slide projector to evaluate the workprints (projected like a movie, too). We could also scan the negative electronically.

 

This is a similar use as a still photographer who takes polaroid shots of a scene to gauge what he will shoot on an unseen negative. We take pictures of various locations using the movie film in still cameras to see what the ambient light level and practical lamps look like and then might come back to shoot with no additional light or supplemental light. The supplemental light can also be pre-shot/evaluated at a different location. Another plus is that movie film is readily available in tungsten balance and many locations already have that color of light.

Thanks for taking the time to write that out for me! I'll give 'er a try and let you know how it works out for me...

The circle of light doesn't appear to be completely symetrical. Seems to me that you could accomplish this with a fresnel w/ a snoot offset so it does not hit your talent. With enough separation between talent and BG this seems reasonable to me!? But I don't know, I've asked myself this same question before...

I put Kodak 5245, 5248, 5218 in still cassettes and shoot this in my Nikons.

This has probably been described before somwhere on this forum, but since you're talking about now, can you tell me a little bit more about using motion picture film in a still camera? Is it just as easy as ordering the film stock and empty canisters, loading, shooting and finding a place that'll process the film? I mean, It's been a long-time since I loaded canisters back in high-school, but at least I know what is involved. Can you also tell me things like how many feet do you load? And, how well can you evaluate your work from a print as opposed to looking directly at the negative?

Thanks in advance, Ryan.

Yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for the suggestion, I've been meaning to watch that movie anyways...

For what it's worth...

I've successfully used a 3000W Honda generator (http://www.hondapowerequipment.com/ModelDetail.asp?ModelName=eu3000is) to power an Arri 1200 HMI Par w/ electronic ballast. The light output was consistent and the genie seemed to handle the load fine---maybe I was just lucky!?