nykvist_fan

Thanks, everyone, for the help. I used a combo of bounces, favoring the mirror boards in certain places, which brought some great illumination to the area around the trees. Much to my suprise, I didn't have to chase the sun too much, only changing the reflection points three times during shooting. Anyway, I did the wide shots first, and, due to fanatical rehersal (my director is a theatre guy), we nailed each scene in about 4:1, so the light dying wasn't much of a concern. The sky was cloudless, and, being summer, it stayed light way into the evening, so I didn't get the chance to break out the kit, because, frankly, I didn't need it. Tomorrow...sorry, today, we're going to do close-up's and some extra coverage, so I am enthusiastic about cheating in some small lights. Thank god the director wanted B&W, as I have always found it easier (yet still exacting and slow work) to cheat in B&W, as opposed to color, which is slow, exacting and painfully botchable (a word?). This is perhaps the only time where hugh polystyrene boards come in handy, as I have always had to trim it down somehow. Bouncing materials: $60 Beautiful Shot: Priceless B)

What are we thinking the XL1's price will drop to?

So, they had a box covering her box? :P

I'd like to find out how Woody Allen and his DP got those outdoor shots in Stardust Memories

I once got into such an argument, the director took a swing at me. I am a pacifist (i'm french, no? :P), but I cracked this guy in the mouth. He was just starting out then, but he is fairly high profile now. I also met Harvey Weinstein a few months ago, and he was an even bigger a**ho**. No tact whatsoever. He kept calling me "Comrade," and got my name wrong not once, but four times in 15 minutes. Now tell me: what is so difficult about Remy? I was waiting for a rim-job joke. Thankfully, it never came. Probably beyond his brain power to make the association.

Watch Bergman's Wild Strawberries. In the beginning, there is a dream sequence that is overexposed, and looks like nothing you've ever seen. The principle for shooting ghosts and the like is to overexpose, or, as was suggested, light heavily from behind.

I believe it was Jean Cocteau who said filmmaking will never be an art until its materials are as inexpensive as pencil and paper. As always, the bottom line is the bottom line. I think DV is beginning to illustrate that point. I must have hit a nerve?

Is anyone aware of the burning temp for standard foam boards?

Regarding the Fox News situation, I was aware of John Gibson's comments, but unaware as to what company he worked for, as I do not own a television. I read 4 newspapers everyday in four different langauges, but I haven't owned the old "idiot box" in over 10 years.

Let me start with the speciifics: + 35mm B&W + Shooting outdoors on an estate, the area being surrounded on three sides by trees + Shooting from afternoon into early evening, but still light + A picnic scene: 10 or more subjects ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is one of the most beautiful areas I have had the pleasure to shoot in, but there are spots, namely by the trees, that are not lit very well, especially into the evening. As a test, I am going to take these giant boards of Polystyrene (or other reflective materials) and put them around the blocked-off area to see if it does anything, but I don't think it will work. I have very good natural light, but I want to get some real lights in there. Anyway, I should greatly value any suggestions on cheating in some light outdoors.

Zelig is an education in itself. They got the lighting perfect in that film.

I watched 28 days later in the theatre, and, while I was not impressed, it suited the story perfectly. We must always stress that Digital is an alternative to 35mm, not a substitute. The next director that asks me: when will we duplicate 35 on DV, I think I will vomit. Personally, I only use 24p for documentaries. Otherwise, you get that "Video Game" look that I couldn't stand in Star Wars. I remember saying to my wife that the actors didn't look as sharp as the CG when we watched EP2.

Eddie, Foam boards work great. When I am in the U.S, I buy them at Wal Mart in the office supplies section for just under $2. Polystyrene is good. Buy it at a hardware store in a large sheet for under $20.

I have a little cousin in NY who wants to get into filmmaking, but doesn't want to go back to college for another degree. Has anyone had an experience with the NYFA? Or other intensive cinematography programs in U.S. Opinions welcome

My american friends have little complaint.

Pritesh, Speaking of Haute Tension, it was a bit grainy for my taste, as well. If you want to avoid that, you should work with something like a medium speed stock. I would check out KODAK VISION2 200T 7217, which has technology built into it suited for digital/post work, and a fairly good caliber of flesh-tones and image quality. But, if you are going for the dark feel to it, you can't beat out high-speed stock if you can stand the side-effects. Otherwise, I am assured by a friend that the stock I mentioned has a rather fine grain. Stick to up close, tight shooting and you can always cheat in some light somewhere.

I can vouch for chris; his site is top-shelf.

MattPacini has a good signature, but this is an international forum to discuss film ratings and censorship, so my french citizenship is quite meaningless. It is never polite to discuss politics on a film board, but reactionary thought is the mother of conflict in political discourse. It also makes me sick that my own people had dealings with that Pig, Hussein. And what is this "Fox News?"

I wonder if independent films are targeted more vindictivly by the MPAA, but I've never found that connection as far as the hard numbers are concerned. Regarding the Wes Anderson film, I had the understanding that only Network could edit a film; I thought, on Cable or Sat, anything goes.

I must clarify my original statement: By using the term "Police State," I was referring to a kind of intellectual police, not a government body. I lived in the U.S for a few years as a graduate student at Harvard University, and I was shocked to find such tolerance and open discussion. As a frenchman, the general secondhand concensus was "the fascist americans," which, after one month in country, I found to be rubbish. The subject of my masters thesis was sexuality and Violence in Cinema: censorship in America and abroad. After a year of solid research, calling producers, directors, writers and politicians, I was unsatisfied with the simple response: this is how it is. Perhaps my logic is flawed. Perhaps there is no solution.

As far as censorship being a singularly american phenomenon, we recognize the idiocy of that statement. I recently read about a video game called Manhunt being banned in New Zeland for explicit violence, while Peter Jackson's early gorefests render this title tame, they were never banned. Rarely it is that films (Irreversible and A Clockwork Orange) turned notorious reactions to their films into respectable box office. I see no difference in any violence, regardless of the message. Is not religious-oriented violence exploitative, as well?

Super 8 is wonderful to cut one's teeth on. I started in still photography, and consider it a prerequisite for people who want to learn. Any community college in the U.S teaches photography classes. Even if you don't study theory, working with the actual stuff does much more than reading a book. Of course, read the book first.

I would highly recommend my alma mater, the LODZ school in Poland.

Phil, All you need is a video camera and an interesting subject. That's all it takes. A friend of mine shot a documentary with the XL1 that I loaned him and wound up with a $50,000 grant to work on his next film. Talent above all else

With the second wind of the NC-17 rating, what are your thoughts on the ratings system in general. If The Passion is awarded an R rating, yet recent horror films are NC-17 for violence (Haute Tension), is this decision the final proof required to define the double standard of the establishment? Why exactly is it that this american organization finds little wrong with endless gun violence in films, but are so enraged at the sight of a penis? And, speaking of it, Vincent Gallo's Cannes favorite (:D), The Brown Bunny shows Chloe Sevginy giving a real, honest to goodness blow-job. Why are people so shocked? Is it christian conservatism? Intellectual fascism? Remember: Submission to censorship establishes a criterion; a definition of form capitalized to autocratic ends. (In other words, the domino theory) Important to remember: the U.S is but one of many with objections to these matters Opinions welcome.