Bryant Jansen
-
Posts
33 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bryant Jansen
-
-
Just curious what you all think of this... will the Stereographer and Cinematographer always be different jobs? I haven't done much work in 3D, but I keep hearing the word and how important Stereographers are becoming.
Is it something that on the day, the Stereographer is going to be handling something else while the cinematographer is handling the lighting and setups?
Or do you think any good Cinematographer is going to have to learn about stereography
In my opinion, a good Cinematographer should know as much about stereo photography as they can if they are shooting stereoscopic 3D. The more knowledge the DP has, the better they can use the tools at hand to help tell the story. I see the role of a Stereographer much like that of a Camera Assistant. They should be there for technical support in terms of the equipment relating to stereo (working with the rig, adjusting interaxial and convergence, etc), as well as have a good working knowledge of stereo theory and practice (if a certain effect is required, they should know how to achieve it), just like the AC should have a good working knowledge of filmmaking elements relating to the camera being used. Again, I believe a good DP should know the gear and theory behind the medium he or she is working with, as well as understand how it works in order to best utilize the technology in terms of storytelling. Of course, filmmaking is collaborative, and all positions should bring as much as they can to a project so everyone can work together and create nice images.
-
Not that this question is illegitimate, but I feel it would be better suited for the Beginning and Student Filmmaker forum, or even the 8mm specific forum.
Bryant Jansen
-
Not that this question is illegitimate, but I feel it would be better suited for the Beginning and Student Filmmaker forum, or even the 8mm specific forum.
Bryant Jansen
-
Hello. I shot 100ft of 7231 (80D ASA) film thinking it was 7222 (250D ASA). If I want to get good exposure when I develop it, how much should I push or pull? And what are the pros/cons in terms of grain, etc..
Thanks.
Hugo,
Exposing an 80 asa rated stock at 250 asa is underexposing the stock by 1 2/3s stop, so to reach the recommended asa of the film you would need to push the film that same amount: roughly two stops. I'm not exactly sure how the stock will react because i have not pushed 7231, but the general effects are an "increase in contrast, graininess, and fog level" (that's a quote directly from the ASC Manual). I have pushed 7212 (100T) one stop and was quite happy with the results. Pushing a stock by two stops will definitely increase these effects, but it will still be acceptable. I wouldn't go any more than two stops though.
Hope that helps,
Bryant Jansen
-
hey guys - me again with another shutter angle question...
i was wondering if i have to be concerned about hmi's if they are flicker free - when shooting with a shutter angle of 90° that is.
last shutter angle question - i promise - for now...
many thanx!
tanner
With flicker free, you shouldn't have to worry about it.
Bryant Jansen
-
I plan on shooting 7231 black and white stock soon, and I was wondering if anyone knew what the latitude was. I tried looking on kodak's site and couldn't find it. I'm going to be shooting almost all outdoors, and a little indoors, and so with the high contrast of sunlight, and I'd really appreciate if anyone knew its latitude. Thanks.
-dan
http://kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/bw/...4.6.4&lc=en - There are some curves and other technical data on the Kodak site, but perhaps you should do some latitude tests yourself. You will probably get a lot more practical information from your own tests than from technical readouts and graphs.
Bryant Jansen
-
I heard it was also edited on Adobe Premiere. I mean, what? why?
It was cut on Final Cut, not Premiere.
Bryant Jansen
-
Nice work. I agree that the music is a bit much, and the compression of the video is quite distracting as well. Looks great, but I would consider taking out ANY shots that you do not find interesting or that seem bland (there were only a few). Its a good idea to show coverage as well as just single shots (which you have done). I really think that if you find a more compelling song and shorten it up a bit it will really make a big difference. Hope that was helpful,
Bryant Jansen
-
Hi all,
Wondering if anyone could help me in achieving an underwater effect, the patterned light you see from swimming pools or whatnot. The idea is the office building is underwater. Not too sure how to go about it, we're running a test next week of a couple ideas but nothing concrete yet. So if anyone's done this before, or can give me some helpful pointers, it would be appreciated!
Thanks in advance,
-Mike
I have not tried to light anything to look underwater, but i have noticed that hanging down larger sheets of gel and moving them slightly (wave-like) in front of a light can give you the look of light reflecting off of water. I would of course test this out, but it looked pretty neat.
-
my film school just bought a camera (eclair NPR super16) and i need to know what kind of tests one must run on it to see how good it works, as well as tests on optics etc. i need to know this cause this is the first time we´ll work with film and the camera obviously is second hand.
thanx for any help you can give
jorge
Doug Heart's book "The Camera Assistant" has a wealth of information on camera tests. It is a great resource to have around anyways.
-
Thanks for the replies! It could very well be from tightening the film, though I only tried to tighten it enough to pick up the slack, and again it is pretty consistent throughout the entire roll. Needless to say I am going to be much more careful about downloading next time. Another odd thing about this roll was that it was lost by DHL on its way to the lab. It was supposed to be sent to Seattle and ended up in Ohio when they found it. Again, thanks for the replies.
-
We recently got our film back from the lab, and while reviewing our telecine we noticed that in the darkest parts of the film there is noticeable blue "noise" along the right side of the frame. The blue only seems to be in the darker areas and does not look like a flash. It was shot on an SRII, and the mag has since been fully tested and the footage came back clean. The nose comes in cycles, and even when things were shot at 60fps it looked like the same cycle rate. We have asked a few people and some say it looks like the film was dished, but I had loaded and un-loaded and do not remember dishing it at all. Any ideas on what this is?
This picture is not the best example, ill try to get a better one up soon.
-
On the Aaton website it does not say anything about it shooting 4 perf. Does anyone know if it does or does not?
-
It's the same rules for making a good optical printer blow-up:
Slowest film possible or practical, overexposed (at least by 2/3's of a stop)...
Why does overexposing help, David? Is it just to get the aperture open a little bit more and thereby getting a shorter depth of field? And if I do overexpose, should I do anything differently when processing?
-
As far as good looking DV goes, Panasonic DVX100. They are pretty cheap, and the 24p looks great.
-
Looks really great Tom, Thanks for the posts. I really like the still of the girl with her back turned to the camera.
-
It looks good, I like the contrast. I can definitely tell it was the first time you used a dolly, however. Not because the moves were bumpy or anything (technically they were nice), but you used it quite a lot. Possibly too much. I think dolly moves are much better in moderation, and they should always be motivated by the story (perhaps it was difficult for me because I have not seen the rest of the film). I also am not sure of the choice not to show the fortune tellers face until they sit down, but again, that may be something I'm missing from earlier in the film. Exposure looks pretty good, it looks a little blown out in the establishing exterior shot, but that is always hard to judge on something compressed. Overall, the lighting looks pretty good. The key on the girl when they are seated is a little hard and sourcy for my tastes (maybe it would have been good to see a practical above the table if your going to have that hard of light, or soften it a little). It looked pretty good on the fortune teller, but in one shot you can see a shadow created by the rimlight on the rug behind her. All in all though, good work.
Hope that was helpful (and not too nit-picky)
Bryant Jansen
P.S. What were the technical details?(Camera, lights, etc.)
-
I like your work. Your lighting looks good (At least what I could sort of pick out looking at the youtube compression). I like the more contrasty shots at the beginning and the ending. Some of it seems overexposed (again, could be the compression), but other than that its good work. I think that in terms of a reel, however, you need to show much more variation as to what you can do, or just shorten it. You show too much of each film. Shorten it up and try to get as much diversity between shots as you can. Like Howard says, show your more "daring" setups. If a reel is repetitive it gets boring. But again, I think your work looks good, the reel may need some work though (and stay away from youtube for posting on this forum!).
Hope that was helpful in some way,
-
The VX1000 WAS a great camera when it came out, but now I don't think it really holds up. Being that old, it probably has lots of time on the heads and wont be very reliable either. The Panasonic DVX100 is a GREAT miniDV camera and I'm sure you can find a used one in your price range. I have seen some really good looking stuff shot with it. Hope that was a help.
-
Hey Guys,
I'm really trying to get better with lighting various setups. I guess the only way to get better is practice so we shot this a few weekends ago. It was shot in about 5 hours. I have a 35mm adapter on my HVX so there are some moments where we are hunting for focus (no follow focus yet).
Overall, any suggestions on ways to improve the lighting, mood, ect.
Thanks,
Brian
Great stuff. Well shot even with the focus issues. I have a hard time trying to critique lighting because I think it is a really up to how you want the mood to be. To give it a little more of an "edgy" look you could try not using so much fill so you get more contrast, maybe darken the overall ambient light in the background so the practicals pop more. Some of the outside stuff looks overexposed (gotta really watch the highlights with the HVX) but I like the way it is lit. So i guess my point is adding more contrast overall could give it a more dramatic feel. Once again great stuff.
-
Casino Royal used 5222 for all of the beginning b+w. Other than that I cant think of any recent major films that used actual b+w stock. Mutual Appreciation (http://www.apple.com/trailers/independent/mutualappreciation/trailer/) was shot on b+w stock (not a major film, but its an example) I'm not sure what stock though.
-
I would scratch test it with a dummy load, do a registration check, and check the lense. Just standard stuff.
Googled it and found a K-3 prep checklist from some film school (didnt read it, hope its helpful):
-
Really great looking stuff. Lots of variation in the shots, and it gives you a good feel for how you shoot people (Which i think is important in a reel). I like the music too. Good job.
What was the snowboarding footage shot on? It looked really good.
-
Amazing work. The website is really great too, easy to navigate and looks very professional. Congrats!
When you did the bleach bypass did you expose normaly or compensate by underexposing? I looks great.
Full frame Director Finder options
in Lenses & Lens Accessories
Posted
Hello!
I am doing more and more full frame work, and doing some research about the optical full frame Directors Viewfinders options out there (non-digital). I was wondering if anyone had any particular insight into the various options that exist?
I am aware of the:
Denz "Director's Viewfinder OIC FF"
Lindsey Optics "Large Format Directors Viewfinder"
and PS Technik "Optica Magnus"
Are there any that I am missing? Would love to hear if anyone has experience with any of these. I think the Denz and PS Technik also support anamorphic, The Lindsey Optics does not currently support Anamorphic.
Any insight would be appreciated! (not looking for any "you should just use a digital finder, app, etc")
Bryant Jansen