Daniel Smith

Hi. I've been pretty keen on the idea of recording material uncompressed or onto higher bandwidth tapes, but how big an advantage to this is there? How much more flexibility in grading will I get? Will I see any difference before grading? Possibly the most important aspect to me is latitude, will there be any real advantages when adjusting highlights/shadows with raw footage? I haven't got any examples nor the computer to run the examples unfortunatelly, but if anyones got input on this I'd like to hear it. tnx. Dan.

With a system anyone can take the p*ss out of, fewer people are going to take responsibility.

This is why Labour are so popular. They offer everything, and claim it's to balance things out so that the middle class who are worth over a million aren't the only ones who can live/function in this country. The fact that it's complete bullsh*t goes without mention as the UK public will believe anything the better looking guy says. From what I've seen it's the lower class and middle class that take the liberal ass kissing route, the lower class as labour will offer them just about anything they like to keep their vote, and the middle class as they have so much money they couldn't care less they just like to jump on the popular liberal fashion band wagon and show everyone how fair they are. Whereas the working class pay their bills, stay out of trouble, and get raped out of whatever money is left to go elsewhere to fund labours votes. As a working class citizen I believe it's better to allow people to achieve their goals on their individual basis, not because of what ethnic group/social class they come from. And the funny thing is, a lot of people from ethnic minorities have this same ideology. It's the white token idiots that have caused most of this positive discrimination controversy. ‘Outlaw’ starring Sean Bean is an interesting film to watch addressing this. Politics is now a fashion in Britain. Love Greenday, love weed, fight criminals with love, be a nimby, compare anything a trickle righter on the political spectrum to fascists, and you're the popular kid.

I liked it. Anyone else find characters from the Coen brother films to be slightly, Cleudo'ish? I don't know how to explain them, almost novel in a way.

ie. Labour.

Some good points, but when I was saying about the bars to get a better idea of the exposure I meant in darker situations. In documentary you're using the available light, which might be dark and not very contrasty, rendering zebra as useless. But, it's just another method. I do both. And of course the viewfinder needs to be setup correctly via the bars before anything else. Interesting point about the pagbelt not easily being able to put the camera down, this is true as I found out, but today I was watching a small TV crew and I noticed there was an AC holding a dedo light, this could be powered by the pagbelt aswell, which is usefull for difficult lighting situations. But I mainly like them more because you can charge them with just an IEC lead which you can easily take with you. The Anton chargers are a pain. But, just from the point of view of someone who's learning this stuff right now, it's just practice getting setup quickly but on-the-fly documentary has taught me this more than anything else.

it's basic I know but so many people don't do many of these things. few people do the bars trick to judge exposure, they just go by whatever they think is exposed, which is often wrong. In the documentary scenario, there isn't time for light meters, so the exposure needs sorting quickly but with reliance. little tricks the books won't teach you, like completelly removing the tripod arm so it doesn't grind the teeth. Most people leave it attached but loose.

forgot to mention this, if you have a seperate boom op. and a stereo mix isn't important then record the audio in split track, the front mic to the left and the rear to the right. That way if something unpredictable happens you've got a backup track.

My amateur input; It's worth memorising a basic but essential work flow. I'm filming footage for a documentary I'm making for a friends band right now and I now have a basic but reliable and constant workflow: 1. Make sure the built in optical filter (if any) is set to 1 (neutral). 2. White balance 3. Check the shutter is off (or at 1/50th depending on the camera) 4. Iris (manual or auto? Some people are scared to go auto as it sounds amateurish, but it's better to be safe then a hero with badly exposed footage because you thought you were good enough to alter it accurately as you go along) 5. Bars for my eye to adjust to the brightness level of the viewfinder and then switch bars off to see I'm exposed correctly (as eyes adjust, even if it looks exposed correctly it's probably not, this goes with any monitor) 6. Auto or manual audio levels for varied sound level, and of course the appropriate channels must be selected (ie. front, rear) 7. I normally leave the zoom servo on full speed or on fully manual so I can do a dive zoom, grab focus and whip straight out again. Often better left on manual as then you have the option to pull slow zooms if needed (for emotional documentary or something) Pagbelts are so much better than batteries for documentary I find, they last so much longer and you can just take an IEC lead with you to charge it, as opposed to a full on charger which is a pain to lug around. Plus they eliminate the battery weight on your shoulder, you can comfortabally wear them around your waist. On long shifts a large camera plus battery will kill your shoulder, and make it it hurt enough to be uncomfortable the next day, and unbearable the next. Not to mention your back. But before any of that, check the back focus. You can't rely on the small viewfinder for focus on a wide, so you need to zoom in, and if the back focus is out you've had it. Also check black balance if applicable. On some cameras you get variable white balance presets, it's worth setting these up well in advance aswell (ie. a. 3200k b. 4400 c. 5600) All simple stuff I know, but it's amazing how many times I didn't go through these essentials thinking I didn't have enough time, until I learnt the discipline of being able to do this quickly, and get whatever I could get setup before hand.

Why flash 'too bright' when it's got zebra.

meh.. I'd rather the 450D.. although there haven't been any dynamic range tests yet so I'd hold fire - aside from the video. and god knows how compressed that video is aswell considering memory cards physically can't handle high transfer speeds.

A small film, or company? Because if it's just a film, then rent instead. Depending on the project (the story, schedule etc.) I have access to a HDX900 (Dvcprohd), deck along with lots of other fancy kit, but it really depends when you are shooting and where, as I would only lend it on the basis that I get a good credit and showreel material out of it and all expenses are paid.

I think one of the biggest things people studying film miss out on is watching the BAD films. We're all told to watch Lubezki, Hall, Tolland and Deakins material, but after watching these films we know we have just watched some beautifull cinemtography but we don't have much else to compare it to so they actually become the norm. I think watching the bad films is just as important.

I don't understand why it can't be done though, even if it's not bringing down the server the site is being hosted on, all countries get their internet via the huge network bays, if these network bays connecting countries together filtered certain IP's, that would cut down on the problem massively. I'm sure there are ways around it, but it would be very difficult and very few people would be able to do it. I know there is a huge amount of information going in and out and physically handling that is a problem, but everything at some point meets a router. Even if it's not filtered at the main bay, it could be a rule ISP's need to implement. As for legalities, the problem is torrents are a great technology for sharing files on as mass basis, but when the torrents being hosted link users to copyright material, there should be a way of making the web site responsible. I mean they shut down suprnova, why not the rest? I'm sure they've thought of the things I'm saying so, why is it they can't filter things? Torrents will nearly always be available, they can't block the ports the programmes are using and torrents will always float around forums etc. and not every server can be blocked, but the huge web sites can be (mininova, torrentz etc.)

Well we're discussing the problem, and considering the evidence I'd say illegal downloading is possibly the biggest drain of profits. It may be old news, but the problem still remains and it's just growing as more and more people are doing it. I don't think it would. Regulating something doesn't mean dictating. It might be mean the shutting down of several huge torrent web sites. Of course, new ones will appear, but when jail sentences or huge fines start to occur the rotation will slow, and remember it?s regulating not curing. Laws need to be flexible when it comes to crime that can change so easily. Go onto these torrent web sites and within a few films worth of downloads, millions upon millions have been lost. I don't think the people who don't download via these torrents quite realise how big these networks really are.

None of those. Only movies released first in the cinema and then onto DVD, all of which should be paid for, and television programmes like Life on Mars, House etc. which again should be bought on DVD.

--- and that torrent looks new. 'The Bank Job' has nearly half a million downloads.

I personally think torrents have a bigger impact than people realise. Considering most of the people I know, download movies. It has become huge. Being able to download several a day, for free, with ease. To solve a lot of the problems I think the torrent networks need bringing down and more control over the internet needs implementing. I just looked at some statistics for "Deception", over 50 thousand people downloading it, with over 87 thousand downloads (atleast).

Thing is, I'm not sure how people can say movies these days are just pumped out into the market like a big machine, when cinemas and films were far more popular 50 years ago. I'd say it was probably more commercial back then than it is now.

I think there are some pretty amazing films out these days to be honest. Atonement, Jesse James, No Country, Valley of Elah, We Own the Night, Kite Runner etc. I think looking back on films has a nostalgic effect. I have a friend whom I'm sure will look back in 20 years and say 'arr they don't make films like Armageddon anymore...', as do people nowadays say about films made years ago when their taste was slightly more liberal, who hate Armageddon. I'll always look back at films like Forrest Gump, Star Wars etc. but now my taste has developed (slightly) I probably wouldn't bother with films like those released nowadays. That and more than just memories of the films come back when looking back on them, they represent an era in your life that you probably miss just my thoughts.

I know it's the fashion these days to know every religion/country/culture going but it's no necessity.

lol no worries, it does get confusing at times.. (msn and girlfriends do NOT go well...) In Americas defence though, they are so big why should they care about other countries? A few states away for America is like a different country for Europeans.

To be honest I'm not shooting enough to be worried too much about the cost (that first line was a bit ott), I was just wondering if there was actually any conclusive evidence that re-using digital tapes decreases the quality in anyway, or if it's just one big cliche.

Same. I never re-use tapes, it's just not worth the risk. But I was just wondering if there are any quantitive test results out there, I mean, we all avoid re-using tapes but, I wonder how bad it actually is technically. I've personally never experienced any problems, only ever problems from other factors like treating them badly etc. but I'm not looking into each any every pixel to see that everything is perfect.

Hi. I'm recording a ton of footage for a friends band, but as they are cheap they aren't paying for the stock, I'm using my own. At my college we have a degausser, which magnetically wipes the tapes ready to re-used again. My question is, how much quality is going to be lost by degaussing the tapes and re-using them? Technically speaking, how bad is it re-using stock? I know it's not professional, but I'm recording a lot of footage and this isn't being sold. cheers. Dan.