Bobby Shore
-
Posts
96 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Bobby Shore
-
-
Hey!
I'm prepping a low budget feature in LA, and am trying to track down Linestra's. If anyone knows where I can find them in LA, would love to know. Thanks!
bobby
-
Hey,
I'm have a shoot coming up with a lot of day time car int. work, and was toying with the idea of doing some of it green screen poor man's style. Anyone have any good examples of films or television shows that have pulled this off? Shooting style would be to mimic practical shooting as much as possible, so pretty bumpy/shaky camera work (ie. hood mount, side mount, hand held). Thanks!
Bobby
-
Hey everyone,
I'm prepping a micro-budget feature film right now in Singapore (first time in Asia - this is truly an amazing city!) that we begin shooting very shortly and we're still basically deciding between these two cameras. Budgetary constraints have basically dictated that if we want to shoot RED, we will shoot MX - which is great - but if we want to shoot Alexa, we have to shoot onto the SxS cards in Prores 4444. My question is this - I've had so many people tell me that unless you are doing something for television or web, you HAVE to shoot RAW. Problem is, we have SO little money that the difference in cost between the cards and the deck is a deal breaker.
My main issue is that we are shooting during monsoon season in Singapore and we have TONS of day exterior work in all of the old canals, abandoned schools, along train tracks and will have few resources to really control much of what we get during these scenes. Director is super cool and doesn't want to shoot tons of coverage (I've been spoiled by someone who wants her film to resemble Days of Heaven, Red Desert, and George Washington haha) so I'm not super concerned about matching lots of shots within a scene with rapidly changing light, but since all of her visual references are fairly low-contrast, naturalistic images I need a camera with as much latitude as possible.
So obviously this lead me to pursue the Alexa since it is purported to have a greater range, but the compromise is the capture format. Anyone have any thoughts on this? So little Alexa footage is out there now and most of the cinematographers I have polled haven't used it yet. Anyone here have any advice? I've shot several features on the RED ONE and several commercials and music videos on the MX and I'm slightly concerned about my highlights and the ultimate lack of control I'll have on set.
Any and all feedback would be greatly appreciated - I'll post some images once we start filming as man these locations are unreal...
Best,
Joseph White
hey man,
I'm shooting a feature right now, tested the MX and the alexa pretty extensively. alexa wins hands down, even shooting 4444 to the sxs cards. I blew up the tests to 35mm, both the RED, and the alexa shooting to cards and srw-1 deck HDcamsr, and the difference (for the different alexa formats) was almost unnoticeable. in alexa RAW, there's about 2 more stops of dynamic range, but going to cards still gives you plenty of room to work with (at least 2 more stops over/under than the RED). plus the alexa handles highlights/shadows with a much more graceful way. also, the quality of the sxs cards, which is only a logc 1080 p finish, still beats out the RED 4K image in terms of overall quality (my opinion). even for FX work, I spoke with the post superviser on the show and 4444 was approved no problem. again, I took the tests all the way to print, watched on a 60 ft screen, and the alexa shot with sxs cards held up fine, looked great.
we ended up going with MX for the feature cause of budget, and it's been working fine, but would have definitely preferred to have used the alexa. Let me know if you have any other questions.
bobby shore
DP
mtl/la
bobbyshore.com
-
so we did our piece with the phantom over the last week or so. only hmi lighting, mostly 18's through 12 by light grids, and a couple 6k and 4k's, also diffused, and some data flash units in the BG. shot with 360 deg. shutter, rated @ 400, and shot 360 fps, 600 fps, and 800 fps. without any noticeable flicker. kinda goes against everything I read/researched, always hearing that 360 fps was the highest you could go with hmi lighting. used regular electronic flicker free ballasts.
anyways, thought I'd share, wasn;t expecting it to work.
-
-
The house lights will almost definitely NOT work. They will flicker like mad and color shift as they do. With the size of an arena, the lights will be on different legs, which means phases, which means the color shifting flicker will roll in waves across the different areas. Trust me, been there / done that. Won't work.
HMI lighting that uses high frequency electronic ballasts will not "flicker," but they can be prone to another artifact. This would be Arc Wander, where the hot spot of the electrical arc that travels in the plasmatic glass within the glass envelope moves back and forth between the two cathodes. The effect is more of a shimmer than a flicker. If there is one big light it is quite obvious, but if many lights are mixed together or if the light is punched through diffusion then Arc Wander often cannot be seen. Mind you I know what to look for so it's obvious to me.
It doesn't really matter what size HMI you use in this regard.
Don't know what kind of frame rate you're going for, but you will definitely need a lot of light. Most people treat the Phantom HD Gold around an ISO 250 or so. Using a 360 degree shutter gains you a stop, but remember that every time you double the frame rate you half your exposure time.
Let me know if I can offer any additional assistance. As the North American distributor for Phantom products, it is our business to support them.
Hey Mitch,
Thanks so much for the reply. For the houselights, even though I'll be testing this week, sounds like I'll have to kill them and just supplement everything with my own lighting. We have enough big guns that this won't be a problem, especially after having talked with the director and keeping everything high speed relatively tighter in value.
So 250 for the ISO? I've heard of people rating it up to 500 and the results turning out great, definitely will be part of the testing.
@JD, thanks for the info as well. The lights are definitely metal halide, but we;re shooting in a couple different rinks and they have varying degrees of newer/older heads, so it'll definitely be something to watch out for in terms of matching color temp to the HMI lighting. As for power, we'll be sorted so as to run bigger heads further away and diffused.
I'll keep you posted on the results of the test. Thanks!
Bobby
-
Hey,
The forum's been really helpful with this topic already, but I had a couple specific questions that maybe you guys could help me out with. I'm shooting a hockey movie, and to accent some of the faster paced action-y type footage, we want to shoot some high speed work (specifically for some of the hockey fights in the movie). All the locations we're shooting in have existing metal halide fixtures above the ice, so to match the color temp., I'd have to go HMI instead of tungsten. Everything I've read so far has seemed somewhat favorable to using HMI's at highspeeds, although it seems a little more hit or miss with a 60hz cycle, even with electronic ballasts (I"m shooting in canada)
Has anyone used the phantom on int.'s with only HMI lighting? I know the existing fixtures will prove to be an issue as well (which I plan on testing next week), but do the same rules apply at higher speeds in terms of shooting at derivative frame rates of 20fps to avoid flicker? I don't think I have the lighting budget to kill the existing lighting and supplement the entire arena with my own. Also, I know with tungsten lighting at highspeeds you want to stick with 5K and up, is it the same for HMI? Would a 1.2 potentially be more of an issue than a 4K, or 12K?
Thanks in advance!
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
bobbyshore.com
-
hey,
I have a project where the director i wants a subject to walk from a wide shot (probably starting from about 20 feet away), into an ECU of the subject's eye. we'll be shooting on a soundstage with the RED MX, so shooting at a deep stop is definitely doable. I was thinking about using the clairmont swing/tilt macro lens system, does anyone have experience with it? Or do you think a I could achieve the shot with just a macro lens around a T-11?
We're probably going to shoot the shot in reverse (starting in the ECU of the eye), since focus will be so critical that close. Again, any advice at all from anyone that's tried something similar would be great. Thanks!
Bobby Shore
DP
mtl/la
bobbyshore.com
-
hey,
thanks for all the help/advice. seems like the 90 degree plate is probably gonna win out.
bobby
-
hey,
I have an upcoming shoot that's gonna require a bunch of shots where we need to rig the camera sideways to shoot with the frame vertically oriented. We;re shooting RED MX framing for 16:9. I don't have a ton of experience with either the dutch head or 90 degree plate, if anyone has any advice on the best way to do this, I'm all ears. Do I even need a special head/adapter, or can I just throw the baseplate on sideways and tilt away?
Not sure this really belongs in gripping, but figured it was a camera placement question. Thanks in advance!
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
www.bobbyshore.com
-
hey,
so I'm shooting my first car spot next week for Toyota. Concept is simple enough: night ext. on a tennis court, two friends playing doubles against unseen partners. One of the partners is blabbering non stop about his car, and the spot basically jump cuts all over the court from close to wide, etc etc. as this guy keep going on. At the end of the spot, we cut to the parking lot where the two friends get their new Toyota (I attached a pic of the location, BG will be the tennis courts), there' s a couple shots of them putting their gear away, getting in the car, driving off.
I know for car lighting, you generally want as big a source as possible to maximize on specular reflections. since it's location work outdoors at night, and not a huge budget, there's only so big we can go (probably 20 by's). Is that big enough that if positioned properly could give the specular highlights needed without revealing the source? I'm pushing for a silver or grey color on the car to minimize this (does that make sense? - I've shot with black cars at night outside and it quickly turned into a cluster**(obscenity removed)**). Also, I've seen a couple people use 8 ft. flourescent tubes positioned around the car to bring out metallic reflections.
Any advice is more than welcome. thanks in advance!
Bobby Shore
DP
mtl/la
-
I would have to agree Wick. I almost recommended the Fisher 23, cause it is the best, but for a 6 or 7' move it just seemed a bit much.
Thanks so much for replies. I finally met with the director today, turns out we won't actually need to operate the camera for the shot, which means no remote head. Looks like I'm probably going with a small porta-jib mounted on a fisher 11 or pee-wee. Appreciate all the help!
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
-
Hi,
I have a commercial shoot coming up that requires a small jib shot, I only need the camera to move from about 4 feet off the ground to about 10-11 feet (6-7 ft. move). Unfortunately, this is outside the range of a pee wee (or equivalent) dolly's boom arm, and I'm looking for any suggestions for a small jib arm that can be mounted on one of these types of dollies. I've used a lenny arm to this effect before, underslung on a weaver steadman head, but we're shooting with a 5D and think it might be a touch of overkill.
Thanks in advance!
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl./LA
-
Finally making some progress on a short film I am dp-ing/directing. Honestly, it doesn't feel quite like a "real" film as there are only two characters, Zero dollars and (most likely) no dialog but what the heck. I plan on fitting a few hours here and there over the next few months to get it done- I guess this is really just an excuse to try something new and have fun.
I completed the first screen test over the weekend and I think I found the look/tone I want:
Screen test link: http://vimeo.com/10532805
Some stills attached.
Thanks for checking it out, I will keep posted on the (slow) progress and upload stills along the way.
hey man,
great looking footage, love the feel! what'd you shoot it with? I really like the low contrast look/lighting. I'd be interested to know how you got those washed out, veiling flares, almost looks like you were shooting a pane of glass the whole time. Really nice.
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
bobbyshore.com
-
Hey,
Just re-cut my music video reel, figured I'd post it and see what ya'll thought. Thanks!
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
bobbyshore.com
-
hey guys!
well am a student film which means little to no money..so i was wondering if you guys can lend a help in how to get close in achieving the fightclub look... i know it wont look the same but something similar..
thanks!
great article. good luck.
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
www.bobbyshore.com
-
nice work - I like the use of smoke and minimal lighting. Especially the shot when the girl is held up in the air and the beam of light is shining down on her.
Personal taste - I don't like streak filters. I've had several people ask for them saying they look like anamorphic flare. To me they look like one point star filters, and totally destroy any beauty the natural flare of the glass has. But I seem to be pretty alone on that one.
hey man,
thanks for the feedback. I kinda agree with you, definitely don't think they mimic the anamorphic flares well at all, but I think they can add a little something to the image sometimes (although I admit it's overused in this clip). There's this company, Vantage, that's come out with a filter that actually gives the blue primo anamorphic flare:
budget was pretty much zero, so lighting package was pretty small... for the performance stuff was a couple par cans, 400 joker w/ leko attachment and a 2K back light pushing through some speakers in the BG.
-
hey,
shot this a week ago, cut a bit of the footage together. First time really using the 7D, gotta say I was pretty happy with it. Let me know what ya'll think (footage I got from editor is low res)
Bobby Shore
DP
mtl/la
bobbyshore.com
-
Hey,
I'm just curious what b&w music videos ya'll have seen recently/not so recently that made an impression. For me, Joaquin Baca-Asay's work on Jay-Z's 99 Problems really stands out. Not so recent, but really stands up.
Bobby Shore
DP
mtl./LA
www/bobbyshore.com
-
I'm looking for recommendations for a decent wireless video transmitter / receiver system. I use the Panasonic HDX 900 & Sony F800 primarily. I'm looking for a new system that is compatible and appropriate for reality shows. Any systems that have come out in the last few years that anyone really likes? I want to make sure the video signal is stable and is not constantly breaking up. Also need to know that they do not interfere with the audio recordings. Let me know model, approx pricing and where it can be purchased.
Thanks in advance for your input!
cheers
al
just used this on a feature: cam-wave
worked really well, as long as there was a clear path between the transmitter and receiver. If something solid got in the way (ie. a wall), the signal would breakdown pretty quick, but with a clear shot between the two, the signal held up to 100 yards. hope that helps, good luck.
Bobby Shore
DP
Mtl/LA
www.bobbyshore.com
-
so, was able to take a look at the 35 film-out from both the SxS cards and the footy from the NF... vindication! after getting nothing but sidelong glances from the director and nervous conversation from the producers, the result was really pleasing: there was a noticeable difference in the footage from the nanoflash compared to the SxS. This was most prevalent in the additional motion information provided by the NF (140 mbs vs 35 mbs). In terms of the additional color depth, couldn't notice a difference (most likely cause the NF is 8 bit, so even with the 422 space, there's not much of a change from the original footage from the SxS cards 420 space).
That being said, footage from both could be intercut... the main difference was less strobing/tearing with the NF footage, overall it felt a bit more natural and filmlike in the motion, which was very important for this project as it has a very rough handheld feel, lots of whip pans, zooms, etc. Although this was still pretty subtle, the cumulative effect of watching a print for 90 minutes on a big screen made the choice well worth it. If I was shooting for TV release though, I'd definitely go with the SxS cards, the NF isn;'t worth the headaches we;ve been going through both on set and in post, at least for the this show. Things are going much smoother now, post has their stuff figured out and we haven't had an issue with corrupted files since swapping out the NF that seemed to give us grief during week one.
Three more weeks to go. Hopefully smooth sailing.
bobby
-
I shot a feature film this summer with the EX1. In preparation I wanted to try the external recorders, the one that was available at the rental house was the Convergent one. I shot some comparison tests and had them printed to 35mm. Then I screened them split screen with native codec on the bottom, and external recorder on top. There was absolutely no difference. Then I took the footage to the post production facility to look at was was happening close-up. As we zoomed in on the images to check color binding etc. we drew the same conclusion. So yes, on paper it sounds like it should look better, 4.2.0 against 4.2.2, 25 megabits per second against 125. But try this test and you will see for yourself.
hey Maarten,
sorry for the delayed response... I wasn;'t actually able to test the nanoflash vs SxS cards before starting production. We just finished the first week of shooting, and we had some pretty major issues with the nanoflash: there were some corrupted files that had the video sync signal actually running down the right side of the frame, making the footage unusable. Luckily the footage was backed up on SxS cards, so we have the shots, although at 35mbs @ 4:2:0 instead of 140mbs @ 4:2:2 color space. Because it's so new, we weren't able to actually get an answer from the nanoflash techs as to why the footage was **(obscenity removed)**ed up... through some more research though, and talking to some other folk, it seems that it was a synch issue between the EX 3 and the NF, could've been a faulty bnc cable.
Also, it's been a headache for post in terms of how the clips are named by the nanoflash, and there've been a couple other issues (ie. the NF not running sometimes, and when you check playback from the camera, the NF will record it although @ 30fps interlaced, which gave us a pretty good scare when we got a call from post saying some of the footage wasn't @ 24fps progressive - luckily we were able to trace the problem to dupe clips made during playback, all you have to do is unhook the bnc cable when you playback off the camera)...
So yeah, definitely posing some challenges... we're thinking of ripping them off the cameras and just going on the SxS cards, but the diretor's nervous about a discrepancy in image quality on the print, so we pulled some selects (both NF and SxS) and we're screening a 35 mm print in the next couple days to see if the two will intercut... if they do, I have a feeling the NF is going to bed. Although I'm hoping there's a noticeable difference, as I'm the one who's been catching all the poop for any issues NF related.
What kind of tests did you run?? From all the research I've done, since the NF is still 8 bit, the most noticeable improvement in image quality will be in the movement (ie. no "tearing" during fast pans, zooms, etc)... The show I'm on right now is beyond hectic in terms of the kind of camera work, all hand held, loads of run and gun type poop, etc., the kind of aesthetic where the additional motion info would make a difference... anyways, we'll see how much production and the director will hate on me after seeing the test. I'll post the results later this week.
bobby
-
-
Hi Bobby,
Any chance of you posting stills from the side by side test?
Sounds like a nice gig. Now you'll just have to giver!
All the best,
Martin
here's a link to a rough cut of the test the editor laid out (here). It's pretty low res, so it's hard to really notice any distinctive differences. The black frames separating shots were removed to get a better sense of changes shot to shot, and at the end there's three shots of EX night ext. before the 7D footy. Only pay attention to the last EX 3 shot (is where I bumped the gain to + 3 to better match the 7D - which with a fast prime could give me two more stops than what is shown in the test, which is why I'm planning on using the 7D for wide night establishing shots for the show).
for the detail and gamma tests. the key was a tungsten based diva light direct, reading 4.0 @ 500 asa. fill side was 1.4. BG was practical cool whites (green bias), spotting @ 2.8 8/10. The chart on the frame right was spotting @ 11.0 1/10 on the whites, and @ 1.0 on the blacks (including the surrounding black areas).
The art dept. just bought a palette of pilsner (4000 cans), a third of which they want emptied for set dressing... guess it's one of the perks of making a movie about drunken banger's.
bobby
Dry for Wet Lighting
in Visual Effects Cinematography
Posted
Hey All!
I wanted to see if anyone had experience with dry for wet lighting, specifically with using moving lights (clay paky or robe or varilight etc) to create punchy shafts of daylight that can replicate the water caustic effect. I'm shooting a small sequence for a tv show in a couple weeks, and planning on going with the tried and tested method of bigger lamps bouncing into loosely skinnned-rosco hard mirror gel and shooting overcrank (200fps minimum), plus a big overhead soft box. The set we're shooting in is meant to be a busted up bell tower with holes in the roof, so wanted to explore other ways of achieving a punchier beam of light effect (hence looking into something like a clay paky sharpie or robe esprit).
Attached a couple images that have a ballpark effect. And open to any insight from folks who may have done this before ?
bobby shore