Jonathan Bowerbank

Does anybody know if any color correction filters should be used when shooting Color for B&W? I can think of only maybe using black ProMist to really deepen the blacks, but would an 85 filter make a big difference, for example. Or can everything be manipulated in DI...errrr

There are 5 dup ads on eBay right now for Arri SR's, the seller is located in France, I'm guessing it's fake.

You're asking for the "easiest" way, right? Well, Kodak sometimes holds screenings of film tests that they've conducted with various film stocks. That's a good introduction to the characteristics of what they carry. Also, Fuji offers a free DVD on their website with various examples of all their current Eterna stock. Hard time consuming way, yet very valuable for my experience: I like to purchase 100' rolls of a certain stock and do an "exposure test" to see really where it performs best and where it really starts to fall apart. An exposure test is when you light an stationary actor with a gray card beside them, and a half black and half white background. You then do various takes, starting from Normal exposure then changing your f-stop on the lens (or adjusting your lights to get a different exposure) with each take, respectively, progressively underexposing the image and then progressively overexposing the image. You then get a print of your film and get both a normal print and a timed print (the timed print adjusts every take back to normal exposure, so you can really see the characteristics of the film and its grain) Hope that answers your question. Regarding film stocks from the 60's or 70's...tough luck, I'd say. It all depends on what sort of look your going for, but keep in mind that back in the early days of cinema the film stocks were very slow, thus requiring A LOT of light. So if you're looking to recreate something like that, a slower stock would probably do you some good.

Just saw it tonight, excellent film on all counts. Cinematographically, it was great. Excellent work with shallow dof, using those anamorphic lenses. I didn't know it was anamorphic until I saw the curtains on the screen go out wider than I've seen them go in a while, ha ha. There was only one fault that I saw, and the vfx team is probably mostly to blame. There's a night scene at an outdoor bar/dance club where DiCaprio and Connelly are having drinks. During their conversation, all the extras in the background are out of focus, and yet the ocean, horizon and even electrical storm in the distance is nearly in perfect focus. I doubt anyone else in the theatre noticed, but it was really strange. And the sunset shot you mentioned, I agree, I marvelled at that shot when it finally showed up. I highly recommend seeing this film. DiCaprio's accent takes some getting used to, but he does it well and you forget all about it eventually. It's a really heavy tearjerker, on the level of "Glory", one of Zwick's previous films.

This answers both questions at hand: From the Good German official website: http://thegoodgerman.warnerbros.com/site/ Soderbergh: I looked at some script continuities from some Michael Curtiz films...basically to see in the script supervisor's notes what lenses he was using. He was basically using five lenses and we pretty much stuck to that -- a 50mm, a 40mm, a 32mm, a 28mm and a 24mm, and I'm pretty sure those were the only five lenses we used thru the whole film. As technology has developed, lenses have improved and one of the things that's happenened is that now there's a coating to reduce flares when there's a light pointing into the lens or kicking off of something. We were trying to find lenses that didn't have this kind of modern coating on it because we wanted these anomalies you used to get from these old lenses. Panavision pulled some of their early lenses for us that some people would say aren't as good, but, in our opinion, for this, they were better. And that absolutely had an impact. We had to shoot color stock because of the blue screen sequences we were doing for the driving sequences. There was some discussion early on about shooting in black and white. I'd shot black and white before, on "Kafka", and I knew that the stocks were very slow and very grainy, so very early on we decided that we'd better shoot in color and pull the color out later, as George did on "Good Night, and Good Luck"

Ha ha, good one Tim. I'm still perpetually impressed by how Soderbergh is able to function as both DP and Director on set, and yet he's still able to give his actors some great direction towards what have generally been brilliant performances. I'm really looking forward to seeing "The Good German", especially considering the technical rules of "old studio days" that he adhered to during production. Oh but look, I've gone off topic...here: Jeunet & Caro w/ Khondji

Ahh yes, I was aware that some Bolex models accepted 400' mags...you are correct. It's just so rare for me to actually see anyone going about it, that it was furthest from my mind. Cheers for your correction :)

I read an article that had an interview with J. Clark Mathis, the DP for the new Rocky movie. He spoke about how he kept the look of the first Rocky film in mind while making this one, but honestly, judging from the trailers, I'm not seeing that same subtle quality that James Crabe created at the beginning of the series. The biggest issues I'm seeing are with the unnatural source key lights, especially for night scenes. It's as if he was trying to put as much diffused light on Sly as often as possible to hide his wrinkles and "corrective" surgeries. Is anyone else seeing how unnatural the lighting is? It also seems like someone just got a little to HMI happy with top lights and kickers. Your opinions will be appreciated :)

The price is nice, considering it's basically only the camera housing. But why go through the expense and headache to rebuild it? Makes it worth an extra 1 to 2 grand to just buy a complete one. If you're comparing the Arri S with a Bolex, I'd say the only thing that makes the Arriflex more "professional" (probably not the best choice of words) is its ability to adopt a 400' mag, thus helping a production go smoother by not having to reload every 2.5 minutes of film that's rolled. And the lens of course is very crucial to the image's quality, if both cameras are functioning flawlessly then they should be able to match in quality if you're using the same lenses.

It can also be referred to as a "cherry picker"

Such a long list could be made out of this, so here are just two of my favorite Director/DP teams who have worked with eachother numerous times Coens w/ both Deakins & Sonnenfeld (You can't mention a Coen film's cinematography without mentioning "Miller's Crossing") Gilliam/Pratt (Come on, Time Bandits, Baron Munchausen, Brazil, Fisher King, 12 Monkeys...all brilliant)

MISCATEGORIZED WHEN INITIALLY POSTED, COULD SOMEONE PUT IT IN THE CINEALTA FORUM, THANKS! http://news.sel.sony.com/en/press_room/b2b...ease/26744.html SONY’S NEW F23 CAMERA RISES TO THE PINNACLE OF THE CINEALTA ACQUISITION LINE-UP System Will Deliver 4:4:4 1920 by 1080 Imaging for High-End Digital Production PARK RIDGE, N.J., Dec. 13, 2006 – Sony Electronics today introduced the F23 camera, which will support 4:4:4 1920 by 1080 RGB imaging. The system will join the HDC-F950 camera at the high-end of the company’s CineAlta™ line of acquisition products for digital television and motion picture content creation. It uses three 2.2 megabit 2/3-inch type progressive CCD imagers and a 14-bit A/D converter. The system will support 1080/23.98P, 24P, 25P, 29.97P, 50P, 59.94P, 50i and 59.94i formats. “With this new system, content creators and program producers will have one more extremely versatile high-end production tool in their arsenal,” said Rob Willox, Sony’s director of marketing for professional content creation products. “Developed for cinematographers, this system will offer the technical and mechanical flexibility they need, as well as a compact and rugged design to withstand the challenging conditions often encountered on location.” The new system will share the HDC-F950 camera’s 1920 by 1080 RGB 4:4:4 design, but also incorporate several new features, the direct result of feedback from production professionals. The SRW-1 digital 4:4:4 recorder will dock directly to the top or to the tail of the new system. This eliminates the need for cumbersome cable handling between the camera and recorder. When more mobility is required, the recorder can also be tethered using a “dual-link” cable connection so the camera is as small and light as possible. In order to be “film user-friendly,” the camera body will be compatible with a variety of film camera accessories, including bridge plates, matte boxes and follow focus units. These can be attached to the unit without modification. For increased durability and reliability, and to withstand the numerous lens changes that often happen on location, the F23 system will use a harder material for its lens mount (B4 type). When used with Sony’s SRW-1 VTR, the new camera system can capture and record variable speed images from 1P to 60P (1P to 30 FPS at 4:4:4 and 1P to 60 FPS at 4:2:2) at the full HD resolution of 1920 by 1080 pixels. This allows for quick- or slow-motion functionality, also known as “undercranking” or “overcranking,” to produce special motion effects commonly used in high-end production. These variable speed images can be played back by the SRW series of VTRs immediately after shooting. The system’s control surface layout, indicators and menu system were designed to give film camera users a familiar and intuitive user interface. Users can operate the system with the supplied “Assistant Panel” remote controller. This device connects to the camera with a single cable and allows users to remotely execute basic camera and VTR operations, such as REC/STOP, changing frame rates and shutter angle. The CVP File Editor, which is the Windows® PC running gamma creation software, is also supported. The F23 system is expected to be available late this spring. (estimated price upon further research, between $100k & $150k)

Nice work Matt. I especially like the long shots of the circular track (nice smoke element) and the other one with the grip & gaffer setting up. The shots where the Dr. is staring at the camera as it dollies around her is kinda creepy, but in a funny way, ha ha good job!

A friend of mine and I were having a childish debate a couple months ago regarding the proper verbage for an extension cord. It was uninvitedly brought up again last night, so I wanted to open it up to a forum of people who know with a surety. The general nickname for an extension cord is "Stinger", correct? He maintains that an extension cord, regardless of its plug, can also be called an "Edison", which makes no logical sense to me. I can understand if you refer to an extension cord with an Edison plug as an "Edison", if you need to specify what type of plug the cord should have. But is "Edison" ever a generic term for extension cords in general?

Maybe Film Runner is a Drug Runner and on the lam...unless that's the case, I don't see why you would have a problem sharing your real name with industry professionals.

The biggest issue with P2's that people have been saying from the beginning is what you have to go through to archive your footage. I'd be afraid to shoot all my footage onto a P2 card, dump it onto an HD and then erase the card. I'd much rather get an optical HD disc like what the Sony XDCAM HD uses, and keep it in storage for if an issue such as this occurs.

I think when you're working with a crew that's helping you out pro-bono, an important thing to do is make sure everybody has a specific assignment, and knows the limits to their duties. If someone is assigned as grip or gaffer, they should know to not hover around the camera interfering with the Camera Op & DP by checking out the composition. Making sure there's an established respect for the Director and AD I think is crucial too, as I've noticed that a lot of people get offended by a razoredged AD who's "barking" orders. James said it right, everyone should treat the project with the highest professionalism...sadly, a lot of free crew members haven't reached that level and don't know proper etiquette.

Well put David, I enjoy simpler explanations :)

A lot of people when they think of High Key, refer to TV sitcoms, which usually work within the 4:1 (2 stop dif) or 2:1 (1 stop dif.) contrast ratio. Low Key is a really contrasty image, I'd say anything more than an 8:1 (3 stop difference) ratio, where you start to get really deep black and less detail in the shadows.

btw, I always feel like an ass whenever I reference my film stock wrong :/ (kicks self) OK, I'm over it :)

D'oh! Sorry, yeah, 250T I did meter at 200 though, since I was using a Sekonic Analog meter and it's kinda tough to set it for 250 exactly. That that it would have made TOO much difference anyway. Thanks for the correction :ph34r:

A couple weeks ago I shot some film tests with Fuji's Eterna 200T 16mm stock. My idea for the shoot was to play around with PlusGreen gels and see how the film would react. I have to say, I was actually impressed by how the shots turned out. I knew Fuji tends to bias towards the greens, even its blacks seems to have a little green in it. But if you play to the stock's strength by adding a green lighting element to your shot, I found it looked fantastic. Not to mention I really liked the finer grain of the 200T as opposed to 500T. Just more evidence that different brands, stocks and ASA's all serve their own purpose.

Last night I was watching the TV series "House" with Hugh Laurie. There was a scene in a bathroom near the end of the episode "Merry Little Christmas", which seemed very similar to the color palette you're trying to achieve in your project. It had Hugh Laurie at the bathroom sink, washing his face and looking into the mirror. There was a tungsten practical above the mirror which illuminated the actor, while in the background the walls and the toilet stalls were lighted green, possibly a denser green than you might get with a Full PlusGreen. It was very effective though. I doubt you were able to see it, being you're in Spain, BUT OH WAIT! I found the entire scene on YouTube! I hope it helps! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqslwD6Vsuo

I have a producer friend who just completed a project for Discovery. She can go on and on about how tight Discovery are with their budgeting. Obviously, they're just trying to scrimp and save as much as they can. Because really, in the case of Discovery produced documentaries, the image quality isn't as big a deal as the actual information they're providing, especially since nothing they produce will ever be shown on the big screen. I just suppose they're just going Digital, just like most other documentarians in the country.

Got a laptop with sound recording software?