Jump to content

dan brockett

Basic Member
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by dan brockett

  1. Canon T2i/550 is outstanding for the money. Same sensor as the Canon 7D, APS-C. I have seen great stills and some nice footage from them and they are cheap, about $700.00 to $800.00 for the body. Dan
  2. Quarterly? Wow. I'd love to get away with doing this as a producer (just kidding!) but none of the grips that I work with would go for that. Great follow up suggestions from Rob. It bugs me anytime anyone goes over net 30, that is ridiculous unless they have made prior arrangements and have partially paid up front or in installments. I had one client go 72 days last year and I was getting pretty peeved but kept my cool and they did pay me. Inconsiderate of them. Times are tough but grips gotta eat like everyone else. Dan
  3. If I were lighting it, two or three cheap wall sconces would have been placed on a side of the hallway walls. Just something lightweight and cheap from Home Depot/Lowes, or even just fabricated from prop or art department, if you have one. Art department figures out a quickie way to temporarily mount them ala double sided or Velcro and they are lit with small battery powered LEDs. At least then you have some motivation for some soft, low ambient to get a picture. If ceiling was not visible, I would probably supplement from overhead off of a boom pole or Pole Cat with a Chimera pancake lantern and something on a dimmer. This sounds like as much as an art department challenge as it is a lighting challenge. I suggest it because I have a circular stairway in my home and have some really modern, sort of abstract wall sconces and they look cool, throw some ambient and or a nice "cone" of light up or down the wall. Gives motivation to get the picture out of the mud or silhouette area if you'd like to? Dan Brockett
  4. I interviewed him a few years ago for The Wizard of Oz DVD box set and I did an audio commentary with him on some film noir movies. Great guy, the nicest guy you would ever want to hang out with. And a great DP. Nothing but smiles and deep knowledge. Dan
  5. Hi Corey: Here was what I thought of it http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/produ...0_brockett.html Dan
  6. So Seth: Did you buy a 2700 while the killer trade-in program was in effect? This is definitely the camera that I aspire to. Dan
  7. Gotcha, I didn't read your post closely enough. Yes, I would just replace a burned diffusion baffle, $45.00 is nothing. Dan
  8. Salil: Send it back to Chimera in Boulder, Colorado. I sent my medium Quartz that had two holes burned through it and they repaired it like new for about $120.00. Dan
  9. Oh yes, there are plenty of those. http://tinyurl.com/ct5lsc Dan
  10. We are using Magic Bullet Instant HD 1.1 on a current project that is shooting on DVC ProHD in 720 24pN and 720 24pN AVC Intra 100. We were supplied some footage that was shot 4x3 DVCAM and have to integrate it into this project. This plug-in handles it surprisingly well, it looks decent, if not impressive, I mean it is NTSC in an HD timeline. http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/products/a...let-instant-hd/ Worth checking out. Dan
  11. Hi Mike: Yes, I have used DVDxDV for years and yes, sometimes randomly the clips it pulls seem to be out of sync by quite a bit. I don't know why and it's not hard to line them up again but it is annoying. Dan
  12. There are many uses but one that comes to mind would be you shoot nature docs and want to return to the exact same deer trail each season. Using this board, you could find your way back easily no matter how the terrain had changed. Same with on-the-water shoots? Dan
  13. I did want to add that the Canon XL-H1 does have a user adjustable back focus. I didn't even know it until another DP showed me. I hate that camera anyway. The back focus on the XL-H1, unlike a broadcast 2/3" camera, is hidden in the menu and the camera does something internally. Weird setup but at least it has it. Yes, the BF can totally be out on a fixed lens camera as well, I have encountered that a few times. It's usually when the fixed lens camera has been dropped or jarred. Dan
  14. Hi Ryan: I own the exact same setup. Personally, I find the improved LCD with the three different focusing aids more than adequate for obtaining critical focus, but I come from shooting with the regular HVX200 for years. You aren't having better luck with the histogram, focus bar and the magnified box? I have been doing lots of shoots with just the LCD and have had no problems in obtaining razor sharp focus using the new tools. But if you have your heart set on using a laptop to focus with, you can run the FireWire output of the 170 to a Mac laptop. You would just use http://www.scopebox.com/preview.php or of course, you could just buy an inexpensive 15 or 17" consumer LCD with component inputs. Dan
  15. As the owner of a Manfrotto 9' matte boom pole, I would say yes, it is quicker and safer to rig and doesn't really need anything in the way of arm counterbalance. Yes, it does need some sandbagging at the base. But if I try to rig, say an Arri 300 at the end of my 9' Manfrotto pole, I am only going to get perhaps 6-7' of extension because I will have to shift the fulcrum point so far forward. The Mini Max eliminates these issues. I like it. You would probably want to check one out in person. If you are in LA, stop by the Matthews lobby in Burbank, they have one on display you could check out. If you are never in LA, might be more difficult to find one you could check out. Dan
  16. Andrew: You may find it helpful to track down the book, "The New Cinematographers" by Alex Ballinger. There is a whole chapter devoted to Lance Accord's work on "Being John Malkovich". He goes into some pretty nice detail about how Accord and Spike Jonze decided to light the tunnels that the various characters go down to get into Malkovich's mind. Some very nice detail about stocks, lighting, how he decided to get to where they ended up. A good read, well worth it if you are researching your project. The book itself is well worth your while too, it explores some great work by several cinematographers. http://www.amazon.com/New-Cinematographers...1892&sr=1-1 Dan
  17. I was at Matthews last month, interviewing the CEO for an article I am writing for a magazine. I had a chance to play with the Mini Max. It's pretty sweet, perfect for when you have a low ceiling, nothing to mount to and you have been forbidden from using other means to physically attach things to the walls/ceilings like spreaders and PoleCats. You know, when you need to float a small 150 or 300 as a hair or kicker in a wide shot where you would see a stand or traditional boom arm. Also handy for getting a small source light outside a second story window quickly. I really was impressed with the Mini Max and featured it in the article. It will be in the February '09 issue of www.hdvideopro.com magazine. A handy tool. The regular Max is pretty big and yes, it does take up some serious space on the truck. Best, Dan
  18. Hey Matt: There is a RED dolly, but Matthews makes it. I just did a story on it for www.hdvideopro.com it will be in the December '08 issue. Pretty sweet dolly. http://www.msegrip.com/mse.php?show=produc...oducts_ID=26766 Dan
  19. Contact Wayne or Glenn at shoot 35 sales@shoot35.com I have a Letus and the BF is a PITA to set but once it's set, you are good as long as you don't change mounts. Not sure how this functions on the SG Pro, all of these adapters have their own little idiosyncrasies. Sounds as if you have bought the Canon series that needs to have a little piece of plastic inserted to make the iris connection, that's why I went with the Nikons, you don't have to do this hack, although I don't think all Canon lenses are this way. Good luck, Dan
  20. I prefer an Arri 150 or 300 with a piece of diffusion to enlarge the source. I find when shooting interviews, I often have no idea what the talent is going to look like. I usually setup the 150 or 300 as a hair light but if the interviewee shows up and is bald or balding, of course, we don't want the hotspots that a hairlight will cause on a bald head. A few years ago, I had to interview an older gentleman who was an exec at one of the studios and this situation arose, he had hair but very thinning. I had the 150 on a 40" arm on a C-stand so I just took it and swung in low about the height of the talent's waist behind him on the opposite site of the key source. I really liked the modeling that it added to the side of his face in contrast to the soft frontal and under fill I had going. It looked great, I wish that I had a still of it for you, but I don't. Kickers are always fun but I travel a lot and have a limited kit when I travel so I don't always have a free light available to serve as a kicker, but when I do or a I am shooting at home, I like to try to work one in on interviews, stand ups and certain scenes. IMHO, a kicker just enhances the 3D effect that we are all trying to light for. Best, Dan
  21. From what I have read, Panasonic feels that there would be heat issues in putting 1/2" CCDs into a body the size of the HPX and they do not want to go the CMOS/Rolling shutter route that Sony has chosen...yet. I think that CMOS imagers run cooler, it is inherent in the technology. I have a feeling that as soon as the technology evolves to where CMOS imagers can be implemented without rolling shutter artifacting at a reasonable cost, I think that everything will go with CMOS. 170 features same size CCD imagers 960x540 pixel shifted, but they did improve noise, detail, upped the speed by half a stop and have new DSP processing. If you are going for purely the highest resolution, you would want the EX1, nothing touches it in it's price range and even quite a bit higher for pure resolution. But to me, resolution isn't everything ;-) I shoot weekly with the EX1 (one of my clients has one that I use) as well and have a a decent amount of experience with both of them. Overall, I prefer the image of the HVX200A/HPX170 over the Sony. Definitely not as high resolution but more pleasing in every other way to me. The HPX170 and the HVX200A share the same identical new CCD imagers. Dan
  22. For those of you who are interested, I wrote a little article for my friend, Ken Stone, about my experience and observations in moving from the HVX200 to the HPX170. Check it out http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/hpx_1...n_brockett.html All my best, Dan
  23. Barry Green over at DVXUser has spent some time shooting with it and has written some about it. The word on the street is good. If you can't afford a P2 camcorder, the 150 is a pretty tight camera. Just keep in mind that the AVCHD codec is a royal PITA to work with unless you have certain editing software that handles the codec natively. FCP users will not have a good time transcoding all of the AVCHD to DVCProHD or ProRes. No variable frame rates either, I would miss those so much. But the cam itself if physically very similar to the HPX170, which is one of the most operator friendly prosumer cameras ever made as far as I am concerned. I will have a very comprehensive article about transitioning from the HVX200 to the HPX170 that will go live over at www.kenstone.net the day after tomorrow (Sunday). Dan
  24. Wow, judging by the length of this thread and the robustness of the replies, work must be slowing down ;-( Whenever I finish a shoot now, the proper terms is, "we got that one on the card" since I am mostly shooting P2 and XDCAM EX these days. I used to shoot a lot of S16 and I miss it but I have to say, I like shooting digitally more because experimentation is free (from a filmstock, lab and telecine POV). That freedom is intoxicating. Dan
  25. Hi all: Thanks for the suggestions. I will post pictures once I settle on the method that will work the best. Dan
×
×
  • Create New...