Jump to content

Robert Houllahan

Site Sponsor
  • Posts

    2,226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Robert Houllahan

  1. Trust? I dunno... but I would suppose every inch counts in that situation..... -Rob-
  2. It will be nice to snap a Digiback on your Sr or Ltr/Xtr seems rather logical. I would also say that making jobs pay for kit is a great way to get more kit. I have taken the approach of a bit older or specialized cameras. I have 2 brand new (2002 manufacture) Hycam's because a customer had a instrumentation need and I got them at the right price. I just finished putting together the rest of my Eyemo kit with a few more Nikkors (18mm, 28mm, the 1/4 turn for focus :) ) and I am picking up my NCS Timelapse motor this weekend in Queens. I am sure I can sell some nice long shutter duration (stars flyingby, etc.) shots in 35mm probably pay for the motor in a few weeks. I had thought about buying a nice XTR about a year ago but finding 10K (plus my ltr) to stretch to get it just did not make sense for me. Having some kit and then going to the rental house is a good way to go, let the rental house pay for the high ticket camera system and maintain it. If I had a job where the client wanted a fancy looking spot and was willing to pay going to Boscam and getting a 435 and support, etc. is what I would do in a flash might bring the eyemo package but as a specialty rig only. Owning the 435 would only make sense if I were in a market and climate where it would give me great leverage or be run almost every day. -Rob-
  3. And please for heavens sake don't anyone go and start thinking I am saying anything bad about the red I am sure it is going to be a very fine example of it's type of camera, similar to the Dalsa I would think in many ways. I am afraid to even say red it's so like pissing on the third rail around here. -Rob-
  4. [Would you now consider buying a camera such as the Aaton Prod, or will cams like RED negate the probable investment benefits over the next two or three years. I bought my LTR54 6 years ago and probably have 10-12K (lenses, support,blah, blah) into it which seems relatively cheap to me, I have gotten tons of use out of it and I am not saddled with a big monthly payment to own it. Film's film and I do not think a video camera no matter how much talk is made about it will negate that look and methodology, and there are major issues with all of the types of imagers be it a bayer or prism block. I know things will go digital someday, of course This is, of course, the prevailing wisdom but I do not necessarily see it as having to be true, the digital phenomena is still fairly new and most people seem to be resigned to digital representations replacing everything from sex to toast in the coming years. Many digital systems are vastly more complex, power hungry, short lived and not ultimately as good as what they have replaced just throw the digital moniker on and accept the dulling effect.... :D Does any (working/ex pro) in here have an opinion they might like to share with me on this? Is it unwise to invest $25k in a used Aaton when I could get a new RED for close to the same? I think a used aaton or sr will set you back allot less than 25k and a complete red will set you back more like 75k after glass and accessories, etc. unless you want to use a plastic follow focus with a nikkor prime with a 1/4 barrel turn for focus. I honestly haven't enjoyed my digital experiences at all. Everything becomes so rushed and the American "push-button" mentality seems to rear it's ugly head quickly and any "craft" turns into soggy work instead. Not to mention that thus far, the images are never anything that excites me. There are allot of lazy slobs (directing) working at the hi-end of American cinema pushing the "new" button history will not have anything to say about the early 2000's all blue screen digital "film" because it will be quickly forgotten and almost as quickly the "originals" will be eaten by entropy. Entropy loves a highly ordered complex system, yummy tasty. These are my opinions as a Jerk...... :D -Rob-
  5. I have done this many times there is really no visible difference between the uncompressed 10bit 422 video and the Digibeta 10bit 422 1.5/1 compressed tape. This is looking at the video out (SDI) from the disc recorder or telecine and then the video out (SDI) from the D-Beta deck on a A-grade CRT. There are things you will see on a A-Grade CRT that you will not see even on a nice SDI PVM and certainly not on a consumer tv. I think our Panasonic's were $26k new for a 20" CRT. BetaSP is a significant step down and DV is a little step down from there, both of these formats in either YUV or in the DVcam from SDI have very significant quality difference from the original Uncompressed SDI signal coming out of the Telecine/ColorCorrector. The 10bit file is not RGB there is no practical SD RGB video format. It is in our case (and most) a Blackmagic 10bit 4:2:2 Uncompressed YUV video signal, the very same signal that comes out of a Telecine or a D-Beta deck. The capture card basically ingests a bitstream and puts the bits in a Quicktime wrapper, the D-Beta deck ingests the same bitstream and compresses it 1.5/1 and stores it in a plastic tape wrapper. When it comes to the video signal there is practically no difference. I agree tape will be around a long long time, it stores much better than optical or hard disc media. In a direct to disc workflow the above mentioned D-Beta tape is the EDITED master and not the full raw master but there is nothing stopping you from making your edited master and then filling up another D-beta tape with your raw. There would be no quality difference between this and making the raw masters to a D-Beta deck attached to the telecine. Direct to Disc is a good way to provide D-Beta quality workflow to people who do not own a D-beta deck and can only swing the cost of a rental for final output. It also saves you all the digitizing time as you have the files on your disc array. -Rob-
  6. Any flying spot telecine (Cintel, Nova, Millenium, etc.) and the Sony Vialta can zoom out (optically) to see the frame and sprockets on the right side of the film. If you wanted a 720x486 res scan then a SD telecine can do most of what you want, if you transfer at 30fps to NTSC video you could then dump that into a frame sequence (tiff, jpeg, etc.) and de-interlace in photoslop. Rinse and repeat on a HD scanner and you'll have 1080x1440 (std 16) to work with but costs go up and maybe this is all too complex. You could also fix up a rig on a lightbox to hold the 16mm film and then setup a decent D-Slr to then take a picture frame by frame, a bit of work making the rig and a bit of time photographing but you could control the framing and get everything including perfs, keycode numbers, etc in a hi-res form. -Rob-
  7. So you bring them snacks to motivate the "talent" :) and if a tiger shark or some other big MotherF show up it's get out of the water or get eaten fer' sure? or will he just eat one of the smaller sharks because people (except surfers) are not a delicacy? I remember reading/seeing stuff a while back about Sharks super-sensitivity to certain electrical fields and have often wondered if any clever chap had built a sort of electric shark repeller for divers, something that if turned on would drive them away. I thought certain beaches (Australia? etc.) had electric shark "fences" that kept our fine betoothed friends from chewing on fat tourist types. -Rob-
  8. I feel that xx22 has a more traditional contrastier and grainier look that xx79 used for color which seems to come out smoother and has a more creamy feel. -Rob-
  9. Sounds like an excellent assessment. Thanks! Better Spectra spend the money on that terrific gate and offer betacam sp and DV video transfers at excellent price points than skimp on the gate just so they can have an inhouse digital betacam deck. I concur, You can always rent a deck, we did that just the other day, you can rent a deck allot of times for $30K and I think the money is better put into the telecine than a deck. The problem with directly comparing uncompressed 10 bit to digital betacam, betacam sp or mini-dv, and correct me if I am wrong, is 10 bit uncompressed is a computer file whereas digibeta is a video signal. Well it is a computer file (quicktime or AVI) that is a video signal, essentially what any of us who offer this are doing is setting up a Mac or PC with a capture card like a Decklink SDI and capturing the SDI output at the far end of the Telecine/Color corrector. So even if the uncompressed 10 bit signal looks better in the computer, when it is edited on NLE and the NLE edit master is outputted to a video tape, how does that look versus if one started with either digital betacam or betacam sp and used a digital betacam workflow or a betacam sp component signal workflow? That is the comparison that I want to know more about. If you take the Uncompressed files (Even D-Beta has compression, albeit light) and put them on a timeline in Final Cut (for example) and edit the show together and then plug the SDI out (your D-Beta workflow) into a Grade-A monitor like what we have in the telecine suite you will see the video picture we had in the telecine suite with no alteration, period. If you then plug that SDI into a D-Beta deck and make a master the very light compression of the D-Beta deck will be the first time the picture is altered (compressed) since it left the 10 bit SDI output of the Color Corrector. We just finished up a Process/Transfer job for one of our clients in Nashville who shot a Music Video (a mix of Ektachrome 16mm X-processed, Vision 16mm, S-8, color neg and Ekta, both straight processed and X-processed) I transfered everything to BetaSP and to 10bit Uncompressed quicktime files (D1 720x486 NTSC) they are doing finish assembly on a Avid Adrenaline and then making a D-Beta master. The BetaSP will just be a backup/dailies format and the Disc will be the working video. Direct to disc is the way of the future..... :D -Rob-
  10. Used a shrink ray on the BL? cool :blink: Do the sharks generally just ignore you? or are they interested? I wanted to say curious but I know they are kinda ancient creatures and may not stray to curiosity. Looks like fun. -Rob-
  11. Bleach bypass has a look, it is great if that is what you want for your show, the process retains the silver in the film and changes the look of the whole picture, contrast, color saturation, highlight handling, etc. This also can be significantly different weather you are going for a film print finish or a video finish. You can still force process the film (push/pull) in addition to the bypass. Were you considering bleach bypass on a reversal shooting stock? or for prints being made from a negative? or both? I would think that any lab that runs print can do a bleach bypass for you on your prints but there will be a setup fee. -Rob-
  12. Well the magic of fedex can get your film anywhere overnight, check around or even check us out (banner on the right) to find a facility to do your process/transfer the right way. -Rob-
  13. AVI can be allmost anything it could be uncompressed, it could be dv compression. HDV is a terribly compressed "hd" format both of these formats are transported over firewire so i would suspect that the facility is using a 8mm projector and some kind of firewire camera rig for a frame by frame capture, hence no real uncompressed video, etc... Where are you located? there are many facilities which use real film scanning systems to do this work which will ultimately yield a better picture that a "film chain system" we are one of those facilities but there is Spectra and Pro8 in LA, fsft in seattle, us (cinelab) duart, debenham in the northeast US, and many more in europe using Rank or flashscan scanners...plus the cost is either the same or just a bit higher than a shop using a little projector/camera rig. -Rob-
  14. The K-3 can be a really good camera and very cheap to run, B+W 100' film can be had for around $20 and processing will be less than that, shoot a bunch and get it all transfered at once to save a bit. More expensive than a DV tape but a XL2 will set you back at least $3k you can buy a whole pile of stock, process and xfer for that. -Rob-
  15. We have been seeing allot of S-8 optically blown up to 16mm from a few film people in Boston as of late, mostly blown up on a JK optical printer. We subsequently answer printed 3 films with S-8 blowups in them (16mm) I was very impressed with the look of this process. I think the S-8 for JFK and Natural Born killers were blown to 35mm optically by a firm in San Francisco (can't remember the name) but I could be wrong. -Rob-
  16. The best quality, even if going to DVD, will be obtained by getting an uncompressed transfer. When you go to dv you get a picture which has already gone through a process which is very similar to the Mprg-2 compression used for DVD playback so you are making a second similar compression pass when you finish your edit and make the DVD. Film footage, especially super8, has a fair bit of grain and this constant changing picture is not very easy on compressors and will look better if you do your big DVD compression step from the least compressed source possible. -Rob-
  17. Film is generally 24fps "progressive" which means the whole picture is displayed at the same time and not broken down to display as in NTSC or PAL tv systems. NTSC is 59.94 fields per second (2 fields make a frame) and pal is 50 fields per second. This is a analog compression technique and works by drawing half of the lines in a video picture "going down" and filling in the other half "going up" there were no LCD or Plasma, etc. displays when TV was invented and the up/down analogy is based on the electron gun sweeping across the phosper on a CRT. Film scanning either uses a 3:2 pulldown or a transfer at 25fps to fit the natural film framerate into the way SD broadcast works. Despite the fact that DV is a digital format it has to work with the long established broadcast standards and recreates it's digital bitstream into a analog interlaced 720 pixel format (with 486 or 576 lines NTSC or PAL) this motion compensation and downres of the natural film picture and framerate is one component of "loss" inherent in the DV system. 16mm film is generally considered to be a 2K res format and even super8 is being scanned at 2K these days so many arguments can be hatched from the film res debate but 2K is 2048 x 1556 and DV is 720 x 480 so there is a significant loss of resolution, this is also why film transfered to SD can look so good because it is "supersampled" basically you are stuffing a 800lb gorilla in a 50lb box, google Nyquist for more info on this. Film color is often represented at 16bit per channel precision (either in 16bit rgb or 10bit log) this is a representation of each color dye (red, green, blue) as a digital sample. Video works differently it makes a representation of the B+W image (the Y in YUV) and then uses two color difference signals (the U&V in YUV) to "hang" color on that framework. This is where the 4:4:4, 4:2:2, 4:1:1 numbers come from they represent how often a digital system samples each of the 3 pieces of the YUV component video signal. Full sampling is 4:4:4 or no information is thrown away. DV is 4:1:1 which means 3/4 of the color information is thrown away and instead of being sampled at 16bits per channel, or 10bits as in hi-end video, it is sampled at 8 bits. In order to make a initial bitstream which is ready to compress the "front end" of the DV system throws allot of information away. The last compromise is the 5:1 compression which is applied to the incoming signal this compressor was designed a few years ago and there are more efficient compressors and the compressor has to be able to be stopped on an individual frame so as to facilitate editing, this is the big difference between Dv and DVD compression. This is a simplified version of what's out there and the differences between DI style RGB representations of film and the video representations get much more complex. Dv looks good because it retains all of the sampling from the underlying B+W picture and tricks you by chucking much of the color, this is why DV looks much better in B+W than in color and also why it is a "clean" looking picture...Dv is much better than Hi8 but I feel not as good as BetaSP but it's cheap and universal and mostly easy to use. Hope this helps. -Rob-
  18. I bought a Eyemo (Spyder Turret in decent shape) and then I bought a bunch of parts including a newish "front" from an instrumentation camera and completely disassembled my eyemo, bead blasted the parts, re wrinkle finished the case (in black) cleaned and lubed the movement and installed the new single turret front on the camera. I shot a bunch of footage with a eyemax 25mm f2.3 lens including a hand cranked sequence in a Soviet era Juliett submarine for a film I am working on and then set about to graft the Nikon mount on the camera. I took the front off the camera again and brought it and a Nikon to C-mount to our C-n-C machine shop and explained to them what I wanted and the flange focal distance, etc and a week later I picked up a Nikon mount front machined to exact specs (this shop does aerospace components for things like the ISS) which I tested out and find to be fine and sharp, etc. the camera runs great and is smooth at all speeds. I also had bought a set of shutters from a guy in LA a while back so I have a range of shutters made of tough plastic to run in the camera (11, 11+11, 22, 90, 180, etc.) very happy with the results so far. NCS motors do have controlled motor ramping for the stepper motor they use so I imagine the intervalometer will be as steady as can be expected from a non pin registered movement as the camera is in great shape. I'll post photos and a movie after I have shot one in a week or so. The eyemo/ncs rig is a bit more portable and inconspicuous than a Mitchell timelapse setup too.... -Rob-
  19. Amen to that Mike, this kind of problem does seem to happen mostly with DV based formats or recordable DVD, etc. Not so much with beta or Dbeta. There seems to be such a strong belief in this inexpensive technology that any flaws inherent in it are almost offensive to the consumer and that is translated as a problem with the facility that recorded the tape and not a problem with the system itself. -Rob-
  20. Constant gardner was a Super16 / 35mm mix and looked great. I saw 2K northlight scans from this picture (raw) and got to play around with them on a Baselight4 super16 to 2K on an oversampled scanner looks really great if shot well. And I suppose the over complex electrolux cam has a place too.... -Rob-
  21. Film is all ground up bones sprinkled with silver (or seaweed from our eastern friends) so I guess film has always been dead, maybe that's why it's so hard to kill. Attack! of the blobulous strips of emulsion! world in peril! I have my first B-movie title! But seriously organic emulsion/processes fit in a sustainable business model and dino-goop falls short. couldn't resist, sorry :blink: -rob-
  22. There were definitely arri M's used as well you can see them in some of the shots with the giant 1200' 16mm mags. I wish I still had mine (I had a 1200' mag too) great camera. -Rob-
  23. I am picking it up next week, I just rounded my glass set for the eyemo out with 18mm and 28mm Nikkor lenses, I already have a 8mm Peleng and a 35-105 Nikkor. I am stoked to get the motor it can do extended exposures and is programmable with the ability to change exposure duration during a shoot, here come stars flying by! NCS also makes a motor which does timelapse and sync filming (up to 48fps? I think.) seems to be nicely built and I am going to bring my eyemo over to NCS in Queens to Pickup/tryout. Maybe I will eventually get a 28mm f1.4 nikkor too but not this round all 2.8 or 3.5 lenses right now. -Rob-
  24. I think there is the desire for a new age with the advent of digital technology but the reality is that you are working with light, not camera gear, if you want to Cinematographotize a moving picture. Unless there has been a new revolutionary development in light it is still the same age :D Ok you have to use cameras too... I dig on film and work with it daily, in many capacities, but have used video allot too from Dv to F900, etc. If you have a Dv or HDV camera already I would add a 16mm windup to that kit and try out some B+W and Color reversal. See how film stocks react push the film and video around under similar conditions and get a feel. The thing is to care for the image like it was your baby and part of that care is knowing how far you can push the format your working in. Future video cameras are going to be allot less like video cameras and more and more will mimic film shooting. -Rob-
×
×
  • Create New...