Phil Savoie

Hi Bob, Just saw this note, sorry for the lateness of my reply. I'm also a CML listmum - I'm glad George sorted you out. I find both lists (CML & .com) very valuable. CML tends to have more 'old hands' but isn't as user friendly as .com. Both lists are tremendous in their free exchange of knowledge and experience. cheers,

Brad, Stacking lenses is a great way to open up your eyes to macro/micro photography. Macro is a hoot and DOF can be a killer. Have a gander of this sequence shot with Zeiss Luminar microscope objectives. The subjects were 1mm in size - the tilt down into 'Amber' was a borescope dipped into a pint glass of honey. The sequence was shot outside - the slightest breeze threw everything out of focus. http://philsavoie.com/ant.html For more micro images check out: http://www.nikonsmallworld.com/ cheers,

The problem when going lighter is one of backlash. I don't know of any systems for a DSLR but as they are such a great tool for some TL jobs hopefully someone will come up with something. Until then I can only suggest rigging up a custom X/Y camera stage with stepper motors.

I'm with David and John. In my experience going to tape Kodak 500asa transfers better when shot at 400asa. I too prefer a deeper negative for telecine. As your testing you may want to do a true asa test of the emulsion batch your working with. When the first 500asa Kodak cine stock came out it tested at 320 in asa tests (it was discontinued due to problems in the blue emulsion layer). I've seen stock vary by almost a stop from batch to batch and from published asa. Due to the nature of film every emulsion batch is a different mix. If you want to be sure of your own exposure tests when working @ 1/3 to 2/3rd's a stop you have to start with confirming the true asa of your emulsion batch. This is very easy to do, just shoot a grey card with a number in frame at different asa settings. I don't label it with the asa because I don't want to prejudice the lab - use the number 1, 2, 3 and so on at 1/3 a stop settings over/under by a stop of the published asa. I'll call the lab after it goes in the dip and ask them to examine the neg image of the grey card with a densitometer, or if your close by to a lab look at the neg yourself, when the 18% grey card reads correctly that's the true asa of your emulsion batch. Once you start doing this you'll be surprised at the variations you may discover. In practice today I rarely do this but if I was shooting something where I wanted to insure exact exposure (like your overexposure tests) or consistent flesh tones or if I was working with a brand new stock (like in your case), I'd do it to establish a common baseline. In these days of DI one could also argue all of this is unnecessary but I'm sleepless in Wales with jetlag and felt like yaking. And at the risk of sounding like an old man I was taught that seemingly small details, like testing asa, are what make you a director of photography. The daffodils are out beckoning Spring. It's almost 3am. Good night.

Steve Scammel was the chap - thanks for posting his details. His kit was top notch, easy to use and set up. I reccommend him highly - he was good fun to work with. cheers,

On the T/L MoCon sequences I shot for Planet Earth we used a 35mm Arri and a MoSys rig. I know of at least 2 other DPs who also used this gear for PE. http://www.cartoni.com/PDF/DS/DS_MOSYS_LAMBDA.pdf

Great post about how key it is to be accurate with the framing chart John. Like you I shoot one for each camera body, clearly labeling them with the camera info and even placing arrows on the frame line I'd like the telecine Op to crop to. I wonder are you and David shooting the ground glass? By that I mean I shoot it's image not just a framing chart. This way I give the telecine Op a framing chart that doubles as a ground-glass chart for me to insure the Op lines up where I want him to. I set the camera up about 7 feet from a wall, with an 85mm or zoom and shine a Surefire directly in the viewfinder so that it projects the GG image on the wall. Next we tape up a blank piece of white paper and with a sharpie we trace the GG makings, and add the camera info and Telecine line-up with clear labels and arrows. Then we shoot the chart as well as grey cards/scale, color chips and slate the can. I do this with the first roll of every new shoot or lab run or with any new camera. Because I often shoot 3 perf and I'm usually out on location shooting when the first batch goes to the lab this Telecine leader has worked a treat.

Hey Ted, I don't know the answer to this one but I hope you post it once you find out! Say howdy to everyone at BBC Bristol for me. cheers,

Thanks very much for sharing the Wikipedia link Tasha. William If your going to DI or finishing on tape 3 Perf is an attractive format. I own a 3 Perf package and shoot for TV never going to print. I'm very happy with the format. Spirit telecines can handle 3 perf with a flick of a switch. As your camera is for student use the 2 perf option may be worth looking into as well due to the increased stock/cost savings. Cheers

Dear Mr. Stent, I stand by everything I have said on this matter. Please understand your initial post made it quite impossible for me to refrain from comment. I can assure you my lot in life is not to snipe at Martin Stent, but also be sure I am not prepared to stand by and read a load of BS, especially when it has affected me and may also affect fellow camera folk. We have both stated our points of view and clearly differ on the versions of events. I too agree it wise to stop boring other list members and put the matter behind us. Happy New Year to you.

Dear Mr. Stent, Thank you for your notes. I'm sorry if you feel I was unreasonable and impatient, I don't remember you mentioning this during our dealings. Yes there was a set delivery deadline, as the camera was needed for an out of country shoot. Mr. Warren and myself agreed the work timetable with this in mind; it should not be used as an excuse in an attempt to cover up poor workmanship. For this camera time was not the factor, competency and the quality of workmanship was the issue. The real rub occurred when I returned the camera directly to you to sort out the camera optics that were never set properly nor aligned. The fact is you were completely unprepared to correct the problem and most surprisingly had no knowledge of the appropriate camera settings. Although you were quite happy to experiment with adjusting the camera the fact remains you did everything but fix what was wrong with it. From my point of view patience, as you put it, had very little to do with your lack of knowledge and believe me I was extremely patent. After three hours of observing you at work and putting on a forced smile I was sent home. I had driven approximately four hours for nothing, wasting all day witnessing you wishfully think your way to a fix, nothing had been improved; the unusable camera still had an out of focus, shifted image. Moreover if time was such an issue as you argue (and it was, the camera was scheduled for a shoot out of country), why weren't you prepared to correct it with the appropriate shims and have the basic information of camera settings to hand? You were well aware of the problems and you knew I was driving across England specifically for you to put the camera right. Mr. Warren was clear that you were the person to contact to correct the flange to focal distance (FFD) problem in addition to the incorrect viewfinder alignment. Upon arriving you pulled the front off the camera body. I asked what the factory FFD setting was for a Bolex SBM and to my surprise you didn't know. I asked how the "ground-glass" collimation of the prism and the viewfinder were set, you were unsure. I asked how the FFD was measured when the beam-splitting prism was taken into consideration and again you didn't know. You made no effort whatsoever to find out either. I asked how you expected to set the FFD, something that on most cameras is set within plus or minus 2 thousands of an inch, when you had no idea of the factory setting. Your response was to attempt to set the flange to focal distance by eye, for three hours, unsuccessfully. Did you have any shim stock at hand to endeavour to shim the camera properly? No, you had none, even though you knew of the FFD problem well before hand, and if I'm to believe what you say you are an experienced engineer and machinist. Your remedy was to initially remove the existing shims to shorten the distance, when this failed to yield a focused image you attempted to refit the existing camera shim stock doubled up in numerous configurations again and again unsuccessfully. This fishing expedition was not the level of craft I expected from a skilled professional with supposed experience working on Bolex cameras. Why didn't you finish the job you ask? I needed the camera fixed correctly and I didn't have weeks for you to get your act together. And to be blunt after seeing you in action I was not interested in engaging your services again. Judging by this thread at least three other cameras appear to have suffered the very same problems at your hand. This was my reason for responding to your initial boastful post. These other cameras that you converted with the same problems, was each unsatisfactory conversion also due to time? Perhaps the other 208 Super 16 conversions you mentioned are perfect, and for the owners' sakes I hope they are. When my camera was examined by someone with Bolex repair experience the overall job and finish of the machine work such as the gate, etc. was found to be very poor, in addition to the incorrect FFD and misaligned viewfinder. This was work you were directly responsible for, not Mr. Warren. In the end my camera was finished correctly and made useable by another, hence the refund issued from Mr. Warren. The only positive was the honesty displayed concerning the refund. As I said to Mr. Warren at the time and I'll gladly repeat, thank you for the refund. It was the correct action to take and the right thing to do. It speaks highly of Mr. Warren's character, and if you also contributed to the refund, it has to be said, yours as well. And quite rightly it also speaks volumes concerning the work in question. The simple fact is people don't provide refunds for jobs completed properly as well as fund additional corrections when the initial work is up to standard. This is a public forum that called into view three cameras with similar conversion problems. I have responded openly and honestly concerning another camera with like conversion problems. All of these cameras have one thing in common - you did the work. We are all aware everyone makes mistakes, as you rightly say. In the spirit of fair play perhaps some of your other conversion customers will weigh in to balance my negative experience?

Hi Brian, Please include the film school at Montana State University in your list. The film program at MSU is over 50 years old producing multiple Oscar winners. MSU offers undergraduate as well as graduate degrees. The undergrad film program is well connected to the LA film community. The graduate program is the only masters film program in science and natural history filmmaking and is sponsored by Sony, Canon, National Geographic, PBS, and Scientific American among others. Graduate students have won Emmys, over 20 Tellys, a Cine Eagle, etc. all as students before graduation. They have also won a number of Fullbright scholarships and can be found working for NASA, the National Science Foundation, the Smithsonian Institute, NOHA, Discovery and National Geographic. The MFA graduate program is a leader in new media technology and web 2.0 platforms, TERRA: The Nature of Our World http://www.lifeonterra.com/ pod-casts globally and is one of the largest science and nature websites in the world averaging 3 million downloads a year. In 2007 TERRA won the student Webby Award as well as being featured in the New York Times and Wired magazine. I am proud to teach there and would appreciate you including MSU in your list. The university address and contact details are listed below. Montana State University Department of Media and Theatre Arts Bozeman, Montana 59717 USA http://mta.montana.edu/ Many thanks, Phil Phil Savoie Associate Professor Graduate Program in Science and Natural History Filmmaking Department of Media and Theatre Arts Montana State University

Dear Mr. Stent, I just saw this thread and please forgive me but I could not remain silent. Phil Savoie, ex-BBC staff producer/director/cameraman here, do you remember me? I remember you Martin. David Warren the UK Bolex rep sent you my Bolex SBM for super 16 conversion, it was to be a time-lapse camera destined to go to Costa Rica. After receiving the converted camera back I shot it prior to the job, as anyone would, the test film came back complettely out of focus. When I querried you about the problem you said "No I didn't test it" - this seemed strange to me as I had just paid hundreds of pounds for the conversion and one would assume any tech in his right mind would shoot a test after the work to check framing, flange to focal distance, etc. before returning it to the client. At your direction I brought the camera down to your workshop personally. I clearly remember watching you for three long hours fumble with the prism and attempt to correct the back focal distance in the tiny dark shed stuffed with junk and lawn mowers. After this painful session I tested the camera -everything was still soft and now the image did not line up with the viewfinder. To make a long story short the camera had to be put right by a BBC tech who commented it was the worst conversion he had ever seen. Mr. Warren gave me a full refund with appologies for all the time wasted and trouble you caused. To now read your boasting of the "over 212" "correct" Super 16 conversions under your belt for "Kodak and the BBC" and to promote yourself as someone of significant Bolex repair experience is something I find laughable. Do us a favor and stick to fixing lawn mowers in the shed.

Thats true Steven but in the end Icky didn't want to back it. Pity. It was a great idea and a wonderful solution for the 16mm owner/op wanting to offer HD as well as film via his own kit.

I spoke to Helmut Bajerke at the Zeiss factory in Oberkochen about the change in multi-coatings because of the new (this was in the late 90s) EU lead restrictions. As I got understood it the last run of Super Speeds - the third generation was the one to own. It was the latest and last set Zeiss made with the hard (with lead) multi-coatings. I remember when the first sets of of Ultra Primes came out the lads in rental at Arri Media in London told me they were going out mint and coming back skuffed up just from rough cleaning due to the new soft coating.

Great lead Nick. Thanks very much for your note. Phil

Here here! For the knowledge gleaned and contacts made 50 dollars is more than a bargain.

Thanks for the heads up.

Wanted - used Arri 2C or 3 Heated Barney. Thanks

On the Eastman website it states 500-320 but I thought it could be exposed as slower stock as well. Many thanks for the notes.

Hand carry it. The x-ray on the belt at security is nothing like the x-ray for the hold. The machine, often behind the scenes, that screens the check in cargo will ruin your film.

Hi, I've uncovered 5 rolls of 16mm HD Color Scan stock in the fridge. As I recall you could expose this at anything from 50 to 500 as long as it's processed accordingly. Are there any recommendations as to the ASA - has anyone any experience with this stock. I'll be shooting outside w/ daylight fiber optics. thanks Phil

Page 178 in Samuelson's 'Hands-On' Manual for Cinematographers. Dave Eubanks exceptionally useful P-Cine program also has 3 Perf at all speeds. Lovely format.

Hello, I'm not sure if 'better' is the correct term. It's important that you recognize that most Nikon lenses are designed for still photography and many Zeiss lenses are designed for motion picture work. The main difference being in the fine-tuning and fine detail during assembly. Cine lenses like the Zeiss primes also get more polish time on the individual lens elements, they are shimmed and centered with much more care as the lens is required to focus (and zoom if it's a zoom) during the image recording process. Still lenses are made in a much larger production run and are made to be focused critically and then the image is captured. For the most part still lenses don't get the same level of craft in manufacture - film lenses due to their much smaller production runs and end cost are subjected to more stringent quality control. This difference comes into play of our use when one follow focuses with a still lens - at times the lens may shift focus and or center while operating. The same is true when using still zoom lenses - they often exhibit zoom drift, the image loosing/moving center during the zoom. I own a 50-300mm ED Nikon in a PL mount that I use on 16/35mm. I treat it like a variable prime and don't ever zoom on a running shot as the image shifts significantly. With the focal length set it produces outstanding images easily cut with my Zeiss Super Speeds. Having said all that the longer telephoto ED Nikon or L series Canon still lenses (300,400,500,600,800mm) are commonly refitted with PL and other motion picture mounts providing outstanding results. These large telephotos use excellent glass and are subject to stricter quality control due to their smaller production runs. One does pay for this as the lenses are significantly more expensive and in line with cine lens prices. Additionally certain lenses like the 180mm 2.8 ED Nikon and many still macros like the Nikon 55,105 & 200mm are known to be exceptionally sharp and make wonderful cine lenses. I've been told that some of the Panavision Primos use Nikon glass but have never investigated this to get the facts. Maybe another list member can comment on this? I do know that Centry made some lenses for cine using Leica glass. It is generally viewed that the Japanese glass has a colder look to it, and that lenses like Zeiss with their T* coating are a bit warmer as well as exhibiting exceptional color fidelity. Its also important for you to recognize that every lens is an individual, as such it?s a good practice to get to a rental house and project each one before shooting. Projecting them allows one to record optimized aperture for each optic as well as pointing out any problems before the job. All of the above mentioned lenses will record brilliant images, still or cine, the choice is up to you.

Howdy Tanner, Jungle environs require a bit of thought as they are difficult locations to film. The jungle understory is usually very dark photographically speaking with dappled light sprinkled about thats often 15 stops hot to keep you on your toes. I agree with Felipe keeping thing level will certainly challenge you. For camera movement such as tracking and dolly moves I've had very good success with sliding cameras down aircraft cable. Stringing cable, although laborious is often quicker and much more practical than laying track over the many vines and buttress roots of rain forest canopy trees that one encounters. If you click on the link to my website below you can see film clip examples. The basic practicality of moving the equipment to the location(s) itself can be a challenge. I'm a one man band producer/director/shooter, usually traveling with one assistant and hiring one or two locals to help transport gear - even so it's not uncommon to use between 20 to 40 cases of gear, not including generators and jibs to get the work done. I don't know your remit but I'd advise planning for local help & extra time to get gear to location and rigging. Jungle trails are often a hilly slippery muddy mess - even in the 'dry' season, extra hands can make a great difference in not getting spent just getting to location. As the humidity is usually close to 100% you'll need to plan for keeping the gear and film/tape stock safe. Hard Pelican cases have served me well, they are waterproof and I stuff a good number of large silica gel bags in each as well as a humidity indicator card. For yourself the humidity can also be a problem. I tend to dress in 100% cotton. If your like me you'll sweat quite a bit, bring a few water bottles. Plan on drinking a few gallons a day especially during the dry, read bloody hot, season. Remind the producer how important a good source of clean fresh water will be for the entire crew, this can be more involved than you think. I had a job in Guatemala shooting a Mayan series at the Tikal temple ruins and one of the real challenges was keeping everybody watered properly for six weeks, in the end I hired a local who's sole job was water for the crew. Check to see what medical prophylaxis is required. I don't respond well to Lariam as a malaria preventive but find Doxycycline no problem. Indeed one of the side effects of Doxycycline is 'increased sensitivity to light' which I always mused was a good thing for a DP ;-). Chiggers and ticks are common in Panama so bring some powder - don't forget some fungal power either. Enjoy the trip. Jungle filming can be very rewarding and exciting on a personal level.