Brian Baker

Phil,

Thanks a lot for your response. I knew there was some sort of mis-match that needed to be accounted for, but wasn't sure what.

I'll pass the info along to my producers. They may be fine with staying super wide and at a high f/stop the whole shoot -- seeing as all they're focus is "magnitude" and they'll be shooting outdoors and in direct sun all day. If not,

They are using photo lenses on the 5D, so this is a concern to look into. But good thing is we have access to another HD camcorder -- don't know the model or specs, but I do know it is a professional video camera, aka an actual video camera =D That'd be nice option because it'd also let the Jib Operator zoom in/out.

I'm not sure about the remote start situation either -- but the obvious work around of manually start/stopping the camera is always there...

Again, thanks for your advice. We appreciate it.

BtB

Hey community -- been a while since I've posted, hope everyone is well and busy.

A shoot I'm helping put together is considering renting a 40ft Jimmy Jib, in order to capture the magnitude of a 10,000+ person event. The producer's thought was to use the Canon 5D Mark II for this shot -- but I'm pretty sure that the 5D doesn't have the proper "interface" to enable remote control capabilities (pan, tilt, focus) of the Jimmy jib.

Would anyone be able to confirm or deny this? I'm not entirely sure if the two can mesh electronically -- my only experiences with the Mark II and jibs have been with small Porta-Jib setups (Manual operator + manual boom arm.)

Thanks kindly!

Aside from the need for a lot of power or to more evenly distribute power (as mentioned above), another reason you may need a 3 phase generator is for varying voltage levels.

Most (if not all?) 3 phase genies allow for voltage adjustments; weather it be in balancing small increments, or moving between 120v and 240v.

Also, on shoots where we were incapable of parking our genny far away, we'd build goal posts (speed rail across two Junior stands -- like tripe riser combos -- held by Big Ben / Cheeseboro clamps) and spring clamp several sound blankets to them.

Just be careful when using sound blankets not to cover the Gennie's vents.

Best,

BtB

... volunteer as assistant grip. That might get you started. Just tell them you have no experience but are willing to learn!

I honestly wish I'd done stuff like this before going to film school.

Good advice to take.

And everyone gets into this industry with the same dream: movie magic.

ISO 200 ain't so fast so going with practical car lights may not work.

 

In Andrew Lazslo's Every Frame A Rembrandt he talks about using 3M Scotchlite reflective material in the distance to represent everything from windows, street signs, street lights and even car head lights. You cut a piece of the material to whatever size you need and then you put a small light as close to the camera lens as possible until you get the reflection off of the 3MM.

I would like to hear more about this, as I don't entirely understand how the material would be used to fake all those items based only on size.

Walter Graff of video monkey lights primarily with basic Lowell lights, although (off the top of my head) I'm not sure the exact units.

A "Ditty Bag of Free Resources" provides a plethora of articles on videography with his conservative + low-budget yet complete equipment package. I'd suggest reading "What's in my Light Kit?" and "Beyond Three Point Lighting" for what he has to say on simple lighting set-ups with the Lowell's and putting together thorough and compact video kit.

Hope his articles help in putting together your package -- best of luck.

Enjoy,

BtB

Link: http://www.gomediamonkey.com/ditty-bag.php

David,

I was speaking in reference to lose of intensity.

And as always, your post is very educational + helpful.

Thank you,

BtB

All of the reasons above and then some is why this book is so damn good.

I like to describe it as "the book that tells you everything you already know, but the proper way of doing it"

The tables alone make the book worth purchasing.

Jim + Jon

Thanks very much for your contributions. I really appreciate it.

I'll be doing a few tests with distance of diffusion in the near future... I'm also curious to see the correlation between fall-off and distance -- assuming that there will be less, the further the diff moves from the light.

But again, thanks a lot.

Thank you very much for your insight.

One quetion for Mr. Mullen that was never totally touched on:

How is this whole 2 DP thing working?

Are you completely collaborative on everything? If so, could you describe the on-set work flow for a 2 DP shoot?

Or are you prepping while he's shooting and then vice versa, ala Law and Order?

Thanks much, and again -- congradulations.

No prob with me. I howled when I read it. You're a funny guy in a dry, understated kinda' way that I like.

When I first read that, I thought Paul said "in a dry, un-desaturated kinda' way" ... which would have also been very punny =D

But Pulp Fiction did have a lot of visual storytelling -- such as any of the stuff with Bruce -- with his trip back to the apartment specifically coming to mind.

 

That and during the talky scenes, I felt that movement was effectively used -- like when Bruce and his girl are in the hotel and she rolls around on the bed, or when sam and Travolta take a walk down the long corridor before their first hit, and the camera doesn't move.

 

Also, this coolgunsandhipdialouge type movies are some of my favorites -- maybe a guilty pleasure, but I really dig edgy, raw, criminal movies of such proportion... and am really looking forward to smokig Aces :0

 

I'm not saying every movie of saoid "genre" is that great... but I do feel that most of them serve a purpose; extremely entertaining, vicarious crminal-violence.... and these movies will always have a strong market.

Take my previous post to be a much shorter, less thought out version of James, as he basically said what i was going for, with more preciosion and tact.

Also, I really appreciate a screenwriting discussion from the cinematic point of view... especially considering how little the occupation has impacted all the points made thus far.

EDIt: Also, for some reason I was allowed to edit this post, but not the one preceeding it.. otherwise this would all be one post.

Agree. It got a lot worse after Pulp Fiction, basically. Then everybody was convinced cool dialogue was the path to nirvana and the only worthwile way to write scripts. It spawned a whole pseudo-cooltalk-gunplay genre that just bores me to the core. Everyone else seems to love it, though. The trend is STILL with us more than 10 years later - just have a look at this:

 

http://www.apple.com/trailers/universal/sm...cal_medium.html

But Pulp Fiction did have a lot of visual storytelling -- such as any of the stuff with Bruce -- with his trip back to the apartment specifically coming to mind.

That and during the talky scenes, I felt that movement was effectively used -- like when Bruce and his girl are in the hotel and she rolls around on the bed, or when sam and Travolta take a walk down the long corridor before their first hit, and the camera doesn't move.

Also, this coolgunsandhipdialouge type movies are some of my favorites -- maybe a guilty pleasure, but I really dig edgy, raw, criminal movies of such proportion... and am really looking forward to smokig Aces :0

I'm not saying every movie of saoid "genre" is that great... but I do feel that most of them serve a purpose; extremely entertaining, vicarious crminal-violence.... and these movies will always have a strong market.

This may be too broad of a querstion:

What are some of the differences (effects on lighting) that adding gel/diffusion directly to a barndoor Vs adding the diff/gel to an open frame afront of the unit? And vice versa?

Are there certain effects that one can acheive better/only with either method?

Are there any immediate aesthetic differences to using either?

Any comment / direction is greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance,

BtB

From what my friends have told me and the reviews I've read, neither of Uva's books are very impressive. The first offers some insight, but the second is merely a recap of the first, with less information.

Stinger = extension cord.

The only time I hear the word Edison used on set is referring to the type of plug -- usually in reference to a household outlet.

And Chuck is aces =D

Lot of good stuff in this thread.

I really like the new additions of the lighting effects (barely illuminated, flickering) to the concept -- and think you can really utilize those to match together your cuts... but I'm iffy about the whole car scenerio.

Are you still going to be jibbing in, or owkring more with cuts now?

I assume the the WS will in some way establish the driver... but if we're in an XCU when the water gets throws on, how do we know he did it? Or do we (the audience) not know?

Maybe its just becasue I got a very clear, visual description of the first concept, and don't entirely understand the latest concepts shots as well as I did the first.

Marek

Just wanted to say that I really like what you did with the white room.

Very well disguised units and looks like great, natural light after removing the blue.

Althogh my expereience pales in comparison to you guys, I have noticted one thing from my shoots; that I don't like diffusing KINOs. For the most part, it sucks too much of the light out of the unit, and doesn't spread in a pleasing way.

And based off the discussion, I'd probably say that you could have done more with the window light too... and then mabe bounce some smaller HMIs units onto the subject -- just so they wouled pop out a little bit, and you wouldn't loose the contrast given to you by the bright window.

Did you "blow out" the window? Just curious -- if so, what stop did you rate it at (if you remember)?

Finally, I like how you aimed the window HMIs to avoid hotspots and keel a nautral flow... *learned*

Thank you very much for your assistance.

I guess you wouldn't need two people... but how wouldn't it be a pain going back and forth from the breaker to the outlet? Or am I missing something with the concept?

Hey everyone.

One of my teacher's once told me about this electrician's tool that will allow you to detrimne the circuit destination of household outlets. Two people, one at the circuit breaker / fuse box and another at the indivdual outlets... and the tool tells you what outlets are normalled to what circuits.

Does anyone know the name of this tool, where to find it, have used it and can talk about it, etc? My teacher said he thinks it's called a Line tester, but when I went on Grainger and Ideal's websites, I got too broad an ammount of results.

Also, what are some of the personal tools that electricians should have? I think I have a pretty good idea, but am curious to see what other people say.

Any help, especially regarding the circuit tool described above, would be greatly appreciated.

very well written, educational post.

thank you.

This may be reiterating what JD said:

On one job where we were pretty low on gels since the beginning of the day, our key grip would use 4x4 and larger cuts on any size lights, and just roll up the excess gel on the bottom barndoor and spring clamp it on. I think they may have even done that with some grid cloth that was still on the roll...

Sidenote:

The "saving grace" is that if you're using them on fresnels or pars is that the gels wear out pretty fast,

We use a lot of fresnels at my school, and have been using the same scrap gels for a while now... and I honestly haven't noticted any deterioration. Any reason why that may be? Are we lucky, or am I missing something with what you were saying?

BtB