David Bradley

Ken it was simply a poorely worded analogy to suggest that in order to create proffessional looking photographs in the digital era is alot easier than it was 30 years ago. I used Ansel Adams as an example as he is widly heralded as one of the greatest photographers in history. As to the point raised about "self proclaimed stills pros", I agree whole heartedly but if they're making a living fair play to them.

I did a shoot not so long ago with fake rain. It was DV, shot at night (exterior) under tungsten balanced to 4500k with the camera pre-white at 3200k. We found the rain pretty much disappeared in the lowlights and could only really be seen when caught directly in the light. If we had the kit I would have put milk in it. We sprayed two garden hose pipes from taps with a thumb over the nozzle in the air. Because the scene was lit so that the background was entirely black it actually looked like rain. I imagine if the back/foreground had been visible then it would'nt have worked. We had similar succes when aiming a dedo onto a window and spraying a hose at it whilst filming in doors. The talent stood adjacent to the windoe, the impression that the trickling water left looked pretty ace if completely accidental. I wasn't around for post but sound was probably the most important element in making convincing rain. I think they used a BBC stock sound of rain as well as additional foley.

Kelly, I would seriously advise against an FX7. It consists of three 1/4" CMOS sensors. Expect very long depth of field and poor colour sensinometry. It also uses MPEG-2 intraframe codec which compresses the 4:4:4 RGB signal from 128mbps to 25mbps. thats a 5:1 compression ratio which sucks. I would suggest you at least get an FX1 and shoot SD. HDV will not be accepted as HD for broadcast by a majority of stations (at least thats the case in the UK). Chances are you will exhibit in SD anyway. Hire a camera - spend the cash on talent. Good Luck.

Photography is great but working film/video adds an entirely different dimension. Your entirely dependant on other people being competent. Photography is a great solo gig so its great for a hobby. Personally I find its brilliant practice for lighting and composition that I can't afford to film. It does seem that everyone with a D40 or some other bog standard DSLR is calling him/herself a professional photographer and trying to charge people for their photographs. Not to say there aren't amazing photographers out there but its all too easy now considering you can take a RAW file to photoshop and make it look like an Ansel Adams within minutes. PS liked your shots, I've shot a gig or two and I always find myself using very fast stock - the highlights don't hold so well but it looks great in high contrast situations.

I think its been forgotten to say that there is no beaten path into the film industry. There are plenty of examples of successful film makers who went to film school - just take a look at the USC alumni. there are however plenty of people who never made it to college and have done incredibly well for themselves. I reckon the best bit about film school is that you get access to equipment that would otherwise cost alot in rent. It also helps build contacts. It also gives you time; time to make films and conentrate on developing your craft rather than working in 'the real world'.

Since you are printing on DVD it is illogical to record in HDV. The V1U uses Mpeg 2 compression, an intraframe compression mode with a ratio of 5:1 (128mbps:25mbps). You can often find artefacts in lowlights and highlights as a result. For the purpose of the conference I would record Standard definition with the V1U. You won't gain any resolution with HDV and you may find that the HDV codec is incompatible with alot of editing software. Use a standard mini DV cassette. Digital master tapes are purportedly the best but in my experience they have provided no significant benefits. If you need a 60min tape use a small DVCAM cassette. (on Mini DV it will record DVCAM mode but will use more tape in the process hence a 60min Mini DV tape becomes a 40min) Do not be tempted to use Cine Gamma or anything of the sort. Any manipulation can be done in post. If its a live event I would use several cameras but I'm unsure if the V1U has timecode sync so you may need a clapper.

You can do?

Andy Use SMPTE bars to properly configure your monitor. -Use the camera to display SMPTE bars on the monitor -turn the colour off or all the way down. -note the 3 thin bars at the bottom right of the monitor known as PLUGE bars; adjust brightness or luminance until the left most bar is as black as the middle bar. You should still be able to distinguish the middle bar from the right. -Turn the colour back to the middle. -Press the blue only button on the monitor (if it has one) or use a blue filter such as wratten 80A layered until you can see no other colour but blue. -Adjust the colour until the bar in the top left is exactly the same tonality as the bar on the very right of the spectrum. (there may be a reference below the bars to assist.) I wouldn't rely on the rental house to calibrate the monitor as you need to re-adjust it every time there is a significant change in temperature or it has come under an impact of any kind. During video shoots when the the DP and the Director rely upon the monitor it is proper to have an assistant recalibrate the monitor every half hour / hour. Make sure it is shielded from light when calibrating.

you must be shooting with a severe amount of negative gain. I frankly don't see the need to lower the gain so significantly if your shooting standard video signal either NTSC or PAL. There isn't significant resolution to justify it and you probably won't reduce visible artifacts. Come up on the gain.

I respect your opinion but its hard to be optimistic about a film industry that rarely rears its head. As for talent being wasted I agree whole heartedly but I just can't see there ever being a big enough industry to cater for every would be Conrad Hall in this country. I do blame Hollywood. If you know anything about the vertical integration act of 1985 I am sure you will be aware that Major Studios in the US and their corporate proprieters have thought very hard about maintaining their market dominance i.e. owning theatres, A/B film distribution. The UK failed to reciprocate and has there for lost its major standing in Global film market. I wouldn't want to be drawn into a discussion about the EU as I know very little about it. Trying to make some all encompasing statement about the EU often results in a polemic and irrelevant discussion that doesn't belong in a cinematography forum. I agree that we do make 'some' mainstream films, but I stand by the point that there is no such infrastructure for distribution in the UK as exists in the US/Gloabal market. Personally I'm not too worried about any of the above. To me national pride is a relic, a stoic philosophy that ties us to sense of moral superiority (particularly amongst many Brits). I love the idea of the EU, the oppurtinity to work in any country free from the boundries of national borders is amazing. If I really wanted to work on big budget films I would do everything in my power to get where they are being made not expect them to be made on my front doorstep. I don't want to suggest that anyone on this forum should subscribe to my view and I don't really see the point in arguing. Each to their own and all that.

agree to disagree. Too easy to get rhetorical on such subjects.

Lungelo. I don't mean to patronise but if I understand your question you want to know if you can change the focal length on the DVX100A. The answer is yes - the DVX features a zoom lens. As a story telling tool I wouldn't employ zooms during a shot, a zoom lens allows you to bypass the necessity for swapping primes when you need to change focal length. Using zooms in sequence looks garish and unprofessional unless employed stylistically as in Kill Bill 2. Changing the focal length on your camera can have a variety of effects upon the way in which the audience will interpret the text. Increasing Focal length will decrease depth of field, narrow the field of view and increase image magnification - you might use this effect to single out a specific character in a narrative and separate them from other elements with in the scene. It could also restrict the field of view for the audience, if a character is looking off camera with very tight framing but no revealing shot to establish a gaze the scene becomes more enigmatic. There are far too many scenarios to list but varying focal length is very important if you want your cinematography to be conducive with established film grammar.

the fluctuations you describe may relate to the crappy mpeg 2 compression featured on the FX1. The image is HD in that it consists of 1080 lines of vertical resolution but it uses intraframe compression. HDV encodes only the differences between pixels (in fact, only the differences you can see). This compression can cut the data rate by 80 percent. That's a 5:1 compression ratio, which reduces an initial bitrate of roughly 124 Mbps to a recorded bitrate of 25 Mbps (DV rate) after compression.

whilst the tips here are amazing as always, might I suggest that you purchase 'Painting with Light' by John Alton, I'm sure you've heard of it and I don't mean to patronise but I'm sure we'll all agree that if we are looking for that golden era / noiresque look then Alton's book is priceless.

Sorry Gavin but I won't agree, infact if it suits the project I'd shoot high8 tape. Resolution and colour fidelity aren't always the most important aspects of storytelling, wouldn't you agree? Perhaps this is an issue this discussion may touch upon, it would seem there is a tendancy to place emphasis on the technical 'superiority' of certain formats. Red has obviously rattled a few chains and it would seem many are intimidated by it or downright condeming despite not having used the thing. 4k presents a new perhaps improved method of image capturing but it won't replace film. Its just another gadget in the tool box that has advantages and disadvantages. I would be glad to get my hands on one just to see if it lives up to the hype it has generated.

You mounted 10ks on surf boards!!!? How? You must have been using some seriously long boards to have the buyoncy to support four people.

well good luck

I wanted to be a photographer since I was 7. When I went to prep school (St Neots, Hampshire UK) we studied fine art and my tutor placed great emphasis on light and how artists use it to tell a story. For some reason I listened to him, probably because art was like a break from everything else. By the time I went to college I was set on being an equestrian photographer. I took a course in film studies and I was hooked. Right Handed

No HD isn't necessary unless your outputting HD. With such a small budget you will only be able to afford (at a push) HDV which uses a mode of compression that isn't considered truly broadcast worthy. Better to stay standard definition. You will get more for your money. I might suggest the following as SD options Canon XL2 Sony DSR PD-170 AG DVX100A Things to look out for are a camera capable of true proggressive scan shooting. Most entry level prosumer cameras feature a 1/3"ccd. Note that the bigger the CCDs the shallower the depth of field one can acheive. Before buying a camera test it to see if its good for whatever you need to use it for. When choosing a camera you also will need to budget for the necessary accessories. VTR Non Linear Editing platform (software + PC/MAC) matte box etc This is all pretty expensive stuff for a start up kit. You are listed as a student, doesn't the institution you attend have any gear? David

Hi Dan The FX7 is a consumer level camera. The FX1 is conisdered prosumer. FX7 captures via a CMOS sensor as opposed to the FX1's tri CCDs. The FX1 can also capture in the 16:9 aspect ratio. The CCD chips it uses to capture are 1/3" (compared to FX7 1/4" CMOS), the slightly larger sensor allows for shallower depth of field which as you know is an important tool in story telling. The FX1 zoom ring is mechanical, as you turn the ring you don't physically shift the focal length but an internal motor does it for you - that kind of rules it out as a benefit. If I were you I would definately choose the FX1 over the FX7, its just better and the more you look into it the quicker you will realise. Having said that it may benefit to save up for a sony Z1 - its better still but the price is quite a hike from the FX1.

Really liked the super 8 indoor scene, it exemplifies your ability to control light. Some of the exteriors particularly the hand helds didn't really hold as well, not to criticise them ofcourse as they may well have been appropriate for the scene.

Agreed there should be a subforum. Personally don't rate the camera against the Z1. Despite the proggressive scan it uses a CMOS sensor. In the short time I spent with the camera I found it had a very limited tonal range with regards luminance and colour fidelity wasn't anything to rave about either.

I'm a fan of analog light meters and for the price £80-£100 retail you can't really complain much about the Sekonic L-398A. Having said that both meters have a cine function as well as still function, they have a very marginal price difference though you may prefer a digital readout. Sekonic L-398A: Measuring Range (ISO 100) Ambient light: Incident light: EV 4 to EV 17 Reflected light: EV 9 to EV 17 Repeat Accuracy: +/- 0.3 EV or less Calibration Constant: Incident light metering: Lumisphere C = 340 Reflected light metering: K = 12.5 Display Range Film speed: ISO 6 to 12000 (in 1/3 steps) Shutter Speeds: Ambient light: 60 seconds to 1/8000 second (in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 stop) Cine speeds: 8, 16, 18, 24, 64, 128 frames per second Aperture: f/0.7 to f/128 (in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 stop) Light Receptors EV 1 to EV 20 L-308S FLASHMATE Measuring Range (ISO 100) Ambient light: Incident light EV 0 to EV 19.9 Reflected light EV 0 to EV 19.9 (with 40° Lumigrid) Flash: Incident light f/1.4 to f/90.9 (approx. f/124) Reflected light f/1.4 to f/90.9 (approx. f/124) with 40° Lumigrid Repeat Accuracy: +/- 0.1 EV or less Calibration Constant Incident light metering:Lumisphere C = 340 Lumidisc C = 250 Reflected light metering: K = 12.5 Display Range Film speed: ISO 3 to 8000 (in 1/3 steps) Shutter Speeds Ambient light: 60 seconds to 1/8000 seconds (in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 stop) also 1/200, 1/400 Cine speeds: 8, 12, 16, 18, 24, 25, 30, 32, 64, 128 frames per second (at a 180 degree shutter angle) Flash: 1 to 1/500 second (in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 stop) also 1/75, 1/80, 1/90, 1/100 Aperture: f/0.5 to f/90.9 (in 1, 1/2 or 1/3 stop) EV: EV -5 to EV 26.2 (in 1/10 stop) All above attained from sekonic.com As you can see the L-308S is far more sensitive so it would appear to be the obvious choice.

Capitalism isn't all that bad, I'd rather live in the UK than communist Russia of old. Conspiracy theories of a ruling class scheme to maintain their power is frankly pretty stupid, I mean seriously do we actually think the top 5% of the country meet to discuss keeping the prolitariates in poverty? Society can not be summed up in such grand narratives, its too diverse. Why would anyone disagree with apologising for the slave trade - it poses no threat to anyone politically, financially or otherwise and if it makes a few people sleep easier at night whats the problem? All the compaints about society will never change the fact that Britain is a small country which makes small films. The Hollywood oligopoly with its very clever vertical integration and the synergy it can create amongst the huge media corporations they belong to is to blame for a lack of funding in the UK. Hollywood can produce huge budget mainstream films and then distribute and exhibit them later at a realtively low cost maximising the potential for profit. A well established infrastructure in the Hollywood model allows this, no such infrastructure exists in the UK. We simply can't compete. Why would anyone fund a huge production in the UK with UK talent and a British theme. It costs far more, there are less facility houses and the lack of competition allows them to charge extortionate rates. Then what is the likelyhood that the film will ever become profitable. We should just focus on what were good at, low budget, niche market films and move to LA if you want to work on $200 million + production. Defeatist? perhaps but to my mind its just a rational outlook on the current scenario in UK/US film making

perhaps if you shoot black and white film use a warming filter or even a red filter to acheive higher contrast. I found in some stills I have shot that this increased contrast without loosing any information in the highlights and lowlights.