Frank Cook

I have a couple of Arri magazines for sale on eBay. Displacement mags for ARRI 35mm IIC type camera ~ fits most ARRI MOS cameras. They are in excellent working condition ~ never had any problems with jams or scratches. See auction here http://www.ebay.com/itm/231026612284?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1586.l2649 Have one more to sell when this auction ends.

I recommend American Cinematographer Magazine. This publication is put out by the ASC (American Society of Cinematographers), and contains a wealth of information. Their website: theasc.com has a store that sells all kinds of items needed on set, and books on how to use about everything in making movies. The members of the ASC has been involved in more great films than I could list here, and they have been around since 1919. Of course you found one of the best places to learn on-line. This site! Many of the users here are working professionals. Practice with a still camera using film is good, but I would suggest getting an 8mm movie camera. They are pretty cheap, but the price of film will teach you to be efficient. This will help you understand the process of script to screen. A projector can often be found in thrift stores for less than $20.00, but make sure it works and the bulb is not burned out. If you want to be a DP or cinematographer, people will take you more seriously if you have shot on film.

Looks pretty good. I did notice that it was shot on S16, but the filmstock is listed as 5219. Wouldn't that be 7219? 5219 is 35mm.

For some reason 3D films give me a headache within about 5 minutes. This one was no exception. I didn't even make it through the coming attractions (also in 3D) before my eyes hurt.

Has anyone used an Arriflex BL I converted to 2-perf? What are the strong/weak points of running this camera 2-perf?

I'm looking to upgrade my gear with the addition of an Arri 35 BL I with 2-perf movement. I film mostly wildlife, so the ability to shoot at speeds up to 100fps and keep a steady registration is important. I have been using an Arri IIC, and it works very well, but makes too much noise when filming from close range. Also, most of the footage is bluescreen footage, and needs to be rock steady. Does shooting 2-perf eliminate the need for high-speed rollers on the magazine? It seems like it should since the film is only moving half as fast. Anyone "been there, done that?" I've been price shopping, but have not found "the" camera. I might buy one, and have it converted (price quote for conversion is ~ $8,000 USD). But, I'm checking prices on camera's that already have the 2-perf movement. Other cameras might do the job, but must be light enough for me to backpack a couple of hours to the location, be silent, and VERY reliable (sending a camera out for repair is a really big deal). Any ideas?

Great looking footage. However, you should try to include women and persons other than Caucasian in your demo. What looks good for lighting a man's face - say from the side with a triangle of light on the opposite cheek - might not work at all for an elder woman. Use your DEMO to show you are a master of filming. Anyone - Anywhere.

I found a great example of an ARRI 35 II on eBay. It has serial number 2005, so it would have been made in 1946 or 1947 (this should be the fifth camera made by ARRI post-war). The movement is the button type (changed in the ARRI IIA), and the chamber looks slightly different than that of the original ARRI 35 that I sold to John Sprung (#1578). There are some great photos of the camera. The camera is on eBay item # 350274080201. Here's the listing: http://cgi.ebay.com/Arri-Arriflex-35mm-Len...=item518df64dc9

Sold. Thanks!

Les Bosher can also make a 1.4X or 2X extender-converter for use with larger lenses.

Have you checked the flange depth and ground glass on the BL2? With your Angenieux zoom at 250mm the is a less depth of field at the subject and more depth of field with the lens at 25mm, but at the film plane, it is opposite. At the film plane, the depth of focus is much more shallow with the lens set at 25mm than at 250mm! Check your flange depth and ground glass. If it was the lens, it would cause the same problem with both cameras. Hope this helps - it should be cheap to check and fix.

Just need to add that this Arriflex IIC has the 172.8 degree shutter rather than the 180 to allow for flicker free use with certain lighting.

I am selling my Arriflex IIC High Speed with Angenieux 25~250 3.9 zoom and mags. Camera has been converted to PL Mount and lens has Visual Products PL mount converter. See and bid on eBay http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=230319471637 Everything is in excellent condition - never abused. This camera produces a very steady image.

Super 35 changes the center of the frame, so the lens mount should be re-centered (to the right if looking at the front of the camera) when using zoom lenses.

It's most likely a Model II (2). Model I ended before #2000. The Arri factory was bombed during WWII, so the exact ending number for the Arriflex Model I is not known. All of Arriflex IIA cameras I have come across have the improved cam movement, but some on these forums say there are a few IIA's with the old button movement. If the camera works good, I wouldn't worry about the exact model. If it was a model I, it would almost impossible to get replacement parts because when the Arri factory started making cameras after the war, small changes were made - just enough to make most of the parts not interchangeable. Camera models from the 35 II up to the 35 IIC have have mostly interchangeable parts - many repair shops have a collection for when the need arises. I think the only big changes were the button movement to cam movement, and the shape of the door was changed on the IIC. Changes such as variable shutter, 3 perf movement, PL mount lens, etc. are modifications on standard cameras.

I film wild bears on bluescreen. Getting a slate means sneaking out in front on the camera, and trying not to be eaten by my "actors." Always a hair raising experience.

Overall, I think you did a great job. Many of the comments are, "good... for your first film." Ouch! This is kind of like saying, "good for your first time cutting hair." Meaning it is bad, but not as bad as it could have been. If you did all of the production work yourself, perhaps that would explain the some of the problems other people have pointed out. A person working solo is too attached to the work emotionally to be objective. I suspect things like the audio problems are from low budget/lack of equipment, not your skill as a film maker. Never forget that the film business is brutal on one's ego. Even the best film makers get stomped and bruised from time to time. It is part of the learning process. Here's my choices for improvement and why I would make them. Cut most of the first couple of minutes - Start with the woman in bed, then cut to the cat changing the clock. A daily routine is implied and the woman later states that she has a set schedule for the day. Shorten the bike riding - we understand a distance is covered. In the bathroom, it would be better if the writing on the mirror is not readable until the woman looks-up. Shorten the exchange with the man begging for money - it distracts from the story objective because we spend too much time with a secondary character. I was not bothered by the violation of the 180 rule in the scene with the married man, but the final scene should have been longer than either of the exchanges with beggar and the married man (Because the final primary character is introduced, and he is supposed to have a greater meaning in the storyline - more screen time). So, there's my strikes at your ego. In my... well... all most never humble opinion, a little re-work would make your film good rather than "good for a first effort." I really like the concept of the cat changing the clock. I hope you put a little more effort into this project. I think people might say, "Your first film? Wow, I would have never guessed!" ;)

The opening is really good photography. The rest... seemed disconnected.

I like the selection of shots. They show that you understand shooting a wide variety of lighting conditions. And that is, of course, what a PD does - determine how to capture light.

You might want to move the screen further away. It helps if it is out of focus, and you will get less reflected light from the screen on the talent. I like at least 8 feet between the subject and the screen - but it's not always possible.

If I were a betting man, I'd go all in for Lucas making another great movie that is not related to the Star Wars or Indiana Jones films. It's not like he's a one-hit-wonder. A new exciting concept will grab his attention, and we will see the collimation of thoughts in a film like no other. Will it be better than his early works? I don't know, but it will be different, and very, good.

Have you ever done a greenscreen animal shoot in the wilds? Have you ever heard of anyone trying? The bluescreen is just regular blue tarp. I think the longest any bear was close to it before ripping the fabric was about 30 seconds. I'm really glad I didn't try to use "store bought" bluescreen. The bears don't act aggressive, but rather curious. More of a "what is this," then they touch the bluescreen with their paws, and it gets holes and rips. Maybe I yell, "No! Bad bear!" :P No wait, maybe I should get a PA to walk out and talk to the bears... ha ha. I get very nervous just trying to get slates (I have to sneak between the bears and the camera). I think the plywood set will help, and I have to build a stage for the full animal shots anyway. The cost of the paint is less than the cost of shipping it to the location.

I came up with the crazy idea that I can film wild animals on a bluescreen set. This fall I tested the idea in the Alaska wilderness. I took my trusty Arri IIC, Angenieux 25~250, and a few hundred feet of short-ends (5205) out to the middle of nowhere. Some "friendly" bears helped me get test footage. The only real technical issues were a tripod that is too light (not sturdy with zoom lens set at more than 150mm), and camera batteries that died. Also, the bluescreen backdrop was damaged by the bears making it very hard to stretch smooth. I can fix this in the future by using a painted plywood set next time. Let me know what you think. Future shoots will be on a full bluescreen stage to allow better integration with other footage. Could you use this type of footage in your productions? Ideas and suggestions are welcome. Icicle Imaging

DON'T DO THIS!!!! Most motion picture film has a coating that will RUIN a "mall mini-lab." Do NOT develop this film at a local shop. The coating plugs the plumbing system. It coats big bucks to fix! The lab owner will hate you, and might want you to pay the thousand of dollars it costs to make the repairs (ie. take you to court). :blink:

I don't think you have enough money to go HD. If you are going to charge for your service, you need not only a good video, but also good audio. That means putting mics on the bride, groom, and minister. Of course, you will not be able to run wires everywhere, so the mics need to be wireless - at least $300.00 for each transmitter/receiver set (you could use just 2 untill you have more money to invest in gear). Even a really good camera will not get good sound from the back of the room using the camera mounted mic. I don't see lights on your list either. You will need them. I would suggest buying a Canon XL 1 (or 2) camera from someone who is upgrading to HD. These cameras are more than good enough for someone just starting out. HD is great, but if the rest of your production is bad - ie sound, lights, it won't matter. Bad production still sucks even in HD. Most people will be happy with a regular SD DVD. If they want high production values and HD, they won't hire a beginner to shoot the wedding anyway! As to the computer, I like apple, so I will restrain from commenting on your choices. If you are shooting a wedding, your gear HAS to work. If something breaks, you don't get to yell cut, then run out for the replacement part. Spare parts MUST be part of your kit. Failing to make the video after you have signed a contract can land you in court, and cost more than your stated budget for gear. Plus, you will have a VERY angry wedding party that tells everyone that they know how, "YOU ruined the greatest day of their life." It might be better to rent gear for you first wedding (except the computer). That way you can see if it something you want to do before spending all your savings. You should be able to rent everything you need for the big day for less than $1000.00. And, if the camera or other critical gear dies, you might have some recourse - able to call the rental house and ask for a replacement camera ASAP. How much to charge. Ha Ha. I know this sounds crazy, but most of the wedding video people I know say that it took them around 70 to 100 hours to edit a wedding video when they were getting started (about 20 - 40 hours for a pro). Let's say you spend a total of 100 hours making the video. and you pay yourself $10.00 per hour, thats $1000.00. Now you need to make something for the use of the gear - say $500.00. That means you need to charge 1500.00 for a basic wedding. Now, are you good enough in your video skills to charge this much? If not, well...