Gregory Irwin

Do you mean did we know that Michael and another focus puller was in our shot? Probably. That was 12 years ago. And I'm sure we got his same answer, "Don't worry about it! I've got a guy!!" A guy, meaning VFX to paint him out in post.

That's right! Especially since I pulled focus on that shot referenced above. It's quick but Michael is certainly there. My most sincere apologies to Shawn. G

Sorry... I was trying to attach this photo and screwed up.

Well I'll be!!! There he is. You are so correct Shawn. I've seen this picture numerous times and have NEVER noticed that. This goes to what I said in an earlier post, that Michael tends to decide what's important or not important in his world. Thank you Mr. Martin!

If you can show that to me, I'd appewciate it. I've never seen that and I not sure that exists. G

Wow. I've never seen that before. Really interesting and so many (too) familiar shots! And I always thought that Bayhem and Bayos was simply our work environment! :) G

HEAR HEAR!!!

Younes, I couldn't disagree with you more. Michaels's sense of visuals is spectacular. His editing skill is remarkable. There is much to absorb about a cinematic style that you don't have to like in order to learn. G

The way I look at it is that I would probably go back for more. He is a known entity and you just have to have the right attitude and your Kevlar suit! And let's face it: we make a lot of money working on his movies and he is very loyal. I actually like him. As my dear cinematographer friend says, " We don't write 'em, we just light 'em!" G

Hi Younes, You are absolutely correct about the sloppiness of the work. I was the "A" camera First AC on PAIN & GAIN and although I can't make excuses for this, I can offer some possibilities why it happened. I'm a veteran of five Michael Bay movies. I don't think Michael always gives his audience the respect they deserve. What I mean by this is that he knows the flaws are there but he chooses not to either avoid them or fix them in post when he chooses to use that piece of footage. The first example you posted is a helicopter shot and the camera operated simply back panned into the gyro sphere housing to keep the boat in frame. That moment didn't need to neccessarily be used since there was a lot of footage shot on that boat. The second example was shot on a Red Epic and the anamorphic lens was simply too wide for the 4K we were shooting. That vignette could have been avoided or fixed but obviously was left in the movie. It wasn't a priority in Michael's world. Of course, we know that they are there and the audience sees them as well. Michael creates an absolute environment of chaos when filming and most of the time any crew member is just not allowed to do their job properly. It's a daily struggle to maintain any sense of standard when working with him. Unbelievably, in PEARL HARBOR, you can see my hands on the edge of frame pulling focus on a Preston handset. Last time I checked, we didn't have Preston's in 1941. We knew it when it happened and Michael said not to worry about it and he would paint me out in post. Well, that never happened and I'm in the movie! In the end, it's a real testimony to the professionalism of all of the cast and crew who perform their jobs very well under fire. Working with Michael is not for everyone. Many have washed out under the pressure. It takes a very special personality to block out all of the craziness that has engulfed you and focus solely on the job at hand. G

Yeah! This one!

I guess that I'm looking at these solutions as a temporary, on set fix for a specific shot. Then I would want to restore the the intended use of the lens right then and there. Shimming is a great solution. Again, I wouldn't want to do this in the field under time constraints. I must say, we used Schnieder diopters regularly on Christopher Nolan's INTERSTELLAR in order to get closer in the IMAX format. The 65mm images are beautiful at a T2. G

With all do respect Jean-Louis, there are not many out there on set with your qualifications. Thus, the disaster. I have a physical optics background and I would be reluctant to do that - in the field and with time constraints. I agree with you about diopters degrading an image but I would argue that any lens wide open is a degraded image in many ways. If it's a trade off of a degraded image when compared to an out of focus image, I would choose the former. Especially when referring to such a wide angle. G

Loosening screws on a wide angle lens?? Risky!! That sounds like a depth of FOCUS disaster in the making. I would go with diopters. By the way, how many names do you post under Sir Power? So... Complicated. G

I love the staccato and the legato comparision. Right on! G

If you are doing a lot of digital work, I would add an Arctic Butterfly (non static brush), especially designed for sensor cleaning, a bulb syringe for the same thing and a lit loop magnifier for inspecting the cleanliness of the sensor. Keep your kit simple. Don't overwhelm yourself with crap you won't use or need. G

Hi Jordan, I would say that besides your tools and follow focus gear, your list consists of mainly expendable purchases that production would pay for. I wouldn't spend your own money on tape, air, etc. G

I've never used them Dom. What glass is inside? G

I own several TV Logic 5.6" on boards. But I'm liking the Small 7" Daylight monitor and am currently considering upgrading to them. They are around $3000 each. G

I had lasek several years ago and had 6 great years. Now my eyes have not only returned to where they were before, they're worse! Old age is a b*@ch!

I had lasek several years ago and had 6 great years. Now my eyes have not only returned to where they were before, they're worse! Old age is a b*#@t! :)

Sadly, contacts don't work for me. The picture was taken in 2009 on THE FIGHTER. I only needed "cheaters" to see close as Stuart observed back then. Those days are over. Now, it's a pair of full time bi-focals. :(

Yep. An unfortunate byproduct of aging.

Thank you Phil Rhodes for writing a wonderful article! And my apologies for this shameless self promotion. http://www.redsharknews.com/business/item/1827-meet-the-crew-gregory-irwin,-camera-assistant

Welcome to the board! G