Gregory Irwin

David, What is the purpose for shooting anamorphic into 1.85? I've never understood this. G

Hoyte will be "stellar" for this project. He'll do a great job. G

This business has always been a den of thieves. Nothing new here. This is the exact reason we belong to a union. We have representation to handle the "not so nice" aspects of the job and we keep our noses clean. And we ALWAYS get paid on time. G

It sounds like an easily correctalble problem by a certified lens technician. Basically with zoom lenses, the front element group controls focus, etc. on the long end of the zoom while the rear elements control the wide end. The middle zoom range is controlled by what's called a field lens. Somewhere inside of the barrel, at least one of these groups is out of collimation. it's an easy fix. G

I've used the scorpio and didn't like it much. Not ergonomic and too complicated. In general, it didn't work as well as the Preston. The Preston is tailored to ACs and quick to set up. It also integrates the Cinetape so one can see the display numbers on the handset allowing much more freedom from the camera. G

In other words, in terms of 35mm lenses, a 25mm lens on the 16mm format would have the equivalent angle of view of a 50mm lens. Great discussion! G

Very true. You mean like, using 35mm lenses on the 16mm format, correct? That effectively reduces the particular lens' angle of view but it's more of a product of the format - not the lens. G

Hi James, I've been an First AC for a very long time and have a pretty good comprehension for optics. Let's begin by saying that the aperture has nothing to do with angle of view. When we speak of aperture, we are talking about the iris blades that control the amount of light and the shape of the path of the light passing through groups of glass elements to a measured film plane (or sensor). The construction of those element groups create the angle of view of the "taking lens", not the aperture. You are correct regarding how the aperture setting affects DOF. But what it also affects is exactly how the light path is guided through the lens barrel. I'm going to generalize this for the purposes of brevity: Wide open apertures allow the light to refract and scatter more causing issues like internal flare (image looks milky; blacks are grey), chromatic and/or spherical aberrations (distortion) and possibly astigmatism. It can also adversly affect the DEPTH OF FOCUS, not field, in wider lenses. Most of this translates to images that don't look sharp and contrasty. There could be linear as well as oval distortion. When the light path is guided on a more controlled path to the film plane, such as with a stopped down or closed iris, many of the above issues are eliminated. This is due to the light passing through a much tighter "funnel" and not being allowed to scatter about. Again, this is very general. Basically, lenses perform at their best when stopped down approximately 2 stops from wide open. We try and shoot most interiors around a T2.8 to T4. There are times when we can't and we must live with all of the aforementioned optical issues. These issues are not necessarily guarranteed but they do have a much greater chance of occurring depending on what generation, manufacturer of lenses, etc. are being used. By the way, the red lines that you are referring to - they haven't gone away. They are there on your diagram on a different path to the film plane due to the aperture being closed down. I hope I haven't completely confused you... Greg

Hi all... I'm very proud of our little movie, SNITCH. It was a smaller production than our norm and one of the most rewarding experiences. SNITCH had a wonderful opening weekend outpacing all others in the box office's per/screen average category. Go see it. It's not going to win any awards but Dwayne Johnson shows that he is a versatile actor. He did a terrific job amongst an all star supporting cast. It's a very good picture with very good work. G

I only trust the Preston system.

Hello Duncan, We used all Panavision, super 35, 2.40:1 XL cameras. Primo lenses. You probably did see a Bartech. We also had several Preston's as well. These days I use only a Preston III. I pretty much live on it full time. I like the flexibility of not being tied to the camera and being able to move around to where I can see better. I have one handset that is set up for only me and I just change channels to whichever camera I'm pulling on at the time. Hope this answers your question. G

I failed to ask if this product still exists and if so, where would I find it? Thanks again... G

Hi all, I'm researching to see if anyone has any information about a variable diopter. It's basically a lens attachment that mounts to the front of the "taking" lens and allows us to dial different strengths of diopter from zero to plus (whatever it allows) in order to go from a wide shot to an extreme close up on the fly. Thanks for any help. Greg

Adam is correct. Light meters do not apply to the camera. Light is light. Assuming that your 2c is running at 24 FPS and your shutter is around 180 degrees, your meter should be set for a 1/48th of a second exposure time. Most meters have a cine setting or at least the ability to set the exposure time to a desired setting. G

What a powerful picture. I've seen Les Mis live on Broadway and the movie got to me as well. I actually understood the story much more this time. But honestly, I found the cinematography completely annoying. Live or not live, I thought that it was not epic enough to match the story. As for the close ups, the lack of depth was very distracting to me - especially when my eyes were doing nothing but searching for focus. Those focus pullers had their work cut out for themselves. That hand held, in your face, free style is a very difficult way to shoot and I believe that it was too intrusive when weighed against the performance challenges. I just didn't feel any elegance to the photographic style that should have supported an elegant story. G

Sorry. I can't make it work either. :(

Here is an example of a lens testing chart. I didn't make this one but it illustrates what I described in my above posting. Mine are usually more dense with the photographs. G

I need to weigh in here. As a career first assistant cameraman, I've been testing lenses for over 30 years. My first point is that ACs generally test lenses - not DPs. This is done during the camera prep. My second point cannot be stressed enough. The rental house does prep the lenses and everything else involved for that matter but it is the responsibility of the AC to certify that all of the gear is up to standard and ready to shoot with - especially the lenses. It is not the rental house's burden. For a feature film, I generally prep at the rental house for 2-4 weeks. The better part of the first week is spent on nothing but the lenses. Now, I do realize in this day of age and with smaller production budgets that prep time can be as little as one day. In this case, there is no time to properly test the lenses. Your priority is to make sure that you have all of the proper gear and that it generally all works and that the lenses are at the very least, focusing properly. But what I'm going to explain ahead is what I do for a complete lens prep. First of all, I arrange ahead of time for the rental house to supply between 4-5 sets of similar primes and zooms, or as many as they can. On my first day of prep, I'll make sure that the camera body that I'm testing the lenses on is prepped as far as ground glass collimation, back focus, flange depth, etc. then I do my first pass of all of the lens sets by checking their focusing ability on a simple lens chart. This officially starts the elimination process. If I don't like the feel of the lens, my initial reaction to it's sharpness and contrast, it's eliminated out of the pool. After going through all of the lenses in this fashion, the survivors of the first cut now go onto the lens projector. This projector beams a lens chart big on a wall in a dark room through each of my lenses. This is where I can really see the characteristics of each individual lens, ie. color, stigmatism, chromatic abberation, internal flare, the eveness of sharpness across the field of view, etc. Now I see a drastic cut of lenses. Second round of elimination completed. The third round, if shooting film, is now actually testing the remaining lenses on film. THE FOLLOWING IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT!!! I make a large lens chart, no smaller than 6-8 feet wide by 4-5 feet high. This chart is made up of a collage of duplicates of very contrasty, sharp BLACK AND WHITE magazine photographs. Magazines like Vanaty Fair, Cosmo or any other publication that would have slick full page ads of jewelry, close ups of models faces, etc. In other words, any photograph that has NO COLOR BIAS and that contains very sharp detail. Watch ads are very useful. Once I've collected numerous photographs, I select one for the center of the chart. It can be anything that you want for your centerpiece. After that, I begin building outward, horizontally and vertically from the center with all of my duplicate photos to achieve symmetry. Once this task is complete, I light it evenly to a T2.8 and begin the photography with my widest lenses to the tightest. I like to use Post It Notes to write the millimeter and the serial number of each lens, stick it on the chart so I can identify each lens on screen. I move the camera back as I get tighter with each lens so I fill my field of view with as much chart as I can get. When I project my lens test on the big screen, it is easily discernible to see the COLOR differences between each lens whether they are warm or cool. This is because I used black and white photos that contained no color bias allowing me to see nothing but the color of the lens' glass. I can also see contrast differences as well as sharpness differences. I now can select my final choices for my lens set and have any final adjustments made to the selects. I also check the selected lenses that the iris settings are accurate. As far as digital lens prepping is concerned, all of the above applies with the exception of actually recording the test. This assumes that you have a calibrated monitor to judge your lenses on. Of course you can record it if you need a reference for later. Having said all of this, I have noticed that many of the new series of lenses such as Arri's Master Primes are very consistent with all of the optic variables. This completes my testing process and I now feel confident that I can go forth and trust my lens choices. Good luck with all of your own lens testing. Test as much as your schedule allows. At the very least, I would always project the lenses. This gives loads of valuable information to assist you in making some good choices. G

When a new technology erupts on the scene (no matter what it is), a multitude of developers and vendors leap into the market. We've seen this so many times whether it's in a professional industry or a consumer industry. I don't remember who all of the players were but ultimately Blu-Ray won out over everyone else. If you jumped in and bought the other system prematurely, sorry! You're done. I can remember when VHS became the standard while Beta simply fizzled out. With regards to the digital movement of the current motion picture industry, nothing is different. Only now are the popular digital systems, whether we are talking about post production or cameras, beginning to shake out. Only till recently, we now have a work flow, meaning a system of labor, that we can count on. With the new technology came new jobs and skill sets. We honestly didn't know what to do with it all at first. I know that I was out of my comfort zone. Now we know who does what with what. Think about it. Just a handful of years ago we had numerous digital camera systems that were completely different. Most are gone now. Viper - gone. Dalsa - gone. Panavision's Genesis - pretty much outdated and gone. Who survived and prospered? Arri, Red and Sony. Please let me know who I'm missing here. We went from cumbersome, over engineered and complicated systems to now much more streamline, manageable and user-friendly cameras, along with a work system to manage it all. I know that I went from anti-digi to now embracing the medium. Does history repeat itself? Yes it does. This was exactly the metamorphosis of the film, motion picture camera from the late 1800s through the 1950s. Instead of Sony and Red, there was Edison in the USA, Muybridge in the UK and the Lumiere brothers in Paris, France. This developed into The Mitchell Camera Corp. in the late 1920s, Arriflex during WWII and Panavision in the 1950s. Good luck with your thesis! G

There is a great book titled "THE LIVELIEST ART" by former USC School of Cinema professor and film historian, Arthur Knight. It follows the sordid history of the motion picture camera's development. It is absolutely scandalous! G

Telephone number salaries Phil? What's that? In the feature world in the US, many of us union folks can receive 10 hour guarantees. That means we get the contractual 8 hours of straight time at whatever one's hourly is along with 2 hours of guaranteed 1.5x OT. That's even if we actually work a shorter day. G

We don't have nearly enough business in Hawaii to support such a lab. it wouldn't be cost effective over the long run. G

Hi Vincent! I worked with the 2 perf Penelopi on its first movie here in the United States. I prepped it out of Abel Cine Tech in NYC for "THE FIGHTER". I would imagine that there have been improvements on the Aaton system but based on my experience, the camera was just fair. The viewing system was stigmatic, the camera was very loud and the video tap was a bit dull. The interface was fussy when compared to other 35mm cameras but not too bad after getting used to it. Having said this, we put the 3 Penelopies we had through the fire and they performed well. As far as the 2 perf is concerned, hairs are an everyday concern. They are unavoidable. From a budget perspective, it's a budget saver and along with the DI, the image is very good. 2 perf is a great argument in defense of film when others want to go down the digital road with regard to cost. Best, Greg

This is very sad for us all. I had the pleasure of working for him. What a joy to be around. He inspired us to be our best. He will be truly missed. G