XiaoSu Han

as usual, questions, comments and criticism welcome shot on RED MX and Cooke S2/S3 lenses the new RED MX chip and it's quite clean iso 1600 mode even made it possible for us to shoot this project on a very low budget a bit grainy at times, but it suits the movie and the look we were after...

here are a couple of updated stills (color and content) - comments and critics welcome

I agree, the colors throw me off too.... apparently the District 9 dusty desaturated orange brown look (sodium vapor does not look like that in my eyes at least) is modern at the moment.

the cinematography kinda turned me off that video quite quickly. I hope we get to see the Alexa in the hands of someone really capable (Richardson or Deakins for example) soon....

We're using the S2's because those are the perfect lenses to achieve some sort of period feel when shooting with the RED. We went with natural light from outside, changed flourobars inside to 5000K bulbs and augmented some shots with kinoflos and bounced 575s. The script is set in the 80s, but since we've such a limited budget some things like the whiteboard can't be avoided.

We're currently in production and I just wanted to share a couple of stills of our latest project shot in New York City. shot on RED MX. questions, critique and comments welcome

oh wow, 25 days only! good luck! how many setups are you aproximately getting each day? what kind of budget was that again?

I like the look of the 99 problems video although I was expecting more like a metal-oriented song with those visuals. Kinda felt misplaced but maybe that was just me. Other than that I really liked the look itself. Great colors.

So if I shoot 2-perf framed for 2.39 I'd do a DI and do an anamorphic print is that correct? Would it be possible to do a "regular" print (1.85?) and have letterboxes or a hard matte? The quality of the anamorphic print would be better but does it matter if the origination format is such a small negative compared to real anamorphic? What's the cost difference? Maybe it would make sense to do an anamorphic print if DI'ed at 4K but do a 1.85 print if DI'ed at 2K? And if I'd go DCP at the end it all doesn't matter... thanks for all the info so far

http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=24600 "If I may nit-pick your nit-pick...Arri 'scope ground glass is marked for 2.35:1. 2.39:1 is the scope projection ratio. " Why would ARRI mark their cameras with a 2.35 ground glass with 2.39 as the scope projection ratio? Is it just a way to "frame safer"? Also, Aaton has 2.35 and 2.39 available as ground glass markings for the new penelope, as 2.39 is the correct projection ratio, what sense would it make to get a 2.35 ground glass? cheers

die analoge widerstandsfront! awesome, saw a rolleiflex too :) ps: join the mailing list at konvas.org, good resource if you should have more questions about kinor etc. cheers

It's good to hear that even in 20 years and 20 times the budget, I'll have the same problems as now, that is deciding for projects, letting people down, taking risks etc. - which does not help you of course. It sure is one of the hardest aspects in the industry it seems. Thanks for sharing with us David, really appreciated. In my opinion if there's a 90% chance that you might do another artistically fulfilling feature with directors that you have done 6 features with, you should go with it. I remember you writing about how you've taken the safe route quite often, so maybe you have to try another one this time. Sometimes, 10% makes the difference between a feature DP and a TV DP. So in the end, the gut feeling always is right. If you want to be a feature DP, you have to go for it, and 90% security for an indie movie is as good as it gets, isn't it? :)

Random quote from reduser: "A camera that shoots like video and has the ability to look like film. All you have to do is understand the basics of Cinematography. " We've been shooting RED for our past features and it was mainly because of the budget of the whole production or the director who wanted more (unlimited?) takes. We started with doing as many takes as we wished, rolling every rehearsal, talking through takes etc. until the producers stepped in and didn't want to buy harddrives anymore. There goes the 'digital is free' argument. We've been trying very hard to make the RED look as different as HD as possible. It was also because of the material, we just didn't need a hard edged plasticy look for those movies. I've seen a lot of bad stuff on 35mm as well and most of the time it's when people shoot 35 for 35mm's sake but forget that you have to light properly, so most of the bad stuff is from indoors actually. For people like Roger Deakins digital at the moment is a no-go and there has to be a reason besides age and generations for that.

Anyone here who has used both? It would be interesting to know if there are any fundamental differences or one should rather decide on availability and price. cheers, Xiaosu

Very well as one of us takes the role of an operator controlling the frame and one takes the roll of the DP behind the monitor having an eye on the lighting. The director can talk to both of us seperately and will get the same answer most of the time and if he communicates with one of us both will know. Also, while one is setting up one shot the other one can think ahead what to do for the next one. Additionally if for example tracks can be laid for the next shot one of us can go with the key grip to get the position right and the other one finishes the recent shot. Every director we've worked with for now has been confused before shooting, but after the first half day they love it. So yes, works really well.

Hey, we are two DPs who have worked together for the last 6 feature films and are looking for a project since the one which we've been working on now hasn't worked out for us and thus we are unexpectedly free. Our CV can be seen at http://www.stilfabrik.at and I can send you more stuff that we've shot if you contact us directly as some stuff hasn't been published yet. The most recent project we've worked on was the first english feature by Ong Bak director Prachya Pinkaew starring Kevin Bacon and Djimon Honsou as 2nd Unit DPs. We can also be hired as camera operators with our RED M-X. Feel free to contact us if you're looking for DPs or camera operators, our rates adjust to the budget the film has and we can talk about everything as long as the story is right. so long, regards, Andreas Thalhammer and Xiaosu Han

It only means that you seem to care a lot about him :)

Has anyone seen this film shot by Peter James? I really like the period look they've employed, having blue shadows and a very nice quality of light... does anyone know how it was achieved? Probably in the DI instead of flashing the negative? Also he says in an interview that he only "used 50% of the negative" for the period scenes, what does that mean?? Just cropped by 50% any information would be helpful...

"I remember Spielberg discussing Saving Private Ryan's processing during the hype about that when it first came out, it had a similar look I think, if higher contrast, he heat stressed col-neg stock by leaving the cans out in full sun in his yard then used a bleach bypass or partial bleach bypass process, very brave if you ask me anything could have gone wrong, I’d committed it to memory but never got round to trying it" read this on a photography forum...

Here are a couple pictures from the shoot: should answer all your questions :)

"Well since you are shooting red, that is what it is going to look like." - That's EXACTLY what I want to avoid. Natural light coming from behind the camera is not the same as natural light coming from the side of the camera. We did a almost natural/available light only feature film in NYC last year where we just used a couple of 500w photofloodbulbs in home depot like fixtures, and tried to steer away from the "RED look" as much as possible. As I am not a 100% satisfied with the result I wanted to find examples by the masters, how they did it if they had to do it. (http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=40503)

Yes, it was something like an Aaton Minima as far as my research went when I researched POV shot stuff, and the SI2K was mounted on a helmet as well. http://www.onsight.co.uk/showcase/35/scoring-gold Here's what we did: (using a NOX camera on the shoulder and helmet.)