John Brawley
-
Posts
855 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by John Brawley
-
-
Yes I'm a rental house technician here in Melbourne. I know, pedantic and annoying, and living in an ivory tower.. :D
I guess I'm applying rental house standards, where the lenses are constantly being checked, and assistants (hopefully) do tests before a shoot to catch any problems. A technician can then fine tune the back focus of a lens in-house if necessary. It always sounded arse-backwards to me when I heard stories of crews adjusting a RED mount to a particular lens, then having to set it back again afterwards.
But I can understand it's a handy feature sometimes, especially for owner-operators, as David pointed out. And if it works, it works.
Good job on Offspring, by the way. It was probably the best home-grown drama of 2010, IMHO. My only complaint is that the pub location was the Union Hotel, and every time I went to drop in there last year it was closed because you buggers were there filming. Now I hear there's a second season. I'm all for Australian content on our TV screens, but does it have to be my local? :P
Hi Dom....
Don't worry...some of my best friends are camera technicians.....;-)
It's interesting though to hear the war stories about RED and back focus....
I take the view that it should be set correctly in the first place, rather than optimized for each lens. I think in a way, there are always going to be slight variances in lenses anyway and it's a fools game to start chasing the lens markings for each lens....
Thanks for your kind words on Offspring. We were actually at the union yesterday ! And yes, we're shooting series 2 right now.... Next time you should drop by...you can check my back focus and I'll buy you a beer...
jb
-
Hi John, you're explanation does make sense. It does kind make me wonder though why some bulbs are closer to the advertised temperature than others. For example, the ECA 250w 3200K Tungsten bulb is metered at 3100K, which is only 100 degrees K off, whereas the other lights are around 300K or more off.
100K is barely noticeable in the scheme of things. You'll find that's the finest increment you can manually dust WB in most cameras.
I find most lamps are somewhere between 2800 and 3000K.
jb
-
I have to respectfully disagree on this. If you follow some very simple guidelines - avoid damaged or dirty shims, line up the screw holes and do up the mounting screws with even tightness in opposing pairs - shimming is 100% foolproof. Takes me about 5 minutes and I've never had a problem.
If the Epic engineers were sensible that's how they've designed their camera - shim the mount to within tolerance, then allow a tiny adjustment to compensate for minute variations in lens back focus. Really, any professional cine lens that is out by more than a few hundredths of a mm (an imperial thou or two) probably has more issues than just back focus and shouldn't be used until a technician has checked it over. That kind of error usually means it's been dropped, damaged in transit or has a loose element.
Dom, I'm go going to take a wild guess here and assume you're a camera or lens technician of some kind ? Shimming a lens is something that can't really be don in the field. You need the right environment to be able to measure the depth and what's required for the shim. And the assumption that a *professional* cine lens shouldn't be out don't mean that they sometimes won't be. And you need to carry the right shims with you (and does anyone ?) And a rental company that would be happy with you pulling their camera mounts on and off in the field to re-shim them....
I hate the current RED lens mount system. The back focus adjustment is fiddly and prone to going out as you try to lock it in. But id rather that then a mount shim and an assumption that my *professional* cine lens is *right*.
jb
-
I am wondering if it takes tungsten bulbs (mogul bulbs and household bulbs) some time after they have been turned on to display accurate color temperature.
You'll rarely get 3200K from a tungsten lamp. There are so many things that can affect the CT, but voltage would be the main one. Once you put the lamp into any kind of housing then you'll tend to get a drop as well as it takes on the colour of the reflector.
In the same way, no HMI is 5600 K either.
These numbers are just approximations but you'll get to know from experience that it's rare to get a lamp that will actually hit those numbers without correction.
jb
-
I would love to hear your thoughts on this shootout... I assume you will be posting online?
As soon as the film out is finished, I'm booking a cinema and organizing a screening. I'll put you on the list if you're in Melbourne.
The results were....surprising. I've changed my mind several times about the advantages of each format as I've gone through the process. I was a lot more enamored of the Alexa until I actually started grading with it. Funnily enough at the moment, the RED MX seemed to get the closest to the 35mm footage in terms of how everything was sitting in terms of colour gamut and exposure range. That's probably going to change again once I get it back to film as well. I'm also planning to output the same material to DCP so I can compare them in both distribution mediums. The Alexa was great to use and operate, and I expected it to be more clearly ahead of the RED MX in terms of pictures as I'd been hearing so much about how much of an improvement it was from other sources.
Even the colorist was was reluctantly agreeing with me that the RED was just easier to match i the conditions we were shooting in. MInd you, I was only recording pro-res on the alexia. Maybe once they do RAW it'll be different.
As I said, the F3 was pretty awful in terms of colour, compression artifacts and it seemed to have a different kind of temporal cadence....motion was...more videoy ? I can't describe it any better than that....and again...i had a prototype / engineering version of the camera.
The 1D had it's place and is a great option for the size.....
The Super 16 looks great for a look, but ends up being pretty grainy once you put it against other formats. If you don't have anything to compare it with it actually has it's own look that could be very useful for the right project.
This was a low light test, basically shooting night and available light. I expected the 35mm not to do well at all, but it's still hard to beat.
jb
-
There is nothing worse then when you set it, lock it and then it shifts!!!!
This happens with shims as well. You measure the depth, you choose a shim, you take the mount off, you put in the new shim, you put the mount back on, you measure the depth, only to find the mount measures differently despite the thickness of the shim you've put in....
The ability to shoot "5K" images with such a small body is amazing. However there are some drawbacks... There is only one monitor/eyepiece out on the body meaning that you cannot run both at the same time - its one or the other. Also the battery life of the EPIC when powered by the side handle didn't seem to last long at all... I remember TED mentioning it lasts 30 minutes. So yes there will be some occasions where it will be fine to run the camera brain only but I imagine that the majority of feature shooting will include the addition of both the I/O and battery module.
Well i think it's bit hard to knock them for *only* having a battery that can run for 30 mins and a single LCD output.... That's only for running in this very minimal configuration. At least you DONT have to have a battery running through a cable somewhere else. The 235 has a similar modest capacity battery that can make it self contained, OR you get a bigger one that runs external. You can add single or dual batteries and extra monitors on the various modules out the back so there's no *issue* as far as I can see...just flexibility....this is the most pared back minimal version of the camera.....I'm excited about having a camera this small as an operator. I can pimp the camera up if I want to, but I love the idea of doing more intimate handheld work with this form factor...(and it has SDI out for video split anyway). All the other stuff that doesn't work yet will come I'm sure. It's more *finished* in terms of software than the first RED was !
But what will Panavision and Sony (with their "4K" camera) bring to the table?
Panavison have been working on a replacement for the Geneisis for years (with some kind of HDR option), but I wonder if we'll ever see it. They seem to be in financial difficulty. I haven't used a Sony camera for...well years......I tried one of their F3's recently. The camera itself is nice in terms of the form factor....but I was very underwhelmed with the end results....I did a shootout with 35mm, Super 16, RED MX, Alexa, a 1D and the F3. We're just in the middle of doing the film outs but the F3 was the worst performer in my opinion. I would say though we had an engineering prototype so it's possible a little unfair, but the codec is VERY limiting, along with the apparent DR of the camera. As I say, I personally haven't used a Sony camera by choice for a long time....I'll keep checking in on their progress, but they aren't really making cinema cameras that I want to use.
jb
-
Not sure why, you'd think all PL-mount lenses would focus at the same distance exactly.
.
Exactly.
[quote name='David Mullen ASC' timestamp='1299188518' post='346319'
Anyway, I wouldn't lose too much sleep over this issue until more is known. If the back-focus can be set, locked, and forgotten about until the next time it becomes an issue, I don't see a problem with making it user-adjustable as opposed to needing shims and whatnot.
It's not an issue unless they totally screw up the design. And that would be a deal breaker of course. To me It's an improvement over their current approach which was a pain in the arse, but was at least better than re-shimming. I think a lot of the back-focus issues are more to do with a lack of understanding and knowledge about how to actually set it properly in the first place.
jb
-
????
This is what it says on the link you gave me:
"Latest Episode
Project Runaway
Wednesday 9 June 2010
Project Starsearch finalist Joss Miller (Jane Harber) has absconded from the show's compound, jeopardising the multi-million dollar TV final.
Wednesday 9pm on ABC1
Thursday 8:30pm on ABC2"
After laborioulsy wading through my Electronic Program Guide, I've discovered re-runs of the original series are being showing on ABC2 on thursdays, but at 9PM.
No sign of it on ABC1
I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused. Was there asecond season, or not.?
If there was, did you mention it here?
I have to admit I'm not much in the habit of scanning through the secondary channels; it's hard enough finding anything worth watching on the main channels!
Yeah i think the ABC aren't great at updating their micro sites. That's all from the first airing, but yeah they are re-running the show now. It looks like a second run of the series is going towards the end of the year.....you haven't even seen the first run yet though !!!
jb
-
Right, so it's a mechanical adjustment. Sorry, from your description of a clever new 'device' I imagined something electronic.
Still seems a bit risky though. As you observed with the Aatons, ground glass adjustments tend to be made once and then left alone. 35mm Arri cameras have several set screws to adjust the depth, flatness and position of the ground glass, and it certainly isn't a procedure I'd want to do in the field. With something the size of a 5K sensor I would think the adjustment would need to be even more critical, notwithstanding the fact that a ground glass image isn't what's actually being recorded.
I'm not directing this at you John, just throwing it out there, but I guess my query is: why the need for an operator-adjustable flange depth in a professional camera? Shouldn't professionals be using properly collimated lenses? And if the flange depth does require adjustment, why move the sensor and possibly introduce alignment issues when it's much safer to just re-shim the mount?
I'd rather adjust the depth with a hex screw than having to re-shim. What a pain in the arse.
I've got 5 RED bodies on a show right now. We checked the back focus at the begin inning and weve not yet had to change it.
For some reason, some people have lots more trouble with RED back focus. I often make it though a show without changing in it once.
There are two things that can go wrong. A lens can be out or the mount can be out.
On a film camera there are three things so it's actually more complex than you're giving credit for.. The lens can out. The mount can be out and the ground glass can be out.
There are tolerances and if you're on the + and - sides momf those then you can still be out. I'd much rather be able to make a simple mechanical adjustment than to have to carry a aet of shims, pull the entire mount off ( which can introduce more issues..not seating...shims not seating etc...) then put it back together. The thing is, that these higher resolution digitval cameras seem to have less wriggle room. I reckon you could get away with more on film. Ask any focus puller...RED is less forgiving....
Just assuming a lens is collomated makes no allowance for temperature differences, freight, differences in mount machining...let alone if the lens is even right in the first place. You're wanting to get rid of the potential for a back focus error from mis-seating vs assuming that every lens you get is perfectly collimated ? You're much more likely to get a lens that isn't perfectly collimated in my opinion....
JB
-
There's an actual Epic in the country?!
That probably explains all the floods, earthquakes and freezing summer weather.
All to no avail of course :rolleyes:
By the way, what ever happened to Lowdown?
Was it only ever a short series, or did the ABC ship it off to some forgotten timeslot?
CMON Keith it's on RIGHT NOW on the abc. It's in it's second screening after premiering last year.
-
This is one of those ideas that sounds like a good thing but could actually prove to be a hindrance.
Unless it's incredibly well engineered and machined, having a large sensor on what is presumably some sort of motorised rack and pinion mechanism could introduce all sorts of problems. For one thing the sensor needs to remain flat with respect to the mount to within 10 microns from edge to edge (both vertically and horizontally), so any contamination of the sliding surfaces, wear or play in the mechanism could result in a slightly tilted sensor.
It needs to be held in its setting securely enough that a knock to the camera body or any external vibration won't cause even the slightest change in the flange depth.
How will the mechanism cope with temperature changes? How easy is it to accidently adjust?
I can foresee scenarios where each time a lens is changed the flange depth gets adjusted.
Of course I could be wrong, and it's a fine idea. Time will tell I guess.
You have to take the top handle off completely to adjust it from what I understand.
The Aaton's XTR PROD has a similar system with their ground glass adjustment. You pop a small cap off the side and adjust the flange depth of the ground glass through a small hole with a hex key and in the the company of a good collimator.
There never seemed to be any problems with it going *out* in my 5 years in a rental company with 8 of them. You always would check it before each job though...just like backfoucs....
jb
I didn't see the mechanism in action, but you had to take the top handle off the camera off to actually get to the adjustment, which was a hex key buried down deep inside ( i think)
I know that there is a similar mechanism for adjusting the flange depth of the ground glass on an Aaton XTRprod as well. Pop the little screw on the side and adjust ( in the company of a collimator)
It never seemed to be *out* for no apparent reason either, but one would always check it before goin out on a job with the camera. Just like back focus....
jb
-
nope, but even though it may sound incredibly strange to you, I got DPs who could freak out for things like that :-) luckily, not many.
Yeah, I was referring to custom labels, I was just wondering, since it's so small, if in your opinion there's enough room for that.
(14 custom buttons seem a LOT to me, anyway, but that doesn't mean we MUST use all of them, so it's ok)
I don't think it's going to contribute to focus issues unless it's way out of it's correct depth...but by then the lens would be *out* anyways....
The buttons had labels on them such as "A" "B" "C" etc....i guess you'd end up maybe remembering what you program them to be after a while...i's one of those *good* problems to have though !
All the menus are very quickly accessed via the menu anyway.....
jb
-
thanks for the report, John.
you wrote:
"they’ve cleverly made it easier to backfocus by putting in a device that moves the entire sensor to change the backfocus"
So that means that the sensor position is relative and not fixed? I'm asking this because while it could be a good thing for adjusting back focus, it will have some influence on measuring focus from the sensor plane, if I'm understanding this correctly.
I wouldn't have thought so...we're talking hundreds of a millimetre adjustments for backfocus....have you got actors that can hit marks like that ? ;-)
You also mentioned 14 custom buttons: no problem with that, though it looks like the RedMote or touch screen would be good enough for 99% of situations, but once you've assigned a function to each one of them, how do you identify them?
I'd use what i use now....a DYMO labeller !
jb
-
I had a visit today from Ted Schilowitz of RED and he brought along an EPIC and Scarlet to show off.
Just some first impressions here....
jb
-
I have never seen a slate on set as it is all done by time code!
It's worth remembering that although the slate primarily allows for the recording of a sync reference, it also has the effect of providing an important ritual in the lead up to a take. Like a starter at the race the effect is the same for everyone, helping to focus all, especially the cast.
The ''on your marks...get set....GO " effect of the slate has an important disciplinary side effect as well as being good for checking sync.
jb
-
Maybe you meant it this way, but either the 5D or 7D has more native resolution than S16. However, you are probably dealing with a 1080p down-res'ed file off the chip.
I think for HD, you'd find a Super 16 scan would have more resolution captured. Don't forget that the Canons'a are line skipping and shedding a lot of resolution to create their 1920x1080 image. So, while it has a high resolution sensor, and it records a 1920x1080 quicktime, if you point it at a resolution chart you won'tt get anywhere near that resolution.
The Super 16 I suspect would have more *recorded* resolution.
jb
-
When I moved to Sydney from Melbourne, I realised that everyone looked at me strangely because I said "frame"
Eventually i was quietly informed by an AC that the correct phrase was "set"
I like frame. It's camera operator specific. "Set" could apply to anyone.....
Must be a Sydney thing....
jb
-
All,
I read over at www.in70mm.com that Scorsese was using 65mm to shoot "Shutter Island."
Hi,
Reading the AC article, it seems they TRIED to use camera 65, for the concentration camp scenes but both the Panavision and the Arri broke down on the first night in some extreme weather. Instead they opted for 35mm with a funky LUT applied for a more hyper reversal-ish look.
jb
-
I've been wondering how one goes about finding out who owes the story rights for a film's story. I hadn't researched this before because I generally like to write my own stuff but lately I've had some ideas for remaking a few films and it might be nice to find out if the rights are available. It couldn't hurt to have the the information in any event. B)
Almost all authors have agents who will generally negotiate the rights with anyone interested in buying them.
Mostly though you'll find, the rights get sold off long before the book even gets published.
jb
-
Aloha
I have been shooting time lapse footage for years and now would like to catch some of that magic on 35mm film. I have been using both a Sony EX3 nnd a nikon DSLR, but would like to step up the quality. Can anyone recommend a camera that has the following features?
1 - Lightweight
2 - variable frame rate - anywhere from 1 frame each 5 minutes to 150FPS - would be nice. I would be willing to pay for a custom conversion if any camera shop would do that.
3 - video assist - optional
I was looking at the russian cameras due to the lightweight. My budget is about 10k, but I would be willing to pay more.
Am I asking for too much? Can anyone recommend such a system? I saw a mod for a russian camera, but it minimum fps was 1 - I need a longer delay that that.
Thanks
Sean
I think for 10K ex-lenses you could look for an Arri 35-3 with a norris intervalomenter and capping shutter.
The capping shutter is necessary for any long frame intervals as most 35mm cameras are 100 % light proof when parked on a single frame for that long.
The arri 35-3, if you get a later version will go to 150FPS as well with a high speed base and can easily take a video split.
jb
-
Hello, I have a question. I have been producing a Doc which was shot on the RED in eastern Europe. I may need to go back and shoot some pick-ups on the cheap with-out a full crew. I was considering using a 5D or 7D to do this. I have seen footage from both the DSLR's and the RED ofcourse, each with their own look. But I have never cut them together. For a documentary do you think the DSLR's would make an acceptable "b-cam" for pick-up shots?
I'm shooting a series at the moment and we've sometimes used 5ds as c and d cameras within scenes shot RED. By and large you can get them pretty close in the grade, although it usually means bringing down the RED footage from it's full potential. And you will all of sudden notice just how softish or lower res the 5d is compared to RED.
But if there's no other way you can get it pretty close, as long as you put up with all the other 5d operational baggage.
jb
-
Hi All,
I'm shooting a job on Tuesday with a Red Camera and a blue screen. I'm aware of the Red Camera insensitivity to blue light when used with tungsten fixtures. So knowing this I'm wondering wether it might be worth doing a couple of things like adding a 80C or 80D filter on the lens just to help it along a bit and possibly compensating by adding a 1/4 or 1/8 CTO on the key lights for the subject.
I also have access to some Super Blue Kino's for the 20x20' Blue Screen which might mean I'm worrying about nothing.
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated! :-)
Gday Adam !
Hope you're going well.
I've shot a fair bit with RED on green screen and would say that the tungsten / green screen isn't *REALLY* worth worrying about. I've also tested with the 80a/c/d (and others) and would say I found the tradeoff in sensitivity loss didn't really gain much advantage in noise cleanliness. You're sort of trading one issue for another.
Super blue kino's are AWESOME and magically make most key issues go away, unless you're shooting head to toe (to the floor). This is the single best step you can take to improve your keys.
I'm not sure that adding CTO would help as such but if you need it for a BG/FG match then again I wouldn't be too fussed. I guess it depends a little on your level of shot complexity but yes there is a very slight advantage to shooting with daylight, but for me it's not enough to warrant stop loss on filters of the pain of daylight (and not continuous spectrum) sources.
Have a great shoot mate.
jb
-
i'm not lifting the black up, 1st: because what i'm filming is not black, 2nd: because i don't touch the level in post to gain some detail in darker aeras.
3rd: the lowest level you can get on the D21 thanks to the log C is 10%, and what is wrong in wanting to have detail in a wooden piece of furniture, or hair and pull-over.??
thanks
But what is the advantage of having black sit at 30% ? Of course you also want some things to be black ? Why wouldn't you put them at say 5% At 30% aren't you just reducing your available dynamic range....
Genuinely wanting to understand your approach.....
I've shot with the D21 and I found that at higher ASA's, in flat fields in near underexposed areas it can have a certain pattern of noise. In fact, I did a DI and the post house rang me to tell me that when they converted it to LOG from REC 709 that was recorded it had huge noise problems and they couldn't go forward ! The noise disappeared into the blacks once they were restored to *normal* though and it ended up looking OK. I also recall seeing the same pattern in The Bank Job, and it's one thing I look for to *pick* if it's a D21 job.
jb
-
what is the good recording format in SI2K ! i tried the 12bit format is it is better than cineformraw?
Uncompressed will use a lot more drive space but is better than cineform, which is compressed. Cineform compression however is still very good.
jb
Lake Mungo
in On Screen / Reviews & Observations
Posted
Hi Dom,
Thanks for the kind words. It's great that the film seems to be finding an audience.
jb