John Brawley

Hi Daivd And Ryan. My head is located in Melbourne at the moment and I'm in Sydney. The manual is with the head. As soon as I can, I'll get something to you both. (all i have is a photocopy of the manual mind you). And I have certainly seen inside the head and certainly can confirm the pan cable is a wire loop with a near invisible join where it's woven together ( i think) There are various cogs and gears but they are more for adjusting the tension of the cable (and therefore the friction i guess). That's separate to the wheel *gearbox* too of course. When I bought my head the pan cable was frayed and I replaced it. You can actually get a pretty good look at whats going on by locking off the tilt, and resting it upside down and turning the pan wheel. Give it a try. The tilt cable is not a loop, but a single length with two stops on each end. Obviously the tilt only moves through 90Deg. jb

I wonder if it's a simple as this. The original pan cable had a join in it that stopped the head from panning. Eventually they worked out how to make a cable that had no join. Instantly you could then just keep panning. Same head. New pan cable ? just guessing. jb

I can't say i've heard of a super mini worral. I was looking for a couple of years before i bought the one that I have. I have also replaced both the tilt and pan cables in mine and ordered the parts from visual products, asking for cables for a mini-worral.( not specifying super) I also have a service manual that makes no mention of the *super* variant. Maybe in the advert it's just a super Mini Worral not a Super Mini Worral ? it may have just been something they changed once they began manufacture in earnest ? jb

I've requested several times that the mods take a stand....obviously to no avail. jb

Hi All. i'm lucky enough to have a Feature screening at Sundance this year as well as a short as Slamdance. Was wondering if anyone else was planning to pop along ? I'll be there from the 22nd. jb

My mini worral has cable drive on both the pan and tilt. I think your info is wrong. Cinema Products (aka CP) bought the worral inventory and then remade the worral geared head thus inventing the "CP mini Worral". A lighter head designed for the then newer and lighter cameras like the Arri BL's. The manual also has the very short lived CP EC 35. Bonus points if you know what that is.... The panavision is belt driven The Arris' are chain driven. jb Bugger it. The EC 35 was one of the first Cine/Video cameras ever built. in 1982. yep that revolution arguably started way back then. Video manufactures have been claiming they are as good as 35mm since then ! Love the last quote below. "The interest in "Electronic Cinema" around 1982 spurred development of two video cameras that promised to put "film-less" moviemaking into the hands of filmmakers. Ikegami offered the EC-35 camera, which claimed to be the first "electronic cinematography camera that matches 35 millimeter quality." Aimed primarily at cinematographers working in television, Ikegami claimed a contrast ratio of 100:1 as compared to only 20:1 for other video cameras and a fully automated setup box, which aligned the camera in seconds and eliminated the need for a video engineer. The EC-35 did resemble a movie camera—from the focal plane forward with its prime lenses, follow-focus, matte box and other film-style accessories supplied by Cinema Products. CBS produced Kudzu, a half-hour, single camera comedy pilot with the EC-35. Kudzu's producer-director had high praise for the "phenomenal camera" claimed that "video production is here. Shows are going to be shot that way, and that's all there is to it." Im planning a shootout with an Eos 5Mk2. look here

Thanks Gus. Im pretty stoked actually. A feature film I shot last year in LA called "The Perfect Host" got into Sundance as well so I'm looking at tickets right now to come over for both of them. Seems like it will be a blast. jb

A good operator shouldn't close their left eye on any camera. It causes eye strain if you do. jb

yep. All of them are loving it. Well interestingly, the US reviews love it, but that the rest of the world so far is luke warm.....Many have compared it to the early US history with it's indigenous tribes...maybe that's why it's going down a treat more so in the US.... The Guardian "The Titanic director's monstrously-hyped creation does look fantastic but, in trying to cover all the bases with militarist sci-fi, vacuous eco-waffle and an intra-species love story, it's too baggy" SF Gate "James Cameron's 3-D "Avatar" has all the smack of a Film Not To Miss — a movie whose effects are clearly revolutionary, a spectacle that millions will find adventure in. But it nevertheless feels unsatisfying and somehow lacks the pulse of a truly alive film."

What did they use before DIT's ? What did they use before 35mm lens adaptors ? What did they use before Mobile Phones ? What did they use before Email ? (might not be serious. sorry) jb

It's no fun if he isn't wading into a thread that is actually generating useful discussion and debate ! jb

That's a story I also have heard from a guy that was working at Sammies at the time. jb

The other alternative is to use this iphone viewfinder... http://www.chemicalwedding.tv/artemis.html Works pretty well considering. Hard to argue with the price ! jb

I've done a lot of timelapse over the years and am very familiar with the Norris as well. The main disadvantage I've found with DSLR's is with longer exposure times. They DO get noisy as you go towards longer exposure times. I think another poster pointed out that most tend to not bother to get the frame exposure time down to at least create some kind of motion blur. It's so easy to have a 1/500 sec shutter to control exposure ! Except when you start to stitch them together there's no motion blur to help the flow of motion. So if it was going to work, I think you'd need to start piling on the ND on your DSLR's. I LOVE doing TX shots with short ends at lunch time or meal breaks. My assistants hate it when i berate them for waisting a precious 20' short end ! Standard daylight filter pack down here is ND 1.2 ND.9 and a pola and still shooting at T11 ! I've NEVER used a video split on timelapse. Most of the time you can't see anything because you have to waste so much light level to get it down to the 1/4' exposure time you normally want. The split's just don't work at that light level. It's not going to show you problems that you can't see by just occasionally peeking in the viewfinder. I've rarely had problems. The only time I have is when I've used a camera for TX that I haven't used previously....like the time i discovered that you SHOULD turn off the light meter when using an Aaton 35 (nice red fogging) AND only use the first 200' or the take up will *screw* up on the last 200'. Neither would have been solved by using a video split. Plus it's another cable to trip over and ruin your shot. and another thing to carry. and power. I've done PLENTY of solo timelapse shots with a 35-3 and a norris. Digital just isn't as flexible. Oh, and the poster that says only 100g battery ? What do you do when the battery runs out ? how do you change it without ruining your shot ? You DO need something external...most forget how quickly a DSLR drains the battery when you have the shutter open. In other words, it takes POWER to keep the shutter open. jb

Depends on your resources but nothing works better than the real thing, especially on close ups. Film and digital cameras are so good in low light now...... Do you plan to have real fire in shot ? If so then I presume you'll have a stand-by making sure this all works to plan. Just ask your stand-by person for some extra flame bars. I've used these as sources, sometimes with a bit of a hard reflector behind...at a safe distance of course... looks just like the real thing... ! ;-) jb

Perhaps its the precision of the engineering, but it feels like you are literally turning the drive itself as you rotate the tilt wheel. it doesn't feel like you're going through any kind of gear box at all, although Im sure there must be something in there that is between the force exerted on the wheel to turning the worm drive.... Maybe it's the gearing they use ? jb

The cinematographer is " Visual Author " . The director tells you what to write about but you choose the words (LIGHTS) how to form the sentences (COMPOSITION) and where to put the punctuation (Camera movement and Coverage) Even if the director tells you exactly how they want it to look, compose and light, you still have to execute the description. Even getting EXACTLY what the director tells you to do in minute detail can be incredibly challenging creatively to do. Don't be foole into thinking that this isn't creative work. 99% of the time most directors aren't that dictatorial anyway and haven't got the faintest idea on how to achieve what they want. A large percentage of them only have a vague idea of what they want and are looking for collaboration. Sometimes though you will work with directors that will want to OVERDIRECT. It's up to you as the cinematographer to diplomatically find ways to tell the story visually. Personally, I prefer a director who actually knows what they want and can articulate it succinctly. Very few actually can. jb

Hi All. First of all I own a CP Mini Worral. They actually stack up pretty well for the price (and your price was pretty good David) I also use Panaheads and Arri's..... Yesterday i was given a gearnex to try on a shoot I'm doing.... Now before I knock this head down, I should preface everything by saying it's great that there IS a new geared head for the first time in...years !!! And the price is so low that it actually compares to 20 year old heads like the CP mini-worral.... But that's also why I was so disappointed in it.... 1. Gearing ratio is too low. Even at the highest ratio, it still takes multiple turns to tilt a few degrees. Same with Pan. Couldn't turn fast enough to keep up with a simple walk and talk i was trying to do yesterday. (180mm at about 25') 2. Unacceptable play in the tilt mechanism. At about 180mm it was VERY obvious that there was excessive tilt play. Enough that you could clearly see a direction change. Enough that would make me send it back to the factory if I bought this new. Almost made me think it was a faulty head. (the second head they had at the rental company was the same) 3. Wheels very stiff to turn. Wheels seemed to have no 'feel' at all. 4. RED with a 25-250HR hangs out the back so far when balanced that it doesn't take long before the camera body actually HITS the tilt wheel ! Means you aren't getting the full available tilt range. (see photo) 5. No tilt/cheese plate. Makes it difficult to optimise the head for shots that need a bit more down or up tilt. I think the main issues are actually to do with the fundamental design of the drive mechanism. I notice that the wheel seems to be turning a sort of giant worm gear. It's this directness that lets it down. It feels very stiff and unresponsive to me. The panaheads use a belt connected to the gear box (the geared part of the head) the Arri's use a chain, the Mini Worral's use a cable. They all go through to another form of drive that just seems to be more precise than the geared worm drive thing (im not an engineer!). I think they will struggle to overcome this shortcoming. I do like that someone is doing an affordable geared head. There's no denying the price. And I can forgive some features for the price (only having 2 speeds, no cheeseplate, not having the tilt range with a long camera) But I feel if only it was a little more expensive then it could have maybe been a lot better. At the moment, I wouldn't seriously consider using it. Ever. It just doesn't feel good or responsive. I only had it for a day but that was enough. Sorry Gearnex..i really really really wanted it to be awesome.....the tilt play alone is a big sin.... I reckon if someone was starting out and wanted to get their wheel chops up then it might be good.....but a second hand worral would be better value.... jb

There can be junk in there but it is moderated. You have to do a bit more than just crop an image to 1:85. Many more photos get rejected than passed. It's better than most flickr groups. jb

There's a great group on flickr... http://www.flickr.com/groups/director-of-photography/ jb

Hi Blade. 40-50 for me. Higher values don't usually seem to allow enough headroom for the specular highlights I like to use when lighting. Using RED for example, i prefer to use the green indicator (50) in false colour for highlights in skin rather than the pink (which is 70). Leaves more room for all important skin tone ! jb

It's not really true to say this is it ? Yes people love to download, but people also love to go out, on dates, to catch up. It's like saying restaurants will die out because you can get meals delivered to your home. It's a totally different experience. I think we forget how special it is to go to a dark room with a random bunch of strangers and perhaps a friend or lover and *share* a storytelling experience for a few hours. jb

Depends on the scale but you generally always want to shoot your miniatures at the deepest F stop you can. Yes we're talking 16, 22 or 32. You will also find there are no cheats with using wider lenses. All that happens is that you have to move the object closer...much closer to get the same relative image size on film. You'll find the DOF roughly the same once you match the relative image size as far as perspective anyways. Plus when you're shooting that wide you start introducing other lens distortions that won't be in the original. Anamorphics also won't be that wide, they generally don't focus as close and they certainly won't be at their best in that situation. In fact, just a reminder, that lenses often look as bad if not worse than wide open when stopped all the way down. I'd be inclined to shoot spherical and not worry to much about the anamorphic match. Spherical and at the deepest stop the lens will shoot. jb *EDIT. On a recent anamorphic shoot, the VFX supervisor had me shoot geometry grids (a bit like a DX test chart) of all my lenses so that he could *map* the lens distortions onto his CG images. Im sure an experienced VFX super could guide you here to match the distrotions.

Except when Deluxe took over all the aussie labs (atlab), they no longer had any use for the fabulous Dominc Case who has now gone on to a career consulting ! jb