John Brawley

Hi Mike. You certainly can get it processed here in australia. Both Fuji and Kodak stock is available. Speak to Kodak Motion Picture Imaging, they have offices in Melbourne and Sydney. You can also get Fuji through their office in Sydney. There is Deluxe in both Sydney and Melbourne and I think nanolab in Daylesford may do some 16mm as well. In fact they are more likely to be the ones you want, because youll likely want to shoot reversal. It's the same perf size, but there are perfs only down one side on Super 16. I think ALL 16mm stock in australia is 1R or single perf for super 16. You can use 1R stock in regular 16 mm cameras. jb

It's a standard part of my deal memo now that I get an uncompressed HD quicktime or a HDCAM copy of the film / production to use for showreel and award entries etc. Of course, actually getting a tape or file from producers usually proves a lot more difficult. I've on many occasions gotten the file or tape by offering to pay for the dub myself, even though the production is meant to supply me with one. If they've signed a deal memo and can't argue about costs then they usually relent. But it's still a lot of work. jb

I never said magic or witchcraft. Well you're avoiding the point. You make stuff up to support what you are saying are new ideas. And you're doing it in a thread that has NOTHING to do with your new ideas. Go start another thread for your new ideas, where you WON"T invent facts to support your ideas. You have lied in this thread and others. I never called you a fake or impostor. You just lie to support your theories on image making. Just stop it. You have acknowledged then that there is a "constant accusation about you hijacking threads". Yet you argue that somehow you're only doing it a little bit. Your posts are largely irrelevant to the topic being discussed and cause confusion, especially amongst the less experienced readers of these forums. Why don't you just go and start your own threads if you have a burning issue you want to discuss. jb

The only one confused is you Thomas. Please just stop posting your new age digital wankery. I prefer truth instead of idiotic wet dreams. You have no clue about anamorphic photography and LIE to create posts to support your fanciful notions, such as your absurd inventions about Jessie James. This films processes have been discussed many times on this very forum and you choose to ignore this easily accessible information yet you use it incorrectly as evidence to support mis-informed comment about a topic you have no direct experience in or even as evidenced by your answer, the most basic comprehension of. Even when it was pointed out that you had totally got it wrong you charged ahead with more irrelevant crap instead of doing what most people would do and apologise ! Just start your own thread if you want to discuss this issue rather than contributing to the original poster's question. jb

##

I'm really f*** tired of US POLITICS on an INTERNATIONAL forum for CINEMATOGRAPHY. Pretty please...... jb

Because it looks nothing like spherical lenses. jb

Clappers are also important for other reasons. They are like a starters-countdown for a race. The acting equivalent of "on your marks...get set..." It's very useful for actors especially to have the ritual of this buildup to a take and the "action" word. Below is a shot of the camera as it's rigged most of the time. GMT is the box in the middle with the grey cable. Behind that is a wireless audio link. Cooke 15-40 T2. Mantis Hand held. This is a little trolly the grip made up to park the camera in between setups. I did this music clip for less than 10K and shot in a day... (it's been nominated for an ARIA for best clip) It's been on free to air a lot. Here for the clip

I've certainly seen that kind of drift with Sony cameras internal clock. I wouldn't be surprised it RED was the same. And yes. $2 watches from Chinatown often appear to keep better time. That's why it's standard practise with drama double system sound to shoot with external clocks such as the GMT or the clockit. The camera clocks just aren't accurate enough. Many recorder clocks (fostex, HHB) aren't as accurate as the Clockits or the Aaton's. Not sure about the clockit byt the GMT drift is specd to be 2/10th of a second over 8 hours. It's usually less than that. If using a Cantar or an Origin C it will even tell you how much it's drifted since the last jam. Im shooting a comedy series for the ABC called Lowdown with RED. Goes to air next year Keith. In your quest to see RED footage on TV Keith, check out Jesters on the Comedy channel, shot RED I believe by Hugh Miller. Also most of the current Hungry Jacks commercials on air. I also shot a pilot for a comedy series called "I can't believe it's not better" which is going to air December 3 on the comedy channel. jb

Actually more significant than the spirit's electronic processing is the light source. The reason Spirits' appear to have less grain is more to do with the softer diffuse light source that the spirit uses (and which was designed by Kodak) Digital noise reduction is certainly available with most grading setups and can help more, but often have their own problems. I think they should be more of a last resort in the whole imaging chain. I think 16mm gets a pretty bad rap as far as grain, but it depends a little on how you shoot it. The SR2 would also not be my first choice for a theatrical finish because of it's well known issues with image stability. The SR3 Advance or a 416 is a much better choice. Or an Aaton. (Sorry Tim) You won't see much difference between 2k and HD in Super 16mm in terms of resolution. I'd suggest a really good colourist in a facility with best practice 16mm workflows would produce a near identical result. I've had GREAT results using the arri scanner scanning for HD. UN-compressed conform and grade means you don't loose too much. This is such a hard question to answer because there will be so many variables. Can I suggest you test with your prospective facilities. ON a recent film I did, i was able to get 60 seconds of the same footage *processed* by three facilities for free, all the way to 35mm. I was able to project and compare. Amazing what you'll learn. You are also auditioning the people you're going to be working with, the colourists etc. Great way to test... jb

Hi Lukka. Are you jamming the internal RED timecode from the Cantar via a 5pin Lemo ? Then disconnecting ? RED's internal clock isn't as accurate as the Aaton's You should use a GMT or a LOCKIT box connected all the time and jam the clock with your Cantar. I am currently shooting an episodic TV series using this system and it works perfectly well, day in day out. jb

Must give two big THUMBS up here to Nanolab. I've used them lots on various projects for super 8 work. In fact...right now I'm waiting for some super 8 to come back. We shot it as part of a faux music clip in a comedy series Im doing with ABC. It's so great to have labs like Nanolab keeping these options open to cinematographers. (and they are great to deal with too) jb

Hi Pete... I was a bit distant from the minutiae of the post process but I believe that the AVI's from the camera (the raw footage) was transcoded to prores and cut in FCP. Although it was certainly possible to playback the camera AVI's within quicktime with the cineform plugin loaded (and we did so on-set) we ended up just rendering them for speed in the edit. Deluxe / Efilm in Melbourne did an AMZING job with the grade. I can't reveal how they did it, but they use a DPX based workflow. They took our EDL and the AVI's, turned them into DPX's and we graded using a regular DaVinci. They got a great result and they seemed to do a lot of work before it hit the grade....there was certainly a lot less noise than what I was expecting when I hit the grade. The images up here are pre "deluxe". Im still waiting to get my finished copy of the film so I can post some grades. jb

Hi Steve, thanks for the feedback. P+S / SI really dropped the ball on their monitoring. I had to use the VGA conversion box as described. it's the blue box velcro'd to the battery ! Boring....but that's how it is.... jb

Looks like Arri have invented the betacam !!! At least it has an optical VF option. I gather it's not the same sensor that's in the D21...? jb

Once again Thomas you are wrong. 24 FPS was only adapted with the invention of sound in the mid 20's. 35mm had been around for a lot longer and was usually (but not always) something in the order of 16-18 FPS. Please stop making stuff up to suit your own delusional dreams of a high frame rate future. Not true. Not true. You can't actually do this in post. And when I asked you how to do this you came up with this.... Right. So to keep all that high resolution imagery you're obsessed with your seriously suggesting we shoot monitors to somehow convert frame rates to retain motion blur ? I'm pretty sure you aren't making sense.... Not true. Since when has resolution got anything to do with dynamic range ? Wow. 1000 FPS imax quality, motion blur shutter speed independent, HDR stills/motion pictures from the one camera ? Thomas, your blue sky dreams are getting pretty boring to listen to and derail genuine and sincere conversations about practical cinematography in today and the near future working environments. I would like to request, on no authority other than my own frustration at your fanciful inventions, that you please limit yourself to discussing stuff in this practical forum, that actually exists or is about to exist rather than ideas that you think might be good for you one day. jb

It's not food it's fuel. You're asking other people are indulging your whim by choosing to help you make YOUR film. The least you can do is to feed them. I do free shoots all the time. But i wouldn't do a shoot that wasn't catered in some way. It's an insult in my book if you don't and asked me to bring my own lunch. If you were painting and renovating your house (aka your own personal creative endeavour) would you really expect painters and builders to turn up for free ? And if they did, then not to feed them, pay their *costs* for being there ? How privileged you are to receive the generosity of your crew's endeavours. The very least you can do is to feed them rather than treat them like they are the ones who are receiving the privilege of working on your production. If you were a highly experienced and respected filmmaker, you might expect people to want to turn up for the chance to work with you and other's of your calibre, just for the chance to watch you work and meet your creative collaborators. Otherwise, I have to agree that it's a pretty insulting and arrogant attitude to expect that crew will. I imagine you're already stretched to just make this film. Films aren't made by one person and you need all the help you can get. Hows about you make it as attractive as possible to work for free on your film ? You might be surprised who would choose to help you out for FREE if you make it easy for them to say yes. Im pretty sure anyone you approached that had some experience would likely turn you down for the chance to work for free with no meals. Think about if you're going to be happy with the kind of crew that would be prepared to work in this way.... There are lot's and lots of reasons cast and crews are fed by production, mainly to do with productivity. If it really did make sense to not do it this way don't you think it would have happened already ? jb

If the telecine facility only had an SD telecine but had an arriscanner or celco for HD and higher for example, then this would be a situation when you would go back and do a "neg select" type transfer like this. Usually they would work of the the timecode of the rushes transfer to DVCAM, but it may be that the DVCAM footage was transferred at a different (cheaper) house than where he wants to go to get his higher quality or better grade done. Cinema tools can do this in FCP, but the OP would have needed to get a FLEX file database generated at the same time as the original DVCAM rushes. The burnt in keycode windows are not really much help for any machine readable systems. jb

Gday Sean. I was actually asking Thomas a question he can't seem to answer. You haven't either, and that's fine. Thomas was suggesting that that motion blur (shutter speed) can be changed in post. jb

Yes you can but not in a way that will address the inherent rolling shutter issue of the RED. Go for the 12K if you don't like the artefact. jb

How do you do that Thomas ?? jb

The only link I could find was for a BBC engineer who posted his internal White paper ? I think you have misrepresented the views of the BBC Thomas. How about you not say say the BBC "Champion" 300 FPS tv but, refer instead to what it actually is.....a BBC white paper by a few of their engineers. This is clearly NOT the BBC championing 300 FPS television. So how about you RETRACT that gross generalisation for starters ? There are numerous (mostly insurmountable for the next few years) issues that have already been mentioned on these lists, namely ISO senstitivity, light flicker, and the fact that even these supposedly pro 300 guys were limited to 25 second takes from their vision research camera. Red struggles to do 4K @ 30 FPS. So then times 10 for the drive space as well of course. But really the biggest objection.. NOBODY WANTS IT. Aside from you and a few engineers...(yeah and james cameron right ?) Every time you post this idea, us "creatives" line up to say why we don't like the *look* of it...something engineers always seem to forget with their endless bouncing ball motion perception experiments. Just because you can measure something as being better doesn't mean it is. And even if we did like it, (which 99% of don't) then it won't be happening practically within the next 5 years will it ? jb ( and i love the way yanks think the BBC is synonymous with quality and expertise in television )

Can you please link to this information ? jb

It doesn't work with the newer electronic ballasts on more modern fluros, but most gaffers I know carry a couple bad ballasts for exactly this. You simply plug them into your fluro light (prac) and instant fluro flicker. If needed you can just source some older style fluro pracs and use expired ballasts in them. jb

I shot a film called Lake Mungo that used more than 40 different cameras from mobile phones all the way up to 35mm. The easiest thing to do is to convert everything to the framerate you want to edit at. We actually wanted everything to go into an older AVID the editor wanted to use because he wanted to cut at 24FPS. The easiest thing to do was to DUB everything to HDCAM @24FPS. He could then digitise from the HDCAM tape and offline the film at 24 FPS and we knew that there would always be an easy matchback. I also created a lot of the effects which were meant to be old copies of VHS footage. I'd dub a VHS tape through 10 or more generations and then *handle* the tape to make sure i had plenty of dropouts. These shots were then re-captured AFTER we did the online and eye matched back in. But it was the only way we could get the degraded effect we wanted. Once the film was re-conformed with what were essentially VFX shots, it was very simple to then create a DPX sequence that could be graded and then printed off to 35mm. So I'd say you should make sure you have the right destination frame rate (presumably 24 FPS for cinema) and then you should be fine. jb