Jess Dunlap

I need to mount Kessler's Cine Drive head to the inside of a car, right above the center console (equal distance to 4 passengers, at approx. eye level):

http://www.kesslercrane.com/product-p/cinedrive_3axis.htm

I've considered finding a car with a sunroof, and mounting through that / from the top. But no rigging can be seen out of any window, so that could pose an issue.

Should I remove the center console and find hardware to hard mount/bolt to that? What would be the most stable mounting method?

Any advice/suggestions are welcome. Thanks!

Thanks for watching! It's been a fun 3 months. Special thanks to Jay Burlage and his Dynamic Perception team!

It was a bigger deal back in the B&W days. If you keyed the dumb side, you'd end up with this white blob more than a defined face. When they wanted a smooth look they'd use a glam light set-up instead of dumb siding it. When color came along, DPs kept using the dumb side rule out of habit. But, as you can see in color movies, the color information alone can establish the features of the face. Rather, as John Brawley mentions, facial shadows add to the information that goes to the brain about the subject. But, the color information can do the job even on a dumb sided lighting.

 

Since this is a B&W rule and color can get away without it, matters like "motivation" have risen to prominence. Look at some old B&W (as usual, with the sound off). You'll see a tendency to favor lighting techniques based more on the needs of the individual shot. Utterly consistent motivation was a bit less of a concern.

I agree that usually, the color information is enough to show the contours of a face. But I'm sometimes more concerned with how the contrast of the face matches the contrast of the rest of the frame - usually the background. So if I'm lighting the background for a certain degree of contrast, it will definitely be hard to match that while "dumb" side key-ing the face, given the flat look you get. I think that still comes through on color images.

I'm not sure what they mean by "way of differentiating lenses." He is right that it's basically normal though. Some lenses are a little warm, some are a little cool. It's just a thing with coatings and the types of glass used. It does show on film. The good part is that it usually doesn't matter since you're generally intercutting lenses of the same series for the most part. Any variation beyond that is easily taken care of in grading.

 

From an AC's point of view, you should reject lenses that are drastically different than all of the other of the series. If they're all equally warm, it's not a problem. If only one of them is, than I would reject it for a more neutral individual.

Hmm.. it's the only lens that looks like that out of all our primes. We have an array of ultra speeds and super speeds, and it's so warm that I'd believe it if someone told me a 1/2 Coral had been put in front. We're finishing on film, so I'd rather not take the chance. There goes that lens!

Thanks for the reply.

Hi all - at a Panavision checkout yesterday I noticed that our 20mm prime (Mk II Superspeed) had a warm tone to it. I was told that it was normal, that it wouldn't show up on the film, and that it was a "way of differentiating lenses".

Is this true? How?

Thanks.

Does anyone have experience correcting for/shooting with these fluorescents? They seem pretty common. Camera is balanced for daylight, so I'm planning on using full minus green and 1/2 CTB on all the fixtures.

Anyone know the CRI?

Thanks!

Shooting real anamorphic for a 2.40 print you'll enjoy double the amount of negative area compared to S35 cropped for 2.40, while using the same amount of film stock. You'll get interesting anamorphic artifacts which I really like. The lenses are slower, though. Undoubtedly, as Stephen points out, for a film like yours it would be cheaper overall to shoot anamorphic to begin with, even with the additional rental costs. DIs and opticals are quite expensive.

 

Bruce Taylor

www.Indi35.com

Thanks for the replies so far. This production has received the 35mm Panavision student grant, which comes with 12 spherical lenses. Can't argue with that! Since we had decided on 2.40 before hearing about the grant, I'm now trying to figure out a cheap, spherical way of going about this.

It looks like the only feasible option would be to shoot regular 35mm with a 2.40 crop (do they make these ground glasses?). Otherwise I'll have to beg Panavision to swap our lenses for anamorphics...

Jess D.

What's the cheapest way to go from a S35mm 2.40, 4-perf negative to a release print? I've heard of doing an optical blowdown in the IP stage, which can be used to strike a regular dupe negative, but is that ridiculously expensive? It will be a 20-minute film, so around 2000' feet.

Also, through that process would we end up with an anamorphic 4-perf print? Or just a spherical 2.40 print within academy aperture? In the second case, is it then even worth it to shoot S35mm in the first place?

Thanks,

Jess D.

An SR3 weighs about 15lbs with an empty mag and no lens. Super speeds are pretty light, as is the Bartech, so you should be fine.

Regarding the power issues. I always use the onboard battery with SR's. I prefer to use the battery because I like the extra weight because the SR's are pretty light. The onboard battery is probably 2 or 3 pounds, so that's something to consider, but you won't be able to use that sled with the camera unless you do heavy mods to your rig to make it 24 volts.

I would suggest you go to the prep and build and fly the rig there so that you are sure it will work. You don't want to get on set and find out that you can't fly the camera.

Thanks for the info. So, an SR3 with a loaded mag and a Zeiss SS should be about 18 lbs, and the Bartech (receiver and gear) being about 1.5 lbs , it should total around 19.5 lbs? I almost feel like that leaves room for an onboard battery and a clip-on matte box.

However, I've heard from others that having the battery on the SR3 will be too heavy for the V-25. If so, is there a way to put the SR onboard battery on the sled somehow, and get some sort of cable to connect it to the camera? Or I've heard that "linking" the two 12V batteries at the bottom of the sled into one cable going up the center post could power the camera... is that possible?

Thanks again!

Does anyone have experience flying an SR3 on the Glidecam V-25? The V-25 is apparently rated for 25 lbs.

I'll be using; Body, 400' loaded mag, Zeiss Superspeed (9.5, 16), Bartech Remote Focus (receiver and gear go on the camera). Is that under 25lbs? I'd like to add a clip-on mattebox with ND's if there's room, since we're shooting outside.

Also, since the SR3 is a 24v camera and the V-25 is built for 12v, how can these work together? The rental house tells me it's fine.

We just had five rolls of 7219 transferred to hard drive, 1080p 10-bit uncompressed, at Colorlab, with no tape step.

10-bit uncompressed meaning Apple ProRes 4:2:2? Are you happy with the transfer?

Is the simplest way of getting S16mm on a hard drive in HD format going through HDCAM-SR or DVCPRO-HD tape? In getting quotes for this, I keep having to budget for transfer of film to tape, and then tape to hard drive (which apparently take a lot of time, and money). I have no access to an HD deck to do that transfer myself.

To transfer 45 minutes of S16mm is going to cost no less than $1,000. It seems like there would be a more efficient and less costly way of doing this. Any thoughts?

Thanks!

If you can angle your wide shot slightly (not perpendicular to that window), then any lights you put near the camera should not appear in the window, depending on the degree of your angle and the size of the window. So if you've got a fill light coming from camera-side, you may be able to hide it that way.

Any other lights you see... try to work with the production designer to put things very carefully in the frame (or even on the window) to cover them up. As long as it's not a moving shot. You could also stick all your lights up above where the reflection is, so it's only the stands that are in the frame, which is easier to cover up. A higher angle shot will help you there.

Hey Kevin (and Alex),

Check out the back of this month's American Cinematographer! (The "There Will Be Blood" issue).

Represent.

-Jess Dunlap (Emerson College)

I'm shooting my first full 1080p HD short in a couple of months, and we've been budgeting and planning for the HPX3000. However, since discovering that there's no 720P option for slow-motion on the HPX3000, as is common with most 1080 cameras, I'm starting to rethink my options. The HPX2000 does have this option, correct? What would the drawback be - is the sensor not full 1920x1080? The short is a Japanese samurai and I'm willing to sacrifice some things for VFR, and 60P would be amazing.

Also, on the topic of Digiprimes vs. Pro35, if having enough light is no problem, it seems like there really aren't any other disadvantages to using the adapter. I guess there could be some softening due to the added glass, but isn't this sometimes desired when shooting full HD? Or is the softening effect not comparable to one achieved with filters (classic soft, etc.)?

Thanks!

Jess Dunlap

Boston, MA