Vincent Sweeney

The premium Nizo Super 8 kits came with a "Kompendium" (mattebox) which had little inserts made of plastic that you could slide into the front of the box. One had a classic keyhole cut-out in the middle. Pic of unit. A peek looking through it at Big Trouble in Little China! (via a little point and shoot Canon) It's late.

Has anyone had experience with Stone Cinema's PL lenses? They have rehoused Contax/Zeiss primes with prices close to CP.2's. Just curious.

It comes out to more like $18k total, not 12k. Yes fully scanned to HD Prores. I've priced this exact scenario out very recently. Obviously you can take the scans to a much higher level but this price will get a good HD file to work with which is all an indie needs. If by some miracle you got movement later on, you could always go back and get a 2-3K of selects. I'd never attempt a feature, with an actual schedule, with a typical ebay cam or, honestly, anything other than a later model Aaton (LTR54 +) or SR. Too many reliability issues otherwise, noise is a huge factor, quality of gate, mags, mount/lens possibilities, etc.. A cheap cam and unknown quality lenses will give more of a Super8 look (which might be ok for some?) You can buy an older LTR S16 Aaton for $5000 easily then spend another few $100 getting it lubed, checked out... then add lenses, FF, etc. I have sadly seen prods go for $7-8000, which is my personal fav. 16mm cam that cost something like $50k new, not long ago at all. But why do all that? Rent a package for $4000 total (one month rate) that will come with a few Zeiss or Optar primes, FF, box, and you are way ahead of the game. You can get factory film for .20/foot, or less if you work hard. ;)

Point made but in the interest of accuracy of today's market (mind you, in the US), 16mm can easily cost more like $685/day, including camera/film/process/scan, depending on days total. This is roughly for a 26 day shoot for 7:1 on 90min feature. An outfitted 5D rental with low-budget prime set and ff, etc, is more like $5000 total.

A lot of people feel the same way and do shoot 16mm for smaller films. Look at this year's Spirit Award noms for example: Black Swan, Blue Valentine (much of it was on 16mm), Everything Strange and New. You have to define what an indie is to start drawing examples I guess. Everything Strange and New is the only "small indie" film listed above. The Fighter was 2perf 35mm which can be a great money saver too. The ease of low-end digital helps to flood the market with lots of one-timers, by the 1000's, so that clouds what's being done to some degree. The price of film telecine hurts it for indies the most. Recent posts here expand on this. ;) If a producer of a small film, let's say with a $125,000 budget this time, is presented with total digital camera rental rates of $9,000, and is also presented with a $19,000 rate to do the "same" with 16mm (including buying film and having it posted in HD), you can see why they want, or have to go with, the first option very often. Some people care more about the absolutely unique 16mm film look/feeling and fight for it, but then others don't understand why you'd want something that isn't hyper clear/sharp. Hell, a lot of people now think you need IMAX style resolution just to play a movie via VOD on a laptop or at best, on Bluray, and maybe once at a festival with a crappy 480/720p projector. The reality of presentation seems to hold no weight with most and they are caught up in the "Keeping up with the Jones's" game. By the way, how do you pronounce your name "Fhj"?

This is a little odd to me too. Can't say I've seen any proof of that and cetainly roll-off isn't better to my eye, then again, most of us don't have access to the best available post production/grading options on earth. 1080 has been holding up fine since that 2nd Star Wars, its all the other stuff in that image that hasn't been so hot since. I just shot a short two weeks ago with several grad students on the crew. More than one of them hated the fact we were on a red and wished for 16mm.

It's just someone's personal taste. He simply likes ultra clear/sharp images. Even when shooting 35mm he puts a lot of effort into shooting at a lens's sweet-spot, etc. The comment about adding grain is interesting though. He's the same one that had planned to shoot Jarhead on S16mm at one time too. You don't see him shooting films like Black Swan, or Biutiful either so maybe it's part taste, and part not working with directors that strongly prefer more texture in their work (or whatever you like to call it).

We are talking film transfers here so an HD scan to a file/HDCam is really the only option these days if you want it to hold up at all. It would make no sense to transfer film to a toy-like HDV tape format, much less SD.

If you want to maximize what a new stock may have to offer, you probably want to use the newest 16mm prime lens set you can afford to rent. The Arri Ultra 16's or Cooke SK4's would be at the very top, but you will pay a good bit more for these than you would for an older set of Zeiss SSpeeds or Illuminas. The "cheaper" lenses may serve you well enough though.

You want an HD format I would think. The most popular thing to do these days is to have a 1080 ProRes HQ file made which you can drop into your edit bay easily. The two formats you listed are both tape; DV is SD and not very useful and HDV is not a true HD format while also being overly compressed. Neither are in use much anymore.

Agreed, and another con would be cost; special processing will raise your per-foot rate. For doing indies it's better to get into the practice of treating film post like you shot digital, to save on film's overall costs.

Professional? Neither, they are both toys. Experimental? You'd have a lot more fun with an old Bolex or even a S8mm cam.

Why would you use a 35mm sized sensor to do wildlife with anyway? I'd hate to think of the focus chasing issues given the focal lengths you must work with, not to mention lens sizes/weight needed. There's a good reason 2/3" and 16mm sized film/sensors exist.

Which show? That spy one that didn't get renewed? It was 35mm. Didn't watch it either. I saw/read an interview with an AMC exec. that explained they were very picky about the quality of their own programming and film played a big part in ensuring their shows hold up to those standards. A good contrast to something like "Southland" where even fire in a shot, in the middle of the day, blows out completely. Well I just saw Blue Valentine at a 4K theater (likely playing a 2K file) and I have to admit, when it switched to the "flashback" scenes that were all shot on S16, it was so much easier on my eyes and more pleasing in all ways to look at. Weird but true for me and I swear I'm not being "film biased"! The modern shots were all on a red I assume, and looked like it. Really great work though. John, are you sure his TV wasn't one of those stupid f***ing TV's that has a "60hz" setting which changes 24p into the 60i look? This scam was developed to push out more HD sets because HD had reached saturation. A Bluray can look incredible when showed properly. Check out Bladerunner, The Devils Rejects (S16mm) or Watchmen to see wonderful examples of how it should be done. It's simple why it won't/didn't take off more than it has; the cameras that are converted are not, in general, the type you do features or most pro work with. If someone is shooting a feature on 16mm now they are going to rent or hire someone with an Arri SR3, Aaton Prod or 416 which are all S16 cameras, which also have PL mounts. Not to mention the few labs that can handle it. Great format though! Cinelicious has some great looking ad work done on U16 like this: http://vimeo.com/12429314

You might want to look into an Aaton which, and I may be wrong here, were the first to think this up with their newer video assist with windowed code. Their Penelope is also a purpose built 2perf camera and very small/comfortable. Not too many around but I know Abel has them at least and would know more about how well this would work in the real world. Please post your findings here after deciding what to go with.

The USA series Monk is all S16 though I dont know how new it is now. They recently starting broadcasting it in HD so it looks new at least. The Walking Dead on AMC is all 16mm too, and it is shooting its new season now I think.

I don't know if they rent. I don't think so. Abel has them as well and they rent everything. Just check their website.

Duclos Lenses has them in Canoga Park.

Interesting and I didn't know that. However I did just talk to a very small lab on Friday that is buying a second hand machine. They appear to be looking to cut into this pricing issue for indies. It remains to be seen what their real rates will work out to be in the end but in the interest of saving film as an option to smaller feature productions who's "hands are tied", I hope he does well. I also hope the guys doing higher-end scanning and resto/preservation work stay around forever too! We obviously need both.

Lighting rentals as a parallel? Lights don't relate to this, nor do tripods, cranes or car mounts. Do RED's rent for what they did a year ago? I recall a DVX "package" once going for $300/day at a rental house, now you can buy one for a little more. An Aaton Prod or SR3 body was worth $20-30,000 a few years ago, but as of 2011 you'd be lucky to get $7000. There is no need to defend an investment here. I'm just bringing up a fact that people don't seem to want to acknowledge. The time is now. The shift is happening in larger percentage this year than any other I bet. Either prices have to change now or that's it for a lot of users. For those not actively in an indie film producing role, right now, all this might be hard to see. If a machine costs X amount, then I hope it has already recovered much of that X by now. Is getting $200/hour better than it not working at all? Maybe Robert could shine some light on that question. And Phil, I don't think they cost $3M, they sure don't now anyway. Brian, what you think happens to small films just isn't the case in the real world. That's the stuff that film books/schools teach students but don't be fooled. The chances of someone picking up a small film, and on top of that paying for anything extra besides maybe E&O insurance, is basically 0%. A winning lottery ticket is a more likely thing. Also, everyone here knows a colorist is a hired artist but paying for the overhead is what I'm getting at. I wish it weren't true but not just little $100k indies are looking for cheaper ways to get it done anymore. Richard, I'd think you have run into lots of those $600 rates. It's a good average, maybe a little high but is true. Funny enough, I just checked my email while typing this and Pro8mm is advertising a sale at $300/hour rates for their 1080 M2 scans. They have some great 8mm packages too if anyone is looking to play around with 8mm. And to your 35mm comment, I could see it budgeted fairly easily given a $500k film or above, although at 2 or 3perf. If you ran into a lab you like recently who's rate is way under the norm, please IM me, I might be able to save the next one. Hey Karl, I know all about what percentages of budgets are for what, having signed checks to pay for it. This post isn't about $10 million dollar films, if that is what you are trying to say. Lots of them are renting Alexa's by the way and 2011 will see that jump.

Keep in mind, I know some of you guys and really appreciate what you do and how complex it can be. I understand all about protecting yourself and your investment. I know you paid out a ton of cash or borrowed a lot to buy that Spirit (or whichever). I know it takes something to keep it going. I know how it feels when you are faced with changing your pricing and how fearful it is that this might undermine your business model, but... If you want to keep your old pricing in place, I think you are about to lose the very business you started. I hate saying this but the reason film usage is suffering badly in the independent movie world doesn't have that much to do with the ease of pushing a button on a all-in-one camera, and little to do with marketing by Sony, Panasonic or RED, but more to do with the $600+/hr rates that seems to be the norm for scanning film from everyone. The time to pressure change in your suppliers and/or your way of operating is here now, in my opinion. The film sales side of things is basically dead and more and more producers know this which will make it worse too, and quickly. I'm posting this now because I have been involved with three funded indie features over the last few months in either helping to budget their tech costs or in a more direct producing position. All three wanted to shoot film, and for good reasons in their cases (two S16 and one 35mm) but just now the last one, just like the others before it, all had to go to something digital instead, along with pricing out color grading to a micro post business using a small "Color" suite. This scenario will just keep growing until it reaches a tipping point at which time I would assume you will either shut down that part of your business or go out altogether.? Are the big clients and the (fading) 35mm ad business the only ones worth worrying about? We all know the big guys are saving money more these days too and since 3D is still hanging around strong, they won't be needing film work for those shows. The AF100, the F3 and Epic/Scarlet's are going to really make it tough in the coming year for indie films to consider anything else, even when they may not want to. How can I again show someone with, let's say a $250,000 budget, a $20,000 camera related item for something that many of them don't understand anyway? I know I'm ignorant as to how machine ownership needs to financially operate but, to be blunt, how soon before I can get quotes that are far cheaper? When might you have to sell that scanner off to someone else who will offer this instead? I see more and more machines popping up for sale... is it possible that some indie film collective will end up with one soon and do it for $200/hour instead? Just concerned here about being forced into using what may not always be appropriate and curious about your plans to deal with this, if at all.

Manageable sized pics would have been nice.

http://www.hdcamerarentals.com is renting out the SI2K now. (as well as Alexa and SI 3D and mobile rigs)

You wont get any votes doing it this way. Spam.

http://www.vantagefilm.com/file/pdf/equipment_41.pdf Hawk lenses link. (They need a wider one. Maybe a 9mm)