Vincent Sweeney

I guess assuming I sort of went through the obvious solutions and have some idea of what I want is asking too much. ;) I probably should have stated it more like this: I need to get a bulb to "naturally" pop when turned on. The shot will have the bulb in it. The effect of a bulb actually popping is very different than turning it off. The bulb is the key source and the frame will go mostly black other than some 3 or 4-stop-under background ambient light. And by "pop" or "blow" I mean that the filament goes to super white then breaks, like what happens when they reach the end of their life or lose vacuum suddenly. Using a 12V "RV" bulb is one idea that came to mind as they have a standard base and look just like a normal bulb. A sudden 120v surge may do it. Something like this: http://www.elightbulbs.com/Sylvania-10449-25A-12V-Low-Voltage-Light-Bulb

Anyone ever pulled off forcing a standard household tungsten light bulb to go out on command? I doubt I'd be successful at making a hole at the base to release vacuum so the filament will naturally pop so I was thinking of a lower voltage bulb on a high-volt circuit.

Looks like you are working hard on it. You might consider posting a synopsis of your project to help put your images in context. I liked the direction you were going in with "Breathe" by the way.

Given the type of questions you are asking, I think you are about to waste your money unless you are doing the shoot purely as a lesson for yourself. Films are made by working with others. I'd find a student DP in your area and have him come aboard. Since you are shooting film, you are more likely to find someone starting out to work on it for little/nothing as he may not have any film on his reel yet. Tackling all jobs is the worst thing you can do.

Seems like a no-brainer, at least to me.

Do you like ketchup on your hotdog too? ;) So to you, and to use some modern examples, would "There Will be Blood" or "The New World" be the same if shot with a new Whatevercam? "...the new normal" -That's another issue to add to my problem. Did it occur to anyone in favor of this sterile look that soon/now most shorts, commercials and TV shows will often look the same way features do? Everything from "Superman Returns" to "Knowing" to the new Genesis shot movie "Grown Ups" all simply look weird to me and I'm not alone there, by far. It is not the fault of who worked on it because they are all clearly talented people so no use in regurgitating that old argument (Mathew). And what precisely is so "breathtaking" Tom? Does it have anything to do with the fact that you can get into the ballpark by pushing a button? Or does that bonding which comes with riding that trendy tech wave helping with your impression? Our generation really love buttons with screens attached to them, don't we? Thanks Paul. I really wish I could on this one but its locked-in already. I keep meaning to stop by... soon! And anyone wanting to see some damn nice work coming from Paul's shop/team, check this ad out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9biUJ2AbcM (SD version!) or http://vimeo.com/9315718 or http://vimeo.com/12429314 (Note: All looks not possible with a new Whatevercam) Steve is a master! And sorry Admin., about the post, I know it's spiraling down into the 10000th digital vs. film argument again which was inevitable I suppose so by all means, lock it up if needed.

Ah, nice Rob, thanks. The older Cookes, among others, was on my list actually.

Is that a loaded question Tom? ;) I appreciate what you are working on and completely understand why you are using the tools that you are, for that type of project, and I look forward to seeing it. Honestly though, would you be be so quick to use these things if you were shooting a narrative, dramatic feature? When people talk about not seeing a feature shot well with one yet, it reinforces what I'm getting at; why use something (on a drama, for example) that you have to fight every time you push that button? I don't think what I'm getting at has much to do with some sensor, no matter how refined or how many "K's" it has. We all know that there is more going on within a given media than just range and resolution so no need to talk about that further. I'm talking about an issue that the more technical types don't like to discuss because it can't really be answered on paper, and is mostly subjective, which is why these posts usually fail to help anyone I guess. Regardless of anyone's point, it has to be acknowledged that the majority of top-tier directors and cinematographers avoid these cameras, for now, for real reasons that lay outside the more emotional and marketing influenced ones owners embrace. I feel like what some energetic chef may go through when walking into a new restaurant to work when he finds out that all the meat he will be working with that day comes from the freezer. He takes out that frozen meat and does what he can with it but in the back of his head he knows he can't go but so far. I was just hoping for some opinions on how to store and thaw that might help reduce the taste problem that I find such a turn-off. Seasoning tricks? Best freezing temp? New thawing techniques? A unique marinade perhaps?!

Bluntly, I have given it as many chances as I can, having viewed movies made with it on big screens, seen many different tests and having shot a feature with it as well, I just can not get past this disappointing result that I feel when, in general but not always, viewing footage from this camera. The point of my post is to ask for others' opinions on how to best avoid whatever it might be that enables this cheap or video-ish feel that I find difficult to escape from much of the time. If you love this brand and it can do no evil in your eyes, that's fine and you can (please?) skip this crazy post. I just saw another trailer for a movie that screams RED to me, even in a low-rez online version, and just had to finally ask for opinions in public. Being asked to use it again on something coming up soon (where S16 would fit perfectly but isn't an option) is adding to my reason. http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/valhallarising/ Maybe it is too much to ask for but this thread would be more helpful if posts were from people who have used the camera on paying shoots and understands where I'm coming from. Did you find certain post/CC tips that helped in some way? Use some filters that you liked? Smoke any shots? Certain lenses help a little? Just wondering what helped you so I can put it in the ammo-box of things to test out. I felt 'General Discussion' fits this post best and may help it from becoming a fan-fest but, if I'm wrong....

Yes, lots of them outside but not in the close up. Don't know what to tell you other than it was warmed up slightly in-camera and the key was a 3200k halogen photo flood. There were some small tungsten bulbs in the place that added a little to the room overall and as you can see, the orange walls could be a factor there. It is important to dial in your colors as close as you can with these 8 bit files since you can do little later on compared to "raw" files so I was always trying to stay on the warmer side. Like was posted, those grabs were not corrected. It doesn't appear overly orange to me although I've seen that frame on three different computers and the way it varies on each monitor makes me not want to post anything again. Add to that how more and more people seem to scrutinize not only cameras but finer details of people's work over the extremely variable and compressed internet. Plenty of people now, for some reason that is beyond me, even try judging motion picture cameras, stocks and lenses by looking at one posted frame, but that's another thread I guess.

How does shooting with two DP's work out for the directors you worked with? I'm confused but genuinely curious.

Yeah, good example of picking the wrong way to do something. I'll second that.

Interestingly and sort of still on topic, I was talking to the SI2K rep at Cinegear and he said their business had increased lately and it was in part due to many people "coming back" to 2/3" sensor, saying the shallow DoF craze was settling down. He re-stated they had no plans to offer a 35mm sized option. I can vouch for that camera, if that's worth anything. If more people tested it, I bet more would put it to use for all kinds of projects. Seeing how it mixed with the 35mm shots in "Slumdog" was proof of how well it holds up.

The best/practical/cheapest 1080 image with the deepest DoF might be a Sony EX3 from what I have seen, assuming we are talking digital here. If money isn't as big a concern, then the SI2K might be a great fit and will give you a lot of image to work with, along with a nice aesthetic. Why list cameras that aren't practical to use for this application, and why say it's hypothetical but hint otherwise? Just curious.

Don't be so concerned with resolution. It really doesn't matter, at all. Does it look good to you? Fit what you are using it for? No need to question more than that.

The Nikons are what you usually see at smaller rental houses for low budget projects. They supplied this kit to me from Indie Rentals and are the older Nikon AI still primes and came with an adapter in the case. I used the same ones on a recent RED shoot and it was amazing how well they held up against a Zeiss kit that we also used, though wide open isn't a good idea on the Nikons. I don't know the brand of the adapter. One of those cheap ones are worthless, by the way. Expect to pay for anything decent. Samy's camera sells a nice one. Some indie features have already been shot on the SLR's. I know of at least one that did well at the 2010 SXSW fest and it was shot all on a 7D. Can't recall its name though. I'd definitely go with one of these over one of those ridiculous 35mm lens adapted HD cams, which I've luckily been able to avoid. I've already run into a few indie projects that were budgeted with red money but decided on an SLR so they can (and rightfully so) put more money into sets, food, costumes, etc.

I have some low pressure sodium looks needed for something coming up. Has anyone used the Lee Urban gels?

Yeah there seems to be some legitimate concerns with fast movement, and the compression and shutter issues. You can see some wobble or jello effect sometimes in posted footage though it is tough to pinpoint what might cause that to happen exactly. On the other hand, nothing I personally shot so far had that issue that I can find. Also, I just watched a quick little hand-held, fast-motion "audition/reel" clip that seemed to suffer very little from any of this and it came from a 7D being handled with no rig, even while running a few times. I will PM you an HD Youtube link when I find it. I think it's a great idea to just go out and start shooting with one of these things and see for yourself. I got too caught up in the tech articles, supposed professional opinions and seminars and found it a huge relief to just see for myself. Hopefully I will get to do something with it again, though with a little better support/time next time. Opinion: The 7D seems the best of all worlds to me, for now. If Canon or Nikon upgrades the compression a notch and tweaks the sound issue, I can't see much of a reason for some of those other mid/lower-end digital cameras coming out to exist at all. The lens choices you have are endless with these things and even the stock L series Canon glass is pretty amazing alone. (less the short focus travel of still glass) I'm shooting a few FX plates for an CGI trailer in a couple weeks and we decided on some L zooms and a 7D actually.

It was being recorded separately. Slated like film. I recorded sound in-camera but it was just for reference. All the SLR's suffer, as of this date, from auto gain and non-pro inputs, etc.. There are work-arounds out there like that's being offered from AbelCine where a "box" will trick the AG with a low Hz tone, it also allows for XLR and monitoring. This might be ideal for some simple applications, interview set-ups, etc. I assume you'd be at the quality level of all the HVX-like cams out there at that point.

For the record, I'm off this "movie". The new principal dates were pushed back till August last I heard, though now no one seems to know anything. I have a feeling it is falling apart for some budget related reasons but I have to move on to other things. Judging from the small amount of footage I shot with the 7D, there is no doubt that these cameras have a place. Learning their limitations isn't too tough and shooting with it isn't as much a pain as some have made it out to be. Getting a decent monitoring set-up is key, as is watching how the video is handled in post. We used a simple little set-up that came from "Indie Rentals" and the producer seemed very happy with the deal they got. Notes: The 7D proved to be a lot easier to work with in this case, than the 5D. The huge sensor size/FoV issues of the 5 really causes some focusing nightmares. The overheating issues that I kept hearing about didn't arise. I was going from one battery to another at one point with lots of on-time and never had a problem. If you go hand-held and are over a 35mm lens esp., try adding weight or using a full rig to help ease the micro vibrations. Adding length to the rig seems to be the key.

Wow Rob, you have a much better crew on this short than I do on a current feature. This seems to be happening a lot lately. (or is it just something I'm running into lately?) Anyway, look forward to some shots.

I'm sorry but I could care less what resolution some format supposedly has and the desire to use whatever has the most "K's" shows a lot of ignorance about one's craft. Some material seems to need the various qualities that film has, it's that simple to me. In 2015, the "Z camera" might shoot 12K but that doesn't mean anything to me or to the end consumer. Maybe the board is slow lately because people, including myself, have finally become tired of the trend-fueled tech talk that seems to get worse with every new (monthly?) camera release. The DSLR, RED, 'K'-talk, etc. is not that beneficial and has become tiresome. Maybe it will all settle one day and more concern for story and craft will emerge and corporate, censored forums will fade a little.

Was wondering too. Any carpools?

Thanks Andrew but I looked into this quite a bit before starting. It appears to me that its best to keep the setting as low as possible, most of the time. There is talk of less range outside the native numbers but, I don't always need it or care about it. I had set up a test shot with many different levels of dark cloth and shadows, along with some almost blown out highlights, and did shots at 800, 1000, 1250 and 1600. The lower the number, the less noise overall in problem areas. Admittedly all we had was a 23" HD monitor and little time but it was enough for me to go on in this case, on top of reading probably every article written by pro shooters that have used these cameras. Also, as was the case for that ext. shot, I may want my stop to land at a certain place and dialing in the best setting helps me do that. At 640 the exposure might be too far under and I'd have to shoot wide open (not good on a Nikon prime) and at 1250 I may start losing the highlights a little too much and have to go to a T4. We are keeping things fairly shallow most of the time and a T4 was a little too much for that shot. This was grabbed very quickly, as were many other shots, and the mattebox and ND were packed away and I was without an AC on it. This film allows for some low noise levels if needed, loss of focus and harsh lighting. I'd rather shoot it the way we want to, rather than worry or be encumbered by some issue that will allow only some slight increase in image quality.

Just started a pre-principal day on a LA based ULB feature. The pre day is due to one actor's schedule. Camera is a 7D fitted with Nikon primes and basic FF, base plate, etc. I wanted Zeiss but the Nikons have worked out better than I thought, so far. For this night no monitor was available. Settings I ended up using were simple: Sharpening turned all the way down, contrast all but one notch down and saturation down two notches. This seems to give at least some options in post for the little bit CC work that can be done to an 8bit file. At the least, make sure your sharpening is off so you can mess with that in post. The line skipping all of these (as of mid 2010) DSLR's do can get you in trouble, esp. when sharpening in camera. There is a lot of talk about the dynamic range of these cameras but I haven't found it to be a big deal and it is certainly not as bad as reversal film like I had heard early on. Range isn't everything and sometimes lots of it isn't a benefit anyway, especially when you can see what you are getting. I am balancing everything toward the warm, usually with the custom color balance tool. I'm hoping to keep things very "low-pressure sodium" and dirty overall. The story revolves around an illegal US immigrant who joins the military to get her green card. She was the only female to excel in a sniper training program but is soon dishonorably discharged due to some fighting and sent back to LA to a dying mother and hungry children. She is offered a job taking out people on a crime boss's hit list. As her kids starve due to her not being able to work as an illegal, she finds it hard to resist the offer. I only have a couple of grabs for now. These are re-compressed jpg's, uncorrected. Hopefully more will come later when shooting has started back in June/July. This was mostly available street light. Slight fill comes from a Biax that can be seen hitting the table at left, indicating an open restaurant that they would be entering though they hadn't quite walked into that yet. I believe this was at 1000asa at T2.8 on an 85mm. I was trying hard to stay away from 1250+ as the noise becomes exaggerated over that, depending on several factors, but when there is noise it often has a film grain look to it. The actors were moving pretty fast so there is some motion blur. They walk into a close-up in this shot so I was trying to stay at a 2.8 at the least. This is once again the 85mm. I had little to no time to set up anything in this restaurant. A small china ball provides the key and I got a little bounce off of a menu for the eyes. I wasn't allowed to replace any bulbs which would have helped a lot at this location. I wanted the eye sockets a little dark as these are some pretty shady characters. I would greatly prefer to key it via the underneath bounce alone but, beggars can't be choosers. The lighting goal on this feature is to try to use all available light and keep it real and not at all pretty. I'm only bumping it up when really needed and only with very small lights, some bounce or a well placed table lamp. A few flags, a 2ft. Mole Biax and a 250w china will probably light 90% of it. (somehow)