Hunter Hampton

I have heard of this lens adapter but have never used it. Can someone enlighten me?

I figured I would throw something into the pot to remind the owner of this website, and the moderators of something they are forgetting regarding threads like these: There are many registered members on this site, but there are many many more in the "dark" who don't register but find this website through some other resource or search engine. Because of all of the hits generated from a forum like this, it allows an outlet for companies to advertise (see right) and support forums like these. A few questions you should ask yourself owner and moderators; Do the companies listed to the right support this kind of discussion? Is this discussion something that you want the cinematography.com brand representing? Is this a discussion that you could openly have with a group of people? At film school? At work? With family? Do you really want new website traffic to see "BEST CAMERA FOR PORN?" at the top of the page? Not everyone is open to Pornography and all it entails, Just because there are a few registered members supporting it doesn't mean the masses of traffic or members do (and I bet most of the companies to the right wouldn't publicly support pornography either). Nor the film school listed at the top of the page. A thread like this belongs on a pornography forum, not a forum devoted to the art of image making. And personally this topic and most of the discussion is bad for the cinematography.com brand, and "cinematography" in general. Hows that for morals?

I have used a 4x4 filter in front of a 14mm lens on the Red with no vignetting. This is a rehoused still lens correct? I dont think you should have any problems with a 4x5.65 or larger in front of the lens.

That fellow also posted this lens over on reduser.net, he seems legit and he is willing to negotiate. I would see what kind of deal you can get with him if your looking for this specific lens.

Thanks Anthony, Thats exactly what I was looking for.

John- The b-roll you captured was excellent- and then the content freaked me out! (I guess that was the complement) :lol: Maybe I will just give it a try and see how it turns out. Thanks for everyone's tips!

Thanks for the example. (That film freaked me out!) I am using an aaton a-minima with its built-in intervalmeter (I think the exposure is adjustable from 1/4sec to 255 seconds in that mode). I would like to see the night sky and stars if possible. There are also many planes coming and going and it would be great to get some of those swimming around. Is there a good staring point similar to the sunny16 rule? Thanks.

I am planning on doing some night timelapses of Portland and the night sky from about 15 miles away on a hill. The city isn't incredibly bright but there is a nice little golden glow and it carries into the clouds. The trouble I am having is my meter (L-758) wont give me any stop reading even when I set it to 30 minute exposure (on spot or incident), I have done night timelapses digitally and I know I can "see" the city and the night sky, but how can I get a decent exposure on film? Any precautions I should take? Thanks.

I don't know if this was your input or the editor/director but I feel the conflict (The dangerous road element) needs to be made clear before we see the driver and passengers reactions. The climax lacks for someone watching because they don't get a picture of the danger until the end. What I am getting at is that the payoff at the end would be greater if we saw more of the dangerous road before they drive down it, other wise its a very funny concept, Reminds me of driving in rural Mexico! ; )

There goes the aaton neighborhood!

Holy Guacamole! That camera weighs 125lbs!

How can I go to these government auctions? :lol:

Karl- (no offense taken) I think choosing a particular film stock or a particular digital format is EXACTLY like choosing a type of paint. I would stop talking why you still have the chance Karl, too much of this jibber jabber and Kodak might have to send its emulsion police out to get you... Do you want to end up in the film press!? :lol:

Film will never go away. Why? The same reason why some artist choose to paint with oils over acrylics, why some musicians master to vinyl using analog instruments, why some novelists still type on an analog typewriter. The list could go on forever. You cant make something be something its not. That said, I like both film and digital- but you don't need to worry about the end of film based image acquisition anytime soon. ;)

I have been asked to show pictures, here are some (matteboxes, tripods, handgrips and other accessories not listed above are obviously not included): (there is now black velcro instead of white for using sunshades- I can take it off if you want) Portbrace: And here is proof about what I said about renting camera packages from someone else instead of getting accessories for mine!:

Value is over $24K, Best offer over $20k takes it. Send E-mail to: hunter@hunterhrichards.com Howdy doodie- I have come to a point where its better for me to rent a camera than invest in this one. This camera has done very well for me and I will continue to use Red cameras (just not own one at this time!). First off, everything is in good condition. This stuff hasn't been on the "Rental market". There are only minor signs of use. I just got the camera back from Red headquarters to get it checked out (This camera doesn't yet have the audio or i-pin upgrade yet but it will be available to you as soon as the serial number comes up). This camera is still under warranty as well and it is the most "stable" Red One I have ever used- thank goodness. So here's what I have- Very basic package- just add lenses: 1x Red one body w/PL mount 1x CF module 1x BNC adapter 1x mini-XLR adapter 1x Top mount 1x Top handle 1x Battery Plate 1x HR lightweight battery mount 3x 8GB CF cards 3x Red brick batteries 1x Red charger 1x Aux power cable 1x Red 5.6" LCD (newer one) 1x Short Red arm 1x Red LCD cable 1x Custom lightweight 15mm baseplate (60mm spacing) 1 pair x 15mm 9" stainless iris rods 1 pair x 15mm 4" Carbon fiber iris rods 1x Lexar Professional firewire 800 CF Reader 1x Black/Red Portabrace semi-rigid carry-on bag for the Camera and accessories The value is around $24,000. I am looking for the best offer over $20,000. My serial is 1244 so you also get ahead of some 4000+ other people for scarlet and epic. Not to mention the camera is worth its full value for trade-in to epic. Save a few thousand! I will post when its sold. And to answer the "Why are you selling it?" Question: Honestly, I wasn't planning on buying a red one at first. Then I had a few longer jobs come up and so I bought it and everything went well. Being that I have a very basic camera package, I often rent the needed accessories per job, and sometimes its actually cheaper to rent a whole camera package with ET and Arri gear for cheaper than just renting the accessories for use on my camera- go figure! I only use this camera a few days per month now and I have been on a film binge. I have been wanting to get an aaton a-minima to use for some personal projects and b-roll, so thats what I am planning on doing. I am going to buy a used a-minima and then defer the rest of the money I get from the sale to pay off some other bills. Like I said earlier, For me this inst a departure from the Red system, I really like the Red and I like working with the Red. I am still going to shoot on Red, it just wont be my camera that I use.

Getting investment is easy* Just watch the second how to video on here: http://www.howcast.com/playlists/964-Filmmaking-101

Back Then: Sony Betacam SP Camcorder Price: about $50,000 Arri Sr3 s16mm camera price : about $50,000 Today: the betaSP camera sells for about $4000 and the SR3 sells for $25K-35K used How is that for going bankrupt? ; )

I just stopped by a friends woodshop and he and one of his employee's are into still photography. Somehow, we started discussing film-based acquisition and digital based acquisition. They were in the digital "camp" and I am more in the middle of the road as I think there are many pro's and con's to both. But it got me thinking: Keeping in mind that the term "film" does not restrict itself to any format (could be any size negative) and digital video could be any size resolution/ data rate. How do you think working with film compares to working with digital video, in respects to budget, pre-production, production, post-production, delivery and the final aesthetic, even archival- anything you can think of. How would might it affect a cinematographer and crew differently? Does it change your emotions or have an impact on your perceived artistic ability? Why would you choose one over the other? This could be any type of project from a $200 million studio film to a one-man-band doc without power in an African jungle. I can think of many pro's and con's on both sides- just from an equipment point of view, but I know there are so many things I haven't considered. Care to share your take on the subject?

Hey I know that guy, is that "texas'? I used to live in florida and skate. I think your flickr problems are from shooting at a non-sync frame rate under 60hz lighting, try 60fps next time instead if 75fps.

Howdy! I am looking for a nice deal (of course) on a used a-minima in good condition with a PL mount, mags and batteries. If you have one or know of someone who does let me know. I would also prefer the model with the 180 degree shutter. If you have any illumnia or ziess primes that would be great too! PM me. Thanks.

And I thought all of this stuff only happened to me because I was dealing with people with less experience in film production (including myself). Good to hear this stuff happens to you too- it was a relief to read this (and I learned things too). Thanks for taking the time to do these.

I would like to see how it handles specular highlights, also maybe just extreme highlights in general? I heard that the highlights roll off very nicely.

For the cost stand point alone, its much more budget friendly to distribute data to theaters rather than film. Other than that, I think you could trick anyone into believing they were seeing an analog film projection, when it was in fact a digital projection. I don't see what the problem with digital projection is, maybe some of you have seen a poor digital screening with a low resolution and the bulb at half power or something, but the new 2K/4K digital projectors look very very nice, If no one told me I was watching a digital projection, I wouldn't have even thought about it. I think this is just a mental barrier that we need to get over- just because your seeing a film projected digitally doesn't change the fact that you are watching a film.:D

I don't know how this is a deal with the devil. The digitally projected films I have seen look fantastic. You can always add a digital hair in the projector gate or some unsteadiness in the frame... :rolleyes: