DanStewart

It's also worth noting that in the DI world it is feasible to build a camera with terrible registration if it saves on cost. I have some work done on a servomotor driven design that could do high speed and change frame size electronically (2- 4 perf, switching out the gate of course). It's registration is awful but it puts a sync dot between the perfs aatoncode style so as long as you're scanning the neg you can software register perfectly in post. It would also be extremely quiet since there is no mechanical movement.

Well it's neither one thing or the other - if he labours over the wings expressing some reason for their creation, fine, but if (as scripted) you are just showing the 'finishing touches' to establish that he made the wings himself without including any emotional relevance to that action then I would immediately think about cutting it if pos - and it is very pos. Matter of taste of course.

It's a script point but I'd skip him messing about with the wings and start on him at the edge - just get the art dept to make the wings LOOK homemade and you've told the story. There are many ways to treat the cliff edge stuff but you've given no info on mood - David sounds like he's going for a magic realism thing with the moonlit matte - does the kid magically fly or smash into the ground? Have a look at the intro to Goldeneye for a nice dramatic reveal of the drop.

Talk to JDC in London - they have a set that goes all the way out to (I think) 18mm, PL mount.

I heard the US pilot had been shot and canned...

I think this works a treat in the new Battlestar Galactica. Really nice to see a new approach to sci fi. Also using docu-style zooms for empahasis in drama is super effective - if you zoomed into someone's face for a reaction they really don't have to act much, since the zoom makes the moment work.

http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/forumdisplay.php?s=&forumid=70

If you want to shoot 24fps 35mm nice and steady, a well conditioned 2c will do you just fine and rent for a fraction of the price of an arricam. For sync, a BL4, Aaton 35-3, or a moviecam, and for high speed an arri 3. (With decent glass of course.) No matter how much money you have, it's about spending it wisely. A shiny, lightweight beauty with digital readouts and heated eyepiece is always nice but for the money you could have another few days shooting, a better lighting or grip package, or a better location.

Actually he's a strapping six footer in the Brendan Frasier mould. Back in London, pint, anyone?

Check out the archives in the steadicam forum.

I've never handheld a BL4 but I wouldn't fancy trying it. The Super America and the Gold are of comparible weight as far as I remember, but the SA is rather more unweildy and uncomfortable. I get the feeling none of these cameras were really meant to be staggered around with. Can you schedule the handheld stuff for one day and rent a compact, or even have a 2c B camera if the shots can be mute? BTW anyone used the 235 yet? Can it be blimped at all?

I'd expect fog movement to be an issue on a long exposure on a shot like this. At the least you'll probably get an apparent decrease in sharpness. I agree with the minature or mother nature approach. Maybe perfect timing at dawn would lift the ambient level without taking away too much - I think it's good advice not to push more than 2 stops. I don't think you can fake the fog at full size. As for the bluescreen approach, it's a possibility to do whatever you need to get the exposure on the b/g and comp in the f/g action from a shot taken at almost the same time. But the fog will give your compositor a headache. This shot is too nice to try and reproduce with CG. Best of luck.

Brad - how dare you. That's like suggesting Britney isn't the finest musician alive.

Whatever you've been smoking, pass it around.

Welcome to the forum. ...I'm not arguing that point. SW created a massive revenue stream (at the expense of creating the blockbuster era) and that money was put back into movies and associated technologies, which is great. But I don't think Lucas single-handedly invented any of the stuff you mention, and since the question is the validity of his newfound solipsistic philosohopy you've made the same point. And yes, lately he is a hack.