Aapo Lettinen

I think LTO tape is the only viable tape storage medium at the moment for large amounts of digital media, it is so widely used in wide variety of fields that the world can't afford losing those archives and thus considerable effort is made to preserve the systems and to ensure reliability. It is quite different with niche tape formats like D6 which is not so old standard after all but very few recorders were ever made and most of them are lost already, so you are basically quite screwed if you have mastered anything to D6 and need to read those tapes in the future. I would say that LTO in the most future proof format like original camera files + TIFF + prores and combined with film separation prints would be the most reliable option by now. Cloud based systems are great but need much more maintenance than tapes generally and may cost more per TB depending on configuration and how much you use the tape system

I would not put the F65 to the same class, it is a more traditional digital cinema camera with more practical sensor size than those oddball ones. With a cinema camera you are always a bit screwed if you can't use all the lenses you would like to, thus it is usually better to stay on the closest standard rather than trying to make a new one. this is especially true with lens mounts. As far as I know The Hobbit was shot on Epic because of the 3D rigs, large amount of cameras used and because Peter Jackson was/is a supporter of RED so he could have great service and pre release models for the shoot. I think it was a good choice considering the production as a whole. however I was very disappointed with the colour rendition in 3D hfr release, I watched the last 2 movies in 2D because it is just so disappointing to watch a fantasy film without colours :blink: it was not theather's fault as far as I know and definitely not camera's fault (the 2D versions were fine as well as the 3D version without the glasses on) so maybe the 3D was not a perfect choice in this series I think :ph34r:

at least it is aimed to be. We well see how it works out but I think Panavision has kept the standards pretty high as usual ^_^ about the RED sensor VS Arri sensor, I think one can just treat them like different film stocks, like Fuji vs. Kodak. that is quite good analogy actually because the Red sensors have traditionally had more crosstalk and harsher highlight handling and because most of the people seem to prefer the "Kodak look" of the Alexa because of the colour reproduction difference and more pleasant "grain"

yes there is, I don't have a camera around at the moment but it can be adjusted and will slow down during the takes. it's just that it will then vent out even more heat between the takes so it may be even noisier then but that is usually not a problem though you will occasionally get complaints about it for no reason :rolleyes: but with a relatively small digital camera with huge heat generation, you can't keep it silent all the time, especially in hot conditions. it would just melt then ;)

I think they mean the sound between takes when the camera is on standby. Never used the Weapon so don't know how it handles things... but generally if you have a small camera body with lots of heat production you just can't do it any other way if you have to fit the fans inside the camera body (which makes them small and leads to the hairdryer sound when they are in full power) . The Dragon sensor is a major update over MX especially colour wise. and in the Weapon they also fixed the annoying filesystem if I remember correctly :lol: I'm not sure what you mean with "thin negative", a latitude distribution issue which leads to underexposing according to the working ISO to protect the highlights? digital cameras may have a bit annoying shadow/highlight dynamic range balance and it is quite normal to underexpose a bit to make up with that if a camera has ugly clipping. it becomes a problem if one gets too much noise when correcting it afterwards, otherwise not so big deal generally... I hope the Panavision thingy is RELIABLE in use. I'm sure the images from it are great or excellent but we'll see how it compares to Alexa 65 :)

that's a valid reason of course but if it is the only argument in discussion and only criteria when choosing a camera it sounds very unprofessional and a bit irritating at times :mellow:

reliability, ergonomics and post workflow are the things which often go missing in forum discussion. I don't fully understand why because they are among the most important factors when choosing a camera for a production, especially for professional shows but also for low budget stuff and indie shorts. That's also why I noted that the Alexa would be wonderful camera for a indie shoot but you have to ramp up every other aspect as well to get it working: heavier tripod and head, more sturdy grip equipment like cranes/sliders/etc, heavier steadicam/whatever you use for stabilisation, not useful with gimbals, a bit heavy for handheld.... and if you want to shoot raw it is quite demanding for the DIT because of the bit rates and slow card readers. and thus also more expensive to backup and do the post. Epic could work better for raw if choosing correct compression ratio but it transfers the nightmare to the colorist and other post personnel. maybe it would be easier if comparing film cameras, like why one would shoot a scene with a Arri 235 instead of a blimped BNCR, because they can have exactly the same output look so one can really concentrate on other aspects without bringing up arguments like "Alexa has better look than RED, I don't want to use RED for that reason" ;)

I would rank the Alexa quite low on the list for indie shorts because of the weight and form factor. something smaller and lighter like F5/55 or Epic is much better so that it is faster to work with (if you can stand the codecs and menu nightmare) and you can save on grip equipment if needed. If Alexa Mini would be included it would probably rank quite high on the list. I would not shoot raw on a indie short unless those shots where it is absolutely needed. even the bigger productions don't usually shoot raw because it is not economic in contrast with the image quality difference in 95% of situations. it does not make up for bad lighting either so I would stick with proves/xavc/compressed raw

hmm I found a 2013 dated sheet which says the main ingredient is GLYCERIN. looks like they have changed it multiple times (quite hilarious when you think of it, mineral oil=hazardous, glycerin= less hazardous, glycol=even less hazardous...) . weird that they kept the product name intact despite they completely replaced it multiple times, I think it would even be illegal in some countries :blink:

are you sure you have the correct sheet, my sheet says clearly that it is mineral oil based?

yeah a glycol based hazer would be better option and probably also cheaper to use. (a common trick is to add distilled water to smoke fluid to dilute it enough to get reasonable quality haze fluid, is cheaper than buying dilute hazer fluid of which most of is water anyway. but the hazer manufacturers may not encourage that practice) glycol based hazers are quite harmless unless you have bad asthma... the main ingredients are ethylene/propylene glycol and distilled water

looks like oil based according to the msds: http://www.elationlighting.com/pdffiles/HZL-1%20(OIL).pdf

one problem with the Red One is that it blows hot air right to operator's face when shooting hand held, very annoying. you can set the fan to slow down during takes if the ambient/camera temperature is not too high, it's in the menus. the camera generates lots of heat so it is necessary to cool it whenever possible, thus you can't keep it quiet all the time

I would buy it all at once if one can save that way, your shooting time is so short that it should not affect the stock at all if stored properly. remember to store in stable temperature. if you are shooting tens of thousands of feets it may be more practical to have it dispersed to you as needed so you don't have to arrange lots of fridges and worry about the storage expenses. is it 16mm or 35mm and which roll lengths, 100ft/400ft/1000ft ? I like the ORWO grain more than Kodak but that is a matter of taste. I am now testing stills stocks with my Konvas, will find out if there too much halation and static electricity issues with them. that works only with 35mm of course and is still a tad expensive. it is also limited to 100ft rolls which is a bit impractical at times and have to spool the films to different core before filming

I think Blackmagic has about the same company philosophy than RED had couple of years ago: they don't care about customer protection and reputation that much so it's natural for them to ship out a bad product and fix it afterwards. remember the Red One days when you had to carry two camera bodies all the time just in case the main camera decides to have a sudden firmware error and does not boot up? Black magic is in the same phase with their cameras now. Of course the low budget guys don't care as long as the product is dirt cheap... maybe their software division is only one person who is most of the time working with Resolve updates so they have no time to make usable firmwares for cameras even when they always ship their cameras late because of "Sensor Issues"? don't get me wrong, I love Blackmagic products, I just hope they were much more reliable out of the box without waiting for delayed camera releases and AFTER THAT hassling 2 years with constant firmware updates to get them working correctly. I suggest purchasing two Ursa Minis so you'll have a backup body WHEN everything goes wrong in the middle of production :lol:

I would be wary about the built-in dimmer options in Chinese lights. lot more difficult to inspect for safety and more possible sources for problems in the long run. with tungsten lights you will probably want to use gels and scrims for intensity control anyway unless you are doing fire imitation or trying to specifically imitate a dimmer effect for theatrical lighting style

I have one of those! (well not the same kit from the same seller but one of the fixtures and they are probably all from the same factory because they are exactly similarly looking from all different sellers. there is also European sellers who sell the same kits here, for example UK registered sellers who may actually live in China but who knows...) Chinese lights are generally not safe to use without repairs and possibly rewiring and that is also true with these lamps. if you can buy a better more reliable set locally that could be an option? Mainly it's the cables and switches which are the problem with these. no grounding at all normally, loose strain reliefs, maybe too thin insulations, etc. of course if you can get someone to check them for you for cheap then it may be cost effective. the stands are generally junk you don't want to use for anything serious but may be handy for small things like grey cards etc ;)

Remember to use rubber gloves and goggles when handling the chemicals and read the safety instructions. You can start with mixing some Coffenol, it is fun to do and the results can be great. Also one of the least hazardous formulas for film developing. For fixer it is usually more practical to use factory made concentrate than mixing it by yourself from the start. Remember to use washing aid and to use distilled water for developer especially if you plan to store the developer solution for long. the developers don't like oxygen but for later stages you can usually use tap water if you want. If you are trying later something more hazardous or carcinogenic stuff (some color developing kits contain formaldehyde for example) you will need even better ventilation in the darkroom and/or other solution for preventing breathing the fumes. the main concern with all developing chemicals though is usually that they seriously irritate skin so don't handle without gloves

there is also lots of factors to consider like what kind of tripod you use and is the head transported separately or attached to it, how complicated the camera menus are and is it adjusted beforehand or do you have to reset and adjust all the settings from start and format the cards. if you are using external recorder or monitor it may also need tweaking which takes time. but you can transport the camera in a way that it can be set up in couple of minutes if needed and still be relatively safe to transport without risking it too much. Quick release plates and other accessories save lots of time and if you can transport the monitor/recorder as fully assembled as possible, maybe attached to the camera already if that is an option

it is close to 10 hours of footage total? the best approach would maybe be to do a telecine transfer of all the material with keykode numbers, editing offline and then scanning selects to 3K or 4K using prores XQ, dpx or tiff. you can use cheapest format for telecine that way and telecine first light if money is a concern, to a easy format like fullhd ProresHQ or ProresLT. I personally usually ask for fullhd or 2k technical grade prores444 or xq scan of all the shot material and finish the film from that fist scan but it is rather expensive for 10hours of material and if you want to do zoom ins in edit like you mentioned you will probably need at least 3k. the third way would be telecine all to cheapest format, edit it, then negative cutting with keykode numbers and scanning the roughly cut negative. saves time in scanning but I don't know how cost effective it would be for the project. My approach of scanning all to the mid quality format the first time is practical if you have to later use lots of the same material for other projects. but it is more expensive as mentioned and you may still need to re scan the edit zoom pieces later anyway

I usually keep the camera halfway built if possible so that it is much faster to get it ready. eg. rods, tripod plates, matte box, ff, etc. in place and usually lens removed if it has to be transported for short distances by car etc. and there is a change it may get vibration or bumps which might damage the lens or mount. If going from outside to inside with a digital camera in a hurry I may remove the lens outside and let it to warm up separately but keep the camera otherwise assembled with the mount cap in place and the camera with power on so that its own heat generating overwhelms condensation. keeping the camera halfway built is especially handy with something like Epic in its own transport case which requires the camera to be completely disassembled to fit there. lots of work to put it back together compared to transporting it halfway built with only the lens and battery removed. with film you can load the first magazines beforehand so it is much quicker to set up the camera. depending on temperature/humidity/other conditions of course ;)

And no, dp should not dictate the end result by himself, it is collaborative art and at least the director and producer have as much to say to the final grade than he has.maybe different pov but still shared work

one thing is that the pro graders grade even dozens of times more material than dp:s and they are really fast in what they do so it is simply not economical for dp:s to grade by themselves if someone else does it three times faster and can also do the rough grade while the dp is working on set. Same reason why all dp:s dont operate or do steadicam by themselves, if they do two shows per year and the operator does 15 there is quite a difference in operating skills... If director or producer wants to dictate grading they must have quite much cinematography/dp experience.otherwise they dont know what to do and what they specifically want, thus the poor colorist has to show them all the possible grades for the scenes and shots so that they can decide which one they like when they see it. There has to be someone who knew from the start how the show should look like and what should be done for certain images. The dp and colorist also share a common language which makes working together much much faster

the more you have money and time the less you have to compromise, it is the same with the camera department, lighting, transportation, catering, schedules, etc etc... one thing to consider is that sound is usually cheaper and maybe easier to fix in post than image so the normal approach is to compromise the sound first if it's the best way to get the scene done on time. most of the sound is done in post anyway whereas most of the image is done on set (depending on production's VFX content of course) in the case mentioned, the producer should pay for the ADR for the wide shots if there were no necessary equipment to get usable sound on location.

more notes: -if you mess something up, the RAW will probably not save you. qualified staff will prevent these things from happening from the start. RED material can be made to look very good but it is a pain to work with at times and may need quite much more work than the easier formats where you just throw the LUT in and adjust couple of things. -if you really want to shoot on real film and have no personal experience with it you should really find a DP who has. film shooting is even more about experience than video stuff and it will make things real slow and difficult if your camera staff is not familiar with it - if you can't get rights to use some material just leave it out of the movie. change the script if necessary. NO ONE wants to make a movie which can't be distributed or shown anywhere, that is complete waste of time, money and work