Aapo Lettinen

how is your post going to be for 16mm, are all the materials developed and how will you do the telecine + scanning? the film post is typically quite expensive compare to the stock costs so you could probably arrange more 16mm days if doing the post differently with more affordable telecine and more precise selects scanning

I would not try to match the Ursa footage with 16mm if you need to shoot the rest on digital. But I would rather try to create a different look for the digital scenes which is motivated by the storytelling so that there would be 2 different looks in the movie. Audience will accept this very well if you are not intercutting the different formats within a scene but are instead creating a consistent look within the scene + ignoring the consistent look requirement in the whole movie.

we did not shoot off speed... but it has happened with 4 or 5 different camera bodies multiple times in a row so it can't be coincidence :blink: it may have something to do with the internal batteries of the cameras, though most of the bodies were not that old. the ac's hot swapped batteries specifically to avoid the resyncing problem :mellow: the Arris keep the TC very well indeed as long as they are attached to a power source but we started to have problems with some of them immediately when powering down and swapping the battery so that the power source was removed for a minute or so :blink:

it has happened when using the "sync couple of times a day" method. it is not a normal practice here to attach the tc box to the camera for the whole day, it is only used when needed for re sync and the rest of the time it is with the sound dept. another way is to sync directly with the Cantar or 788T (the most used recorders here) via cable if needed. I've been in one production where we ran wireless tc to the camera continuously but otherwise it is normally "sync once before first shot - check visually every now and then - re-sync after lunch or whenever needed "

MTV maybe?

The out of focus shots did not disturb me at all, even that long Luke shot. But there were some very irritating edits on the island where the edit was in the middle of the weaving focus move which caused kind of "bump" on the edit

the "Known For" section is really stupid indeed. For me it only shows the old cheap ass low budget indie productions I have been in and NEVER any of the "mainstream" 2 - 4 million budget feature films I have worked in. Every now and then I think if I should remove those low end productions from my imdb page completely as "incorrect information" because they give an impression that I would only do shoestring indie stuff :unsure: One of the reasons I don't do much indie films nowadays is that they "flood the imdb page" and are thus bad resume even if the films themselves would be good :(

I think it was mostly just bad directing and screenwriting and over-confident use of mediocre CGI and too-much-greenscreen sets which seemed to confuse the actors as well. the movies got immediately better, I think, when they hired other directors for these newest films. Also remembering that Lucas did not even direct the "original Star Wars movies" except the first one and some bits of the third ^_^ these newest ones are not "great great" but they are quite OK for modern blockbuster films I think. Definitely better Disney stuff than those Pirates of Caribbean films or most of their animated films ;)

I have shot lots of gymnastics events in sports halls and basketball arenas and they generally had aroundt F4 with pmw-EX1 camera so it should be possible with 500T. But you screen grab looks like lots dimmer lighting than sports hall so I would expect shooting almost wide open or even pushing a stop with 500T. could be around F2.0 at 500ISO or even lower, impossible to tell without going there with a meter

a good machinist could make you an adjustable height adapter which would attach to the existing rod mounting points on the camera body and have new mounting points which have adjustable height. I don't know any factory made solutions for this but it would be more practical I think than try to find a perfectly fitting mattebox for the odd-rods. you can also try a factory made riser on the rods to lower their level a little but usually these lower too much (like 2cm or so at minumum) so I think you would need one custom made and also more heavily built one if you are using handles on the rods

seems that they changed the film lab to Focus Film but it should still be running in Stockholm

if you want to try different options, I think there is still Arriscans at the MediaMonks in Stockholm (Stockholm Post Production, "STOPP" ) . And Dirk Dejonghe does 3k scans with custom built pin reg scanner in Belgium. There is even possibilities for high quality telecine or scan here in Finland (Reel One has a Millenium2 which is capable of 4k transfers if using external recorder, the standard setup is 444 hd prores. There is one Spirit HD telecine, I think at YLE, with very good operator. And the National Film Archive, KAVI, has a 4K Scanity which is setup for dpx workflow and the operators are used to handle damaged material if needed. ) Michael mentioned the Cinelab option, and there should be some options in UK and France I think. And the USA option as well if shipping is not a problem. Europe may be a bit expensive but you just need to ask around. I don't know about Poland, is there any good labs there which have proper telecine/scanning options?

I personally like to use heavy walled aluminium pipe (48-50mm outer diameter) for that long overhead rigging... maybe if the light is very very lightweight like under 1 pound or so, then you might get away with the thin alu pipes but that thing seems already falling apart so could not stand any weight at all I think :blink: one thing we did in cheap ass school productions was to use a c-stand or other heavier stand mounted on grip heads and telescoped to the suitable lenght. that should hold small lights in place as long as you are careful with it and don't over extend it. but like others suggested, when not sure just back it off so that the light does not fall on actors if the system breaks :ph34r: remember to always use safety wires btw when overhead rigging

It should not be that difficult to make a new version of a ipad slate app which would just send the same data to the metadata fields of the camera files, for example on ursa mini. the main problem with metadata is that the camera dept guys generally don't have much time to edit them and add descriptions etc. because they need to concentrate to the current/next shot being made. the task must also be possible to do fully remotely without any need to use the camera even for a second (that would basically stop all the shooting for a moment every time the metadata would need to be edited in camera so it must be able to be done remotely by someone who does not have anything else to do at that moment) It would thus be easiest having an additional person who is fully concentrating to metadata editing only (someone who is positioned near the director and script supervisor. maybe an assistant script supervisor who would be hired for only this metadata task? or an additional assistant editor hired for the task? audio recordist generally names the audio files with shot and take number based on the slate data he/she sees on the monitor so the audio is easy to find with current workflows without camera metadata altered. if the slate is correct of course. Multi camera shoots with remote metadata editing on all the cameras for every shot? I don't know how much this is actually done nowadays, do others have experience with for example 2 or 3 camera movie shoots with very detailed metadata for editing purposes applied in camera?

On the shows I have been DIT the audio dept has either set up a wireless audio send to the camera by themselves or I have requested one on the first shooting day and the rest of the time it has used continuously. This is only a preview stereo mix from the audio recorder and meant to simplify and speed up dailies workflow, the audio was normally synced again from the original wav files before editing. Just a wireless audio transmit+reseiver like sennheiser or similar. Being able to have dailies without syncing is a huge benefit but the stereo mix was not used in editing because it would be of no use for makimg omf or final audio and wireless has problems every now and then

the main problem with F5/55 is that editing programs like FCPX can't handle the raw natively and it also takes lots of hdd space. But the cameras themselves look great and they are very versatile, especially in documentary use where the interchangeable lens mount is a great benefit as well as the size+weight and frame rates. we have actually normally transcoded the 4k F5 raw material to xavc-i 4k 10bit for editing and it has worked fine for that. One of the weakest points of the F5/55 is that damn viewfinder connector... such a bad and fragile design on a otherwise good camera :o the menus can be tolerated easily and mostly one would set them once per production and then only format cards and adjust a setting or two if needed. I don't understand this "complicated menus is so bad thing that I cannot use this or that camera model" thing a single bit, one does not need to go through all the menu pages for every image being shot, it is more like once a day max type thing :blink: Red cameras have quite excellent image nowadays (Helium and Dragon sensors) but their filesystem + folder structure is kind of dumb and complicates post a bit. plus it is slow to make previews and render offlines from the material. sony raw is a bit faster to work with by my experience and it has the benefit of having the clips in single files rather than split to million small fractions which are all over the place like that damn cinemaDNG, such a mess and can cause additional problems in online every now and then :huh:

idiots + guns is never a good combination...more training for the police would be needed :unsure: the Finnish police officers have different training than the US ones + generally less handguns around (carrying one 24/7 for self defence purposes needs special permits which are very difficult to get, normally a gun licence is granted only for either hunting purposes or shooting practicing or collecting purposes) so their first assumption is not that an unknown object is a gun when they first see it. if you would attack them aggressively with a tripod they might taze you however if talking would not help :rolleyes: The biggest risk here would probably be that someone accidentally drives over you when you are shooting on the street and the police thinks that the accident was your fault so you would need to pay for the car repair in addition with your medical expences, very annoying :o there is also always lots of people who think that everything which looks like "CHEMICALS!!" is primarily meant for making bombs (the normal film developing chemicals for example) and one always needs to explain them what stuff they are and how it is NOT possible to make high explosives from Vitamin C or Hydroquinone or Sodium Carbonate :blink: so an suspicious looking tripod would be very safe to carry here without risk of being shot accidentally but if you would publicly carry an empty chemical bottle looking thing or an erlenmeyer bottle or other lab stuff someone would definitely be interested and you would soon have all kinds of security personnel around you asking questions :lol:

greenscreen lights should generally be neutral or slightly cooler than the key... warmer is not optimal but depending on your noise levels and front/background color separation it might be good enough. one of the reasons of lighting greenscreens with daylight balanced units is to avoid too much blue channel noise on the screen, by raising the absolute color temp of the screen lighting (by aiming of having equal amounts of blue,green,red on the light to avoid too much blue channel gain when balancing the colour temp in camera or in post). this is separate from the subject/foreground lighting however and it depends on the subject and camera model if you can live with the too warm screen or not. I personally would either change the greenscreen lights to daylight (just light it separately with daylight units and switch off the original tungsten lights) OR go with the tungsten greenscreen lights and light the subject with tungsten as well. If your camera has lots of blue channel noise (like the original Red One) then I would definitely go with a daylight color temp lighting completely and forget the pre installed tungsten units. but current cameras should handle the situation OK and if having problems you could go with some intermediate temp like 4000K

you can also think it this way: if the both batteries would have the same Ah's (10.4 Ah) but one is 14.8v and the other 7.4.... then you would need two of the 7.4v batteries in series to get to the 14.8v (7.4 + 7.4v =14.8v) . so there is double the amount of li-ion cells in the 14.8v battery compared to the 7.4v battery so the theoretical capacity is thus doubled. if you would convert the 14.8v 10.4Ah battery to a single 7.4v battery you would have enough cells for two parallel 7.4v battery assemblies so the total Ah rating for the converted system would be 20.8 Ah with 7.4v output. Kinda similar of having one AA battery for 1.5V or two AA batteries in series for 3V

it's the Wh ratings you need to compare, NOT mAh's. the Wh will tell how long the batteries would theoretically last with for example 40W load (Wh divided with load in W = hours) . 14.8v x 10.4 Ah = 153.92 Wh , 7.4V x 9 Ah = 66.6 Wh . More than double the difference in capacity so the voltage matters quite much ;)

reminds me of the Matrix trilogy and the moss-green madness back then :blink: anyway, one can also accidentally make somewhat similar type look from normal looking movie if using the jpeg2000 xyz (DCP source) version as a raw material and just making the rgb exports from it without converting the colour space, or converting the wrong way. that will make somewhat overall green colour shift to the whole image and if slightly adding contrast or boosting saturation it could look exactly like the stills posted here

maybe they were accidentally delivered the XYZ colour space image and they decided to "just make the VOD version from it without conversion, should be no difference compared to RGB master" B)

movie trailers are generally sent through completely different editing/post/grade pipeline than the final movie if you are comparing the early trailers. at that stage the movie has not finished editing stage and therefore online most likely not made even partially, so the trailer is done from early edited select scenes and fully onlined and graded separately from the raw material. so the early trailer grade may not have anything to do with the final movie look: it usually has different trailer editor but also may have different post facility, different colorist, different programs used, vfx scrapped together from non-finished fx previews, etc etc. They may for example have a grade very close to the dailies look (aka add LUT and render out -style) or only slightly tweaked... and the grade made noticeably different on web and cinema and tv versions. the later trailers may use final graded movie material depending on the post workflow but it kinda depends. One can, for example, cut the final trailer from a clean tv master on some films, or online the trailer based on the finished movie edit so that it is easy to copy the grades from the full movie's grading project and then slightly tweak them for internet use etc. but as said the trailer look does not necessarily have anything to do with the final movie's grade, depending on for example in which stage of the actual movie's post work the particular trailer needs to be edited and published. one Finnish film for example had a very warm retro tone lower contrast trailer (kinda warm tones + warmish greys+neutral shadows) BUT a much higher contrast cold look with very cold blueish shadows in the final movie, graded by different colorist with different style.

your topic title is incorrect by the way... it should read "MOVIES RUINED BY DIGITAL GRADING AND CURRENT COLOUR TRENDS" which is really the issue here rather than the shooting or projecting format

yes we are living in the era of stupidity, I'm glad you noticed it :lol: if needing more you can just check YouTube or some lifestyle sites :) or the average newspaper website, any of them ;) anyway, that neon-green instagram filter is quite annoying indeed. haven't seen the new movies so don't know if their grading choices worked or not but in still frames it looks horrible most of the time :ph34r: