Aapo Lettinen

The biggest problem when making dcp's is actually quality control. They are pretty hard to check for all errors without investing significant amounts of money to equipmemt. Ideally you would need a full server and projector setup. For free and low budget stuff I prefer rendering the jpeg2000 out of resolve and wrapping with opendcp software. Commercial high budget stuff is always full done in post house and check screened in movie theater. It is pretty cheap to get the ext file system work in pc or mac, I have couple of computers with the plugins installed

I prefer exporting to jpeg2000 sequence and wrap that to mxf container with the other dcp materials in separate program. for low budget stuff it is also cheaper because no need to purchase the easydcp license then . it is also possible to export to TIFF format after grading (DCDM style materials) and convert the tiff to jpeg2000 sequence in another program before wrapping to mxf for the dcp creation. The post house will handle this for the OP so no need to worry about it in this case

ok then I would scale it directly to 3996x2160 and reframe during scaling. if you really need an intermediate version of it (for example if the upscale needs to be done before grading and reframing or similar reason) then you could do an intermediate upscale version at full image height (the resolution being 3996x 2245) where the image is upscaled horizontally. then this version can be later vertically cropped+vertically reframed in 3996x2160 timeline without any further scaling. It depends on the software used how this is most practical to do (if the quality of the upscale would be substantially better if doing the intermediate instead of scaling directly in the grading software). of course you could also grade in UHD resolution and upscale, crop and reframe the end product after the grading. It depends of your grading workflow which way would be the easiest and whether or not you will need the intermediate versions (do you for example need an graded upscaled but uncropped version of the movie or alternatively an letterboxed UHD distribution version of it? if the UHD version is also required in great quality then it may be practical to do the upscale after the grading so that you would grade in UHD using temporary bars as framing guides and then do UHD direct export and DCI flat upscale export after the grading. You should consult the post producer and colorist about the upscale options and at which stage the upscale would be most practical to do. If the program allows I would do the grading in UHD if all the material is already UHD and then do the upscale to the end product but it depends on a lot of things, especially how well your grading software does upscales compared to external soft)

are you planning to pillar box it inside a 1.89 "Full" dcp (4096x2160) or are you planning to generate a DCI 4k Flat dcp (3996x2160) ? it would also be possible to create a "hdtv dcp" of 3840x2160 and letterbox the 1.85 there but I am assuming you specifically want the 4k Flat type output. In that case (the required output being 3996x2160) I would just scale the image to that resolution directly without the 4096 intermediate. you would lose the same amount of image quality but the scaling process would be simpler without the intermediate step (both horizontal and vertical are scaled upwards anyway by the same amount whether you do the intermediate or not. the scaling amount is exactly the same because the vertical resolution of both formats is the same (you are scaling horizontally by the same amount and cropping vertically by the same amount) You will can calculate the scaling percentage from the horizontal resolution difference between 3840 and 3996 or just do it automatically in the software you are using (for example in Resolve you could set the Scaling to "Fill" in the settings and then reframe vertically the desired amount

I have not seen the animals fearing HMI units but I can imagine their high frequency sound could be a problem for some species. Even some people may get a headache from HMI noise as far as I have seen. Did the trainer specify why the daylight would be preferred, would the animals be more active in high colour temperature?

and it creates massive amounts of moire/aliasing depending on what you shoot. some people can live with it better than others, for me it was a deal breaker and the single reason I never purchased that camera model

European audiences are also more stimulated when something happens here instead of that thousands-of-times-used-boring-as-hell New York :P (though London and Paris are also so used that they are becoming boring too :wub:

blimped 2C's were pretty common in non-panavision films before Arri BL came around. I believe they were cheaper and easier to use for that than Mitchell cameras and there were not many alternatives back then. lots of Finnish feature films used them as well as far as I can tell from the making of photos

Sound pretty reasonable if they let you get it wet for that price. You can also do vfx with stunt hand adult dropping the real dead cat to the floor child never being in the same room with it. OR you can do the ok quality cat prop thing with the child, then do separate closeups of the real dead cat at animal shelter etc using small for example 4'x4' floor prop under it which can be disposed after the shoot

it would be more humane to use a dead cat and scare the child with it than make the child to hurt a living cat multiple times by dropping it to the floor and tell it is somehow "ok" to do that :blink: ---- anyway, why not use the best cat looking prop you can find and if that is not enough for the whole scene then you can just edit it differently and do some separate closeups later with a real dead cat ;)

sedation would be otherwise doable but you can't drop a living animal to the floor from any height. it will seriously hurt it :angry: and I would not trust the child could handle the sedated cat correctly. maybe continuously supervised by the vet and the animal owner but still.

is this going to be a "normal sized" cat? is it a comedy scene or drama? just asking because cats are relatively long and flexible and large animals and I think it's not going to look like how you're planned it to be if a young child is holding a realistic cat prop and just dropping it into the toilet hole. Probably he is holding it with both hands from the center (because it being relatively heavy and awkward to hold in front of him for a long time and that would be the easiest way to hold it I think) the front and back hanging from both sides like upside down U-shape and then when he drops it, the head and tail side will bounce from the toilet seat very heavily before the whole thing goes down the hole and splashes. It will probably look pretty comical at least, if it being a dark comedy I understand why you want to shoot it that way :)

maybe you don't need to be so graphical with the cat images so that lower quality prop could be used? people will get the point with wider shots if the children act appropriately.

OK then a real dead cat is DEFINITELY NOT a good idea. the child may get traumatised for life :o I thought it would be a scene with only adult actors...

that moviefx site looks like great source, maybe they have something suitable :)

there might be a possibility to "borrow" a real one from a animal shelter or similar which lets some animals go on regular basis. If it needs to look VERY real this might be an option as long as everybody agree to it and it is ethical (the cat already dead anyway and it is treated respectfully). It would not be possible to use the real one for more than a couple of hours of course before it needs to be cremated and crew members may feel bad about it even if its dead by natural causes :/

The Konvas magazines are not difficult to load, you just have to be careful to maintain exactly correct loop sizes. the problem with the Konvas mags is that they are quite picky about correct maintenance and calibration (pp spring pressure etc) and there is some compatibility issues if you try to mix different generation mags. If you know what you buy it would not be a problem at all like with any equipment :) the easiest way to load the Konvas mags by my opinion: If you want a good old 35mm camera I recommend Cameflex! it is possible to get one in good condition, just make sure that it has NIKON MOUNT so that you can easily find good lenses for it :)

Konvas cameras are not exact copies of Cameflex. the early top latch model has similar type of magazine sprockets but for example the film path around the gate and the camera body and mag gears and mechanics are totally different. The actual movement is different as well in Konvas vs. Cameflex, there is nothing similar in them. (I have couple of Konvases AND a Cameflex so pretty easy to compare side by side :) ) The turret design and oct18 lens mount is copied from a Arriflex (probably Arri2A) but Konvas was not the first model copying Arri and the "original Russian copy" model would be the AKS4 camera which resembles Arri2 very clearly. So the path probably was: Russians first copied the Arri2 fully and when Cameflex came around they partially copied the quick magazine design to Konvas but kept the well-working Arri-style turret and designed a more simple and cheaper to manufacture movement by themselves.

ps. your 16mm Western manufactured camera kits seem to be pretty overprices. You should maybe get an Aaton LTR or Arri SR if wanting to spend thousands on a 16mm camera :) I could sell you a SOMEWHAT working Kinor16 2m camera with 12-120 lens but it would need to be locally picked up from Finland because I need to show you what is done to it and how to get the motor back running WHEN it starts to run on wrong speed. It is a bolted-together diy camera project so if expecting to just get an easy and reliable 16mm camera for your shoots I would try some Western model :D Konvas is OK though if properly serviced and if you happen to get a good kit together. May take some year or two to accomplish. As said the Kinor 2m needs the crystal motor to really work. Don't buy the SP you won't get good lenses for it

russian gear is OK for any use as long as it is properly serviced. The service is the key here, these can be very picky cameras and they will ruin your shoot if they are not working correctly or if you don't know how to use them. They can be very handy and affordable if in great shape and properly serviced and adjusted regularly. Cameras directly off of ebay don't work before they are put together by a technician. I have bought couple of Konvas cameras and they may even have gravel/small rocks inside them. the sellers know nothing about the cameras OR if they know they don't want to tell ... Please notice that almost all of the Russian kits you linked are sold WITHOUT LENSES. Russian lenses are pretty affordable in general but they may be EXTREMELY DIFFICULT and time consuming to find in good shape and you will spend couple of times more to lenses than what the camera costs. Kinor sp lenses are relatively rare. Kinor 2m lenses too and you may need to purchase what you can no matter the shape they are. Wide angle Konvas lenses tend to be in very bad shape, especially oct18 ones. It took me 3 years to get a good condition 28mm F2 lens for it which is not scratched all over the elements. 35mm lens is great and 50mm too. 75mm totally overpriced by hipsters and impossible to get for good price. 135 kinda cheap quality but ok but very affordable. 22mm vignetting a little and pretty rare. 18mm impossible to get in usable shape. for oct19 versions it is a bit easier but they are much more expensive. You really should concentrate on the lenses you want when purchasing a camera, especially if wanting a Russian kit. There is additional danger of accidentally purchasing AKS mount lenses when trying to find oct18 mount ones. the mount look pretty similar in pictures and the sellers may not know the difference but they are totally incompatible mount and cannot be used with Konvas at all. Kinor cameras are great in other ways (except very difficult to find usable camera body and usable lenses) but the motors are their weak point. eBay motors may be in too bad shape to be used at all (burned down electronics because of wrong polarity "test runs" by sellers etc) and even working motors may be unreliable. I purchased 3 motors and got two bad ones and one which works SOMETIMES correctly and most of the time not. I strongly recommend building your own motor for it or ordering the Olex crystal motor which is much better construction anyway. Russian gear can be affordable if you know what to look for and how to service them. You have to be very knowledgeable about the stuff though and you need to be patient to wait for the usable ones to pop up

I for example have an old Cameflex mains powered motor from the 40's which runs perfectly 25.00fps. it is actually possible to use an inverter to get 230v 50Hz input to it and thus get it running steadily at 25.00 fps with battery power

120 and 230v synchronous motors which take their constant speed from the mains grid frequency have been around much longer (at least from the 40's) than the battery powered crystal motors where the speed reference is generated internally

I was referring the outer dimensions of the lens part of the mount and what the individual tolerances control image-wise. Basically the barrel diameter is important and the flange bottom surface position in relation to the optical center is important. otherwise it is basically just if it's too large to fit the camera or if the flange is too thick or thin to lock securely.

the cylindrical part behind the flange in the back of the lens is 54mm and that is the "actual mount" part. The flange is just to lock it to the camera and hold it in place. The actual cylindrical mount needs to be accurately machined but the flange is not as critical as long as it fits to the camera and can be locked in place

I am absolutely sure that a experienced director can do perfectly good job working as a dp as well especially if not needing to operate by himself. It is the lighting part of the dp work where their role may start to fall apart.... Directors tend to have no idea about lighting because that would require lots of real dp experience though it would not matter that much if making only available natural light movies