Aapo Lettinen

yeah Olex is great for Kinor servicing. The original motors can be quite unreliable when in bad condition and there may be something wrong with the circuit board. My 3m motor had broken insulation lacquer on the capacitors and a screwdriver scratch damaged circuit board which made it work with inconstant speed ( I was able to fix it by myself but took some time and lots of testing). You may want to upgrade to the Olex's chrystal sync motor if the motor part itself is fine and only the circuit board is faulty. You did double check the fuse and power connector polarity before testing? wrong polarity may fry the electronics which is why so many eBay motors for these cameras are in unusable condition, someone has just attached them to a car battery for "testing" without checking first which wire is + and which is - , the Russian stuff does not normally have polarity protection so it is a blown fuse or complete mess and destroyed electronics depending on which particular equipment is in question and how lucky you are <_<

zooming in and reframing is easy in any edit software. but if the darkening is very subtle you can maybe correct it in grading without any need to reframe. widescreen end format also helps because then you will mask the gate corners anyway with the 2.35 / 2.39 / 2.40 mask

You really can't make "soft" image with current lenses and the Zeiss or L-series look is quite far away from that: they have more like a neutral or colder look, higher contrast (at least the Zeiss) , ugly flares (L-series), sharp or very sharp all the time. Have you considered making the look with filters instead and choosing the lenses based on other aspects like ease of use, f-stop, size and weight? I shoot with Nikon AI-S lenses all the time with GH4, Sony FS7, Eclair Cameflex, BMPC4K, Bolex, etc. in UHD, DCI 4K, 4perf 35mm, N16mm and they are normally very good lenses unless you want to shoot wide open all the time. If shooting wide open most of the time you will really need MODERN ASPHERICAL PRIMES, nothing old will be good enough wide open. The Super Takumar look might be worth investigating though the AI-S Nikkors or similar small size lenses are great when on the road. I would maybe take different glass for low light (two or three very good primes) and "daytime" (scenes where you can stop down two stops to get away with a zoom lens without too much aberrations and vignetting) , so it would be two or three very fast primes for low light and one or two lightweight zooms for everything else

I still don't understand why the DP should be the one sponsoring a indie film with gear and insurances etc. just to be able to get to shoot something. Renting out your gear for profit is another thing but needing to have 50+ k worth of equipment just to get the luxury to shoot something for free is absolute madness and very insulting for the whole profession. It's like playing drums in a band but needing to also buy the guitars and PA and other instruments to everyone else just to have the priviledge to be there :angry: If one wants to support the production economically, then good rental house contacts (=discounts!!) would be much better investment than expensive gear which ages quickly and is mostly sitting on a shelf collecting dust when it is not working for peanuts in cheapass indie films :wacko:

I have only been in London once but shouldn't the Shard and the "Killer Walkie Talkie" + other skyscrapers be in the background in this shot if it would be accurate? Or are they Trade Marked and they only could afford the London Eye and Big Ben? :lol:

Better get the Alexa Mini then? RED is thought to be more of a indie and vfx camera anyway. I would avoid productions who are hiring based on gear though, it is a clear sign that they don't care about artistic values and the end result will likely be bad. If you charge accordingly though it's no problem :)

I haven't had much issues with epic/scarlet noise but never used the weapon, the dual fans can change the game of course. But if the camera is not overheating you can usually set the fans to low setting during record so that the noise is quite substantial. I don't live in the middle of desert however, it may be different for people who use them in very hot conditions. Taking a red camera out to the desert is a bad idea anyway, those things are not sealed and will collect the whole sahara worth of dust inside... But why the camera noise would be problem in a commercial shoot? They rarely have any sync audio anyway so who cares. With the same logic we would need to stop hmi lights because their buzzing disturbs the sound guy's thoughts :P

you will need the lenses anyway whether shooting film or digital and film camera bodies are very cheap nowadays (you can get a used Arricam set for less than 20k, 16mm cameras are couple of K:s ) . something like a Moviecam Compact and SR3 or Xtrprod and the rest goes to the lenses, support and digital gear. For lower budget use something like a Varicam LT could be great or used Sony F5 /55 (easily interchangeable mount so you can use almost any lens you want, and easier raw format than RED

the RED cameras are not much difficult to set up and the menus are not a big nightmare like some people think but the format is more post demanding and will need more filtering and tweaking before looking as nice as the Alexa image with minimum processing. so you will most likely save time and budget by choosing the Alexa and the director and producer will be very happy for the results and very easy and efficient workflow. every camera may need some tweaking at the beginning of the shoot and most cameras are kept halfway built most of the time during the production, you won't normally completely tear them apart after each day so it is not that important how long the first setup will take. if the Weapon was so difficult for the DP why he did not build it in the prep and transport without the lens, it works in most simple shoots and is super easy, takes 2 min to set up and start shooting? why wasting the time for things which can be done in prep and keep everyone waiting?

I would maybe choose the Alexa Mini for the easier workflow, the look and great handling properties. the MX Scarlet is a bit lacking in frame rates and formats (no anamorphic etc) but the Scarlet Dragon could be enough for the shoot if there is budget constraints which do not allow the Weapon or Epic. I second that the F3 is limiting in formats and it also has more "gritty" look compared to the other options. if you need to choose a lower end Sony, then the FS7 is much better choice I think. Personally I like F5 / 55 look and they are very handy cameras especially because of the interchangeable mount but the Alexa looks usually suits commercials better I think (more subtle contrast handling, colors, skin tones and better highlight handling)

that's why I advised focusing on more specialized gear which can't be easily found elsewhere (especially lenses which create special look) and a lower end camera body which can be used for miniunit work or as a b or c camera. trying to get a full A camera grade set with lenses etc. costs way too much I think when one can get almost similar effect with lower cost but more specialized equipment and sell oneself more as a talented DoP which has "some cool gear available if needed" instead of a person "who is cheaper to hire because he can rent out his 200k gear for peanuts" :mellow: for example a Red Raven with a gimbal, basic remote focus and good quality lightweight lenses would be good for this with one miniunit worthy tripod kit, slider, couple of lower end zooms (like modified stills zooms) if possible. should be something around 30k total I think. If one wants to compete in the A camera field the lens set alone will easily be well over 100k , like a Cabrio zoom with 4 or 5 Ultra Primes or a 5 set of Master Primes with one or two zooms etc. Nowadays I would maybe invest on anamorphics like V-lites or Cooke anamorphics. You will need the best Red or Arri model. the Alexa Mini could be great for most of the stuff, it is more practical for most productions than Red cameras. Something like a Compact Prime set or Xeens or similar low end stuff won't cut it in that game but for miniunit and B stuff they can be great if properly used. I think the 60-70k is hugely underestimated for A camera set unless you want to do indie and lower budget stuff which can't afford normal rental house prices. for cine use something like 250-300K would be more ideal. this is just for one camera body, tripods etc, follow focus (remote + normal) units, LENSES (the most expensive part), monitoring, mattebox, filters etc. No lights or much of grip equipment. some old used dolly maybe. of course one possibility is to take the "art house" route: invest on great 35mm and 16mm film cameras and historic lenses and shoot real film at the era when everyone else has switched to digital. do some great imagery and you will certainly be noticed. assuring the producers and directors that film is the right way to go can be nightmare but they will probably appreciate your talent more in the end :lol:

If you want to buy gear, buy the stuff which is very difficult to rent in your area (no one else has it or very rare gear) so that you can help the production to archieve special look when needed. For example a special rare lens set for art projects. If you need own camera try something more affordable and handy which can be used as a b or c camera, like red raven or similar lower cost body which is also handy for miniunit stuff

I think the real issue may be that you dont have the right contacts to get to the feature game. I think you should focus on making more commercials and maybe higher budget short films to get more contacts which might get you feature work. Very high end reel material and try to work with persons who also do lots of feature work. I would avoid low budget indie genre, especially low budget indie features. Gear is also quite irrelevant if you want to do high end stuff,you may just end up wasting your own money so that the producer can save on rental costs...

I highly recommend using real light meter for light level readings if you are intending to shoot on film. A stills camera helps you to find and remember camera angles and composition so it is helpful in that way

stills are great for general lighting reference and quick look tests if done right. they of course can't emulate correctly the camera used for actual shooting but one can take for example photos where both the actors and the lights can be seen so that it is much easier to remember the lighting setup when needed. it may also be faster to check the photos than to watch dailies if the video village is not near the set etc. dslr can also be used as a "dp/director viewfinder" to quickly reference/test shots without needing to move the main camera. video camera ISO:s are not fully comparable because of the rating technique so the light readings are very rough at least to the point of unusable for comparison

yep, don't use spaces or any special characters in a filename (like ÅÄÖ / ? + & % etc) . the _ is normal way to replace space in filename and works in most systems. you may also want to make the filename as short as possible for compatibility but it is not that critical in most systems as long as you can identify the versions from the first about 15 characters without reading the whole 200 character long filename... it is also a good idea to add render day, video and audio format and version number to the filename, it may be really painful to try to locate the right version if you have million almost similar looking files which are all named "new", "newest", "even newer" , "final version", "final version corrected", "use this" or "use that" etc. I normally add the render day first (year_month_day) so that the versions can be easilly arranged and located in Finder without needing to read the descriptions.

the 60 piece doc render was super easy I think :lol: the hardest project so far was another documentary where I had to manually retime about 600 clips in Resolve for online (pretty much all of them and also manually force conform about 1/3 of them because of the difficult source material which confused the software). Some catastrophic XML error which we could not resolve any other way (FCPX was of course involved). THAT was frustrating and took a lot of time :rolleyes: Just remembered that I have 4x2GB of leftover iMac 2011 memory here which I don't use anymore, such a pity that we live in different countries, not practical to send them to the States and they would not arrive on time :(

iMac ram is pretty easy to obtain so I'm sure it will work fine. you may have to need to change all the slots at the same time though, it is harder to find memory which can be mixed with the originals, easiest way is to just update them all. one possibility in situations where time consuming render is very likely to fail multiple times is to render in smaller chunks and assemble them afterwards in same or other software. the worst case I have been in was a feature doc preview version graded in Resolve which crashed so often that I had to render it in 60 separate pieces to DPX and then assemble in other project. It is much easier than it sounds like, you just need to use markers and be frame accurate when rendering/reassembling

of course you can export it UNCOMPRESSED. that expresses every frame. he may have slight problems to playback it though :lol: if you have a friend who has mac with the prores codecs you can just export your movie to uncompressed or other intra codec and then recompress to prores with the friend's mac. For example Resolve or Mpeg Streamclip work for this, no need to have Premiere on that computer

the sound guy's point is to have a playout with intra codec, not long gop. if you have ever tried to make a online with h264 reference you know what I mean, the edits may vary depending on the GOP position so it is impossible to know if it's in perfect sync or off by 1 frame. some images may be in perfect sync and others may be off a bit. Are you going to make the sound on single pass or is it possible to have a h264 version first and send the prores later for final mix so that the end result can be checked for possible 1 frame errors? most sound guys here are happy to work this way as long as they can get a intra codec version for finishing.

of course you can make a short film for experimenting and resume and benefit from it a lot. Just remember not to use all your money on a single movie, you will want to make another, better one right away (even before the shooting of the first is done) ;) The best way to learn is to surround yourself with people who are more experienced than you and learn from them during the process. If you want to mainly direct films, get yourself a very experienced DP, gaffer, producer, actors, wardrobe, makeup dept. etc. so that they know exactly what they are doing and can help you to fully concentrate on your own part. I would not use ARRIRAW for a project like this unless it is a experiment on its own. RAW shooting is not that common in film industry anyway, it is more reserved on certain projects and situations when 90% of the other stuff is shot on compressed formats like Prores444 or XQ. For indie use the Alexa Mini is more practical I think than the XT.

yeah you need a counterweight on the back of the camera. our DP uses small lead blocks with Ronin and F5+raw recorder but I don't know for sure where he gets them, they may be part of his Gates housing. maybe you can make something out of metal which can be attached to the top/bottom behind the camera. like a cheeseplate with lead added to one end or something like that? should not be complicated as long as the weight is right

yep here it is normal that the "gaffer" handles also the bouncing and flagging etc. everything lighting related which affects the final image. Grip department handles only camera related stuff like flagging the monitors, using dollies and other gear like tripods, etc. Here the "gaffers" make lots of creative decisions on set regarding the lighting (working for the DP of course but when they know the style needed they are quite independent on set) which necessitates them to be available for all shooting days, even if there is just a styrofoam or two needed for the shot. In Finland the local term is broadly translated "Head of Lighting" ("Valaisija" or "Päävalaisija") although the term "Gaffer" is also used in the credits. In the States it falls more on the shoulders of the Cinematographer to make the creative decisions regarding lighting I think?

with viewfinder and batteries it comes quite close though. Sony's mount is also more versatile even if it's physically a bit weaker. But it of course depends on what one uses the camera for and how much it creates revenue or if it's only for indie non-profit use where one usually tries to save every penny possible even if it means that the gear is more bulky and time consuming to work with. I myself just calculate "save 5mins by using internal nd instead of filter change --> change filter 500 times --->save so much time that you save much more than 3000$ by using the more expensive camera". Same with the light sensitivity: if one has a low sensitivity camera which is free and a high sensitivity camera which costs 200$ a day it may cost much LESS to rent the high sensitivity camera because then one saves in both lighting rentals costs and time when shooting, both = money

Old scifi films which have optical effects and miniature work (Star Wars, Logan's Run, 2001 Space Odyssey, etc.) . Tarkovsky's, Kurosawa's and Kubrik's films. Soviet epics like Gypsies are found near heaven, Lautarii. I highly recommend watching more Soviet films, they did some great work there, also in large format (like Dersu Uzala, a Kurosawa film) I like Almodovar films quite a lot, he has great crazy characters and drive. Fatih Akin has done some great films. There is also some great Korean and Chinese films (some the epics are quite dull and full of bad cgi though) Generally everything which is not American or British mainstream helps you to widen your perspective, it is good to watch films which have very different style compared to usual Hollywood stuff. It's like finding a different music style after listening only pop music all your life... Watching some B-movies may be more beneficial than you would think of, it is much easier to analyze them than great classics which you adore. Keep in mind though not to choose intentionally badly made stuff like Sharknado etc. , it is much better to watch stuff where the filmmakers have just had low resources or too little time (or skill) to make the film good, you can learn a lot from how they have managed to still get watchable finished film when everything went wrong starting from the script...