Phil Rhodes

I tend to use ffmpeg for jobs like this, as you have fine control over everything. If you're comfortable with command line tools, you can do very well. You probably want something like: ffmpeg -color_range 2 -i INFILE -c:v libx264 -preset medium -crf 25 -pix_fmt yuv420p -c:a aac -vbr 4 -s 1280x720 OUTFILE Adjust the crf parameter for less bitrate, higher is less. Run tests of a couple of minutes of footage to find a setting you like before committing to the lengthy job of compressing the whole thing. There's probably a friendlier front end for it you could find and use that. P

Hello! I have pictures of you in the desert with a camera somewhere...

The problem is parasitic capacitance faced by the signals as they travel around the sensor.

It's not that boring. I mean, I bet it becomes pretty interesting the second you smack the back element of one of your expensive-as-a-nice-car lenses. Unfortunately I don't know the answer to the question. I shall ask around. P

You also want the polariser closest to the scene for the strongest effect. Filters such as diffusion will, at least in part, scramble the polarisation in the light and reduce the amount of effect the polariser has. That might be what you want, but be aware.

Yes, although at some point there has to be a path from the photosites to the amplifiers. OK, more modern stacked semiconductor manufacturing can provide more flexibility in exactly how this is done, and I would imagine Arri has paid for every modern convenience in pursuit of exactly this sort of performance, but the single biggest issue in every cinema-grade sensor is managing capacitance as these tiny signals go flying around and that isn't a problem that can be entirely worked-around. Now what happens when they make the LF version of this...

My understanding of this is that active sensor cooling mainly makes sense on long exposures, which is why it's found in astrophotography. I've read at least one paper which suggested it's not particularly helpful for the sort of exposures we use in motion picture work. The other issue is that its only purpose is to be able to cool things below ambient temperatures, which is impossible with simple forced-air cooling. The problem is, any time you cool something below ambient, it becomes a target for condensation. To speculate wildly, it's possible that the design could use a peltier to cool something more aggressively toward ambient, but it's hard to imagine that being easy to do without risking condensation on at least some part of the device. So it's possible, but I'd say unlikely.

Yeah. The problem is, that's a claimed SNR of over 100dB, which is barely possible. If true this number will involve some degree of digital noise reduction, which is probably fine, but it's worth understanding what's really being discussed here. After all the thermal noise of just a resistor at 300K is about -84dBm. P

Seventeen stops is an... Interesting claim. That's more than 131,000:1. Many companies have made interesting dynamic range claims.

Apparently, the film and TV industry, particularly in the UK, has a serious problem crewing productions. I have to say it's not something I have hit personally as when I occasionally need people it's often just for a day or two. For anyone setting up for a multi-week feature or high-end TV production, though, it's apparently grim out there, with crew able to charge significantly enhanced rates as there's almost nobody available. Producers, particularly on mid-range shows that can't afford the new rates, are suffering mightily. And you know what? Film and TV has long been an absolutely horrible employer, at least since the contractorisation of more or less all crewing. It's right up there with the most notorious boogeymen like fashion, it its enthusiasm to rapaciously exploit near-helpless young newbies. Borderline-illegal employment practices have been allowed to run rampant, from straightforward nepotism to open-secret initiatives to create closed shops by the back door. Entry involves months - probably a year or two at least - of employment at almost-illegal wages, in expensive cities with not even the hint of recognisable qualifications or employment at the end of it. At worst, it can involve taking the casual abuse of more senior people who know they can get away with it. Not seen it? Try being a new, female, grip or electrician. It's practically hazing, and it's hard to tell whether they really mean it or not. Your average five-foot-one, 105-pound school leaver would certainly be forgiven for taking it personally in the locker-room atmosphere of a film crew lunch break. And let's not just make this about the more overtly tool-belt-wearing parts of the profession. Post-production houses are notorious for hiring minimum-wage people on zero-hour contracts to fetch takeaways for the better-paid with, generally, zero prospects of meaningful advancement. When the awkward questions about a step up the ladder begin, there's always another offspring of the wealthy who can crash in the family's Kensington apartment for a few months while they work out how comprehensively they're being screwed by a company with a nine-figure turnover. Whether or not it was ever the producers' problem to clamp down on this sort of thing (and make no mistake: it was), the production office hardly comes off looking blameless. Training has long been perpetually someone else's problem. With a few exceptions, producers and other employing entities, such as rental houses, expect people to just somehow be available, and are rarely asked, and practically never required, to contribute anything to any sort of official training. I know this because I've done it; even on the small stuff I've organised, I have on two occasions been pressured to find some money to pay for a very new person who was acquainted with the focus puller. I did it because someone has to, but financially, that probably just makes me the idiot (I don't do it any more because the stuff I organise is generally not sufficiently like a real shoot for anyone to learn anything useful, but that's beside the point). For a long time, the requirements for crew - again, particularly in the UK - were so low that it barely mattered, and these deeply unpleasant, catastrophically unreliable arrangements were somehow enough to train new people. Since it became clear that wasn't going to keep working, there have been a couple of very small scale initiatives to try to regularise things, though almost any of them could be characterised as an attempt to control the labour market. One organised by a big UK rental company does deserve calling out as a high point, but in general, it hasn't been nearly enough, hence the desperate situation we're in now. And as ungenerous as it is, I'm not going to be able to get the smile off my face for a week.

A while ago I posted gear porn with an Ursa Mini and various accessories, and wished for a Fuji zoom. I was recently able to scratch the itch, this time with an Ursa Broadcast G2, Blackmagic's new 6K baby, with the Teradek Bolt 4K 1500, Anton/Bauer Titon 150, Wooden Camera UMB-1 and power distro, and of course the mighty Fujinon Cabrio XK6x20. This configuration appeals to what's left of my tendency toward ENG cameras.

I'm thinking of things like the Aladdin Fabric Light, which seems to be able to save an enormous amount of time, gear and space in terms of simple convenience. Hugely powerful, compared to a diffused fresnel, too.

Inasmuch as "media engine" means "hardware handling of video encoding and decoding," they certainly do and have had at least since Nvidia's Kepler microarchitecture in 2012. Specific features may vary somewhat.

I've always built my own. I won't deny there's typically some minor snagging, but there's a very large advantage: if it breaks, you know how to fix it faster than any warranty service. As Andy quite correctly puts it, components are in short supply, though there's perhaps some sign of that easing a little if the reports are to be believed. Some money can be saved. (By the way, @Andy Jarosz, I spent some time at Orbital in downtown LA today and met some people who recognised your name. Another AJ says hello. Isn't their big stage big?)

I'm looking for someone to work as a general camera and lighting assistant on a very small demo shoot for one day on May 16, in a town just east of London. Reasonable rates paid depending on experience. Nothing objectionable in the tone or content of the piece; it's an adaptation of Shakespeare. Complete beginners very welcome; this is not a big deal shoot, but I need an extra pair of hands to help out and thought it'd be worth at least mentioning it here - it's worked in the past! Get in touch via the forum for more details. Phil

I think Sirui has at least the intention to do complete sets. The APS-C coverage series includes a 24, 50 and 75. There's a 35 in the micro four-thirds version, but with coverage limited to micro four-thirds sensors, and I'm not sure how many of those they're going to sell. They've also done a 1.6:1 50mm full frame. Time will tell if they can get the others out but if they can make them all for $1500...

If I mention Sirui do I get baleful stares from the high-end people? Seriously - thanks for that, it's super-comprehensive. Do things like the Panavision B get used much? I've heard of C and E a lot.

It's better than that. 1536000 / (24000/1001) = 64064. It even works for 23.976!

Hi folks I'll be upfront that I'm researching for an article here. I'm looking at anamorphic lenses with a particular interest in listing recent releases, but I was wondering what it'd take to list all of the anamorphic options that currently exist. I would imagine it's not more than a couple of dozen, at least in terms of things available commonly at rental. So, um, who wants to go first?

Wow, that stuff dates itself. When were they made - looks like late 70s, and I see early 70s date codes on the chips. P

Is it only there on alternate frames? Sometimes you see that on old movies, almost as if it's a reflection of a light that's barely out of the top or bottom of the frame and it seems like half the shutter is reflecting something back into frame, as if someone fitted a spare part (mirror?) which wasn't properly black painted around the edge. Speculating wildly there, but I have seen flares much like that before.

Aapo, I'd be very happy to propose writing about the process of developing this, to some editors if that's of interest. Do you have a final finished version to show yet?

You can get decent-quality LED strip from ebay if you look around a bit. Doesn't have to cost a fortune. Whatever you get, get enough to do the whole job in one hit, so it all matches.

I think it has legitimately become less necessary with immediate monitor feedback of what you're doing. It's a matter of degree, of course, but we're not shooting 5 ASA orthochromatic monochrome anymore.

I have made 8x8 frames up with ripstop nylon and it works fine. I would say it's not quite the same textile as what is often called gridcloth, which has a stiffer, more papery texture. Maybe that's just what one particular manufacturer uses and I'm not aware that either has any advantage over the other. Various kinds of semi-translucent fabric would work as a diffuser so long as they're neutral in colour (or you're aware of and happy with the fact that they aren't, as in unbleached muslin). The only issue is when people on a crew are used to particular types - someone asks for a quarter grid and you've got what you've got, and it does what it does. These days I think the LED textiles are a much better bet, anyway. Less setup, more compact, vastly more efficient. Most of them are outrageously expensive but if anything was ever worth it...