Michael Belanger

Absolutely. Maybe it goes without saying, but we should stress that we're talking about tapeless systems, so all that original footage is being copied to backups then immediately erased so blank media can be sent back to the camera. That's a damn scary prospect.

It's not that it's a difficult procedure, it's just good to have one person who does that and nothing else. Someone who can focus totally on methodically downloading and backing things up. With a film shoot the loader safes the film and that's that till it gets to the lab, where a bunch of methodical guys do lots of stuff to process it, dry it, catalog it, etc. With tapeless a lot of the happens as you shoot. It's basically moving a crew person from the lab to the set. The other option, having the regular camera crew handle things is kinda like asking a painter to also troubleshoot your server issues. The DP, AC, etc focus on capturing the image and the MM handles the data. By the way, I was on a music concert shoot with five HVX-200s running at once, downloading to a single powerMac and we were barely able to keep up with the data flow (should have had 2 machines for that one). It's all much easier on a feature where you're getting a couple of 10 minute cards per hour if you're lucky.

I'd probably go with blacked-out windows and alternating the fluors on the ceiling on and off, giving pools of light and shadow up and down the cooridors, glow coming form adjoining rooms, etc.

I've worked on 2 low-budget features shot on P2. The term we used was "Media Manager." I was basically a separate depatment from the camera crew with the sole responsibility of downloading and backing up data as it came off the cameras. I'd also review and log footage as time allowed. I worked out of a central office away from the live set. It might help to think of this activity as somewhat equivalent to what happens in the lab with film as it is developed, spooled, work-printed, and stored. It's "safeing" the footage and making copies that can be worked with, just done on-set rather than over night at the lab. And of course the copies are identical to the original. As important as the footage and backups on a tapeless shoot are I would be hesitant to ever consider it a "push button" process or to dump the responsibility onto an existing crew position.

My best advice is to check out the deleted scenes on the Bamboozed DVD. You'll see a couple of scenes as they were shot, pre-processing. What they shot is very flat compared to the final image which seems to have been largely built in post. It was shot with Sony VX-1000s (except for the stage portions which were 16mm).

Thank goodness we invented the internet so eventually Wikipedia would have a place to live... Basic info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase_power

Your best bet is to start at the top of the Sony food chain, the HDCAM series. The have a proven track record with 35mm transfers and fairly cinematic depth of field while being more forgiving than 35 as far as focus pulling. Depending on your budget, work your way down the line. Next would be Panasonic Varicam, Sony XDCAM-HD, and Sony XDCAM-EX, and Panasonic DVC-Pro HD (P2). HDV would be your weapon of last resort because of the high compression ratio. Then again, movies like Bamboozled were shot on mini-DV so if your content is up to par they'll overlook the minor details. Oh, and as far as RED, I'd be worried about stability issues on a feature (seems like most people have 1 or 2 backup cameras on hand in case of failure), the narrow depth of field of 35mm (requiring that expert focus puller), and post-production issues. I don't know if I'd recommend it for your first project, getting your feet wet.

There's a tiny, hidden tract of what I assume are Eichler homes in Long Beach. They have that same atrium design and you did an amazing job of re-creating that on set. Bravo.

Here's a link to an article about Gerald Perry Finnerman, the DP for Star Trek, Moonlighting, etc. No mention of the eye light effect in particular, but lots of good info about cross lighting, color, diffusion, etc. Gerald Perry Finnerman Thanks to Curt McAloney of StarTrekHistory.com for the link.

You can certainly have a 2-shot in a wide or even a close-up in certain situations (lover's on a bed with their heads side by side for instace). I like to think of the various shots not by their exact framing, but by what they do to tell a story. So a wide shot establishes the setting, shows us where we are, etc. The medium shot picks out a subject (or subjects) and lets us focus in a bit on what the story is about. And the close-up shows substance, details, expressions, etc. Mascelli is just saying that a medium show with 2 subjects is very dynamic. You have only 2 items drawing your attention and often they are opposed in some manner. Man and woman, good vs evil, killer and victim, etc. No matter what the relationship, there is an interplay between the two that generates its own interest (as opposed to a shot of just one subject).

I've wondered about the origin of the "flag appendix" as well. I assumed your 3 points plus I also tend to use it as a handle to hold the flag when inserting into the grip head. I have a couple of scrims hanging in my garage on a hook by the way.

You can try the standard footage run in reverse trick for part of the sequence. Park the 2 cars as they would be right before impact, for a t-bone crash your camera car is bumper to the side door of the impact car. Both cars back up at moderate speed as you shoot. In post you reverse the footage and probably speed it up a bit as well, ramping up the speed as you near impact. This can be cut in as a second or so of footage after a shot of the car shot normally approaching the impact car, but not getting very close. Bridge the 2 with a cut-away to driver or passenger.

Fantastic response Jaron. I myself have been looking at the Pilot which seems to be a 2/3 scale version of the Flyer. Have you tried it? How does it compare to it's big brother?

I wonder if it would drive sales of 4K projectors for the home market? lol.

I can give you my take on file/asset management. I was a media manager on one of the early features shot with the HVX-200 and P2 cards (unforunately never release). I was also a consultant on "Sex and Breakfast" which also shot on the 200. I number each blank card heading to the camera crew sequentially with the date of shoot and an incrementing serial number. If we shot today, the cards would be numbered: 20080718-01 20080718-02 20080718-03 etc. The cards arrive at the camera in their cases with this number on camera tape on the outside of the box. The box also has a letter (A,B,C, etc) that matches the permanent letter on the card itself. The card is shot and returned to media management. I download the complete data from each card into a pre-created folder. The folder names match the card numbers above. Once the data is downloaded I lock the folder and change it's labeling color to red so I know that data is not to be touched. I do this on 2 separate external drives. The first one is the "negative" drive and the second is "negative backup". The term "negative" simply indicates that this is the raw MXF data from the camera. These two copies can be run simultaneously by the way. Drag the contents of the card into the first drives folder, then do it again to the second drive and it will download to both at once with only a 20% time overhead on P2 cards. After that I import the footage into FCP, storing the resulting Quicktime files on a third drive, the "workprint." Once I've confirmed that the file sizes of data on both negative drives match and do a quick check of the footage in FCP, I erase the contents from the P2 card, remove the old label from the card box, write a new label with the next sequential number from my log sheet, note the download, etc and then send the card back to the camera crew. At the end of each day of shooting the two negative drives as split up and go to separte locations. Typically I would leave one on-set in the media management office with the workprint drive and the second would come home with me. This is a fairly methodical and detail oriented procedure for me so I like to be off-set and away from distractions as I do it. On the feature I was lucky enough to be at a single location the entire time with a private area for media managment. The script supervisor would note my card numbers as the reel numbers by the way. I believe they were on the camera slate as well so it all works out perfectly. Just treat each new card heading back to the camera like a completely new entity even though physically it's being re-used. I'm now shooting with an EX1 and the proceedure is pretty much the same.

I'd probably aim for a fairly dark silhouette but with a little detail still in the shadows to show shape. If you remember the first few rounds of ipod commercials there were straigh black on color then eventually they did a few with actual perfomers where there was some detail in the blacks.

Here's MSEs Griptionary to get you started... http://www.msegrip.com/mse.php?show=griptionary

My first inclination is to shoot this as a clean silhouette on green-screen and motion track the background in during post. It seems like a lighting/spill nightmare otherwise.

Rule one for HMIs is they output between 3 and 5 times the light of an equivalent wattage tungsten fixture. so a 575w hmi is giving you the equivalent of a 2K tungsten. It's also going to cost you a couple of thousand dollars. The largest HMI you usually see that will run off household plugs is a 1.2K, so roughly the equivalent of a 5K tungsten. Keep in mind this is 5600 Kelvin (blue) light, which means for outdoors matching daylight, on set simulating daylight, or at night simulating cool moonlight in a wash for instance, you don't loose any light output correcting to daylight as you would with tungsten. Weight wise they're about the same as tungsten fixtures, assuming you're used to studio fresnel lights like Moles. There is some electronics in the head, but most of the added weight is the ballast (which can weigh a hell of a lot). This is a box, usually on wheels, that sits on the ground next to the light and attaches by a special multi-pin cable. The ballast in turn plugs into the wall.

I've been looking at the 2X4 variety wall spreader from Norms. For the pressure point at the wall, do you put a square of plywood between the spreader and the wall to distribute the pressure more evenly? Or maybe a section of 2X4 so you're assured of having a couple of joists taking the load? Would you guys recommend the custom-made baby-pin adaptors that are built for the speader or just use Cardellinis?

I have some upcoming short films projects that will be shooting in a small apartment. I'm wondering what my options are for mounting small backlights "up and out of the way" in a standard residential setting. These will be LTM 200w Peppers most likely. I'm limited as far as defacing the walls and ceilings, etc.

Not quite. $6500 vs $5200 based on B&H list prices. Both come with a single memory card of vaguely similar capacities

A quick question for David or anyone else who cares to wade in. I've often wondered if we should be posting EX1 related items in the Sony or Sony (Prosumer) boards. I've tended to think the prosumer section even though the camera is badged as a CineAlta, mainly out of defference to the high-end camera users here, but many of the menu settings, etc are very similar to the Sony F series cameras. Any thoughts?

Material of construction can be a good clue. Stobe boxes are usually light-weight nylon. Chimeras and the like are heavier fabric from what I recall, somewhat approaching canvas weight but I haven't used one in a while. You could try some incremental experiments with 200w, 300w, etc lights to see how things fair. And as someone said above, photos might help in the identification process.

I'll cast my vote for Celtx as well. It's open source, absolutely free, allows collaboration online, publishing of scripts online, automatically formats to different script forms, AND... It's a full-functioned asset management system. It allows you to tag scripts by parts: actors, locations, props, etc. These entries area databased and you can pull them up, add photos, notes, etc (or your production team can from their own computers) and print detailed reports. It's definitely worth downloading and trying out.