Scott McClellan

Can anybody clarify the specifics of using a s16mm lens on the Red cam'? I believe that the focal length of the 16mm lens roughly doubles, but would like to verify? Also, I'm wondering if the sensor coverage is full at 4k (or now 4.5K), or does it crop to something more like a 2k size image? I'm shooting a short on the Red next week, I only have primes available with the camera package, the director wants to implement a couple of zoom shots and I can only find a vari-zoom lens that is normally used on an Arri SR2. Had a hard time finding any info on this through the search function. Thanks a bunch.

As an additional note- shooting on an overcast day sells the day for night effect much better- nothing says daylight like pronounced clouds and deep, sharp shadows. If you have to shoot on a clear but cloudy day try and avoid seeing the sky as much as possible. Also, since you are shooting in a town remember that things like street lights, window INTs, etc will not be visible. There are lots of good and helpful threads on this site for shooting day for night. Just do a search and see what you come up with.

Dror made a good point- If you can afford to do it (and have the time)- switch out the fluorescent practicals with Kino bulbs to your desired color temp- Kino bulbs aren't usually too expensive to rent and are made to fit in fluorescent fixtures. Otherwise you can balance your lights to what's there with a little CTG or something. Mixing daylight and tungsten isn't a bad idea, depending on what you want. It'll give you a very warm yellow and blue mix of light (check out just about any scene in Eyes Wide Shut as an example of this)- might not be right for the sterile look you mentioned here, but might be great. Hospitals sometimes have all sorts of windows in doors and between rooms etc. that you could maybe cheat as outside windows and push an orange-ish light in through for your street light effect? Just a thought- may not be possible, depending on the location. You might also want to over expose your BGs a little to help wash out some detail and create that white, sterile look. Good luck with the shoot. -S

...This might work especially well for the wider shot you have planned.

Not positive about this one, as I have never tried it in a shooting situation, but what about using a small mirror (like the kind found in a make up compact case) to reflect it's natural shape on to your subject's eye. Simply mount it on something sturdy so it doesn't jiggle- then shoot your desired light source/ intensity in to it- setting the angle to hit your target as desired. It's easy to test and very inexpensive. Of course the other techniques mentioned here will work wonderfully as well. Just thought I'd ad another possible option.

Both look great David. Just wondering what you used to bring in the BG in the shot with the van? Were both of these scenes on a 500T? Also just curious if you used some sort of boom arm off the lift for your soft box or is the shadow on the ground actually coming from the practical in the shot? Thanks!

I really like the book, "Reflections- twenty one cinematographers at work". It's chock full of lighting scenarios, diagrams, interviews and other helpful info that you can learn from. I agree with Frank that seeing and doing things first hand is the best way to learn, but this is one of the books that I found very informative and helpful.

I like to put a plastic shower cap over the lens/ matte box when not shooting to help keep things like snow and sand from blowing on the lens when not shooting. They're cheap and easy to find (if you're traveling, the hotel probably has them in your room).

That's pretty cool. Probably get some good results if you shot the night look in camera and then applied the lights in post. Impressive how fast those effects can be achieved.

Ah yes. That certainly makes sense. Thanks David. -S

While we're on the topic of Indiana Jones I also have a quick question- In Temple of Doom there is a classic shot of Indy on the rope bridge, where he is holding his shoulder bag with the stones in it over the side in one hand and a machete in the other- I think the camera pushes in on him as he spots the main "bad guy" of the film who stands at the far end of the ravine. This particular shot always looked like it was captured on a different stock, to me, than the rest of the film. Just curious if anybody might know what the story is on this shot, or if maybe I'm just crazy? Thanks a bunch. -Scott

Can't help but feel that some of the colors are too saturated and the blacks are a little too deep, in comparison to the original three films. This is just my first impression however, judging from my computer's monitor which I realize is not the best gauge. However, I am also used to seeing these films on the old VHS format (I know, I know) before the digital re mastering took place, but to me the desaturated pallet simply ads to the look of those films and the old serial feel. Regardless, I am really pumped to see this fourth installment.

Oops, sorry about the double, half post. I'm still learning how to use this message board.

I find shadows are a pretty good indication of day for night. Sure the moon can cast shadows when it is close to being full, but it isn't very common for a film stock and lens to be fast enough to capture this sharply. The sun is so bright that it tends to cast very deep and sharp shadows where as the moon's shadows are a little softer looking. However, if you see things like street lights and other practical light sources lighting scenes you can be pretty sure that it is actually night.

I find shadows are a pretty good indication of day for night too. Sure the moon can cast shadows when it is close to being full, but it isn't very common for a film stock and lens to be fast enough to capture this sharply.

Hi Marc, Awesome work- I really enjoyed the "new reel". What is the name of the track you used in the edit? I too love the way that the camera dutches with the movement of the bike. Great shot. I think that your Narrative reel actually had some more stunning imagery (it was all very beautiful), but my only complaint with it would be the song selection. I just found that the music didn't drive the imagery as well as it could and for that reason found it a little less enjoyable to watch. It was very dramatic feeling, which I'm guessing is exactly what you are going for, but I found it a little too 'heavy' (not in the metal sense of course). Keep up the great work! -S

I wonder if they get paid extra when they have lines?

Hi Marc You have some really beautiful stuff on your website. Great job. I enjoyed everything that I saw and it is obvious that you are very skilled, so I don't think the problem is in the work itself, but instead perhaps the way that it is presented. A simple style probably is best when presenting your portfolio, as it allows the viewer to concentrate on the imagery at hand, so I like that aspect of your site too, although I felt the lay out could be a little more stylish- The big thing, however, is that I found the site annoying to navigate. Having to hit the back button between each image/ reel was the problem for me. Your work is very slick and professional looking, but the website could be stepped up, as I find it doesn't match your level of work. If there was a way you could view each selection and still have the main menu for that category present on every page I think the over all experience of your website would be much smoother and pleasing to pilot. Hope this is helpful and keep up the great work! -oh and just curious if the Stella spot is the final cut or something you put together, showing your favorite images from that shoot? Love the full shot of her with the candles in the FG.