Tyler Purcell

Film stocks start to deteriorate after 5 years in proper storage. So a stock made in the 80's, even if stored properly, won't look like it did back then. EXR is easier to find, is a lot newer and does have a more vintage/classic Kodak look. There was a whole bunch of it on ebay recently, but it wasn't stored properly, so it was too risky.

If this were 1990, I'd say yea... just cut it on film, but "digital editing" has been around for 30 years. If you have no experience with it, you've got a pretty steep learning curve ahead of you. If I were you, I'd be shooting stuff with a cheap digital camera and learning how to edit NOW because there is a lot to it. For instance, you can't take the scanned compressed files form the lab and cut them without a decent computer, fast online storage and the right editing software. You can't just download iMovie or Windows Movie maker and expect them to work.

Umm, one of the most basic features of all editing software is the ability to resize or "scale" the image. Most people scan Super 16 at greater then 2k resolution, with a 2k finish format, so they can resize if necessary.

Must it be 4K?

You've kinda run into the problem with C mount Bolex cameras. I don't believe there were any S16 format C mount lenses made. The only way to get S16 coverage that I know of, is through an adaptor to another format. Most common is Arri B to C or PL to C. The Bolex EBM has a much better mounting system and adaptors are much less money. You will get some vignetting full wide with a zoom, but as you zoom in, it should be OK. Adaptors are available through Visual Products and I see them all the time on ebay.

The cinematographer works directly with the director to put their vision on screen. This "CAN" include; composition, lighting, stock selection, camera selection and support. The cinematographer also works with the gaffer to create the films look, they are the ONLY direct connection to the lighting department. The director only talks with the cinematographer when it comes to what's on screen, not the gaffer/lighting, or even operator/assistant operator. The camera operator basically works the camera during the shot. They take direction from the cinematographer and work the camera as directed. A lot of cinematographers enjoy running the camera as well, so the position of "operator" may only be available on bigger shows or shows where the DP doesn't want to operate. When I young, I got experience by starting on the ground level and learning things through hands on experiences. Yes I stepped on a few people's feet, yes I was awfully excited to be shooting on 35mm and would jump at the opportunity, but that's to be expected when your just starting out. Most of that learning needs to be done on set however, its hard to really learn those things without getting hands on experiences.

One side note, anything you've seen in the theaters in the last 3 years that was shot on film in the US, was processed and finished at FotoKem. FotoKem is the LAST big lab in the country that can do everything. So their work is spot on. I've recently developed a business relationship with them and outside of the high pricing, the results are top notch.

What AKS would you want to hang off the camera that 1) could be light enough so the velcro works and 2) can't go on your belt or around your neck? I've never seen anyone put AKS on a camera before. I have absolutely velcro'd cables and camera specific accessories like a speed controller. Velcro glue can be removed with a heat gun very easily without damaging the camera body.

Well, I don't like digital very much. Knowing that the future of filmmaking on motion picture film is hazy, I decided to start a charitable foundation based around educating our youth about using film. I also teach senior filmmaking at a local arts high school on 16mm and 35mm. We're building a phenomenal program that I'm hoping in a few years, can be taught by other instructors at different schools. So I'm with you on the whole film thing and there is a lot of validity to what Adrian says about having a film background. He's also a talented, hard working guy with a great reel... so does it really matter that some of the reel is film, or that he's just a good fit based on who he is, talent and experiences? Becoming a cinematographer is difficult because in many cases, you can't pick your jobs, you've gotta go with whatever is available and being able to convince some random low-budget filmmaker to shoot on film vs digital is very difficult. It's even harder to find a job that's already slated to be on film because in most of those cases, the filmmaker already has someone lined up, hence the reason they're ok with going film. You may get lucky and find a few shoots per year that need a film cinematographer and in that case, having that "specialty" does help for sure. I also always suggest cinematographers first learn how to shoot on film, especially 35mm because that knowledge will translate perfectly into the world of digital cinema from field of view to shutter angle. Yet, it's even more important today to have MORE experience with the modern cinema cameras AND have your own digital package ready to go. I've lost many jobs in the past because I don't own a 4k digital cinema camera. When you graduate into bigger films, its less important to own a package, but those low-budget guys, thrive off the DP bringing their own package.

I want my film camera to have a histogram. LOL :P

I've never seen one and I look every day. They go for around double the OP's budget.

Man it would be nice to have a few film cameras and constantly be shooting film, but those days are long over. People don't want to see film on demo reels anymore, they want to see RED and Alexa material, that's what "sells" today. Also, for the cost of making a decent demo reel on 35mm, owning your own equipment, you COULD buy a pretty good 4k cinema camera. So it's kind of a catch 22... if you want to work in the industry today, you've gotta know the current tech and market yourself as knowing it.

The Arri 235 is one of the newer 35mm cameras, so they still go for quite a bit of money. 3000GBP will get you into a 4 perf 435, 535, BL4 or Moviecam Compact. Finding a used 3 perf 235 for anything near your budget, isn't going to happen. People with those 3 perf and 2 perf movements, are holding on to those cameras. Heck, there was a 2 perf Arri III being sold in NYC recently for $5k USD. That's a lot of money for a 30 year old camera, but people are desperate for 2 perf cameras. Anyway, if you need/want a 2 or 3 perf camera, you can't be picky on what body it's in. You'll also have to rise your budget quite a bit.

I fixed my statement. I was referring to "video" cameras in his price range. Sorry bout that. DSLR's don't really count as they're not video cameras.

The F5 is dead quiet compared to the RED. When you build a camera into a very small box, you loose the ability to convection cool it through a large heat sync and decent air flow. You've gotta then add fan's at high RPM's, which make quite a racket. It doesn't matter on big productions where everything is ADR'd, it does matter on smaller shoots in intimate settings. I did a shoot earlier this year with my LTR and RED Epic, the film camera made no noise and the Epic was a vacuum cleaner. Which humors me because we've spent so much time building "technology" we have forgotten all the decades of making film cameras quiet.

It's hard to sell yourself for narrative feature productions without a Red or Alexa. Those are the "key" words people are looking for today. I have a few buddies with "alternative" cameras like the Sony F5, and they struggle to get the bigger jobs and always borrow RED's or Alexa's because that's what people want. It helps to generate the least amount of friction possible with the people looking to hire you.

Moire is generally a consequence of cameras without an optical low pass filter. This is a device that smoothens out the pixels which are smaller then the imagers. Both aliasing and Moire come from the same issue. Edit: Unfortunately, I don't know if any video cameras in your price range that ship with OLPF's. However, there are some companies making aftermarket plugin adaptors for some cameras, which help reduce moire and aliasing. http://www.mosaicengineering.com/ Moire is directly related to image sharpness. You can attain "softness" through glass if you so prefer. I rarely see Moire issues on my Blackmagic Pocket camera's, mainly because I don't use high end glass, so the image is already "softer" then it would be with a higher end piece of glass. Really modern/crisp glass can exaggerate moire and aliasing issues on pretty much any camera. I believe there are screw-on filters which help these issues, though I'm not sure how well they function. Now that you know the problem, you can do some research.

If you're shooting "speciality" work, there is a market for the Bolex. If you're going out shooting a standard narrative project, standard/modern cameras are where it's at.

Yea, the Alexa feels like a complete package to me. I just don't get that when I'm "assembling" a Red. Last shoot I was on with a Red Weapon, it took the DP about an hour to set it up and start capturing. The next day I did a quick shoot with an Alexa Studio and we were recording in around 5 minutes. It took longer to boot the camera and punch in the base settings, then it did to set it up.

Yes, it's pretty common for grain/noise to be added in post. Generally the reason is for balance. So the most noisy/grainy scenes in the movie will be de-noised. The output of that de-noise will set the "base" noise level for the entire show. Then in a lot of cases, the other scenes will be brought to THAT noise level. Also, because most movies today have special effects and/or computer made elements, noise/grain is added to match the original camera material. So even if the ENTIRE movie doesn't have added noise/grain, A LOT of scenes will. Finally, noise/grain is very commonly added to an over-all image, in order to reduce the crispness of the digital source. It's a funny problem because the industry as a whole, has spent A LOT of money developing cameras with less noise, yet people complained about how crisp the images were. So now they add noise to help reduce the crispness. Cinematographers also use softer "vintage" lenses to help combat those problems as well. Those softer lenses mixed with noise, really does give the impression something may have been shot on film.

Best thing to do is hit up your local rental house and take the different cameras out for a spin. Most people will let you shoot indoors and right outside of the shop in order to get a feel for the package. I personally like the Alexa over the Red packages, mainly because they feel like a complete camera when using. The Red cameras require crazy rigs to hand hold, which is a real pain. I also prefer the Alexa's color science, it's more akin to film then the Red is. The Alexa can also record in an editing native codec (Pro Res) and deliver a high quality 12 bit 444 workflow every efficiently. Where I do like many things about the RED cameras, including low light capabilities, size/weight, resolution and even the codec, which works really well in finishing programs on fast computers. The imager is an acquired taste and requires substantial amount of re-working to make look decent. If you're going to RENT, it's a no brainer to go with the Alexa for MOST applications.

I think owning some sort of camera as a cinematographer is very nice. It allows you to book smaller gigs, where the production company wants a whole "package" and you can get a decent rental fee for your work. I use my little camera package all the time for personal projects when I'm not working. It's a heck of a lot better then renting for those occasions. It's nice to dream about capturing those bigger, long-term gigs that last decades. A good agent who gets you work, a busy producer or director who can't work without you, a production company who loves your work and pushes you. Those three things are what I call a "gold mine" and are SUPER RARE to find. Getting there takes MUCH MORE then a great website, awesome demo reel and loads of credits. You could spend a decade building all of that stuff and without the appropriate connections, you may not get anywhere. So most of the time, you'll be working on lower-end stuff, just to keep money flowing. In that case, having a decent package will absolutely be a door opener. The big question is... what package to own? Honestly, you'd have to spend upwards of $50 - $70k to get something "worthwhile" once you add lenses, support and accessories. Today, everyone wants 4k even if they don't understand what that means. Today everyone wants efficient/sensitive camera bodies, for that more natural underlit look. Everyone wants decent glass, because the image must be clean/crisp, it's digital after all. There really are only two choices... Alexa or Red. Those are the cameras you'd get jobs using, everything else would be a struggle unless you were interested in shooting ENG/Documentary in which case, there are many more cameras like the Sony F5/55 and Blackmagic URSA Mini 4.6k. You can get into a decent used Red Dragon package for around $60k with glass, accessories and support. Since the Alexa still isn't 4k native, it's becoming a harder sell for those producers who are 4k crazy. You can get the 3.2k software updated cameras for around $35k, but then your spending less money on glass and support, which is a problem. You could always find someone willing to let you borrow/rent glass for cheap, but that really depends on your connections. There is some validity to owning some lighting solutions, but don't go crazy. I'd get two Arri combo kits and maybe some mid-grade HMI. You could also work out a deal with someone who owns a grip truck locally. I personally rather have the gaffer come with their own equipment, then have stuff sitting around in my garage for those rare occasions when the production has no lights. However, having lights for smaller projects to keep you busy between bigger projects, it's nice to have SOMETHING support wise. In the end, getting equipment is a huge investment and if you don't have guaranteed work, it can backfire. It's almost better to get the job without the equipment and make friends who have equipment sitting around they're willing to let you borrow for cheap. This way, you don't have to deal with the upkeep AND you can use the stuff for a low rate anytime you want. Of course, that would be the best outcome and it's tricky to find someone willing to do that, but it's possible.

Yea I mean, it can take a decade to build a strong foundation in a single location. It's great to love traveling, that's a HUGE added bonus. However, being around, hanging out and getting to know people over time in one place, is super important. Your work is great, but it appears to have a very "commercial" look. Nothing bad about that, but I know a dozen people living in L.A. who do the same thing. New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco are the hubs for commercial work like that, mostly because the big agencies are there and they like to keep the production companies close. Those big agencies use the same guys over and over again. Once they like a look, they ask for that same DP or his "crew" time and time again. So it's nearly impossible to break into that arena unless you already have an inside track. I work for a commercial/industrial company and they hire the same DP's for every shoot. I was only able to show off my skills when one of the cinematographers couldn't make it for re-shoots and it was handed off to me. I was in the right place at the right time and it worked out, that's kind what you need to do in order to work your way up. The big catch 22 here in Los Angeles is; whatever you haven't shot, that will be your biggest weakness. Looks like you haven't made a feature yet, so that's a big issue if you want to grow/expand your career. You may have to get on some super, ultra low budget feature shows, just to get some IMDB credits. I agree with David, I think you should have no problem finding a good agent. However, I don't know how much work will come from it. Most of my DP and Director friends, don't get calls from their agents. Most of their work is through their immediate/close network. So what's the answer? Well, there really isn't one. If you didn't have talent and didn't have a decent reel, it would be a lot easier to give you a course of direction. However, you have a great reel and seem plenty talented enough. So the only issue you have is meeting the right people and getting work. Those two things are the most difficult part and honestly, the only way I know how to meet those people is through other people, which takes time and a lot of effort.

Yes, it's insurance for the film negative. This is to protect the production so if there is any damage or loss to the negative, they can file a claim to help pay for reshoots. These sort of policies exist on film sets for actors as well. For instance, if an actor is injured or sick during a production and can't work, there is a policy to cover re-shoot dates.

Like all things, depends on how well they are maintained. The SR3's are MUCH quieter then their predecessors. We just did a demo with an SR3 and my LTR in class, both with film, both running and the students knew the SR3 was running, but had no idea the LTR was as well. That's how much quieter the Aaton is. They had to pick it up and put it next to their ear to hear it running in a dead silent classroom.