Miguel Bunster

Hi, Thanks for your replay, well the pre timing will be done on the plasma but then for the final part will be done on a screening room at a bigger facility so to much the LUT and do minor tweaks. I would love to get your info. The deal is almost closed and I passed the ball to production becasue I been two weeks on the phone and now I am trying to concentrate on the script...figure that...but is worht the hassle to shoot on 35mm. Shoot me an email and best. M

So I will go in camera-film-DI testing in a few days and will test a lot of things in only two days. I am planning a couple things to test the DI workflow and get a short selected print and HDCAM And HDVPRO results of the tests (only 1 or 2 minutes for film out sadley but its what it is) to view and show. Now what you guys think would be the best way to put to test the DI workflow and just go hard on it? I am planning a few different things but becasue I can print only 1 to 2 minutes out and get it projected here in town it would be grat to get some thoughts on charts, extreme sutuations, exposures, color etc. All form the tech point of view. The n the rest of the testing will more artistic things and so on. THanks a lot! M

jejej thanks...was curios on opinions enver had the pleasure of a 70mm print beside the one only Lawerence of Arabia and hell..that was great... Thanks M

[O one thing that catched me attention for say the least I went to one of this big post houses (big for sure) and they were timing in really big plasma monitors (expensive but not crazy) there work and of course at the end had a projector for final printing stage but all ther suites were on this 60 inch palsmas or 45 whatever the number was... I think I so Samsung and Panasonic monitors...any optinions? M

Hi couldnt agree more with your thoughts. Production had in mind a super 16mm budget (we are about a 1mil movie) adn then go DI. I prioposed if i was able to get a good deal DI wise and camera wise and film wise we should go 35mm, the love the idea but make it work so there I was for 10 days on the phone and things came together. The DI made sense for the 3 perf thing but turned out that here in Minneapolis there is one camera (may be wrong) thats 3 perf and bringing cameras from LA is expensive for shipping, insurance etc so going 3 perf kind of cancels its way out for a 100,000 feet of film. Now Optical si stil a posibility but I worked before with a place called Local Hero Post Production based in LA and had a good experinceon my last film which was bigger. We are still seeing some place by production side but Local Hero cme in with a good workflow/bid with post sound included that theproducers like so they keep eveything under one roof and make their life easier too. Will see how everything works out but I looks like we will be able to shot 35mm. Is a teen comedy so no heavy DI or anything heavy dutie is needed but a reason I want to use it is becasue the stor takes palce in winter and runs into summer but we start shooting in May till june for a 22 days shooting plan. And it not winter!!! so the DI makes sense to refine certain things in case we require it. So we are actually looking at Super 1.85 24fps -SD dailies - HDSR444 LOG selects - FINAL DI in Scratch ( I think) and then get multiple masters in corresponding formats. I think we would gain going and finishing all the way optical and have no problem but the "Weather" and time for shooting may come down and a DI may help smooth certain things like sky, shadow colors, contrast etc... I feel comfartable. Some people ask me why a smaller house (money is a reason) and I had a good experince with them but as well small i not equal to bad, not at least now a days that there is access to knowledge and gear and etc.... thats my thought at least...and well for bigger palces you pay the price and that menas maybe s16mm..... And we are doing test ending in HDSR 444 or HDCAM for wiewing, I am testing the lenses optically and getting a print and as well shoot 1 to 2 minutes of film and go through the whole post process and get a final print out for that footage and see it on the big screen... But will see al resultas a few days out...thigs jsut comming together...could have tested earlier if going s16mm but I believe is worth the hassle and extra work.... Any thoughts on this would be great. M

I only have seen the 35mm version of Blade Runner which is 2.39 but its mentioned on IMDB that the 70mm version is 2.20 I am curious about how much different it is in extra frame change etc. Any thoughts? Ps: beside de super 70mm quality etc...

Hi, I am going through this post process selection now. Originally production looked at shooting RED but for some respectable reasons the director who is great (and his first film, big hollywood writer) decided RED or viper were not right for his film visually and production looked at shooting super16mm and then go DI. We are actually pushing things and trying to work out on 35mm not only for the extra quality but optically wise (perpspective, depth of field, angle of view etc) is a better choice for the film. We being talking with a couple bigger houses and a smaller one I workedwith before which I had a good experience for a HDSR 444 LOG post workflow from where we will get a lowcon master daily and from that pre timed dailies for the offline in HDVCpro quality and then get a final version in HDSR444 LOG and sub formats so they can go sell the film and if so then make a print. Number been around in one place for 100,000 aprox for all the post DI and post sound included (no composer or music) and to the other end to all DI post workflow with out sound to 70,000. All based in 100,000 feet of film. Some are big post houses and other smallers but is the range we been looking at. Which is actually really good considering. Kodak is giving a killer deal and so Deluxe so things may come together and get 35mm. One more thing we been looking at and are getting the numbers is going the optical way and from the final print get a low con print and from that make an HD transfer and so on for sales. This is cheaper to a certaini degree (well it is) because post house which do image and sound and are related to lbas give a good deal package at least in our range. The final tradition price will depend on the amoun of optical and etc but to a certain degree this is more marginal. But the producers had a fair question: why if we are going 1.85 35mm dont we go optical? so looking into it more price wise. As well wanted to ask any1 opinions in the followin because I wont be able to compare the tests but this is one thought: 1-shoot 1.85 and do HDSR 444 LOG workflow or: 2- Shoot Super 1.85 and Do HDSR444 LOG workflow, curious if is it worth it the extra negative from looking at it, not from number wise. Problem of doing this is that locks production into going DI but well this is decided before all takes place of course. Where we are shooting there is only 1 camera that is 3 perf which was an orignal pln to go that route and do a DI but things look like a 4 perf show. Any thoughts? Thanks and best! m

Hi, I am going through this post process selection now. Originally production looked at shooting RED but for some respectable reasons the director who is great (and his first film, big hollywood writer) decided RED or viper were not right for his film visually and production looked at shooting super16mm and then go DI. We are actually pushing things and trying to work out on 35mm not only for the extra quality but optically wise (perpspective, depth of field, angle of view etc) is a better choice for the film. We being talking with a couple bigger houses and a smaller one I workedwith before which I had a good experience for a HDSR 444 LOG post workflow from where we will get a lowcon master daily and from that pre timed dailies for the offline in HDVCpro quality and then get a final version in HDSR444 LOG and sub formats so they can go sell the film and if so then make a print. Number been around in one place for 100,000 aprox for all the post DI and post sound included (no composer or music) and to the other end to all DI post workflow with out sound to 70,000. All based in 100,000 feet of film. Some are big post houses and other smallers but is the range we been looking at. Which is actually really good considering. Kodak is giving a killer deal and so Deluxe so things may come together and get 35mm. One more thing we been looking at and are getting the numbers is going the optical way and from the final print get a low con print and from that make an HD transfer and so on for sales. This is cheaper to a certaini degree (well it is) because post house which do image and sound and are related to lbas give a good deal package at least in our range. The final tradition price will depend on the amoun of optical and etc but to a certain degree this is more marginal. But the producers had a fair question: why if we are going 1.85 35mm dont we go optical? so looking into it more price wise. As well wanted to ask any1 opinions in the followin because I wont be able to compare the tests but this is one thought: 1-shoot 1.85 and do HDSR 444 LOG workflow or: 2- Shoot Super 1.85 and Do HDSR444 LOG workflow, curious if is it worth it the extra negative from looking at it, not from number wise. Problem of doing this is that locks production into going DI but well this is decided before all takes place of course. Where we are shooting there is only 1 camera that is 3 perf which was an orignal pln to go that route and do a DI but things look like a 4 perf show. Any thoughts? Thanks and best! m

Hi, My 2 cents... I have to agree with Rodrigo in what he is saying. No matter what job you have in this bussiness you gota do it as good as you can if not, there is no point in doing. As him that helped me achieve certain things and at the same time some people well established have helped me out of pure kindness to get there. I did too the PA thing for free en CHile making coffee out of a stoking (for real, really good cofee too) and then so on that people helped me but never got to shoot with them but started shooting shorts etc but that people wrote my recomendations letters for AFI and introduced me to some more. After AFI I just promissed my self to shoot no matter what regardless of pay check and so on. I shot everything and stopped worrieng if it was the right or wrong choice. Was happy to be shooting which compensated for being broke...both havent changed that much jaja but seriously was the commitment that got me some place. I shot all type of things and honestly tried the best. That took eventually to just finishing another film with a great cast and crew and way bigger budget than anythign else I done but aproched it with the same mentallity. What got me this film was all the other smaller proyects and one in special which was a low budget film where i becme friends with the director and producer and worked on it for a long time for free in the CC and so on because I just wanted to get it as right as possible and they recommend me later for this bigger film based on that attitude. I would never thogh a year and half after school I was going to be on a set with this cast and crew. And not being a mercenerry goes a long way. The seccodn unit DP came on board (friends and a really good dp) to do my digital stils and whatever I needed and the movie flipped and he became the operator and second unit DP and id am amazing job at making the film even better but he never came on only with that, he came on to help me on my first big film and things worked out for the best and had a great 21 day shoot in L.A and mexico with him and the whole gang. Beside having more money and toys and more people giving opinions it feels pretty much the same, there is a different kin of presure and aproach to it especially when shooting three cameras om many scenes and some times all three at diffeerent FPS trying to match depth of field etc but that another thing... Going back to rodrigo's comment. I love working with everyone in every department and have a good creative time and that has taken me along way, you would never imagine who recommendsed me for another films and so on comming out of having a good creative work from amkeup, woredrobe etc... I believe that you CAN't keep people in a place por position because its good for one. IF you see they have potential of doing something else they want to do but havent been able and you can help why not? Others done it for me. We did it on this film and helped that person and it helped me to get something done in a better way... Well my 2 cents. PS: Rodirgo your work was aboig inspiration for our film so thanks! M

I am shooting a film i s35mm and using a 1/4 BPM though out the whole film. We never go wider than 35mm lens and never shoot over or under a 2.8 in interiors (except one scene) and day exterior all at 5.6 or at most 8 depending on the lens...its a pretty gritty film with a lot of under exposure and high ratios somoe times the fill being 3 under the key and so on and shooting a lot into sources...i havent seen the pattern of the dots but i know what david is speaking about. I tested this and got 35mm printd of the test and looked fine. is a softer look but int he DI we are gona apply a 50% bleach bypass effect which will cancel in some way the BPM effect in the shadows but still kepp the skins softer... We were shooting a scene where I had mazi brutes shooting at the windows and i didnt have time to move them (last shot of the day) and the lens was getting a direct soft flare from the window and the BMP created this milky effect which will be towened down in the DI when I crash the balcks back but will stil be there around the window. This is more noticible whn there is few bright areas beside the one flaring the lens...didnt like this but was forced into the situation but at the same time is something we are going for.... I like DI when they dont become a "LOOK" and the organic feel of the film is lost. I will see hwow that wide shot on a 35mm flared with bpm can be handled in the DI. My timer was on set and I explained him what was going on and he said he has dealt with that before and should be able to handle in when crashing the blacks...if nto i would have lost 10 minutes moving the lights..... Still is better to do all in camera than "fix" in DI but can save a lot fo time and moeny when you have a big cast on set. My 2 cents. M

true enough but i am shooting in different takes both sides of the car as the front windshield and the back one....so thinking about that... ..m

So i just came back from the picture car company end measured their densities and loss stop and took some srl digital still for color reference. Color si fine and Light loss can be in the place I need. Light tint has a 2 stops loss, Medium Tinit between 2 1/2 and 3 stops loss And heavy tint 3 1/3 stop loss.. aprox of course...spot measured.. Because I am panning (camera in back seat) from front seat to back seat in one shot i was planning to tint all windows equalily to get a constant exposure through out the pan...but now considering leaving the front windhiels a tint lower (like light tinit) and the side windows a medium tint and the back window a light tint...this will make both front and back a little brighter but the sides darker and will get a little more ambient. This way I can work with smaller lights and not need a process trailer... So with medium tint i was getting aprox two sopts over in the exterior and two stops under in the interior... any thoughts? M

O yes got hta tbefore in HD jajaj really nice effext if you go for it....annoying in the other cases....but this is something you can acutally see as you are shooting unless i putting the name to another effect.. M

[Hi, thanks for the replys! I am going to the car picture company to see and decide on the tint level. I may go heavy tint on some cars for two reasons. 1- Is we dont want to see inside the car when shooting outside and 2- The way we want to shoot car interiors is 180 degree shots. Handheld panning from driver to passenger on back etc. And that mean i iwl lbe looking out the front shield and side windows and i want them to never bi lit from camera side so i will go with light panels on an angle for both and have them underexposed by 1 1/2 stops inside and have the exterior 2 stops over. SO If i am shooting 5279 (considering the exterior is sunny) i get around a t:32 so i will tint the windows to get the exterior down to a 16 or 11. and then light inside the shots to get a 2.8 - 4.0 and expose around a 5.6 (not using ND i may drop a nd6 to shoot wider open.) Thast my plan but of course a lot will go out the window (not being ironic) but thats what i am amaing for and ideally shoot in a street in shade or backlit by the sun. ANy thoughts? Thanks! M Camera movement is importan for me here...so i am working on a way I can shoot hand held 180 degrees movement. (2.39 aspect ratio in s35mm). As David mentioned if you have a process traielr and can do it right is worth but to be done half way I agree is better aproaching the opposite way.

Interesting for sure. Thanks for the replays. I printed a test of 5279 using an ND85-1.2 plus a ND3 and had no problem so most probable thing i will go with a 1.8ND85 and avoid extra glass...any thoughts? M

Hi just curios about it. I am shooting with 5279 in exterior work for a film and I want to shoto at 4.0 on the stop and will be using heavy ND which I have done before and NP but was testing a couple things and in a couple i got some color shift. Not so much on a single ND85-1.8 btu combining two NDs. I u nderstand this as adding characteristics of the filters but wanted to ask peoples experince in this. Thanks! M

Hi, I am shooting a lot of car interior hand held style like in 21 grams etc and I am having the cars windows tinted (for exposure and for character things "drug loard cars") and I am going in to see the density. I was thinking a 50% tint but wanted to ask peoples opinion about working in tinted cars like color shift etc. As well the non tinted cars will be shot in right time of day and lit with a ocmbination of light panels, 200 HMI jokers. Any opinions would be great! Thanks a lot! Ps: i was going to use a platinium camera but changing it for a Aaton 35. Smaller size would helkp a lot. Best M

I did, checked all, ASC web site has not lsited the 2001 (when the film came out), checkd artfull text data base too etc...no luck... brbrbrb

Oopps and forgot about Friday Night Lights....as well any guidance would be great! Thanks M

Hi, Hate to ask but I havent been able to find an article about Treaining day and I am sure i so one in ASC Mag..may be wrong. Any direction swould be welcomed. Thanks! M

Hi, I am in the pre production of a film with many variables and I am setting my worflow with the post house and wanted to ask peoples opinoin on the following which is really important for me, so thanks in advance for your time. My issue is the following. I done a similar process before in different ways but last time was really unhappy for the following. I shot in s16mm (in Chile) had a low con pass made in canada and when the master's low con HDSR tapes got back the low con was all over the place. Scene which i had on purpose overexposed areas were pull back to get info in the highlights but the blacks were crashed so in the timing sesion i had to bring things back up and got this brutal grain and lack of detail in the shadows and some artiffacts... I want to avoid this in the low con pass and I am figuring out a way to do it and my question regards that. The base specs of what I am doing: s35mm 3perf - 2.39 aspect ratio and some 4 perf maybe for b-unit and hand crank(may not be able to get two 3 perf) Telecine Low con Pass to HDSR (production deciding on HDSR final master or 2k depending of it gets theatrical distribution) Dailies will be graded from the HDSR Low Con Master in Scratch or similar. I am sending the colorist digital stills which will be graded to the final look (based on camera test and matching my DSRL). We will come up with matching LUTs for my photo editing software that will match what the colorist is using in Scratch. I do micromanage but the stills will be a reference if anything is off. (Most of the look wil be done in camera as much as possible anyway). My cocnern is setting a process for the low con and have been looking into things but here is where i need some help and opinions. Beside sending notes and talking with the low con people what is your advice?s there actualy a way to set a predetermined transfer setting? I am looking into charts etc and gona make a three part test. The first one is the basic one (as if i was finishing on film) of shooting differente exposures to see the range and then printing back to see where i want my printer lights (getting actual prints for this) and with that same test go through the low con and color timing stages. There as well I will set the settings of my DSRL camera and printing options. Based on those results come some more tesst but are directed to lighting, art makeup etc. Being researching and talking with epople but there is not a predetermined way to set the low con (and maybe is not the smartest idea) as when you are shooting for optical finish and you know your printing lights. Any thoughs would be great. recommendations on what charts to use for the low con etc as well. Thanks you very much! Miguel

Hi, I am in the pre production of a film with many variables and I am setting my worflow with the post house and wanted to ask peoples opinoin on the following which is really important for me, so thanks in advance for your time. My issue is the following. I done a similar process before in different ways but last time was really unhappy for the following. I shot in s16mm (in Chile) had a low con pass made in canada and when the master's low con HDSR tapes got back the low con was all over the place. Scene which i had on purpose overexposed areas were pull back to get info in the highlights but the blacks were crashed so in the timing sesion i had to bring things back up and got this brutal grain and lack of detail in the shadows and some artiffacts... I want to avoid this in the low con pass and I am figuring out a way to do it and my question regards that. The base specs of what I am doing: s35mm 3perf - 2.39 aspect ratio and some 4 perf maybe for b-unit and hand crank(may not be able to get two 3 perf) Telecine Low con Pass to HDSR (production deciding on HDSR final master or 2k depending of it gets theatrical distribution) Dailies will be graded from the HDSR Low Con Master in Scratch or similar. I am sending the colorist digital stills which will be graded to the final look (based on camera test and matching my DSRL). We will come up with matching LUTs for my photo editing software that will match what the colorist is using in Scratch. I do micromanage but the stills will be a reference if anything is off. (Most of the look wil be done in camera as much as possible anyway). My cocnern is setting a process for the low con and have been looking into things but here is where i need some help and opinions. Beside sending notes and talking with the low con people what is your advice?s there actualy a way to set a predetermined transfer setting? I am looking into charts etc and gona make a three part test. The first one is the basic one (as if i was finishing on film) of shooting differente exposures to see the range and then printing back to see where i want my printer lights (getting actual prints for this) and with that same test go through the low con and color timing stages. There as well I will set the settings of my DSRL camera and printing options. Based on those results come some more tesst but are directed to lighting, art makeup etc. Being researching and talking with epople but there is not a predetermined way to set the low con (and maybe is not the smartest idea) as when you are shooting for optical finish and you know your printing lights. Any thoughs would be great. recommendations on what charts to use for the low con etc as well. Thanks you very much! Miguel

thank you very much! M

Hi, Been looking for info on Syriana but with no luck. I found a dvd playback article in ASC and someonline interview to Robert Elswitt where it mentioned camera and stock and a little insight on his aproach. Does any1 know if there are any long articles about the cinematography work? Thanks a lot! M

When shooting purely red the is a lack of definition in that layer in film (as i udnerstand and red and di a test ssome time ago). What some dps do (talked about it) when shooting dark rooms with jsut red light, they will actually shoot for example with magenta which will expose more of the three layers and not just the red layer of the film stock and in post color time it to red. But if you shoot pure red (one wavelength in theory) it will or shoud look softer even if you hit the focus right....considering your lens works fine. BEst M