Ben Brahem Ziryab

Thanks again. I'll have to some perform tests with the RED ONE (unfortunately film is not being used on this project) and see how well it handles overexposure. Hope it holds well, especially in this kind of situations where you actually need the enormous exposure latitude. If it doesn't work out, I was thinking of moving the BG plate back and putting something like a flag, blocking the light from the PAR, and sort of isolate it.

Thanks for insight, Adrian. But how do you know how keep the streaks of light so strong throughout the window blind, and still maintain highlight details in the background (probably a matte painting) ?

Hello, After recently seeing "The Black Dahlia", photographed by Vilmos Sizgmond, I was very inspired on how the lighting was approached, and particularly the lighting coming from the windows, as an essential component in forming the space and the overall mood of the shot. The style, obviously, is strongly influenced by abstract film-noir lighting and roman paintings from the caravaggio era. As a matter of fact, I need someone to give me insight or a description of how to recreate this type of window lighting effect? Thanks, Ziryab Ben

Finally someone answer...hehe :) Anyway, I'm fully aware of the presence of National Film school of Denmark. I visited the schools several times and even know some of the teachers there. One of the problems with it is that they don't consider my age (18) to be appropriate. Even though I'm not too young according to the school's policy, I'm most likely to be rejected. As well, the school doesn't count as an academic degree, and doesn't open any door for me in terms of getting my MFA in Cinematography. And I do need a Bachelor Degree in order to get a scholarship for my future studies at UCLA, USC or AFI.

Any suggestions or comments?

Hey everyone I'm a danish student who is currently looking to study Motion Picture Arts after my high school graduation next summer. As I won several awards and believe to have a solid portfolio, great high school grades and a diploma for a 3-years filmschool program, I find my chance to be reasonable for attending one of many undergraduate programs (BA or BFA) in the US. The only major problem, of course, is my financial situation as the danish government only founds master degree's. As I will have to pay every dime out of my own pocket, I need something very affordable. As soon as I finish my bachelor, the danish government can found my cinematography master's at UCLA, USC and AFI Conservatory. I've already found four different Universities that I find reasonable: San Diego State University (first priory), University of North Carolina and University of Houston. All have annual tuitions around 21-22.000 for non-residents, including campus, books and health insurance cost (which I don't need as I'm already covered by Vanbreda International). Additionally, I looked up Academy of Art University in San Francisco which should cost 22,000, but doesn't include housing. So, I am asking if you have any comments to my research or any suggestions to undergraduate programs with affordable tuitions (that I can pay for myself) ? Hope you can help... Ziryab Ben,

The "making of" video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teoSDTJDjF4 The concept is very simple: They shoot two different plates, one with actors and one without, using a motion control camera. This way it's easier for the Visual Effect team to blend the CGI elements with the live action. Certainly very well done... Cheers,

And by weaker backfocus performance, I mean that the backfocus on Master Primes needs to be adjusted a bit to match the sharpness of Ultra Primes when using it on RED ONE. Ultra Primes should be just right from the rental house.

Any hint on what you're doing with the film in post?

Yes, ARRI Ultra Primes from Ziess are defiantly beautiful lenses and a good choice for the RED ONE camera. I am not sure whether they are fast enough for your needs. They are although extremely sharp from corner-to-corner (over T4) and very reliable lenses. Great focus rotation and distance as well. You may also consider the cheaper Master Primes (great lenses, but a little softer at edges. Also the Back-focus performs a tad better with the Ultra Primes). As Brian mentions, they are very expensive and not something you want to buy in four different focal length, without testing them first.

Why shoot film if you are not going to take advantage of the enormous exposure latitude, you know? You can underexpose the 7207 right down to 3 stops and still see the entire spectrum. What are you doing with it in post? This is important, but yes it supports enough light to keep the beautiful tones and information on the negative.

Zooms (In this case, Telephoto zooms) and Primes serves different purposes. Per say the field of view should be the similar at same focal length. As for the quality,there is a difference. Primes tends to be faster lenses than zooms, considering all the light-loss in zooms (compare aperture in f-stop of both lenses at 50mm, not T stop). As well a lens with such focal length range is usually compromising quality. Primes usually takes advantage of improved coating, optical purity and better optical properties in general. I can't say anything for sure, unless you provide us with more information. So if they're similar, my guess is you're better off with the prime, unless it's a budget issue,

Well, it's not always up to the director whether a DP is required for the job or not, especially in corporate hollywood. I think someone like Steve Soderbergh is too much involved in the process and technology of cinematography that he simply can't let go of the camera. You know, Soderbergh's style of shooting, always makes me think of him holding a Millennium XL Panaflex right on his shoulder, operating the camera with his hands on the matte box. For me it's seems very clear that his visual approach matches his vision. Stanley Kubrick once said that he would never use cinematographer...Until de discovered John Alcott of course. Never say never, Soderbergh just needs to find the right DP.

Ok, here's thing: You should always spare film from any x-ray machines. If possible, request a manual inspection of your film. From personal experience, I know that this is not always the case, especially in european customs and airports. I remember arguing with french custom office regarding this issue and they wouldn't manual inspect anything below 1000 ASA. So, basically no horror story yet for me, but I never ship or transport high-speed from one country to another. So ask for for manual inspection and make sure your films is below 800 ASA and they will be fine :) Good luck :)

Yeah, it certainty seems like to be shot in HD. Anyone knows for sure? Great show!

It doesn't mean anything in particularly. The main difference is that the second shot is tighter, with a deeper focus on the first. [iN #1] The second gunman is somewhere involved in the story (as Adrian mentions the shot is showing what's happening with the two people) and as part of the coverage, he's has been included in the frame.

Why did no one mention the opening shot in "Touch of Evil" or car chase/single-shot sequence from "Children of Men"? My favorites are probably the rain scene from "Road to Perdition", train robbery from "The Assignation of Jesse James by coward Robert Ford" (+ every shot in the entire film), "Amelie" (several shots), chicken scene in "City of God" and, of course, handheld camerawork of "Soy Cuba" (I am Cuba). And many gorgeous shots from Ron Fricke's non-narrative "Baraka". I also pretty much agree with most shots that has been mentioned here, as of the fantastic composed imagery of "Lawrence of Arabia" and "Barry Lyndon"...2001, Blade Runner (amazing visuals), There Will Be Blood etc.

I absolutely agree. They are used as toplighting in large sets and, as you mention, spreading even light. I remember the lighting designers on "Dreamgirls" using them for lighting the stage. They bring out harsh light, but can be soften with diffusion frames or silk skirts. And not only are they difficult to control, they are also difficult to handle correctly.

Great to hear that you're starting out. But first things first, you won't get any decent Zeiss glass for your 1500. Zeiss announces ZE photography lenses for the Canon EOS, but exclusive and very expensive primes is not what you want to start off with. For more serious video projects, please notice the available PL adaptor, giving the possibility of using the appropriate Super Speed/Ultra Primes. As recommended by Trevor, the Canon 24-70 F/2.8 is the way to go. All-around sharp, affordable zoom with a lot of performance.

For anamorphic lenses, I'll usually go for the Lomo's. Excellent glass with great performance throughout all stops. I'm in love with Lomo's organic quality and dimensionality. Optical purity is obviously there, and they're for sure more affordable than the Hawks. When it comes to spherical glass, I would probably go for a set of Cooke S4 primes. You mention the Angenieux zoom, which I don't remember using since early 16 mill projects. Not a big fan of zooms, but again this probably has to do with my way of viewing a scene. I like to plan focal lengths at an early stage and using lenses that maintain even sharpness, all the way from center to corners. Every situation is different, so my focal length preferences would be slightly different between projects as well, but usually somewhere between 28-85mm on 3-perf Super35 format. If I wanna go wider than that, I'll use the Ultra Primes from Zeiss.

Hey guys Does anyone know where to buy issues of the monthly ASC magazine in Europe? I am looking for some sort of internet store selling the magazines, since it's a little problematic buying them directly from US (because of the expenses in import duties, shipping etc.). Doesn't matter where in Europe, but shipping must available to Denmark.

I don't agree with the Camera Department necessarily being small. Of course, it all depends on the actual production and budget of a film. On some productions, the Camera Department is somewhere big compared to other departments and the other way around (Let's say a film with a lot of CGI = Visual Effect department being big...or a film with a lots building sets = The Production Design department being big...A film with no CGI, very little Production Design can have the Camera Department as one of their biggest department) It's correct that the Director of Photography is heading the Camera Department, but then you would need to specificity Camera Department? Because a DP is usually also head of the Lighting, Grips and sometimes the Electrician Department.

Yes, the difference is in the focal length of the lens. That might also be differences in color, contrast and sharpness, depending on quality of the lens (different lenses even by the same manufacture can have different qualities). What are the f-number for these lenses? Because they may not have the same max. aperture, which will affect the depth of field and therefore also control the amount of light you let though the lens. As mentioned before, it's a good idea to put the lens on a still camera and decide what focal length to use for the particular shot. Unless you'r using PL Cine Lenses and you don't have the ability to use them with still cameras, you have to use a director's viewfinder for this task...

Can you please give an example (picture, still from film, anything) of what you are looking after, because I can't fully understand what you mean by overexposing the back light. If you are looking to soften the light, you can either move the back light further away, use a diffusion filter or reflect the back light into a clean white surface (like flamingo or light reflectors). Then you can use Adobe After Effects for creating that desired glowing effect, digitally. Pro-Mist filters is screwed into the lens. The function of the filter is to excess sharpness and contrast and creates pearlescent glow around highlights. So it may work for you...

Yes, the RED ONE camera are able to shot in RAW. I am not sure exactly about what you'r asking...but I assume RAW on the RED ONE camera means the same as on still photography. RAW and JPG compression are very similar. The advantage you will get shooting RAW, is the better control over the Brightness, Gamma, Contrast, Colors etc. in Post. The Image Quality you will receive after transferring the footage to the computer will be the same you saw on your LCD Monitor while shooting. And of course, considered you shot in 4K and the monitor only displays up to 1080p, there will be a difference in resolution which can affect the level of detail, but all-in-all the image on the monitor and the transfered footage will look the same.