Alvin Pingol

>>Does really matter if you are using a black stock, a white or beige one? Lighter colored nets will lower contrast moreso than dark/black ones, diffusion of highlights will be more apparent. >>What about if you are using a different brand? Different halation effect; i.e. irregular "star" pattern will be different from brand to brand, depending on how the nets are woven. >>What about in 35mm? Is it just a matter of changing shutter angle Yes, 144 degrees at 24fps = 1/60th. If shooting a PAL television, shooting at 25fps (180 deg. shutter) will work, too.

Hi Phil, great post up above! Technobabble is truly an acquired taste. :-p You would think an NTFS version of the FireStore would be available as well. I'd much rather have each take as its own file than have the longer ones segmented, but I guess a lot of software nowadays can automatically detect segmented AVI files and join them with ease. Ehh. This is OT; I'm finished :ph34r:

I noticed it too, especially in certain shots, INT. apartment. I wondered why only select shots appeared to be pushed, as opposed to the whole scene/sequence; of course, not being present during the shoot, it could've been one of many problems that could have not been resolved any other way (as was discussed in a previous thread, and is most certainly true, you never really know the conditions under which the footage was being shot - for all I know, a bulb may have blown and crew had neither the time nor resources to replace it, etc, etc...). An Oscar contender, IMO. :)

Consider Day-for-Night photography.

I point you in the direction of this: http://www.resellerratings.com/seller2375.html Careful where you shop!

>>it does rather raise the question as to why they changed the name, other than >>the commercial need to produce something that appears new (and the fact that >>PCMCIA is a bit of a mouthful). Hah... P2 is much easier to say than Extended Quad-SecureDigital RAID PCMCIA Memory System, or the EQSDRAIDPCMCIAMS as I like to call it. :D >>Phil, maybe you can explain why you can't just plug an ordinary firewire drive >>(as opposed to something like a FireStore) into a camera and record data, if >>that's correct. I think this was answered in the past, but essentially, the HDD needs an interface to manage the data it will be receiving (the FireStore, obviously, has this built-in). If connected directly to a camera, the 1394 cable would carry the 1's and 0's to the disk, but without an interface to tell it what file system to write as, where to put the data, how to write the data, what to name the data, and so forth, the HDD is lost and cannot write anything. I'm sure Mr. Rhodes can explain this in a much more technical and thorough manner. :)

Kodak Look Manager System: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products...=0.1.4.16&lc=en Sorry John! ;)

Combing through the archives (all the way back to the Siteforums days) pulls up an amazing amount of text you've contributed that, in itself, would make one incredible book!

Similarly, with little else to say, I AGREE. :lol:

Jeremy, the Cinepak codec is an old codec with outdated compression algorithms. Even at high bitrates will results be just mediocre. Consider a codec like HuffYUV (link), which uses lossless encoding algorithms to compress the video to size, while at the same time avoiding any degredation of the image.

If in-camera motion blur proves problematic, consider the post-route. Software such as this (link) may help. While I haven't used this plugin myself, the gallery (link) has some samples that don't look too bad...

>>I'm looking for a 3-chip DV or DVCAM POV solution. That would be uncomfortably large and cumbersome to rig to a motocross bike. A lipstick camera system may be a more feasible solution for you. >>It needs to be pro, robust, and mountable. Lipstick cameras will undoubtedly give you the most freedom and ease when it comes to mounting; their small size makes placement simple and keeps rigging equipment to a minimum. Though they will not give you the greatest of image quality, they can be very robust and may prove to be the best solution in this situation.

Had the chance to see this film tonight, and thoroughly enjoyed it. A few scenes you could tell were push-processed (photochemically or digitally, I couldn't tell, but the weak shadows and blown highlights were a dead giveaway). Didn't see any anamorphic artifacts, so a 2.35 extraction from S35 I'm guessing. Quite sharp throughout, especially the EXT shots. The one of Mae (Zellweger) walking to the church was razor sharp; I would've never guessed a DI was involved. Beautifully photographed, a few very powerfully composed shots in there. I enjoyed Totino's work. The editing during the final fight was a bit frantic, but it fit - added to the intensity and tension, not that there wasn't enough already!

Underexposing! You're rating the film faster than it actually is, so you will thus be giving it less light than what it would need, if rated normally.

>>Or maybe there's a setting on the monitor we can change in terms of refresh >>rate or something? Under the display settings. Refresh rate cannot be changed directly on monitors, AFAIK. You have to go through the Control Panel (Windows), or right-click desktop, etc, etc... For simplicity's sake, choose 60Hz. Every monitor, old and new, can handle that - and it syncs perfectly with the 1/60th "open" shutter.

And use lens hood. Or flags. Just make sure any stray light doesn't hit the filter, as it "activates" uniformly. A tiny lens flare becomes, with an UltraCon, a washed out image.

Something slightly diffused (and appropriately gelled) for augmenting the glowstick, and a harder source for the flare. I can't offer specific recommendations, but just be sure that whatever you're using to augment these sources doesn't create a shadow of the practical! After all, a lightsource will never cast a shadow of itself. ;) >>Why not loose the P&S and go with Digi-primes for this ? I second this recommendation. Not only will it allow you to work with lower light levels, but will be of great benefit when you wont have to worry about toying with the device when in tight quarters underground.

Christmas lights.

I wouldn't worry too much about this. To the viewer, the flashlight represents the one and only source of light, that which illuminates the otherwise pitch black surroundings. Naturally, the contrast ratio between the flashlight face and dark surroundings would be very high; having the face of the flashlight blown out should look natural. Moreover, the face of the flashlight can't possibly occupy more than a small fraction of the frame at any given time, so a small hotspot should not be objectionable. Plus, it's not like you're losing valuable information in the highlight; people don't need to see the bulb. I would worry more if you try to keep too much detail by stopping down and using supplemental lighting - makes it seem as if the guy's flashlight isn't bright enough!

CineSneakers. Made from the finest cine-quality Duvetyne. Only $299.99! * Look for CineSneakers in Muslin, coming this Fall! :D

Do a forum search, as there have been threads regarding lightmeter recommendations in the past. The Sekonic L-508/L-508Cine seems to be popular choice. :)

Seems to work for me. Should take you here. Some really amazing work! B)

I would recommend PAL over NTSC as it will give you a slight increase in resolution as well as better color subsampling (4:2:0 vs. 4:1:1). Because the NTSC XL2 is capable of shooting 24P, a transfer to film from either region camera should be equally simple. >>Also, I was wondering if I move back to the USA, will having a PAL camera >>cause me problems? Only in the fact that you'll need a converter box to view your footage on television; 60Hz sources (fluorescents, TV screens, etc.) may flicker slightly if using PAL standard shutter speeds, like 1/50th, 1/100th, and so forth. Additionally, an NTSC to PAL conversion will never look as good as PAL to NTSC. Hope this helps...

Well, if some guy told you that, then hell, why not? :D But honestly, do a specifications comparison for starters, that'll hopefully set a few things straight. Then, use common sense: Which camera is newer? Is more expensive? Is bigger? ;)

Private Message; the option to send one can be found to the left of a user's post, below his or her avatar and info. A useful feature for privately communicating with other board members, without having to use e-mail.