Evan Andrew John Prosofsky

Yes I believe so, only problem is even a large cooler won't hold 7000ft of film. My worry is that the space blanket will hold in heat as opposed to holding in the cold? From the sounds of it though this shouldn't be a problem? Anyone that can provide more info regarding the effects you get from distressing film to heat would be much appreciated, Rob??

Good to know the desert should be ok. Do you agree using a spaceblanket with the reflective side up would be a necessary precaution? Could you please elaborate what the "very interesting things" baking the film does? At what heat for how long? What are the changes? Are you familiar with savides process? Thanks very much

Hi there, The topic really says it all. I'll be shooting in the Nevada desert in the heat of summer. Apparently there are occasionally dust storms and severe heat. Being from Canada I have absolutely no experience with this kind of weather/conditions, and as the DP I'd love to know how to best protect the camera. Specifically during lens changes/mag changes. We will have a van with us that I am hoping we can have on standby when I need to swap out a mag or lens, but this might not always be the case. I know sand/dust/dirt love to get into everything (including lenses??? uh oh, we're shooting s4's and cooke zoom) so I was planning on using a standard visqueen rain cover over the camera with a small hole for the eyepiece. Can anybody suggest anything more/better? And what about lens/mag changes? General camera upkeep? Shooting in the heat like that? Please let me know :) , thankyou! Evan

This month I will be travelling to the desert to shoot a music video on 5217/5219. I will be outdoors in plus 30 degrees celsius heat for 3-4 days with little to no shelter, our van being the main "depot" for film and gear. Eg. no fridges for the film. It will most likely be kept in the back seat or trunk, about 7000ft worth. 1)I feel that I have read in the past that when Roger Deakins was shooting out in Africa he would use a space blanket on top of the film to reflect the sun and keep it relatively cold. Is this correct? I guess I was always under the impression space blankets are meant to retain heat and that this wouldn't be ideal? Either way -- can anyone please suggest the best method to keep the stock cold? 2) Follow up -- I know that Harris Savides baked the film for a short amount of time (under 15 min?) for the film Birth. From what I recall he did this along with 2 stop underexposure and a 2 stop pull to "break the black" of the film and create a grainier, more muted and painterly color pallete without a true black ala classical painting, which used deep blues violets and reds instead of true black. My question is, aside from undergoing serious testing myself which I can't afford, what does exposing film stock to high amounts of heat actually do for the film? And is there a dramatic difference between cooking the film slowly (eg. in the back of a hot trunk for a month) compared to quickly baking it at 500 degrees in an oven for 15 minutes? As always, THANKYOU! Looking forward to the responses, Evan

I must still be confused. Are grey cards/color charts not used by the colorist to set the overall exposure/color balance of the scene? So if I shot a color chart in flat light, but then the scene that directly follows was exposed for say, the highlights, would the colorist not then try and correct that based on my color chart? Would I have to put a note beside the color chart saying something about the look? Like "bright blooming highlights coming through trees, dark moody forest" so that they know not to do so? Sorry David.

Anybody have any suggestions??

Hey everyone I actually just thought of another question. When you have a source that you're exposing for in the scene, deciding where to put the grey card is easy. But what about situations where you're doing a mixed exposure? Eg. Shooting in a dense forest where patches of dappled sunlight break through the trees. You average the exposure between the shadows and the dappled sunlight so the shadows are 1 under and the dapples are 2 over. Where does the grey card go? And wouldn't the colorist ruin the shot by timing to either the shadows or the highlights depending on the card? Still confused. Sorry, haha

This is exactly what I was looking for. Thanks so much for the help! Right now I am only using a BNC cable and running it clean. I will try the mini-monitor output and see if that makes a difference or not. I will also experiment with diff. monitors. Just from a comparison standpoint, do you happen to know what big features shooting film use for video tap/monitoring for SD? (not interested in the HD IVS which is clearly far superior but way too expensive) Thanks again,

Excellent advise on the notation, definitely going to utilize that next time I shoot. Thanks David

I'm just really confused. For instance I recently watched the behind the scenes for "Revolutionary Road" and there must have been a 12 inch or so monitor Sam Mendes was using for viewing at a video village. Even based on the quality I could see on his monitor on YOUTUBE the image looked relatively good. They were shooting with a 535B which I believe has the same tap as the 435? Is my transvideo monitor just bad? Is there something I'm missing that these bigger shoots have? Stumped. Does anyone have anything more to chime in?

Amazing, all makes sense. David, Adrian, thanks for the fast responses and incredibly helpful ones at that :) You're the best! Evan

Hi, Up until recently most of my shoots have been extremely run and gun and low budget; I rarely had time to shoot a color chart. That being said, the film has always come back colored beautiful. But I figure it couldn't hurt to get this parsed out because of this my understanding is still a tad shaky. To confirm -- one would shoot a grey card (or color chart, or both? help) in the lighting they want to be neutral? So what confuses me is then, what do you do in situations where you want the light to be warmer or colder and there is no neutral source? To clarify let me give an example; I am shooting a scene on 5219 outdoors, the subject is lit by a blazing fire. I expose for the subject lit by the flames, and want the film to turn out exactly as I see it, very warm. If I'm shooting tungsten film without an 85, where would I want the grey card to go? My intuition tells me I would have an on camera light balanced to 3200 that I would shoot the grey card with. That way the color of the flames (lets say 2500K) look slightly warmer, as it does to my eye. Is this correct? What is normal practice for shooting a grey card or color chart? Is it normal to have an on camera light like this to shoot color charts in situations where there is no neutral lighting? Do you shoot them at the beginning of every scene? Every change in lighting? Please explain :) Slightly confused and looking forward to your answers, thankyou! Evan

So I've been looking around for a workable directors viewfinder because I'm sick of renting one every time I get a job. I already own the typical alan gordon mark V, and I don't mind it, but it really just doesn't cut the mustard when compared to the real PL mounted finders. I like seeing how the lenses react to real light sources and having a bigger image with true focus/DOF is pretty incredible. So my question is, first off -- why the heck are these things so expensive? I've begun looking around; There is an unbranded one on ebay right now trying to sell for 4000 dollars. Alternatively the denz finder with the fancy wooden handle for sale on the ASC website is listed at 6800 dollars WITHOUT a ground glass?!?!?! Thats basically how much I paid for my 435. Insane. The list goes on. I'm finding that the average price seems to be around 2-3k. Does anyone know where I might be able to find one for cheaper? Lastly, I've been looking into the fries finder for sale at the "DOP Shop" online which says that "Inside the finder is a set of registration pins to hold a film clip". Does anybody know what this means? Thanks and sorry for the rambling list of questions, frustratedly yours, Evan

Really good to know! Thanks so much for the interest and comprehensive test Dom, thats incredible of you. To anyone interested, the director just received the footage yesterday and sent me some screen grabs. I can definitely say master primes were the right choice, and I do seem to notice a small increase in sensitivity when compared to super speeds, which very well may be attributable to what Dom characterizes as loss of speed under stronger lighting, as I shot under a lot of hard backlight and harsh neon/street light. I'll share the finished edit when all is said and done :)

I often hear the phrase "such and such is a good lab". I understand that this statement can refer to other things like turnaround time, general treatment, price, etc. But I have heard certain DP's imply that the processing is better or worse at various labs. I also remember the stories of Woody Allen and Gordon WIllis shopping around labs to find the best processing for B+W for Manhattan. Now, I usually go to what I would consider legitimate labs; Technicolor, Alphacine, FotoKem, etc. so I'd imagine that I haven't experienced "bad processing". That being said, I would love to know what exactly it means to get bad processing and how I could tell? Can the effect be subtle? Thanks, Evan

Interesting, thanks Adrian. Does anyone else have any experiences (specifically with the 435?) that they could share? Any good video taps? Bad ones? Anything I should know? Tell me about it -- the HD tap is so damn beautiful. But at (what I remember to be) around 25k (double what I paid for the 435 alone) its a little ridiculous. Anyone know how much it is to rent one? Though then I guess the effort to re-install on every shoot might get annoying. Thanks!

Hi everyone, So -- I recently purchased an Arri 435 and a transvideo rainbow monitor to go along with it. Now, granted, I have very little experience with video taps/video monitors on film cameras. Its rare that I use them. And I know that video taps have a bit of a reputation for being not so good less than SD quality video. That being said, I recently did a shoot with an arri 235 and a very similar transvideo monitor and the image quality appeared to be much better than what I'm getting on my 435 with the regular IVS. The cam has been serviced by visual products so I know chances are there's nothing faulty going on, but the image is so bad (mushy, dark, excessively noisey) that I can't use it unless I'm in bright sunlight (yes I know about the aperture adjustment ring and I have tried using it). Does anyone have much experience with video taps? Is there a trick to getting an useable image? Do I just need a better monitor? Is this just par for the course? I spent almost 500 dollars getting the monitor/cables/etc, I would have hoped I could use this dang thing to my advantage. I know there is the new HD IVS (far out of my price range) so please don't suggest that ;) , though I do know there is an IVS 2 but I have been unable to find what the differences between it and the original IVS are. Arri seems to be kindof shakey on details regarding taps. Please let me know your experiences, thanks very much! Evan

Thanks Stephen, you seem to reflect what I've heard others say in the past. But can you be more specific about how much slower they can be than a 1.3? I mean, are some a half or even full stop slower? If its something like 1/8th of a stop I really can't be bothered to care. But if some super speeds are more like a 1.8 or 2 it really does help effect my decision towards something like the master primes. I get the footage back this Friday, fingers doubly crossed...I'll be sure to post some stills. Thanks everyone

Thanks Adam! I just have one last question that remains unanswered, it was : "- I've heard the superspeeds aren't a true 1.3, though both sets of lenses open to 1.3 are the masterprimes actually more sensitive? If so is there a drastic difference? (shooting on film lowlight I'd really like to avoid much underexposure so this is really important to me) " If someone happens to have any info regarding this that would be wonderful! Thanks again, E

Thanks for the tip Freya :) I've seen those filters used once on a RED shoot and I didn't find the effect very convincing.. though its definitely an interesting look...I'd love to know if I could tell the difference or not when push comes to shove had I not been there to see things firsthand. I will definitely post the finished music video when all is said and done, thanks for the interest! The song is by Sebastian Schuller and titled "Nightlife". I'm glad you appreciate that it was shot on film...I love film and try to push extremely hard for it on any project I do. if you're interested, heres a link to the last two music videos I did, shot on super35 5219 and zeiss super speeds. Cheers! E Links: ,

Thanks as always for your expertise David. I tested both the white frost and fog filters and in the end decided to shoot clean. I've always been a bit afraid of filtration though I know I shouldn't be. It was my first shoot using Master Primes and I thought it would probably be smarter to see what they can do without filtration before I go messing around too much. Though the idea of adding a fog effect in post makes me sick.. hah

Hi everyone! I'm shooting a music video in Miami this coming weekend on 5219/arri 435. The film is to be shot entirely at night under minimal lighting conditions (neon signs, etc.), because of this I want a lens with the widest stop possible. My choices are the master primes or the super speeds, both 1.3. Now heres my problem: I want the sharpness of the Master Primes, but they don't flare whatsoever. I really love the way the super speeds flare when a point source hits them. They have this white/blue ethereal glow to them that I think will help this music video. But they're not sharp enough. So I guess my questions are: - Can I attain a "super speed flare" (or just a pretty flare/glow effect in genereal) by using Master Primes and some form of filtration? And if so what? I was thinking maybe a fog filter? I know kaminski uses these but I have absolutely zero experience with any form of filtration. And -- will using some form of filtration negate the sharpness of the master primes anyway and then I might as well just rent superspeeds? - I've heard the superspeeds aren't a true 1.3, though both sets of lenses open to 1.3 are the masterprimes actually more sensitive? If so is there a drastic difference? (shooting on film lowlight I'd really like to avoid much underexposure so this is really important to me) - Last question (unrelated) , I was considering shooting some night exteriors that don't involve acting at 12fps so that I could get an extra stop of exposure. I can't imagine there being any problem with this but I figured I'd throw it out there incase anyone has any advice/horror stories etc. Hope that all made sense, sorry for the long post. Cant wait to hear what y'all think. As always -- thankyou! Cheers, Evan

Hi Everybody, Just a quick question here: Wanted to confirm if it is possible to use a short end originated from a 1000ft load (300ft now) in a regular 400ft mag. Are the cores different? Is there anything I should know? And vice versa, can I use a 300ft short end originated from a 400ft load in a 1000ft mag? Specifically I am referring to the arriflex 35 III, but I'd assume the rules would be the same across all cameras? Hope that makes sense. Thanks very much! Evan

PM'd

PM'd