Stuart Brereton

I have to agree here. Canon manufacture HD lenses with a max aperture of t2.1, Panavision's digi Primos are t1.7. T3 is just not good enough.

Yeah Bob, that exactly what I want - a first time director telling me I've fu**ed up.... not good advice.

I'm sorry Jan, but I find it hard to believe that people with serious money (the b-budget that you mention) are seriously talking about switching their productions over to a untried, untested (and unseen) camera system. So far, all anybody has to go on are the published specs, and a few screengrabs, Making production decisions on that basis is foolhardy, and if your clients are that easily swayed by what is still currently vapourware, then they are setting themselves up for a fall. I would hope that you are advising them in the strongest terms to wait until the RED system has proved itself viable before committing a production to it.

I would usually avoid doing close-ups of faces on anything less than 20-25mm, unless there was a specific reason for a wide angle look. If you have a zoom lens and the budget can stretch to a microforce, why not hide a small zoom out in the dolly move?

Definitely some sort of color correction on the second image (assuming that the first was shot 'straight'), unless the RED 300mm is a very warm lens.... Nice images, though. Shame it wasn't a sunny day - I'd like to see how it handles high contrast.

Star Filter? Yuck.... ;)

'CUBE' - 87 minutes of my life that I'm not going to get back.

It's not just zoom lenses that have to compensate for light loss. All lenses do to a greater or lesser degree. This is also the reason there is no 'formula' to be found, as different lens designs require different amounts of compensation.

I just don't understand you, Phil. You are a well informed and intelligent person, whose posts, on a variety of subjects, I respect. But for reasons best known to yourself, you constantly denigrate the industry you work in, and the people in it. We've been here before, obviously, and I can't be bothered to rehash old arguments which got nowhere the first time around, but I just wish that you could be a little less needlessly bitter and derogatory. It just sounds like sour grapes, and I think it's beneath someone of your ability to be this way.

I am aware of that. However, that was the point I was addressing, hence the reason I only quoted that part of Keith's post.

Any UK/EU demos planned? Would be good to see what you've all been up to... ;-)

It's set in Cardiff with a predominantly Welsh cast - what do you expect? I've never heard anyone complain about the number of cockneys in Eastenders....

As cinematography.com's self proclaimed resident 'n00b' you'd do well to show a little more respect for people vastly more experienced more than yourself You may not like his work, but given your own inexperience you don't have the right to make blanket statements like this.

Rory is not shooting any of it. I'm guessing you've been looking at IMDB. The DP for blocks 1,2,3 & 5 was Mark Waters, with Ray Orton shooting blocks 4 & 6 & Simon Butcher block 7. Rory & Ernie Vinzce are both back on Dr Who, I believe.

The F750 ised on Torchwood, not Doctor Who. They use DigiBeta.

My point was that commercial channels obey market forces and them alone. If something is popular it's good. If not, it's bad. The BBC, whatever it's faults (and they are many) does not work this way. It has to try to be competitive, but also to satisfy the conditions of it's charter. It also has live with the fact that whatever it does there will a chorus of complaints from licence payers who think their licence fee is being wasted. The end result is a Broadcaster that plays safe, to keep as many people happy as it can and safeguard it's funding. That's what I mean when I say it has less freedom.

I think it's important to note that for every nicely lit American show, there are probably five that are quite pedestrian. Also, many of the best, and best lit come from channels like HBO, who perhaps being pay-per-view have a freedom in content and look that the BBC does not. On the subject of Casualty, it's worth noting that when, a few years ago, they experimented with a darker, contrasty, dropped field look, they were beseiged with complaints from viewers. It's not always producer choice....

I had some cokin ND grads which I used for a long time before I bought some more expensive glass filters. They were fine for the work I was doing, which was mostly on DigiBeta or DVcam. They scratch easily, and there is no particular relationship between the strengths that I could determine (perhaps that has changed) but for the money (£12 each) you can't go wrong. They do come in odd sizes though, so if you have a W/A adaptor they might not cover the frame. Best to check. For an HDV shoot, they should be fine, and cheap enough that you could carry a good selection.

F750 with Digital Primos. Varicam for slo-mo. Later episodes used ENG lenses, don't know why.

I believe the Japanese have an interesting take on obligation. That is: If you don't feel it, you don't have it.

It may look gaudy, but it IS lit, which was the orginal point. As for 'Casualty', obviously you can't compare its' look with 'ER', but then neither can you compare their budgets.

I know what you mean, Phil, but Torchwood is aimed at adults and is much darker than Dr Who. It still shares the same universe as Dr Who, but the scripts have been very interesting on the whole. Time will tell... Not me, I'm afraid.

If you live in the UK, you've probably seen the ads for this new series, which is a spin-off of Dr Who. I've been doing a lot of operating work on it over the last three or four months, and I think it's going to be good. The first episode airs tonight at 9.00pm BBC 3.

Actually, it's the other way around, as the SI camera actually exists. When RED is available it will be the competition.

I'm sorry Phil, this is just wrong. There may be some shows which would prove your point, but the majority of current British TV dramas are lit by talented people who care about their work. The '2k bounced off the ceiling' approach may once have been common, but the influx of very well lit American shows has forced UK drama to raise its game and compete.