Bryce Lansing

I've worked with both for years with not much thought. But when it came to buying them used, I noticed that the 407 is pretty easy to find used (and decently priced), but the 3081 (which retails for more) is almost impossible to find used. Other than the obvious physical differences, what are the actual differences between the two? They're both 1k fresnels, and i haven't noticed any difference in light output.

Damn.. I think it may be a Par can globe. When I open it up, I'm looking through a semi-spherical glass to see the bulb, not the flat UV glass I'm use to seeing on newer HMIs. How much do you think a conversion would cost me?

I just got an old style Arri 1.2k HMI Par, and someone had mentioned getting it converted to hold a single ended bulb instead of a double ended bulb. I decided the wait til the bulb was no more to decide. Now my bulb is dead, I'm not sure what caused it other than maybe using power from a broken down old house (could that have caused it?). The bulb itself doesn't look broken, but one of the metal prongs on one side looks like it turned to black dust, so it's only held by the prong on the other side. Now should I buy a new double ended bulb, or is there a reason I should convert it to single ended instead?

I got my Arri 1.2k HMI Par with magnetic ballasr, fully aware of the flicker issues. But now I'm a little confused... I read that 24fps at 180 degree shutter (1/48th) was flicker free, but that 23.98 at 180 degree shutter was unsafe.. So first I test the Canon 7d at 24p (which is really 23.98 right?) at 1/50th, and sure enough, rolling bars. 1/30th, 1/40th, and 1/60th looked fine. Then I tested my HVX200a, 24p (23.98 as well right?) at 180 degree shutter, and it from what I could see it looked completely fine. I know it has a global shutter so I wasn't expecting rolling bars, but it wasn't flickering at all either. Why is this? Is 1/48th a flicker free shutterspeed with the HVX? Or am I not seeing a very subtle flicker?

I noticed this generator on craigslist: http://losangeles.craigslist.org/lgb/rvs/1741349538.html I don't know much about generators, but I know there must be a reason that it's less than a third of the price of Honda's 6500 generator. Would this be a decent generator for low budget film lighting? Or is it not built right for it?

thanks for the feedback.. I just ordered a used Arri 1.2k Par (old headlight style), am I gonna be dissapointed with this light. I have used the Arrisun 12, and I liked it a lot, but is my old headlight style Par going to be dissapointingly less bright, with less throw and spread?

I noticed that the newer, expensive Arrisun 1.2k Par doesn't use the term "headlight style", but the old style one does. I see the obvious difference in physical style, but the lenses look the same. What are the differences in light output?

Where is the best place to purchase used HMI lighting on Los Angeles?

Is there a way to shoot 24fps on a RX1, with an HMI/magnetic ballast, and not get a flicker? Isn't the only completely safe shutter angle 144° (1/60th)? The Bolex has about a 133° (1/65th) shutter right?

Thanks, I'll give it a try! What density would you reccomend using for the least filtered look?

I'm looking for a filter, if it exists, that can soften blemishes in a face, but not give the whole image a low contrast, diffused look. I don't want the viewer to know the shots have been filtered. I always read that the Black Diffusion Filter did just this, but when I finally found an example, it looked low contrast and diffused, with halated highlights. Is there any filter that can do it?

I really don't do a great deal of RED work, but here and there. Not enough to buy a filter specifically for only the RED. I always push Directors to shoot film, but for the low budgets, I mostly get a lot of digital work. I was keeping IR Pollution in mind because I thought it was a common problem in most digital cameras, and many to come. But if that isn't the case, I should just stick to a set of regular NDs right?

I'm thinking in investing in some 4x5.65 ND filters, but it just dawned on me that with all this digital now days, where IR is a problem especially when using ND, maybe I shouldn't. I know they make an IR filter to use with NDs, but also make IR-ND filters. Are IRND filters better than using an IR filter with an ND?

after much contemplation about what to invest in, I've finally decided that lenses and lighting are the few investments that I won't regret in a few years. I've got a pretty good set of Nikon Primes that have been very good to me the last year, but any ACs thatcome from cinema, always seem to have a little trouble adjusting to them. I'd really like to have a set of Cine lenses, but due to my budget/income, I'm limited in that department. I was thinking I could get a set of either Zeiss or Cooke Arri STD. mount primes, maybe B-mount. That way I could have a decent set of Cine lenses that I could use with a PL mount adapter. My other option is Zeiss ZF still lenses in Nikon mount. I've heard these are very sharp, but that working with them on set will be the same as the Nikons. I was thinking of these pros and cons: Standard or B mount Cine Primes: Pro: they're cine lenses, accurate focus distance, good for follow focusing Pro: they take a PL adapter, can be used with Arri 35mm, Alexa, F35, D21, RED, etc. Con: they're old lenses, will I look unprofessional? Con: they could be tough for DSLR use Zeiss ZF primes: Pro: Easy use with DSLR use via adapter Pro: Covers full frame and can shoot film on my Nikon body Con: They're still lenses, same on set as the Nikons Con: Film, and High end digital cameras rarely have Nikon mounts, unless privately owned Also, which are sharper?

Since color motion picture film has about 13-14 stops of latitude, where do the extra 2-3 stops lie in the zone system? If Zone V is f5.6... Zone 0 - f0.7 Zone I - f1.0 Zone II - f1.4 Zone III - f2 Zone IV - f2.8 Zone ? - f4 Zone V - f5.6 Zone ? -f8 Zone VI - f11 Zone VII - f16 Zone VIII - f22 Zone IX - f32 Zone X - f45

So was there never a time when they were shot on 2/3" SD camera's? Were they only used for News?

I know that motion picture film is coated with remjet to prevent static electricity, what would happen if you ran three feet of still photo film through a camera? Would it cause any damage? I'm looking into getting a IIC with some standard primes, and when I do, I'm going to want to test for scratches, and to see the sharpness of the lens. I'm wondering if I can just load a magazine with a roll of Ilford B&W still film, run it through, process it myself for free, and look at the negs. Would that cause any problems?

My girlfriend was watching her DVD of the 90's show "Sabrina the teenage witch", a 3-wall set, multi camera sitcom, and I noticed how smooth a slow-motion shot was. My first thought was "they must have shot that shot on film, because video didn't have high frame rates in the 90's". My second thought was "how did they cut one film shot so well with the rest of the video footage?" I looked at it's tech specs on imdb, and it said "Panavision Cameras and Lenses". Surprised and confused, I search "Full House", which the tech specs also showed Panavision, and specified 35mm as the format! I search Seinfeld, the same thing! Now I obviously knew I Love Lucy was shot on 35mm. But I was under the impression that all multi-camera, 3-wall sitcoms since the 90s were shot on video. They always look pretty terrible (the flat lighting, multi shadows, and generic 3 camera angle cuts), I assumed quality was not a priority, and that they just cranked these sitcoms out on video while the well-lit single-camera TV series were shot on 16mm/35mm. How many of those multi-camera sitcoms from the 90s were shot on film? What about the shows now? I noticed Disney channel went from a lot of Super 16mm single camera shows like "Even Stevens", "Lizzy McGuire", and "Phil of the Future", to simple/easy to shoot multi-camera shows like "Hannah Montana" and "Wizards of Waverly Place". Those are shot on video aren't they?

Anyone at least in Southern California with a IIC?

That's a nice one.. But even the poorest quality PL mount lens will cost me way more than I can afford. I just need a ready-to-shoot IIC with a few good Arri standard primes.

I'm looking to buy a ready-to-shoot, Arri IIC package, with a few mags, a crystal sync motor, and a few good standard primes. I'm in Long Beach, CA, so I'd prefer to find one in or around Los Angeles County.

Oliver, Thank you for the tips! -With the mags, is it something I'd be able to check myself? Or would I have to take it somewhere to get it checked? -For the image steadiness, how do I test this? -What about the power situation? The only film camera I've ever owned was a Bolex with the spring motor, is buying an old electric motor risky? Thanks!

I'm looking to buy a basic Arri IIC package soon, But i don't want to get ripped off, or spend a few thousand on a camera that will end up costing me a lot more. What should I keep an eye out for when looking at used IICs? Are there any red flags that say "don't buy this camera!"? How reliable and durable are IICs?

How do Arri standard mount primes compare to baltars? I'm thinking of getting a IIC soon with some Arri standard primes. I was concerned about lack of sharpness, but I Love Lucy really opened my eyes to how sharp old lenses can be.

I was watching I Love Lucy tonight and really started to notice how sharp it is. There are always a few soft shots where the focus appears to be slightly off, but every shot that is in focus is extremely sharp! Does anyone know what camera bodies and lenses were used for I Love Lucy?