Fred Neilsen

A friend of mine is offering me the opportunity to borrow ten or so theater lights that he wont be using (fresnels, parnels, par 64s...) So, anyway, I was wondering if there is a major difference between film and theater lights, Is there a difference between the quality of the beam, and the overall construction of the units? Has anyone used theater lights to shoot a short film? Or is it just that a fresnel is a fresnel? Thank-you in advance, Fred

It's sort of a spoiler alert, you can read it when it's highlighted.

For me the main selling point for most Imax features at the moment is the sound (as most of the features released over the past year haven't been 15/70 true Imax). Are the "imax experience" cinemas equipped with the 44 channel and through the screen sound speakers. The Imax in Darling Harbor, Sydney is acoustic heaven, though I haven't been to any multiplex Imaxs so I can't really compare.

Have you considered film? $3000 will buy you: A: an excellent 16mm camera package (eclair, cp16...) (with light meter, changing bag, maybe a heavy duty tripod...), with either enough money left over for a supper 16 comversion or enough stock to shoot several shorts or maybe even a feature) B: an SRII package can be rented here in Australia for about $300/day (maybe even with a lens) on a two day week this is very affordable with your budget. C: an MOS 35mm package, there's a complete arri IIC on ebay at the moment for about 2 grand. D: an MOS 16mm package, Bolex, Arri, B&H there are some excellent and very cheap 16mm cameras that will give you beautiful images Eg: (Shot with a spring wound bolex from the 60s) Fred

I believe they also did this in the film "Monsters Vs Aliens". In Monsters Vs Aliens (from 3:20 onwards) In video games: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyHodpiAe0I

Just a note on older meters and batteries, try to avoid getting a meter designed for 1.35 V mercury batteries as there is no real reliable alternative for these batteries on the market today, my first meter was a Gossen Lunasix 3, which took these batteries, and I remember the batteries costing more than the meter itself ($50+ for two 1.55V silver air cells). Another note is that it is probably best to buy a cheap new light meter (like an entry level sekonic) before Christmas (their heavily discounted) they will probably still be sold out at the moment as all the photography students who start their courses in January get a light meter for Christmas, (Or at least it's like this at the moment in sydney, after checking at all the large photo stores in Sydney) Fred

Neglab, here in Australia, has their price for 35mm stills listed at AU$15/roll. (which is according to the website negotiable) http://www.neglab.com.au/index.php?id=3

Generaly, the cheapest option is to shoot with what your distribution media will be, eg; 35mm, will be cheapest with 4 perf, next cheapest is S16 with an optical blow up), and then a DI (2perf, 3perf, Digital...) will probably cost a small fortune. So if a 35mm print is an absolute must, it makes the most sense to shoot film, either 16mm or 35mm 4 perf as the cost of stock/processing/contact printing (or even a blow-up) can sometimes be lower than a film out. [short ends, SR2, cheapo processing, discounted blow up... but it can be done, and done well.

Thank-you everyone for clearing up my confusion, Karl, I didn't know that you could recycle prints, by that do you mean reuse, bring to other countries, or by means of removing the emulsion/separating the silver... I always suspected that film wasn't as bad as it seems, certainly by comparison with other industries, anyway does anyone know how polluting the manufacture of a digital cinema camera is, I take it, that it's similar to that of making a computer? Of course if it was similar to making a computer, film would be far more efficient (at the rate that most buy digital cameras/That those that use film expose it) Fred

Many people assume that film is extremely bad for the environment, with all the chemicals which go into making the emulsion and processing it. It seems that leading DOPs such as Don Macapline hold this view; "As far as the environment is concerned, it [film] is a very expensive, filthy way of producing entertainment" Is this view correct, is film infact that bad for our planet? Many digital fanboys claim this as one of the major arguments for digital over film, others say that producing a Cmos or CCD is far worse for the environment. Anyway, should I feel guilty about shooting on film or not? Fred

I saw this nifty invention last night on an ABC program called the New Inventors. I'm not too sure how it works but it seems to control light in part of the frame, to lower highlights, or raise shadow in oder to give a less contrasty image. It sort of sits between the prime lens and the camera, anyway, here are some links; Demo of lens http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s2746555.htm Before/After http://www.livetechnologies.com.au/prototy...monstration.htm Anyway, sort of looks cool and might be able to solve problems of dynamic range, certainly in security cameras and maybe with further prototypes, in the profesional video world. Fred

Sounds like an interesting stock. Seeing as I usualy only use one stock (even if shooting daylight and tungsten, I know, bad habit, fix it in TK... :angry: ) this seems like a viable choice. I could do with the greater dynamic range (after using digital for all my short films this year) I miss being able to see everything out of a window, and not being scared of shooting in a car. Thank you everyone for clarifying my confusions and helping me to understand what seems to be a great stock. Fred

I was trying to find the dynamic range of kodak vision 2 and somehow stumbled across this, http://motion.kodak.com/US/en/motion/Produ..._Films/7299.htm I assume that it isn't new as it is vision 2, but I've never heard of anyone using it. I'm curious as to what it is. Digital processing, Matching It's characteristics with other film stocks... (all sounds cool) Has anyone used it, Do all labs process it, does it cost more This is mainly to satisfy my curiossity but if you dont need to bulk order, I might buy 100' or 400' roll Fred

A great thing to do is have a look at past topics in the AC section, there's plenty of information there, like how to load specific magazines, how to uses a slate properly, how to get more jobs...

A quick summary up of the top 3 film courses on offer in sydney, the first two are great because the cinematography is mainly on film, as apposed to 90% digital with film as an extra special treat. AFTRS (australian film television and radio school) -Australias biggest film school -Post graduate courses are offered to industry professionals in cinematography -selective school with entry based on merit -amazing facilities -located in the center of australia's film district next to where star wars, australia, moulin rouge ect where shot -other locations in Melbourne and hobart (I think) Short courses and undergraduate courses also available SFS (sydney film school) -Practical based learning -good balance between practicle and theory -major part of the course is completing a 45min 16mm mini feature shot with an SRII NIDA (national institute of dramatic arts) -Similar in course struture (and brochour design) to AFTRS -Teach different things, NIDA is more focused on drama/directing *I did however once see a great program in sound design, at the end of the course, the students put on a show by recreating the entire score, foley and ADR to famouse movie clips, live in a theater. I hope this helps Fred

Hi, I've got some old EXR 100t (from the 90s, I think) 2000' plus a bit of Vision 1 (320t) (about 1000'). Are you in sydney? Fred Ps: your website is awesome :-)

But remember that production design will play a huge part in selling the illusion of the 60s, do a lot of period research.

make sure you close the view finder, there's a small lever on the side, this is to avoid light leeks on the film (a mistake I have made numerous times) You will also need an intervolometer, if it's a short shoot (less than one day), you can get away with something like this: http://www.intervalometers.com/timeflow/index.php However on longer shoots, there is a risk that the spring will get overwound, so a motor drive timelapse is probably the best option http://www.intervalometers.com/rev/bolex/index.php

This is actualy a three way collaboration, Baz Luhrmann (director), Catherine Martin (production designer and baz's wife) and Don M Mcalpine (DP), Catherine martin won an oscar for best costume design in Moulin Rouge (I think, not to sure) And Don M Mcalpine was nominated for best cinematography for moulin rouge in 2002. It really was a great collaboration they have made Strictly Ballroom, Romeo + Juliet and Moulin Rouge (my favourite).

Thank you Olex That was an amazing amount of information, It cleared up allot of questions I had in my head, I think I'll go with a russian camera, (I didn't reallise they where so in-expencive!!!!) Does the Konvas have a steady image if it doesn't have registration pins? (I know that my stop-mo with a bolex is quite stable, but that's 16mm) Thank you again, Fred

Thank you Karl Yup, I don't think I'll reinvent the wheel, I did not factor in image stability (I had some dilusional thought that an SLR had superior image stability) so I guess I'll just buy a 35mm film camera (with single frame) and then sell it again after the project is over (cheaper I think than renting for 1 month, even with a 2 day week) Thank you again

Thank you for your reply I guess I was making it a bit complicated I'll have to check out the nikon, do you know how much do they cost with the mag, also, how many frames can they take? I'd also like to know more about the Rusian camera, how much they cost, and when where they made, (I've herd that some russian cameras used different perferations, is this true?) Can the rusian camera be converted to 2perf? (though I know that if I shoot SLR, I'd probably be shooting 6-8 perf...) Thank you again Fred

Thank you so much for such a quick reply. I'll have to check out the article. Tension was a big problem in the prototype I made, I guess I'll have to experiment a little.

Hi Guys This is my 4th post So far this great community of cinematographers, grips, gaffers, camera men and women, 1st and 2dn acs, students...... have helped me buy a follow focus for a bolex, lubricate my bolex, and fix it's viewfinder. Anyway, I think it's time to make the great leep (from digital to 16mm and from 16mm to 35mm), I'v got a stop motion animated project (15 min with a 3-1 shooting ratio) with a large enough budget to shoot 35mm I cant afford to rent a "vista vision" camera however so I have to make one. So what I want to do is attach my old mitchell 35mm mag to a 35mm SLR camera, with maybe a light tight steel box in between for the film to have a bit of slack so that nothing gets caught up. I did a test with a mag, some old film, a card board box, some sewing spools and a consumer olympus non reflex camera. It worked quite well. I am trying to use all of the camera's original mechanics, and simply slit two holes in each side of the SLR and run the film from the mag through those holes. Anyway, my question is, how do you think I should do this, and is it worth doing, and is it possible? Note that I only need single frame capture Thank you for any help ps: here is a diagram (this is why i am studying cinematography and not graphics design...) Fred