Dan Salzmann

PRECISELY! I do not know how it could be possible to continue working on a set after being belittled like that! Maybe the whole thing was a set-up publicity campaign. Lots of hype on this!

Just wanted to underline that this is just an emergency measure and for tungsten only. To increase the power of practicals it is much better to just insert higher wattage globes. Not too long ago we increased the voltage for some practicals in a house in a remote area on a weekend and they blew out very quickly with around a 25% voltage increase. Since it was night there were no shops open and we just about made it with our spares. Beware!

Acetone. Try to use clothespins in the future to avoid the residue.

Perhaps they should offer Look Manager as a freebie to DP's that are clearly bringing them sales in order to help us demonstrate film even more efficiently as a capture medium. Also R&D towards emulsions that have a bit more "character" instead of the "grainless neutrality" native to the V word.

With music video budgets being what they are these days, the iPhone and YouTube are the least of our worries.

I'll second the Jon Fauer book as a great reference for the camera. Especially if doing speed ramps with the RCU.

What is a GASP? Filming the rebound off the wall off the wall in a convincing way is what's got me a bit stymied.

The first movie that I remember made me aware of the camera was "A Hard Days Night" starring the Beatles which I saw when I was 8 or 9 years old.

The thing with the ball on a zoom motor is that it would look too much like it is spinning on a single axis. Basically there is an establishing shot of a little kid kicking the ball off different walls in an alley. Trying to find a way of getting a low angle shot where the camera looks like it is rebounding - bouncing off the walls. Would like to get the feeling of the initial impact of the foot followed by a bit of spin then the jolt of the impact on the wall. Maybe some kind of small rollover head. I'd like to stay away from CGI on this if possible.

The thing with the ball on a zoom motor is that it would look too much like it is spinning on a single axis. Basically there is an establishing shot of a little kid kicking the ball off different walls in an alley. Trying to find a way of getting a low angle shot where the camera looks like it is rebounding - bouncing off the walls. Would like to get the feeling of the initial impact of the foot followed by a bit of spin then the jolt of the impact on the wall. Maybe some kind of small rollover head. I'd like to stay away from CGI on this if possible.

The title of the post says it all. Is this a job for some kind of bungi rig or... Should add that this is in 35mm.

Looks great for wildlife shots.

As more and more films are shot on digital, more and more people will get accustomed to that look and film will eventually become a thing of the past. Sad but true. All we can do is adapt the best we can. I still have trouble with the word "videographer" - sounds cheap and digital cinematographer sounds like I am a hologram. I'm glad that I started professionally in the 80's when it was "experimental" to shoot a music video on video and shot super8 in the late 70's when it was all over the place. Definitely not the time to open a film lab...

You can't go too wrong buying grip and lighting equipment but of course you still should have a very clear idea of what you are going to do with it. That being said, the increased presence of LED technology may make certain tungsten fixtures unusable when replacement bulbs are no longer manufactured. This rendered a lot of tungsten fixtures unusable when halogen replaced tungsten. If you plan on renting equipment out, be aware that it is going to get knocked around, require maintenance (time and money) as well as depreciate in value. Even "tough" items like C stands can take a beating, tightening knobs can get lost, etc. Some of my super clamps, magic arms and other basic grip gear is more than 15 years old and still functioning on film and video sets. My 16mm and 35mm gear has paid for itself already but I got started when music videos were all shot on film so it was a different era. Of course certain special filters bought for film use are also now applicable in digital formats. These days because of the economy and technological innovation being what they are, I will not be investing in any serious camera gear. But that's me in a major metropolitan area. Perhaps if I lived in a smaller town and had an extended contract with local TV station, corporate client, etc. I might think differently.

A green filter will lighten green and darken red in B+W. It is commonly used to lighten trees and foliage. Test, test, test since it can also make lips much darker than their normal gray scale rendition. Red filters make blue skies darker thereby rendering clouds more dynamic. Test that too because people can look very pale. With Tri-X (or any other high speed film) outdoors, it is a good idea to have a range of ND filters. ND grads are used in matteboxes with sliding stages so that you can position the grad. These can be quite useful but have to be used carefully since you probably don't want actors walking into the ND gradient and suddenly getting progressively darker for no reason.

And whatever you do, don't forget that even if you get people working for free they have to be fed. If you have 20 people on the set to feed at 10 pounds each per day (2 meals, snacks and refreshments) thats 200 pounds per day just for that. Than your runners and perhaps other personnel will need to be paid back for petrol or public transport - that's another one cost. I think it is wise to heed the advice of the other posters and be realistic and not think just of the camera but really study all aspects and costs of what it is that you want to achieve. You stated that "Rope" was made for $50K but I am sure that the actors salaries alone were more than that at the time. Do not neglect the costs of sound both during and after the production. Sound personnel often require much more than 1 mike on a boom. Do not be discouraged by all this, just keep it real.

"Thanks to HD I can now make real 16MM films." That is a really strange line!

How can you say that a reflected light reading from a 30 year old TTL light meter is more useful than a reading from an external digital incident meter in the majority of situations? And when the exposure changes because the camera pans to a point where the TTL is reading off a darker object and suddenly overexposing the whole image that can look good? I don't think so.

Most likely rather fragile and likely to get lost and/or mixed up with standard gels. Perhaps they could have a place in TV and blue screen studios. My experience with glass dichroic filters on tungsten lights was that they sometimes showed odd colur spikes as well as getting real hot.

I strongly suggest using an external light meter with the camera set to manual operation. That way you avoid in-shot exposure changes which looks really bad.

I find myself bringing less and less gear to sets while my 1st AC seems to bring more and more. Usually my Sekonic cine meter and a Pentax digital spotmeter as backup, my Minolta III colour meter which I don't use very often, a small digital camera, laser pointer, Scorpion, chalk in a chalk holder to make marks quickly where I want things set up (this way I can stop trying to steal the 1st AC's and improve set morale), a pair of leather WWII tank drivers gloves that are thin yet quite heat resistant, small pocket mirror and a 9mm Luger in case focus is out (just kidding!) I have some filters that are slightly out of the ordinary and sometimes those come along. The rest is usually just comfort items-sunglasses, rain gear, etc. Of course, things change if I'm using my camera gear. A certain DP I know maintains that the less you show up with the more top level you are and he just shows up with a light meter and the Wall Street Journal in the thinnest Haliburton atttache case I've ever seen.

You are right f2.8 is not fast for cine use but it is 1 1/2 stops faster than the f4.5 previously mentioned.

Sounds like you need to get some more experience on higher end commercials and music vids first. Try to meet key grips and DP's in your area.

I have a Nikon 20mm AIS f2.8 that is not that heavy and was not all that expensive.

Larger, old style torches (flashlights) can be tricked out with 12V halogen spotlight bulbs and powered by a small brick battery. Whatever you use can be NDed, diffused or colour corrected with a small piece of gel.