Mike Lary

I agree with Dominic. Find a writer you can work with or find a short story in the public domain you can use. You could take a fable or fairy tale and adapt it to modern day. The troll under the bridge, for instance, could be an angry hobo jumping kids and stealing their iPods :D Working from someone else's material might be a lot more challenging, anyway, because the writer wasn't in your head preconceiving shots as he/she wrote.

Have you tried the Adobe site? They have a reference library and forums you can access for free after registering an email address that I found helpful with AfterEffects. Premiere, like any other app, is going to feel non-intuitive if you're used to competitor's products who use a different kind of logic (and I use that term loosely) in their interface design. I had the same experience you're having when moving from Premiere to Avid and FCP. I thought: why can't other companies make intuitive interfaces like Adobe's?

Why ask someone to make you an index when they already exist? Here's the very first thing that comes up in a Google search for "index of filmmaking terms": http://homepage.newschool.edu/~schlemoj/fi...s/glossary.html Or, you could read the FAQs on this very site: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...?showtopic=8069

Both. Search the forums for book recommendations. Read until you get bored, then experiment. When you get frustrated because your experiments aren't working the way you'd like, go back to the books and try to figure out why. If you can't find the answer to your question, post it in the appropriate forum. Good luck.

Your question is too vague. If you're looking for advice on cinematography books, search the forums. If you have specific questions, ask. No one's going to give you a numbered list of all the things you need to do to achieve your dreams (whatever they are). When you figure out what questions you're asking, put something in the title that lets people know the topic. 'Needs help' is a given - that's what forums are for.

In the spirit of honest critique I'm going to blunt, so please don't take offense. I think your demo reel looks professional but your website doesn't. It looks hommade, like you used a real basic web building tool. The outlined buttons look very 80's. Also, the graphic on the front page is too big and distracting. I would use a different image because close-ups of a human eye are cliche in filmmaking and photography. You might consider hiring a designer to build the site, or even find a student that would do it for free as a porfolio project. Prospective clients don't expect a cinematographer to be able to design web sites, but they'll be turned off if the site doesn't reflect your level of professionalism. As far as the demo reel goes, the photography looks great, the pacing is good, and the music is perfect (upbeat with good rhythm). The shot of the girl running to the door is a little dark in the beginning, and the effect is a bit jarring going to that from the previous shot. Maybe if you trimmed the beginning and just showed her at the door, looking around, it would look smoother. Also, compression artifacts are visible in many areas, so the quality of your work is not really being seen. I'd render it at a higher quality, even if it means reducing the physical dimensions a little. The still image on your resume page is also way too compressed.

Details, please. RX? Non-RX? Focal lengths? Condition?

You can have it telecined (transferred to digital format). Reversal works fine, in fact it's pretty sharp telecined. Someone mentioned MiniDV as a format to have the digital file transferred onto. The problem with that is that the video will be compressed if it goes on MiniDV, which means substantial quality loss. Kind of defeats the purpose of shooting film. You might try Bonolabs. They transfer to hard drive (they supply the external drives), you transfer the uncompressed video to your computer, then send the drive back.

I agree on the BW reversal advice. It's much cheaper than neg by the roll and you don't have to make a print to project it (more $$). Another plus is the smaller exposure latitude of reversal. Because it's less forgiving than neg, you have to be more conscious of your exposure, which means you won't get into bad habits and be lazy with the light readings. One drawback is that every time you project the film, you run the risk of getting scratches or jams, so any problems you run into can't be recovered because you're projecting your master. Usually the first few rolls people shoot aren't 'neg worthy' anyways, though. On your first roll, at least, you should definitely shoot a fresh roll of reversal unless you have a bum roll that you can run through the camera as a scratch test. If the camera has registration problems or scratches the film, better that you spend as little as possible to find that out.

I put the film end under my pointer finger, slightly behind the tip of my finger, then run my finger forward along the inside (core) of the spool, keeping the film flush with it. That way I can locate the opening with the tip of my finger and gently guide the film through. If the film is a slow speed, like 100 or 200, I'll let enough light in so I can see the inside of the take-up spool, and push the film end through at something closer to a 90 degree angle. Either way, it only takes five seconds or so to get it right.

(assuming you have a computer) Can you transfer the footage from your camcorder via firewire to your computer? If not, an alternative would be to use a capture card on your computer that supports s-video or whatever output options you have on your camera, and import it that way. Do have editing software on your computer? Avid has a free, basic editing program that works fine. A lot of people like Vegas. There are other, more expensive solutions like Premier and Final Cut Pro.

Would something like this work? http://www.datarescue.com/photorescue/specs.htm There are a few other data recovery programs out there that oftentimes can salvage data from cards, but I can't vouch for any of them personally. I hope things work out for you.

Prices vary depending on where you are, and they are negotiable. I don't think you'll find a combined rental kit for camera/tripod/lights, etc. Everything has its own price tag.

Roger, Is there a rental house near where you live? If I only had $500 and really wanted to shoot on DV or HDV, I'd rent the equipment. Buying into the technology is only going to put you out a lot of cash (unless you can create a revenue stream with it and make your money back) and you'll be stuck with depreciating equipment that is antiquated in a year or three. If you rent the equipment, that will give you time to concentrate on writing, storyboarding, and planning for the day(s) that you shoot.

Yes, thanks for posting the pics. I had some 'end of file' errors when I tried to open some. A couple gave location errors when I tried to download them. But I was able to snag a before and after of the wall being painted, which gave a good idea of the difference between flat and corrected.

Dimitrios, Thanks for sharing your work. The images look good. As far as lighting is concerned, I would like to see more on the couple in front of the sunset, even if it was just bounced from the sunset - to give some modeling to the figures. The table-with-coffee shot looks pretty blown out in one area - the doughnuts on the plate (can't really tell if they are doughnuts, but I'm guessing). Other than that, I can't think of any complaints. Good work. (edited to remove picture links)

What codec did you use? All I got was sound, and an error saying I needed software that was not available on the Apple server. I'm on Mac OS 10.3 and Quicktime 6.5.2.

Well, I'm a big Bolex fan. All their 16mm models have single frame capability for stop motion (not pin registered, but I haven't had a problem with frame steadiness yet), and backwinding capability for double exposures (or to backwind unused film so you can refrigerate it). The variable shutter will drive the price up, however. You can pick up an early model non-RX or RX for anywhere from $100-$300 with a prime lens (or multiple primes), but the variable shutter models generally sell for $400+, and twice that if they have magazine capacity. Switar lenses are sharp, and there are plenty of them around - the trick is finding a camera that has some primes on it and snagging it before anyone else. Sold separately, lenses go for $50-$250 each depending on condition. Body and lenses are cheaper for non reflex models, but non-reflex models require you to focus the lens, then rack it over to the shutter position. This poses a problem if you do macro work because you have to rely on a parallex viewfinder, but for normal work it's a small price to pay for the $avings. Here's a link you can use to determine what features are on any Bolex based on the serial number: http://www.city-net.com/~fodder/bolex/history/ Since you don't trust zooms, a Krasnogorsk K-3 is out of the question - they come with a stock zoom and Pentax mount, and only one lens mount (a pain if you're using primes). There was a thread awhile back where a number of people listed 16mm cameras by price and quality. You might want to search the archives for that. Good luck with whatever you choose.

That sounds pretty definitive (but I don't see what naturalism has to do with choosing between those mediums). Are you really even considering 16 or are you looking for people to validate your decision to shoot S8? Since transferring your film is going to cost you several times more than your setup costs anyway, the real question is - do you want to spend a little extra money (in comparison) to buy a 16mm camera instead of an S8? A few hundred bucks, maybe less, will get you a decent MOS 16mm camera. You can always rent a sync cam if you have a paying gig. I don't know anyone who can actually afford to shoot film, but we do anyway, and we go into hock to get the equipment we need. I wouldn't consider shooting anything smaller than 16, and I'd be shooting 35 but I wouldn't have any change left for rice and beans.

I agree with Dimitrios. Learn as much as you can about photography. Learn how to use the manual exposure and manual focus features on a still camera, and experiment with different light sources and environments. Don't get too caught up in processing effects with film - the technical side of camera operation will be more applicable to both film and digital movie cameras. A great book you might want to pick up is The Photographer's Handbook. It will answer just about any question you have, from camera/lens operation to more technical stuff about film emulsions and lab processes. If you plan on being a creative force behind the films you work on, you need to understand how to tell a story well. This skill (contrary to popular belief) doesn't come about just by watching a ton of films. Read and write a lot to develop those skills. Take creative writing classes if your school offers them. Watch lots of films, good and bad, and watch the commentaries to find out what the filmmakers were trying to accomplish and whether or not it worked. Analysis of other people's films will help you to be more critical of your own work, and might help you to avoid making some of their mistakes. Like David said, have fun. Balance experimentation with study, so you have fun and learn at the same time.

Sophie's Choice has nice flashback scenes, almost completely desaturated. The look fits perfectly for that film, given the subject matter, but it may not be the kind of 'dark' you're looking for.

The wheels need to be perfectly aligned, as they were, when you return them to the spindles. If not, one wheel will put tension on the film, resulting in tears and jams. The only difference between single perf and double perf is the extra set of perfs. Remove the pressure plate and you can see the claw. That is where the single perfs will be. Run black and white reversal, and buy it directly from Kodak, at least for your test roll. That way you can be assured you have fresh film and most likely any problems you run into will be camera related. You can special-order double perf film, but it might cost more (I've never done it myself). Make sure to buy some gaffer tape and, before you shoot, run it the full length of the camera cover, to block possible light leaks. When you send film to the lab, you need to tell them exactly what you want by marking it on the film cannister (process and print, process only, process and prep for telecine, etc). They will not make a print from a negative unless you ask them to. I'm not in the UK, so I can't give you any recommendations on labs. Have fun!

mike@oxygenhabit.com Thanks!

Ashley, I was considering BonoLabs as well. Would you mind emailing me the sample images, too? If you want, I can host them for you on my server so you can link to them from the forums - that way you can avoid bothersome requests from folks like me. :)

This is my understanding, based on the ASC manual's description of DOF problems when choosing a format (p. 156). A given focal length lens at a given fstop has the same depth of field regardless of format. However, in order to get the same field of view on different formats, a different focal length is required. So, the DOF will change between formats if you are trying to achieve the same field of view (25mm lens on a 16mm camera, 50mm lens on a 35mm camera, etc.). The smaller the format, the larger the DOF when matching the same field of view. Also, the DOF tables in the ASC manual are entitled 'all formats depth of field tables', which indicates the lens itself is the determining factor.