Mike Lary

You might find this interview of some use: http://www.stevensoderbergh.net/articles/2002/cinematographer.php He keeps a slew of interviews on his sight. Personally, I think if it works it works. The end product is what matters, regardless of how and to whom duties are delegated.

I find his detailed persuasions (the cost of your wedding would be better spent on my camera, etc..) far more offensive than any Craig's List ad I've seen. He might as well just say "you know you're all failures, so why not fork over your money and live vicariously through me?". It's amazing how brazenly stupid people can be when they delude themselves into thinking they have the supreme creative vision of the universe idling in their brains. For someone who claims to have been shooting for over ten years he acts remarkably like a cocky freshman who hasn't yet been given the opportunity to see himself fail and become humbled by his shortcomings. He should be ashamed of himself.

It's not illegal for an employer to ask your age. Most employers are smart enough not to ask because doing so opens the door to an age discrimination lawsuit if someone feels they were denied a job they were qualified for based solely on their age. This particular post sounds like a work for free situation (there's no mention of payment), in which case laws regarding hiring practices don't apply.

I studied Hapkido for awhile. I think you did a good job highlighting the style. You kept it simple and focused with momentum. I wanted to see more, but I didn't feel anything was missing. The editing was tight. Talking about the health benefits is good if it's going to be used to promote the art.

Essential gear for the serious iPhone DP: http://www.tiffen.com/smoothee_home.html

http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=4523

http://www.amazon.com/Grip-Book-Fourth-Michael-Uva/dp/0240812913/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275065707&sr=1-1

That link doesn't work.

Has anyone used the lighter weight Kino travel case as checked baggage, and if so how durable is it? Here's the one I'm referring to. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/2586...l.html#features I'm trying to avoid purchasing a Pelican case because it would be cumbersome for field work, and I only plan on flying with the unit a couple times. I haven't flown with Kinos before. Any advice would be appreciated.

Can you post some photos?

If you have access to archives of ASC Magazine or other cine publications, you might search for articles on these films: 'The Hunger' 'The Exorcist' 'The Thing' (John Carpenter's) 'The Descent'

My apologies. My eyes must have skipped Tri-X and gone straight for the ISO. You definitely need to nail exposure. Reversal is not forgiving.

You have a light meter, right? Set it to the film stock ISO and walk around inside your house. Start at your light sources and measure light levels all around the room. I think you'll find your perception of what lights up an entire room varies greatly from what the meter tells you. Your eyes adjust to low light levels. Film does not. To get the best quality image on film you want to overexpose, generally between a half and 2/3rds of a stop. Unless you're looking for a large grained, mushy, underexposed image, you'll need to boost your light levels. You can boost practicals with higher wattage bulbs if the sockets are porcelain (plastic sockets can melt and create a fire hazard). You can also bring in some china lanterns with high wattage bulbs. It depends on your desired aesthetic how you should handle the lighting, though. Unless your interior is quite large, I would advise against using work lights.

James, as a former graduate of that school I'd be happy to detail the pros and cons of the film program and recommend some professors to you. Just send me a PM.

Are you sure you put enough bait on that hook?

I feel really bad for this guy. He has to live in a motel room in another country on someone else's dime while getting paid to do what he loves. That must be rough. If things keep deteriorating for him at this pace, he might have to sublet his property in the states and take his cat on the road with him.

None of which have anything to do with the original topic... A good percent of that thread was off-topic nonsense meant to make light of the subject, subvert the discussion, and goad people into heated arguments that ended in name calling. I'd rather not have to wade through pages of self-indulgent prose and wisecracks to find valid information in a thread that clearly was providing valid technical information that could benefit the community. Forum members should think of this environment less like the room they're sitting in as they type and more like a room in Tim's house. He's kind enough to let us gather and have discussions while he's at home AND while he's away at work. We should respect the rules of his house.

Hi Ben, Overall, it looks good. I would remove the opening shot of the DJ and the shot of the kidnapped girl. They are not up to par with the other material. Also, the bathroom scene feels too long, probably in part because of the slow dolly shot. I would only show one of the guys peeping over the top of the stall. Otherwise, it's too much of the same aesthetic. Good luck!

The ND filter on the camera is going to lower the exposure level of everything in the room, not just the window light. You need to choose your desired exposure levels for all lights, then modify the light coming through the window accordingly. As Brian said, ND can be affixed to the outside of the window, and that works great if you can keep it flush and if your outside light level is consistent throughout the shoot day. ND will only cut the light, however. It won't diffuse it. One of the cheapest ways to diffuse light coming through a window is to affix tracing paper to the outside.

The delivery date varies month to month, usually between the 30th of the previous month and the 6th of the current month. I received my February digital edition on January 30.

With all due respect, Peter, I didn't direct the question at you.

I could make an assumption based on what Jim has said so far, but I'd rather hear a thoughtful and precise explanation. His statement implies a necessity for film technology to improve at an exponential rate in order to survive, and logically that statement doesn't make sense to me.

Please elaborate on that statement, specifically in what way(s) film should be changing at an exponential rate and why.

There may be plenty of writers in the forums. But you asked how many DPs write and direct their own material. That's a very different question. I can't think of many filmmakers who have done all three with any degree of success. Kubrick did, but he was a professional photographer for years beforehand. If you skipped cinematography classes in school, you should collaborate with someone who didn't - and study as much as you can about cinematography on the side so you can properly communicate your desires to him/her.

It's good to see that he's still supporting the format. I bought from him about twelve years ago. His service was always fast and the film was high quality.