Mitch Lusas

Ditto on the hard time sleeping the night before. The more I can spend in that fictional film world, though, the less I worry. Of course, it also helps to have a killer crew. When I have had a great crew supporting the production, it's smooth and I don't worry as much.

Well, it's not really dead, just forgotten about. If you want to try to breath new life into it, post a new setup on David's thread. If I saw the thread up again, I'm sure I would post a setup or two.

Hey Daniel, another big reason for the use of a mirror in dSLR's is due to heat noise of the sensor. The longer a sensor is activated, the more it heats up...and of course, there's the extra noise. Personally I like looking at the actual light through the mirror as opposed to the pixels of a LCD. I talked to Nikon about the implications the heat issue and the D90's video mode. I questioned if they had found a way to counteract that for longer shots using the D90. The tech guy told me that the video would get progressively more noise as the shot length grew. However, he stated that it would not be readily noticeable unless you cut the end of a long take with the beginning of another shot. So there still is no fix to the time/heat/noise issue...probably not until they get miniaturized, water-cooled heat-sinks behind the sensor (just my guess).

Film has been bought. Thanks.

Alright, one more drop in the price. You can get all of the film listed for $150 + shipping...or best offer.

Hey Ben, thanks for posting. I liked your video. You have great intuition in your camera movements, and I loved how you made the audience follow your focus pulls. Personally, I liked the "hand-cranked" type of feel that the D90 pulled off. It definitely has it's place, and I think you made good use of it in this video. Very fun to see what the D90 can do in a real world situation.

As I have not yet gotten any bites, let's spice things up a bit. For $200, you get all of the film listed above. So, that's the: 400' 16mm Kodak 200T 7274, frozen and sealed 395' 16mm Kodak 200T 7274, frozen, loaded, unloaded, then frozen again 400' 16mm FujiFilm Eterna 500T 8673, frozen and sealed and 400' Kodak 320T, all I know is it was in a refrigerator when I got it, and I immediately froze it. When you contact me for the film we will discuss the method and price for your preferred shipping. Thanks,

So I have some film that I'm trying to sell. Some of it will be brand new and some of it is older. Here are the details of what I have right now: $85 - 400' 16mm Kodak 200T 7274 - Bought New then immediately frozen and sealed in plastic bag, never thawed (three years in freezer) $75 - 395' 16mm Kodak 200T 7274 - Bought New then immediately frozen, thawed, loaded into a camera, but ended up taking it out and placing it back in the tin and freezing again in plastic bag (three years in freezer) $85 - 400' 16mm FujiFilm Eterna 500T 8673 - Bought New then immediately frozen and sealed in plastic bag, never thawed (three years in freezer) If you buy all three I will throw in a can of unexposed 400' Kodak 320T. I don't know what kind of film it is, and I only know that it was in a fridge before I got it. When I got it, I immediately froze it. You will definitely want to send some of this film off for testing before using. When you buy the film we will work out the shipping method and costs that best suit your needs. The film will be shipped from Connecticut. Also, if you are interested I have some brand new film that I can get my hands on (16mm and 35mm). Please email me via the address in my signature if you are interested of if you have any questions.

Very cool video. The reality of time hit me; when you enter into marriage you enter not just for that moment, or the moments of beauty, but for a companionship that takes you through those wrinkles until parting ways at death. Very powerful way to get across an oft used vow.

Definitely go for a Mac Pro. On top of the usual reliability, FCP userbility, and general build quality factors, here are my reasons: 1. Snow Leopard will be coming out shortly; that will allow for 64-bit processing power to be fully used. We will probably see a new version of FCPStudio within the year that will also be able to take advantage of the speed boost. 2. Macs, unlike PC's, can effectively use more than 4GB of RAM. PC's apparently can only use 4GB of RAM, which if you have a 512 VRAM only translates to around 2.5GB of RAM. Even if you load up your PC with 6GB of RAM, you won't be able to use all of it. Mix Snow Leopard with the use of RAM, and you're looking at a killer combo in performance. Something PC's just can't touch right now (though I've heard that some extremely expensive server versions of Vista can use more than 4GB of RAM).

Over the past year I have found that the buyersguide on Macrumors has not been accurate as Apple has changed some of their game plans. There will most definitely be a new release when Snow Leopard comes out. If you have a machine now that can work for the time being, then I would wait. It probably won't be a huge upgrade though.

I'm having issues Sending audio files to Soundtrack Pro from Final Cut. It's the latest Studio version (sorry, I'm not currently on my editing computer to get the version number). Here's what happens: I send the audio to Soundtrack Pro as an Audio Project (problem occurs whether using just Referenced Audio or Using the Entire Clip). When I save the file in Soundtrack Pro, even if I have not edited, I go back to FCP and the Out Point moves over to the left cutting off most of the clip (it's not a set number of frames, it seems to randomly either go all the way to the In Point or a few seconds away from the In Point). I cannot extend the Out Point as the clip shows that the Out Point is all the way against the end of the clilp. Sorry, it's a bit confusing. Anyway, I've found a work around that involves me edit the actual clip and changing the saved name. So basically, I'm duplicating the file and editing that; then reconnecting the audio to that new edited file. However, I would love to edit the way it's supposed to be done through a .stap file. So, has anyone run into this problem? If so, do you have any work arounds that allow the use of a .stap file? Thanks,

Hey Martin, You won't want to use the kino's for the effect you're going for. Mix Kino's with fog and you have yourself a very nice frontal light. Looking at the Metallica videos, it seems there are three effects you may be looking for: 1. Strong Rimlight - Two Instruments at 45° angles at a downward angle. 2. Strong Rimlight plus Diagonal Splash - Same as above with an instrument barndoored on the backdrop. 3. Strong Rimlight plus Diagonal Splash with Front Slash/Snoot - Same as above with another instrument tilted down on the musician. Use a snoot or create a slash with the barndoors. Looking at your lights though, I think you're going to need something a little more substantial. Remember, if you use the Kino's, you'll basically be killing the contrast you're looking for.

Hey Sean, love your work. Great natural shots and a beautiful use of lighting and composition. Congrats on the award.

While I don't have photos, we have put it a Mini on the end of a C-Stand. That's one of the huge pluses with the SI system. There are screw holes on it that allow for quick, versatile rigging. Just remember to bring long cords.

As for the ASA, the RED apparently is native 320. When you push it to a higher ASA you're actually lifting information from the darks. This information from a RED / Final Cut Pro workflow workshop, not from personal experience.

Think of it this way: if the audience viewer has a television that is out of sync, then everything they see is out of calibration, and your correctly calibrated production will match everything else. If they don't notice how out of calibration their television is, then they won't be judging anything you put out.

As you're just starting out you may want to get a good lay of the land. While reading books isn't everything, it'll definitely be a great start. There are at least two topics on this site that discuss great books to read. One of them can be found at http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=32188 . And definitely The Complete Film Production Handbook.

As much as I'm for bucking the system, they may not be allowing the use of a dolly so you can experiment. I definitely second the hand held approach, as it will allow you to focus more on the performances and not the technicalities behind nailing a "dolly" shot. And I'm saying this from experience. As a director, I used to focus a lot on the technicalities. Instead of trying to come up with a "dolly" replacement, just take what you have and embrace it. As for the other methods, a couple quick thoughts: Wheelchair - this is the best method when looking at precision, smoothness, and space. 2x4 Method - Was really smooth and precise in Army of Darkness, however, they had a lot of space to use this method. Tripod Method - Very interesting, never heard of that, but very interesting.

Thanks Walter, very thorough answer. Hopefully contacts (most have UV protection) offer some protection. Thanks again, much appreciated.

I, too, am curious as to how Black Light is dangerous. While it can cause skin cancer, the risk, I've heard, is about the same as from sun exposure. Are there any other risks?

Thanks. The Cineform Recorder looks amazing with a unbelievably great price. Can't wait for the release. Oh, and per the discussion concerning the video, I just downloaded a full resolution video from dpreview at http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08091705canon_5dmarkII.asp and viewed the files from Vincent's site. They almost seem to be shot with two different cameras. The one directly from Canon (via dpreview) is very laggy and noisey; while Vincent's is crisp and smooth. While the cinematography is much better with Vincent's, the quality of the capture itself seems to be the problem. Is it possible that the dpreview files are from an earlier release and Vincent's is from a more recent version of the 5d Mark II? As a Nikon dSLR user, I was holding my breath for the 5d Mark II, but now that seems to be turning into a sigh.

While I don't sit down and write out equations, I do run rough 'calculations' (if you can call them that) in my head. Mainly, I know the look I'm going for and am familiar enough with the lights I use that I have a good idea of placement in order to achieve the exposure for the subjects. It may just be me, but I only think of doing serious calculations on distances, subject placements and instrument placements when doing special effects work.

A quick rabbit trail: Has anyone used a good portable solution for capturing HDMI?

Hey Tim, Thanks so much for your insight. I ended up getting out of the program with a partial refund. Well worth it though, because the time spent was not justified by what I was re-learning. Thanks again, I realize I can't be hard on myself.