Bruce Greene

My most recent trip was to Moscow with 16 pieces of Steadicam equipment. Due to customs and possible corruption issues my shipper advised against shipping by freight and recommended that I bring everything with me on the plane with an ATA/Carnet. The Carnet cost about $700, but Delta airlines charges just a $50 flat fee for each case of camera equipment (see website). One must provide a production company photo ID to obtain this rate. This rate is good for domestic travel also. Other airlines may offer this rate as well. Last year shooting in Texas, I drove from LA...

Interesting question. So often, on small budget films, it is necessary to work "by the seat of your pants", rather than though a story board or shot list. Your intuition may rule here. I think the most important thing here is to know the script really really well. And, review each scene before shooting. The question I most often ask myself is "who's point of view" is this scene? From which character should the audience experience this moment? This can tell you when you want to be close to the action with the camera or to view a close up from far away with a long lens. Think about the environment. Tha audience often needs to know the the lay out of the action so that they can imagine the next move or reaction of the character whose eyes you'll be showing this story point through. Wide shots are very important for this as they show your characters relationship to the space and other characters. Once you've contemplated these questions, you can then go about thinking about how to light it, with the proper mood, emphasis on the most important part os the frame, and keeping all that equipment out of the shot. All while keeping on schedule. It's almost never easy, but usually engrossing and fun! Hope this helps a little :)

I have a small supply of old flash bulbs from the 1960's that I'm saving for such an occasion. Barring that, I'd go with the shutter over the light solution. I've used it for lightning in the past, and with a little practice, I think you could make some very convincing flash camera effects. The challenge will be to find one of these old shutters. They look like a metal venetian blind that you put in front of the lamp.

It is interesting that we a expending so much effort to discuss the end of film for making movies. I think a much bigger threat is the end of cinema...due to piracy. It won't matter if we shoot digital or film if everyone is stealing the end product. We won't be shooting much of anything, at least not as a career, just a hobby... Sorry, just popped in my head just now :)

Sometimes I think we are forgetting that were here to photograph the writing and acting. And, most of all, to tell a great story. Both film and digital can accomplish these goals. And, yes, soon we will have no more film, but there's nothing we can do about it so go out and make some great movies!

I hate to say this Paul, but the rule, pretty much in the "movie" biz is that these long days are kind of routine, at any age. I do find that there are not so many older people working on movies though... Wish it wasn't so...but it is. Best of luck to you. You've received some excellent advice above!

Why do I get the feeling that this is your homework assignment? Why don't you give us your opinion?

The projector has a shutter that flashes each frame 3 times

Thanks Brian. My thinking also...

I start shooting tomorrow in a 50hz country at 24 fps. Should we shoot 24fps or 23.98? (red camera) Please reply quickly :)

I invested in a digital cinema camera in 2006. It will never come close to making it's money back in rentals. It has had value as a marketing tool and I've gotten enough projects to more than pay for the investment through salary. I'm now shooting a project that is a direct result of the relationships I made owning the camera. So, it might not be a crazy idea if you can afford it.

Phil, I live in LA but I'll be in Moscow till October. Are you near by?

The good news is that almost no one sees these bad low budget films. But to protect my work on the better ones, I've learned to color grade them myself. Sure, it may take longer than the shooting, but I've become a better cinematographer through the process.

Now I see. I wasn't loading the images when I made my reply. Never mind :)

I'm not sure whether I should be offended as a Colorist...or a Steadicam Operator :) Phil, please describe this cap in more detail so that I can avoid it!

David, Every time I think of replying to a thread like this, you've already said it better than I would have. Thank you!

A few years ago, I noticed a post here in the "jobs" forum from someone, fresh out of school who offered to work for free. I checked out his student work and asked if he'd help me on a mini spec spot for one day. After that I hired him as a 2nd ac and gaffer on some indie features. That was one way of getting to know people in the "chain of command" :) and it worked for him. Now, he's not so often available...

For many, yes, this is the future. Micro budget filmmaking can be rewarding, it's just not a career that can pay rent and support a family. A more realistic approach might be to teach for the rent and make films on the side. Many still photographers take this route. Isn't that how Ansel Adams did it? George Kucher ?

Since there are a lot of young filmmakers who read this site, it might be wise for all to read this article. I think back to my film school days when I realized that there might be some danger to all this electrical stuff. I went to a technical book store and bought a text book about electricity for some community college course. The book gave me knowledge and an appreciation for the danger of electricity. Maybe saved my life, who knows. I do know that I tied into many electrical boxes...while safely insulated...until the time there just wasn't enough room in the box. While I was safe from electrocution by using thick rubber gloves and standing on an apple box, the power box exploded and sent shrapnel flying everywhere. It was the last time I tied into a box. Safety training in film school ought to be a required course before any filmmaking commences. It's always amazed me that lamp operators are called electricians, when many have little knowledge of electricity...

Last summer I shot a feature on the Red MX. I just completed color grading the film from the original r3d files. My thoughts: After grading about 2500 shots... The camera produces incredibly detailed and noise free images. However... I feel that the camera has an "odd" color look to it. I've played with these files every which way, and while they can look stunning, it's difficult to make the images look like they did live on the set. Maybe it's the RAW converter, maybe it's the imaging chip, I have no idea. I do know that still images shot RAW with my Canon 5d look normal when processed in Adobe Camera RAW. The RED R3d files need some unusual tweaking to look "photographic" for lack of a better word. Right after I graded the RED movie, I graded a project shot on the Sony f-35. Right away the images looked the way I imagined, though they have a bit more noise and are not as detailed as the RED images. But, color wise, they are much more "natural" looking. The Sony seemed to have about the same dynamic range as the RED MX, but does require a bit more light for best exposure. As for the DP loosing control of the process? Well, I've taken back control on these projects:) I had a choice between sitting and advising a colorist or spending a little more time and doing it myself. I chose the latter for these projects. I'll also add this: One sure learns the characteristics of the camera when one grades 2500 clips oneself!

Really good point John!

The color shift is even over the entire frame. I'm virtually certain that it's not the OLPF. But upon thinking about it, the problem takes were all taken on the same two days...don't know what that implies because it comes and goes.

It's not IR in a night exterior shot without filtration when one angle is good and the other is red. I would post a frame, but the data is on someone else's system and it's not easy for me to grab a frame...sorry. And no puns were intended, at least by me. I'm not poking any fun at this problem, but if you can make me smile, go for it!

The files contain more than just red information and are correctable, but I don't think fully so. It takes a bit to make them match the other shots in the sequence. One shot is impossible to make look really good, but it's a little under-exposed in parts. I am correcting from the original .r3d files. Thanks David for your advice to send the file to RED. I hadn't thought of that :unsure: Can one send one frame of .r3d? Or do I need to seen the whole clip when it's in Red RAW format? I ask because I don't want to buy a hard drive to send it to them <_<