Brian Rose

I?m really conflicted on shooting SD versus HD, and if anyone could offer some advice, I?d really appreciate it. To begin, I am a student at SIU Carbondale, studying for my MFA. I am beginning my second year, and next summer I will start shooting my thesis film?a biography of James Polk (11th U.S. President). It will be lengthy, likely between 2 and 3 hours. It would be part travelogue, part Ken Burns, if that helps. Primarily, I envision it as a product for the television market, like PBS, something that would be shown in two parts. That said, I would still like to submit to some festivals. I?m trying to keep all doors open at this point. Obviously, I want to make it look as good as possible. My budget is 15K (not including possible grant money), which (I think) precludes 16mm. Thus, I plan to shoot digital, but I am torn between SD and HD. Several professors I have spoken with have been encouraging me to try HD, but I worry about the baggage that comes with it. Although my school is well equipped for work in SD, but only recently begun to equip for HD. There is only one suite for HD work, but it is necessary to downconvert the footage for editing. We have a number of SD cameras, like XL1S, and a DSR 250. Not the newest stuff, so I?d likely get something newer, something that can do 24P, like a DVX or XL2. In terms of HD, the school just recently purchased a single HD camera (sorry, I don?t know the make, but I will try to find out). I?d love to use it, but I?m always worried about using equipment that is scarce. I worry about starting a project in one format, and being forced to shoot in another because what I was using has suddenly become unavailable, or is being used by someone else. If I were to shoot HD, I?d buy my own camera as a failsafe?possible a Sony V1-U, or Panasonic HVX200. Even so, I?m scared by all the technological demands of HD. My shoot would involve a lot of location work, on historic sites around the country and in Mexico (battlefields mainly, for the Mexican American War sequence)?not exactly the best conditions to be lugging around a lot of extra equipment to handle the HD workflow. Then there are so many post production issues that I worry might get in the way of finishing my project. There are so many questions of format, how to upload my footage, edit it real time, down converting, etc, etc. I am most definitely a novice in this department. If I stuck with SD, I?d be more comfortable. I can find a lot of reasons why HD would not be best for me at this time, but I keep returning to the fact that HD is the future, and if my piece is in HD, it will have a better chance in the marketplace than an SD project? Or am I mistaken on this point? I also wonder, is it worth it at this point to invest in an SD camera like a DVX or an XL2, or should I get an HD camera like the HVX200, and shoot MiniDV? Is it a better investment to buy HD? HD is the future. I fully accept that. I would love to shoot HD, because I want my project to look as good as possible. Obviously, quality won?t matter if the film is ?shite.? Obviously, I want to focus on telling a good story, first and foremost. That said, do I risk getting distracted with the new technological baggage that comes with HD? Should I instead try to draw upon my knowledge of lighting and cinematography to produce the best production value that SD can offer, even if that means sacrificing the detail and clarity of HD. As a student, should I focus on saving my money, and trying to get the best I can out of the equipment I currently have (i.e. SD), or should I gamble on HD, knowing that it would be better positioned as a saleable product to potential distributors in an increasingly HD marketplace? Should I play it safe to ensure I get the project done, or take leap of faith and gamble on HD? I?d really love any thoughts you all can offer. Thanks! Best, Brian Rose PS: I wasn?t sure which forum to post this in, SD or HD, so I thought I?d do both, to get a mix of opinions. Thanks!

I?m really conflicted on shooting SD versus HD, and if anyone could offer some advice, I?d really appreciate it. To begin, I am a student at SIU Carbondale, studying for my MFA. I am beginning my second year, and next summer I will start shooting my thesis film?a biography of James Polk (11th U.S. President). It will be lengthy, likely between 2 and 3 hours. It will be part travelogue/part Ken Burns, if that helps. Primarily, I envision it as a product for the television market, like PBS, something that would be shown in two parts. That said, I would still like to submit to some festivals. I?m trying to keep all doors open at this point. Obviously, I want to make it look as good as possible. My budget is 15K (not including possible grant money), which (I think) precludes 16mm. Thus, I plan to shoot digital, but I am torn between SD and HD. Several professors I have spoken with have been encouraging me to try HD, but I worry about the baggage that comes with it. Although my school is well equipped for work in SD, but only recently begun to equip for HD. There is only one suite for HD work, but it is necessary to downconvert the footage for editing. We have a number of SD cameras, like XL1S, and a DSR 250. Not the newest stuff, so I?d likely get something newer, something that can do 24P, like a DVX or XL2. In terms of HD, the school just recently purchased a single HD camera (sorry, I don?t know the make, but I will try to find out). I?d love to use it, but I?m always worried about using equipment that is scarce. I worry about starting a project in one format, and being forced to shoot in another because what I was using has suddenly become unavailable, or is being used by someone else. If I were to shoot HD, I?d buy my own camera as a failsafe?possible a Sony V1-U, or Panasonic HVX200. Even so, I?m scared by all the technological demands of HD. My shoot would involve a lot of location work, on historic sites around the country and in Mexico (battlefields mainly, for the Mexican American War sequence)?not exactly the best conditions to be lugging around a lot of extra equipment to handle the HD workflow. Then there are so many post production issues that I worry might get in the way of finishing my project. There are so many questions of format, how to upload my footage, edit it real time, down converting, etc, etc. I am most definitely a novice in this department. If I stuck with SD, I?d be more comfortable. I can find a lot of reasons why HD would not be best for me at this time, but I keep returning to the fact that HD is the future, and if my piece is in HD, it will have a better chance in the marketplace than an SD project? Or am I mistaken on this point? I also wonder, is it worth it at this point to invest in an SD camera like a DVX or an XL2, or should I get an HD camera like the HVX200, and shoot MiniDV? Is it a better investment to buy HD? HD is the future. I fully accept that. I would love to shoot HD, because I want my project to look as good as possible. Obviously, quality won?t matter if the film is ?shite.? Obviously, I want to focus on telling a good story, first and foremost. That said, do I risk getting distracted with the new technological baggage that comes with HD? Should I instead try to draw upon my knowledge of lighting and cinematography to produce the best production value that SD can offer, even if that means sacrificing the detail and clarity of HD. As a student, should I focus on saving my money, and trying to get the best I can out of the equipment I currently have (i.e. SD), or should I gamble on HD, knowing that it would be better positioned as a saleable product to potential distributors in an increasingly HD marketplace? Should I play it safe to ensure I get the project done, or take leap of faith and gamble on HD? I?d really love any thoughts you all can offer. Thanks! Best, Brian Rose PS: I wasn?t sure which forum to post this in, SD or HD, so I thought I?d do both, to get a mix of opinions. Thanks!

Thanks a lot to everyone who watched my film. Hope you enjoyed it! The semifinalists are announced on the 27th. Gonna keep my fingers crossed. Lot of great submissions. Until then! Best, Brian

Sorry it's been a while since I've posted, but I've been busy working on an entry for that Heinz Top This TV challenge. It's a stop motion animation using construction paper. A new realm for me. Anyways, I hope this is in the right spot, but I thought I might share, if any one would be interested in checking it out. It was shot digitally, using my Sony Mavica, at 2.1 mp. Unfortunately, the Youtube encoding leaves something to be desired, but hopefully it is not too distracting. If I am lucky enough to make it to the next round, I hope to get something of better quality up. Until then, enjoy. Thanks! Brian Rose

Interesting site, but I'm not sure what the special process is they talk about. That effect is also known as the Harris shutter, and fairly simple. Just mount a camera loaded with color film on a steady tripod and photograph the scene once with a red filter, backwind, expose again with the green, and again with the blue. It can also be done with BW neg, but unlike the color footage, you have to shoot color separations, then recombine in post...it's a little more complex, and uses triple the normal footage, but the color (in my opinion) is much better and more "far out." Once I get back to school I'll post some of my footage to demonstrate this. Great link though! Brian

I must have been thinking of the release date, 1955. My mistake! That would mean that the Ladykiller's was the last three strip film, since I'm fairly certain that was shot in early 55, and released late that year. Brian Rose

David, I appreciate your candor, which is why I'm going to do some rudimentary camera tests first before going off and buying more equipment. I'll do as I did with the first bolex tests, setting up a miniDV camera on a tripod, and photographing a static scene three times. I will also shoot the scene normally for side by side comparison, and then I will share what I find. I figure the only way to know for sure is to try this out, and see what happens. Most likely, the color I produce won't be worth the added trouble, as you say. But who knows? Brian

Foxfire was the last American film to use Three strip, and it came out the same year as the Ladykillers. Come to think of it, I'm not sure which was filmed later...Foxfire, or the Ladykillers, so it's hard to say which one gets the sad honor of being the last. It is definitely one of the two. Interesting fact: several of the three strip cameras were converted to shoot VistaVision, hence the confusion when production photos on post 1955 films show what appears to be a three strip camera being used!

Nate and David: Thanks a lot for the feedback. To address your concerns, I am in absolute agreement and believe that film is still the way to go. It is the ultimate dream for me...a practical, three strip process for 16mm or (god willing) 35. But there are a number of issues involved with shooting film that I have encountered with my two strip experiments which have convinced me to go in a new direction, for the time being. 1. Alignment: Proper color depends on a precise alignment of all cameras concerned so that they may each capture the same identical image. This is a very difficult and time consuming process. I tried as much to align them properly by sight, using charts and reference points to ensure close duplication, but there is still a great deal of trial and error that takes time and money in film stock, lab costs and telecine. Furthermore, as another board member pointed out, it might not even be POSSIBLE for perfect alignment of the cameras because of inherent flaws in the individual lenses being used with my bolexes, if they were not from the same "batch." By using digital, alignment is simpler because I can view my footage immediately, and make adjustments as needed. And, since I can buy three cameras at once, the odds are better of uniformity between the three. 2. Synchronicity: it is vital the the film cameras run at precisely the same speed, and in sync with each other. Otherwise, color bleeding of varying degrees of severity is inevitable as the three records slip in and out of sync. I was able to make do with spring wound bolexes for these first tests, but if I wanted to produce anything with the process, I would have resolve this issue, which can be done by only two ways: 1. common shafts/drive belts that ensure synchronicity or 2. crystal motors linked to a common frame controller so that they are in sync with each other. Either prospect demands much time and money, which, as a grad student, are in very short supply for me. I want to produce at least one short subject using the process I have developed. Film would be great, and I would prefer it...you are absolutely right on that point, but ultimately, I want to demonstrate that it is possible, practical and preferable to create color through multi camera systems. I have roughly two years left of school, and considering my financial situation, it just would not be economically feasible to build a multi camera system using film within that time, and with my money. 3. Sound. This is a minor point, but I would like to do a short with sound, to "seal the deal" in terms of practicality. My current set up, using bolexes, is far too noisy. As with Technicolor, I would have to blimp it severely to quiet it down enough sufficient for recording levels. With digital, this issue is moot. Conclusion To address you concerns over the quality of using digital, that remains to be seen. I will do some camera tests with a single 3 chip miniDV camera, and do side by side comparisons to see what will happen, and what the quality will be like. I'm not sure what will happen, to be frank, but I believe, based on the theory behind what I am doing, that the color I can produce will be superior to single AND three chip technology. Even three chip cameras ultimately have to record the three color records onto a single miniDV tape..and these chips have their limits in terms of color reproduction. I believe that by devoting a DV tape for each color record, and using three cameras, I can improve upon the color vibrancy, accuracy and saturation in a significant way. And even if the bump in quality is not that marked, it will still demonstrate that my process can work. It could help when the time comes to ask for grants or funding to pursue my greater goals. But at the very least, it is an interesting, new spin on image making. And consider the possibilty three cameras open up for high dynamic range cinematography...I've only begun to read and explore this method, and I am already excited about how this could be applied to what I'm doing. Ultimately, I want to produce at least one short subject demonstrating this process, which is why I'm looking for some cameras that can record sharp, detailed video. I aim to make a presentation piece, which is why I'm hesitant about using lipstick cams...I'm just not sure the overall image quality will be up to snuff. But, I really do appreciate these comments, and I hope you understand where I'm coming from and what my goals are at this point. I have by no means abandoned film, but merely set it aside out of necessity. So to reiterate my original question, would you all be able to recommend some nice, reasonably affordable miniDVs. Like something from the Panasonic GS line...something in the range of 500 to 700, I think. Thanks! Best, Brian Rose

Well, it's been a while with no reply in the SD forum, so I thought I might repost this in General and see if I have better luck in getting feedback. That said: All, In case you aren't familiar with my posts in the 16mm thread, I've been experimenting with three strip cinematography, whereby the three primary color records are captured on individual strips of BW neg and recombined to produce vivid color (like Technicolor). Because of the expense and complexity of three strip photography with film, I want to change direction and build a three-camera set up using mini-DV cameras. Below is a crude schematic of my design. Basically, using beamsplitters, mirrors and colored filters, this system will enable each camera to record one color record. Then, in post, I will recombine the images for full color. IN theory, the color saturation, accuracy and overall vibrancy should be markedly above standard cameras, or even three chip systems. Getting to my question: I need three cameras for what I intend to construct. They need to be reasonably small, and not too expensive (so no XL2s, alas). For this first set up, it will likely be some sort of consumer level model (i.e. sub 1000) Obviously, I don't care about how each camera records color, since I will be shooting using the BW function through colored filters, and adding the color in post. However, I do want to get something with as fine and sharp a picture quality as possible for my budget. At this stage, I was planning on SD cameras. Of course, I don't have a ton of money to spend, so I was wondering what make/model of camera you all might recommend that would be the best quality for my purposes, and that would cost between 500 to 700 dollars per camera. I'd really appreciate any help! Thanks!

I saw Spiderman 3 the other day. I saw it in Imax, and I have to say that I had some mixed feelings about the cinematography. It looked great, I will admit, and the though the grain was more visible in some scenes than others, it did not bother me so much. What dove me nuts was the shallow depth of field, which was especially noticeable on the extra large screen. I recall one scene (no spoilers) in Peter's apartment when he's talking to his aunt. He is in the foreground, she in the back. As she speaks, the focus is on Peter's face, so we can see his reaction to her advice. Fair enough. But it was so annoying that all I could make out was his face, and the rest was just a mushy blur, until he turns to face her, and then the focus shifts to the aunt, and now Peter is a blur. I suppose whether you like shallow or deep focus is an opinion kinda thing, but I thought the scene would have been SO much stronger if it (as well as others) had been shot deep focus so we can see the speaker and the listener both in focus. It just seems to me a bit lazy, when one could have crafted a stronger scene with a little composition, some extra lighting, and a stopped down lens. What it boils down to is I don't like being forced to watch something because of the focus. "Okay, look at him...rack focus...now look at her." Back and forth, back and forth. I wished I could just sit back, and watch the scene. The way directors and DPs use focus to direct the audience...it justs feels to me like I'm being led by the hand every step of the way. I think that's one reason why movies like Citizen Kane and The Best Years of Our Lives endure. Gregg Toland's use of deep focus allows the audience more freedom to discover new things within the frame. Every time I see those movies, I discover something new, thanks to the masterful use of deep focus and composition. But that's just one guy's opinion. Brian Rose

All, In case you aren't familiar with my posts in the 16mm thread, I've been experimenting with three strip cinematography, whereby the three primary color records are captured on individual strips of BW neg and recombined to produce color (like Technicolor). Because of the expense and complexity of three strip photography with film, I want to change direction and build a three-camera set up using mini-DV cameras. Below is a crude schematic of my design. Basically, using beamsplitters, mirrors and colored filters, this system will enable each camera to record one color record. Then, in post, I will recombine the images for full color. IN theory, the color saturation, accuracy and overall vibrancy should be markedly above standard cameras, or even three chip systems. Getting to my question: I need three cameras for what I intend to construct. They need to be reasonably small, and not too expensive (so no XL2s, alas). Obviously, I don't care about how each camera records color, since I will be shooting monochrome through colored filters, and adding the color in post. However, I do want to get something with as fine and sharp a picture quality as possible for my budget. At this stage, I was planning on SD cameras, although HD could be a possiblity in the future. Of course, I don't have a ton of money to spend, so I was wondering what make/model of camera you all might recommend that would be the best quality for my purposes, and that would cost between 500 to 700 dollars per camera. I'd really appreciate any help! Thanks!

I am currently in film school, so I will try to do my best to give an unvarnished, objective stance. There are definitely pros and cons to getting a degree in film. First off, I would recommend studying film as a grad. Use your time as an undergrad to get a good solid degree in something like business, or English or History, as I did. You have to plan for those rough times between projects, when you'll have to get a regular job to make ends meet. A good, solid degree as an undergrad will at least impart some skills you can apply to a range of jobs, until you get that big film gig. That said, on with the pros: Film school is great for meeting people that share your interests, knowledge and level of committment. That was a major reason that I chose film school. Also, film schools are great for getting access to expensive equipment that would likely be unavailble to you if you went the indy route. Now, this requires research because not all film schools are created equal. Here at SIU Carbondale (Steve James of "Hoop Dreams" is an alum), we've got an array of 16mm, from Bolex to Arri SRs, super 8 to a brand new HD camera system. It's a great way to lay your hands on a lot of good (and not so good) equipment and learn their ins and outs. FSU has just about the best equipment out there. There are others as well. Supposedly, NYU needs some work in this department. A film school is also a good way to get your foot in the door for film festivals, though this depends somewhat on the school's reputation. Now the cons: Money, is of course, a factor. If you are going the film school route, I say look for an affordable school, or one that offers aid. My school is giving me tuition plus living expenses, so I am essentially being paid to study and make films. There are others out there. FSU, for example, pays all the costs of production. Also, there is the matter of faculty. Faculty are kinda like studio bosses. You wind up butting heads sooner or later. Most are great, supportive people. Others can be arrogant prigs who will try to mold and steer you into making what they make. It's actually a good lesson in creative autonomy. Sooner or later, you'll be forced to say "no" to one of these authority figures...a very useful word that too few people know how to use. What about the degree? Well, if you want to teach, an MFA or DFA or PhD is very useful. But if you want to MAKE movies, the degree itself is worth about as much as the paper it's printed on. That's just how it is, and it is something you should keep in mind as you enter a film school. In a way, it's rather nice. You don't have to worry as much about getting stellar grades, because who's gonna care? All that a company will want to know is "What work have you done." It's less burdensome knowing that grades and degrees are secondary to the work itself. Ultimately, it's up to you. On the one hand, I'd say that if it was between NYU and making your movie, I'd go for a the latter. Frankly, only a sucker would shell out 30K a year, plus living, and then another 50K for their thesis, when they could've used that money to make a nice first feature, or a nest egg until a job opens up. But if you can find a nice film program that is affordable, or will give you aid, it is worth considering. Hope this helps! Best, Brian Rose

David: Thanks for the compliments. It means a lot, especially coming from someone like you. I do have a couple rolls of plus x left in my fridge, so I might go out and give it a shot. If I had the time and money, I'd love to do a short subject in two strip. It has this amazing look to it...difficult to describe. I'm a huge fan of two-strip Technicolor, and I've always wanted to recreate it. And it certainly works in winter to makes things extra dreary looking! Now, onto your question: Recombining the colors, I discovered, is pretty simple (that is, if the images are aligned!). I had the footage telecined by cinelab (great work guys!), and loaded it into Premiere Pro 1.5. In the workspace, I layered the color separations: red on top, followed by green, and blue on bottom. I don't think it makes a difference which layer goes first, but this way, I can keep track of which color record is which. Then, I apply RGB color balance to each color record. Depending on which color I'm working with, I drain away the other two colors. If red, I zero out green and blue, and so on. This yields three records each with the proper color. Then, I apply the screen key effect to every layer EXCEPT the bottom one. This renders the frames semitransparent, and produces color. It's as simple as that. Now, with the footage on youtube, I had to do an extra step. Since I only shot the red and green records (like early Technicolor), I had to adjust the color balance to compensate for the loss. Uncorrected, the footage has a strong yellow bias. By adding blue to the green record, I can negate that tone, and produce a more normal (if not accurate) color palette. Best, Brian R.

New VitaChrome footage at last! Sorry all for the extended delay. When I last posted, I had built a crude, two camera system, oriented around a plate beamsplitter. VitaChrome Camera Prototype I shot some test footage in late January, and got the footage back a few weeks later. Around the same time, I began research for a short documentary for an exhibition in late April. Because of time commitments, I had to set aside the color work to focus on the doc. But now that that project is finished, I have returned to the test reels. What I found was decidedly a mixed bag. Most of the footage had problems of exposure, or alignment. But, a few brief clips were reasonably acceptable, and I think they demonstrate that it is POSSIBLE to pull off multi strip color. But, I have many challenges to work through before it is acceptable as a format. This time I used double x BW neg so I could have a little more freedom in lower light conditions. However, the grain structure was not very pleasing to me, so I will probably stick with plus x in the future. There are also matters of alignment and camera synchronization that I need to work through. So what's next? I am considering taking both a step back, and forward. Because of the difficulties and expense of shooting 16mm, I plan on setting aside my work in two-strip motion pictures and focus on achieving three strip color with 35mm still cameras. But someday, I might be ready to tackle Everest: three strip motion picture photography! Until then, enjoy this two strip 16mm footage. I just posted it on youtube, so if anyone has trouble loading it, give it a few minutes, then try again. Lemme know if there are any problems. Any feedback would be most appreciated! Best, Brian Rose

Hello All, I've done some digging through the archives, to find what I could on spot meters, but I didn't find what I was looking for, so I thought I'd start a new thread. I was looking at getting a Minolta spotmeter M to go along with my incident meter. What do you all think of this particular make/model? Any thoughts, comments or concerns? Best, Brian Rose

Sorry, forgot to mention. It is an H-16 Reflex. Brian R.

I just got a 25mm Switar C-mount for my Bolex, yet when I went to mount it, I found that the rear was too large. There is this extra ring in the rear of the lens that prevents it from screwing in fully. It is an AR lens, but I had assumed that all the c-mount switars were standard, aside from the rx, non rx distinction. What happened? Brian R.

I've read some info about this student award teh ASC gives out, but does anyone have experience with this, or knows what the criteria is? I'd like to know just what the ASC is looking for in a recipient. Just interested to know. Might give me something to aspire to in the next three years! Brian Rose

Funny you should mention that. I've been in touch with the designer, asking about how he built his set up. I've bought the parts already, and my next step is to build the drive system. I made a few mods, but it is very similar to his design. But thanks for the info! Best, Brian R.

Well, I had quite a day. I was doing more test shots with the two strip camera, and the spring on one of my cameras blows out! Man, that has got to be one of the nastiest sounds I have ever heard. It was a good thing I was alone. For a minute there, I was talking like a sailor! Well...it could be worse. I mean, the camera is still usable, just not the spring motor. So, I have even greater reason to switch to some kind of motorized setup. Fortunately, I managed to shoot several rolls before this unfortunate setback, so I should still have something to show you all in a couple weeks. Needless to say, tonight I plan on drowning my sorrows in ice cream! Brian R.

Thanks for the suggestions. Check your pm. Best, Brian Rose

You all raise some good points. First off, with regards to compensating for light loss...the green filter loses (according to Kodak) approximately 4 stops, while the red loses 3 stops. Essentially, then, the green requires double the light. So, the beamsplitter I used is not balanced, that is, it is not 50/50 transmission/reflection. Rather, it reflects approximately 65% of the light, and transmits 35%. Essentially, double the light is reflected as transmitted. This way, both cameras use the same f-stop, since I have compensated by giving more light to the green, and taking a little away from the red. So, they should have the same depth of field. At least in theory. Once I get my footage back, I can see what balancing is necessary. And, switching the colors is a simple as changing the filter insert in each bolex. So, I'll give it a try! With regards to registration, yes, this is a problem as well. At this point, being a grad student, I'm pretty much forced to use bolexes for my testing, as much as I would like to build a really kicking system using something with a superior registration system. In the mean time, I try to take care of the cameras, and ensure they are properly maintained. Overall, I think for what they are, and how old they are, they are quite good in terms of registration and steadiness. Same goes for Super 16. I'd love to have that extra leeway, and shoot wider, but it's just a matter of money at this point. And, it is interesting you mention drives. That is what I'm working on next. I've got a pretty simple system worked out, one with a common axle that links both cameras. The drive shafts are connected via timing belts and miter gears to form a perfectly synchronous system. The drawback is that these cameras do not have the 1:1 shafts (again, money...donations accepted :) ), so any drive shaft needs a pretty good amoutn of torque. The other idea I've had is to get a tobin motor for each one, since they would then be crystal sync. Granted, they wouldn't be perfectly synchronized, but at least they would be synced to a common frequency. Until then, basically, what I did was calibrate both bolexes to run at the same speed, more or less. Each can now shoot precisely the same number of frames (661 by my count). The problem then, is getting them to run at the same rate. Using old rolls of film, I just ran the cameras over and over again at a given speed, slowing one down, speeding up the other, back and forth until they both ran the same time. I've gotten them to where I can start them at the same time, on a full wind, and they will kick off at the same moment when they wind down. Pretty sweet! Well, I hope that answers some of the questions. Thanks again for all the comments. They are a great help. And, I hope to have clips in a couple weeks! Best, Brian Rose

Unfortunately no. I'm pretty behind the times when it comes to webpages. Ironic, huh! I do have an album at photobucket, where I keep my latest images. Hopefully I'll upgrade, but until then, I hope this will be satisfactory. Thanks for taking such interest in my work! http://s127.photobucket.com/albums/p140/Brianruns10/ Best, Brian Rose

Chuck, Thanks for the tip. You're right about the glass. It does have some flaws, but it came reasonably cheap. Once I get my test shots back, I'll have a better idea of what changes I will need to make. If all goes as I hope, I plan to upgrade the optics, per your suggestion. Thanks! Best, Brian R