Brian Rose

I can see where Mr. Jacoby is coming from. It is tough to make a film when it will always be compared to Goodfellas, or Raging Bull, or Taxi Driver. In my opinion, I think the Mr. Baulhaus's work was very good, because after a while, I ceased to notice it. I got so into the film as a whole, that pretty soon I stopped looking for editing or cinematography, and just went along for the ride. Certainly there are some films, like Lawrence of Arabia, where appreciating the cinematography is essential in taking in the whole experience. For other films, I would argue that it is good that it does not draw too much attention to itself, as that would detract from the narrative. Same for editing. There are some films were it is a vital element (like "The Wild Bunch") but others where the best editing is what you don't notice, because you're so involved in the story. (possible spoilers ahead) Yes, it was a change from more stylized efforts like Raging Bull and Goodfellas, but I think it worked. For me, it was the best movie I've seen in several years, because I was so caught off guard by it, so much so I didn't know what to expect. I left thinking about how many ways a less capable director would have messed up that movie, especially the ending. I was praying it wouldn't end the way I was expecting, the way most Hollywood fare ends these days. Instead, I was left completely off guard, and when I left that theater, I was trembling, and my heart was racing. I cannot recall the last time I was physically affected that way. And the way the audience reacted, to the sudden, shocking death of one character in an elevator was something I hadn't heard in a long while either. We were jolted awake by something fresh and new. I must admit having doubts about Scorsese in recents years, but all those doubts have been abated by this film. It is one of his very best, dare I say, right up there with Goodfellas and Raging Bull and Taxi Driver. I'll say it right now. If Scorsese doesn't get Best Director for this one, then the Academy will (for me) be completely out of touch and irrelevant! That's my two cents.

My apologies for the confusing threads, but I was trying to keep questions short and simple. I had figured if someone asked, I'd give the filter information. Anyways, actually, I'm doing this in premiere pro, since they are video clips (of static scenes) shot through three filters. I may try Final Cut next.

Are you talking about doing this in final cut?

All, I'm trying to play around with color, by filming in black and white. I've got test clip of a still scene that I shot three times, once with each of the three primaries as a filter. So, I've got the color records in BW form. I've tried numerous ways to convert this to rgb, but with middling success. I've tried tinting, color balance, nothing seems to yield very pleasing results. Also, I'm having trouble trying to composite the image. I've tried working with opacity, but again, mixed results. Perhaps there is a keying effect? Brian Rose

All, does anyone know off the top of their head what the filter factors are for the wratten 25, 47 and 61? Thanks! Brian Rose Sorry, that was wratten 24, not 25

I forgot to mention, do I need to worry about infrared light with film? I know digital can be more sensitive, so you might need a hot mirror filter, but would I need a hot mirror for 16mm as well? Brian Rose

All, I am experimenting with creating color using black and white film, akin to technicolor. I plan to do really simple stuff, mounting a camera, pointed at a stationary object, and film three times, once through the three primaries, then combine in post. I've done some preliminary tests with digital, in which I set the camera to record in black and white, and then I recorded through the three filters. In Adobe Premiere Pro, I recombined the images and achieved color, but the overall image is very dark. Should I be overexposing when I capture the image? Any idea why my pictures are so dark?

All, I am experimenting with creating color using black and white film, akin to technicolor. I plan to do really simple stuff, mounting a camera, pointed at a stationary object, and film three times, once through the three primaries. I've done some preliminary tests with digital, in which I set the image to black and white, and recorded through filters. In Adobe Premiere Pro, I recombined the images and achieved color, but the overall image is very dark. Should I be overexposing when I capture the image? Any idea why my pictures are so dark? I've posted two frame grabs. The first was taken normally. The second is a composite of the color seps I made with black and white images.

Thanks for the info! Actually, I'd rather not call, at least not right away. I guess I didn't make that clear outright. No, you all are right, one must be careful when contacting such individuals. I was more interested in sending a letter, or perhaps email. Best, Brian Rose

Most definitely. You raise a great point with regard to his age. That is one reason why I am eager to contact him. Last I had seen, he appeared in good health considering his years, and I look at it as a great opportunity to speak with one of the last giants of hollywood. I think of all the greats that I will never meet, and I think that if I do not try with him, it would be an opportunity wasted. I'm just eager to write him as a fan of his work. And who knows? Maybe, just maybe, I might be fortunate enough to strike up a correspondance! Brian Rose

I would very much like to contact Jack Cardiff, because he is my favorite cinematographer, and because I think correspondance with such a giant of film would be incredibly valuable. Based on his filmography, he is still pretty active, so it seems possible. Anyone have any clue how to reach him, whether by email or by phone? Best, Brian Rose

My Goodness you're right! I can't believe how dumb I was. I could have sworn my model had a butterfly shutter. It must be some sort of illusion, because in the past, I was sure the shutter had two blades, on what I could see of it. After you mentioned it, I went and made a tiny mark on one blade, and bam, I find that it is a single bladed camera. I must've gotten my wires crossed! Well, I'l have to think of something else now! Thanks alot for saving me a ton of needless of work! Brian Rose

I've got an old bolex that I want to modify to shoot color film. What I mean is, since the camera has a two blade butterfly shutter, it is possible, with colored filters, to achieve crude color akin to Kinemacolor. I want to experiment with this. Now, I can sort of access the shutter through the prism gate, but it would make my job a heck of a lot easier if there was some way I could remove the front face place so I could see the entire shutter. So far, I've removed all the screws I can find in the plate, but there is still something holding it in place (though it is loose, so I must be close). Any tips? Thanks! Best, Brian Rose

I just felt I had to apologize because in hindsight, I felt my comments were out of line, and ill-informed, and I did not want there to be any hard feelings over the matter. Brian Rose

Here was my post, which I think caused some of the problems, and for which I apologized and retracted: "As much as I want this RED thing to pan out, it seems funny. I haven't heard any buzz about this item, and all of sudden this announcement of a break in? The first thought that popped in my mind is that someone couldn't deliver, and a "break in" sure is a convenient excuse to delay a concept indefinitely. And what's with a 50K, then a 100K reward? Odd for a company looking for investors and funds to offer such a huge amount. Of course, it would be easy to offer such an amount, if one knows that no one is going to provide such evidence. Because there is no evidence. Just my opinion."

I would like to formally apologize for my role in any suggestion that the break in was a "hoax." I admit to being a skeptic with regards to RED, but my comments were based on my own bias, and were poorly informed. I admit to being ignorant to the situation surrounding RED in recent weeks, and my comments were very much out of line. I very much love this forum, and respect the members who have helped me on numerous occasions. I did a diservice to them, and to the board with my slander. I hope you all will be willing to accept my apology, and I wish the best of luck to the persons who have invested so much time and capital into RED, and my fondest wishes that they are able to overcome this hardship, and bring their dreams to fruition. Sincerely, Brian Rose

It just doesn't pass the "smell test" right now. I agree. As much as I want this RED thing to pan out, it seems funny. I haven't heard any buzz about this item, and all of sudden this announcement of a break in? The first thought that popped in my mind is that someone couldn't deliver, and a "break in" sure is a convenient excuse to delay a concept indefinitely. And what's with a 50K, then a 100K reward? Odd for a company looking for investors and funds to offer such a huge amount. Of course, it would be easy to offer such an amount, if one knows that no one is going to provide such evidence. Because there is no evidence. Just my opinion.

All, I'm going to be filming a football game this Saturday. It takes place at 6:00, so essentially, it will be at night under the stadium lights. I'll be shooting 500T and I have a milliframe controller for high speed photography. This is a first time for me, so I was wondering if any of you have filmed in a similar situation? What's been your experience? Any tips, or suggestions? Best, Brian Rose

All the theory certainly is a drawback to film school. But, I'm meeting good people, have access to great equipment, and best of all, they're paying ME to go. So, I'll leave with a few films under my belt, and no debt to show for it. Brian

I just started film school this fall (SIU Carbondale, Graduate) and I am amazed at how much I don't know. Editing on a steenbeck, sound mixing, knowing all the different lights available and how to use them. Upto now, I've been self taught, buying my own 16mm stuff, experimenting, reading. It's taken me a good distance, but not as far as I need to go. Man, it feels overwhelming. Have some of you had to deal with this? Being confronted with knowing that there is so much in the field of cinematography that you're not familiar with. I mean, how do I start? Where? Brian

Which brand would you recommend? Thanks! Brian Rose

I'm wanting to buy some color compensating filters, specifically Red 25, Blue 47 and Green 61 for a Harris Shutter. Various how-to guides suggest that these filters can be had for 6-10 dollars a piece. Yet, when I go to retailers like BH Photo or Calumet, the price is 50 or 60 dollars? Am I missing something here?

I'm doing a documentary project, and for the opening, I would like to begin with a few night shots, which gradually yield to daybreak. I would REALLY like to capture the first traces of light in the early hours, those subtle hints of blue, then yellow, before finally orange and the burst of the sun itself. Has anyone tried this before? I gather I wont' be able to use my 50D until the sun has actually broken, but I have some 500T. Would this work, if I say, pointed it straight at the point of first light, and opened the aperture wide open? Or would I need to cheat a bit, and shoot at a slower framerate? Since it is a relatively still scene, I could get away with it. Thanks! Best, Brian Rose

Bernie, Thanks for the tip. I tried it, and ran the camera at 75fps. The function sounded good and steady, albeit a bit noisier. I checked the mag, and couldn't detect any visible marks. Now, should I be looking for scrapes on the edges of the channel, or at the bottom of the recession? Thanks! Brian R.

I should say, I don't hate digital. It has its uses, and when used correctly, has its own strengths apart from film. What burned me was the level of haughtiness this prof. had toward digital over film. And it seemed for all the wrong reasons. He kept talking about how much easier it is to make prints and maniuplate images than it used to be. He admitted the quality wasn't as good as earlier techinques, but he was just so thrilled that instead of having to labor in a darkroom, he could do everything on computer at his home, and then print it out. To me, this seemed to be the completely wrong idea. I like what is hard! Sure, its a b*tch to take light readings, shoot the film, get it processed and all that just for a few minutes of footage, but IMHO, the product of all that labor, seeing that actual, beautiful image on that thin strip of film is so much more satisfying than a digital image that can be taped over in a second, as though it never existed. For me, art is about labor, and I was so troubled that this particular prof didn't see that.