Gregg MacPherson

I think Transylvania Film & TV services the old O'Connor models. http://www.transfilm.com/ Worth searching the web for people interested in old O'Connor also.

What's the subject and quick background on your documentary?

A real treat (a cool little experience). Thanks.

I like the basic idea for the form, but it feels a little randomized and becomes to feel un-modulated. A more conscious, deliberate manipulation of the rhythm would have been worth exploring. Without that we feel more locked into the surfaces. Imagine some "stills" that are held longer, allowing more exploration for the eye, some more emotional potency, some contrast with the other rhythm. Also, sound has just been used as a backdrop. So overall there is not great direct emotional impact. Someone who has just had these experiences recently may empathize, will find the emotional value even though it's not so directly offered. For me I felt a bit locked on the surface. I was left feeling that you were a bit locked onto the surface. What did this love actually feel like? Who was this girl? Hard to tell really. Good effort with the exploration though. Well done.

You may need some filters to impress the actors too. I have a spare set of Tiffen 4x4 85, 85N3, 85N6, 85N9 that I may sell. Maybe some others. PM me if interested viz(at)extra.co.nz

Hey what exactly is that matte box? Are the filter trays metal and can they take a 4mm thick filter? Does it have a clip on clamp option or do you always have to use rods? How heavy is it? More questions possible depending on your tolerance. Thanks, Gregg PS. You need to make a decent base plate with rod mount for your GSMO.

That's amazingly good looking for a self built, scratch built unit processor. Let us know if there ever is an English version of any videos. Cheers, Gregg

I don't think one can group all the 16mm cameras without regestration pins and say that they have image unsteadyness that wil show as a reduction in sharpness on screen. Someone clearly thought pins were not required when he designed the Aaton. You can shoot a regestration test to check the camera. I almost bought a CP16A once. After being warned about the regestration system that uses little balls in the perfs I shot a reg test and could in fact clearly see a sort of rhythmic instability. I didn't do any comparative tests with other cameras unfortunately. The regetration test was quite simple. I drew some fine horrizontal lines on a piece of A4 paper, shot that full frame, rewound the film, rotated the paper about 3 degrees and shot the paper again. I realize now that I could have drawn some vertical lines also that might have been useful. If you do some test like this, get some advice on the interpretation from someone who has tested various cameras and knows what's acceptable.

For something really interesting but even less common. An Actionmaster 16mm is up on eBay. Up to 500fps from a camera about the same size as a GSMO, that sits on your shoulder.

A long time ago we used a small light on the slate with a wireless connection to a beep generator on the 1/4" tape recorder. The motivation was that the camera, sound rec and slate could be separated in the dark during some stage performances. You still needed to try and ID your shots, so the AC would try and do that with a torch etc. For your case what about just using quiet tail slates. If you are interviewing in a quiet environment then the clap can be very quiet. Bringing in a tail slate won't affect the content you just shot. It will affect the rhythm of the conversation a bit, but your team can set the feeling of that. Otherwise, units like we used were available, or maybe something even simpler is possible, maybe it's so simple that you can just make your own. One possible advantage of a beep or bloop system might be if you wanted to record sound for longer periods and just drop in to shoot sync picture c. Beeps on a separate track.

Interesting looking camera. When did it last have a lube and a check over? Just saw an Arri B to CP lens mount adapter for 95 bucks. May be usefull. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Arri-Arriflex-Lens-Adapter-For-Cinema-Products-CP-/160937136141?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item257899d00d

Hey Giray, I don't think this definition of what a "proffessional" camera is matters nuch to Yaran the student or Matthew the film maker. They want some cameras for their own projects and the fact that most 16mm/S16mm cameras are sliding off the "proffessional" platform is actually useful to them. Regarding the prices. yes there are trends, but the patient and desparate do not ride trends. I saw a S16 Aaton with PL mount sell for $2000 recently.

The Beaulieu R16 stripped down with a small prime lens is small and light, quite usefull. I found it hard to clean the gate easily. They are fairly noisy, though you can get a little pilotone signal generator to shoot sync.. It would be a great camera to wrap in many layers of bubble wrap and throw into the mosh pit, or bolt to an aircraft wing etc. There are several quiet running shoulder mounted cameras that you will see for sale. Lower cost ones first, based on the price trends. If I have the order a bit wrong it doesn't matter much. CP-16R, Eclair NPR, ACL1, ACL1.5, ACL2, Aaton LTR, Arri SR 2. You may not find an LTR or an SR2 easily for under $2000, but I have seen it happen. Like I said before, the price doesn't mean much without knowing what service it has had and what costs are comming.

Hey Ethan, I was going to say things like how it's commonly easier to learn all the technology and skills required than it is to hold onto the slender thread of creative intention that made it all begin. Of course, now I have said that...... I think Tarkovsky, properly recognized offers a beggining point, at least for an artist. If the world that he saw, imagined and implied is real then it's an inexhaustible well spring. And the forms you find will not necessarily look like his forms. A quick google shows that there are maybe lots of film makers in Victoria BC. If you join CINEVIC then you will get a Bolex or an Eclair NPR for free. My advice is to join, meet some people, just ignore the fact thet they may all be raving about the Scarlet and the Tarantino style film or horror film they want to make. There will be one or two artists in there. Find someone about to shoot on film and help on their project. Doesn't matter what you do as long as you are near the thing you are interested in

Hey Joseph, When you were looking for 35mm stock from the 70s (?) recently, were you looking for stock that was frozen, hopefully useable? What's the project? Are you going to use smaller guage stock to try and replicate or make a style reference to the feel of 35mm stock from that era?

Jay's BL (scroll up) is a good price with those prime lenses. But only get a BL if you aren't doing hand held. You can get view finders that let you put the BL camera on your shoulder, but if you want hand held then you should try a couple of different cameras out to see how they compare. If you are patient on eBay some good deals come up in your price range. You have to be aware of the service history and what costs are comming, who can service it for you or fix problems.

Prefix this with me saying that I'm not trained or experienced in interpreting MTF data relative to grain to get a satisfactory feeling (intuitive explanation) about percieved sharpness. I overlaid those Kodak MTF graphs for 5203 (50D) and 5219 (500T) and the B, G response of 5219 is noticably higher from 20cycles/mm. At 50cycles/mm, quite a big difference, (10% and 20% for Green, Blue. Is there a simple way to understand this? Does larger grain make it easier to maintain those higher MTF values? I often wonder why Kodak MTF graphs always seem to stop at 80cycles/mm. For 16mm, lenses that can resolve 200 lp/mm have been in common use since the 80s. I followed the technician looking at a set of MKII Zeiss recently and all but one looked extremly crisp at 200 lp/mm. I don't know what % value I could put on it, very close to black and white.

I was looking at the early part of this interview. Peter Jackson discusses 'The Hobbit' . Director Peter Jackson spoke with Hero Complex contributor John Horn at Comic-Con International in July, just before announcing that the two-film adaptation of "The Hobbit" would become a trilogy. He's definately the lead lemming for the new. Paraphrasing him........There is no eye strain with 48fps apparently, you just have to get used to it. And if the industry is going in this direction then he / we just need(s) to go with it. (paraphrasing him....these are not my thoughts). At arounf 5-00 minutes is he equating the Epic at 4k pixels to 65mm film or is he just talking about the size of the camera rigs (3D vs 65mm)? In the year 2525.........

Ethan, In which direction did your thoughts go ? Cheers, Gregg.

Fuji UK are still showing really low prices http://www.filmstockclearance.com/

Post 12 There are two ideas there. The first idea, that the "interaction between the photons and the material structure of the actor is changing the physicality of both photon and actor". I qualified that idea later in my Post 8. It's late and I'm tired so I'll quote that. "The sequence of interactions that occur between photons and object then photons and eye or emulsion could be considered at a very fine level, down to the quantum mechanical level or beyond. This is an intuitive but fairly safe and useful descriptive idea. To be fair, when I go on to say or infer that the photons effectively carry encoded information on the quantum level from their interaction with the actor, that is a speculative notion of mine. While this is a direction I would like to explore, it may not be vital to my theme at the basic level." The second idea, "that the microscopic contains functional principals of the macroscopic. I'm thinking that each single microscopic interaction somehow encodes a snapshot of the macroscopic, at that moment." Perhaps this is what you are asking about, whether I believe in the statement. Again this opens into two parts. The first part paraphrases a quite ancient principal that the microcosm is a contained expression of the macrocosm. I guess one could say this was part of my philosophy and I believe it, yes. The next part is an intuitive extension. The idea that each interaction between a photon and the actors skin is an event that somehow encodes an expression of the macrocosm at that moment.in time. A very fascinating idea to me. I believe in it enough to explore the possibility. Some of these ideas may seem esoteric or seem inaccessible without being a quantum physicist or Unified Field theorist. But the basic value of ideas in my original and subsequent posts can be taken without reference to that stuff. Cheers, Gregg

Just looked at their website. They are about the same price as ones I had seen on eBay. On Cristmas special for $99 at the moment (smiling)

George, I wrote a few posts following the first one that attempt to expand on the ideas and offer others. May be useful if you are interested. To be clear, I think a vast amount of information is "lost in translation" (actually just plain lost) as soon as light arrives at a pixel. It's true that conscious "seeing" is selective or conditioned and subconscious "seeing" with some value to art can be assumed for any media. But no, the implication that any media might offer the same degree of usefulness in this respect is wrong. Digital represents a crude simplification. This is one of my core ideas. After 100 years of conditioning from seeing film we are at a point where the conditioning from seeing digital is taking over. The fact that people in the cinema may not see the difference is a tragic indicator.

Post 11 I'm not really convinced you actually read that. (smiling) The idea of the photons making lively interaction with the actors skin then arriving at your retina to make a similar interaction you? Made no impression? Isn't film something analogous to the retina? While digital is not? I think we as a society have a kind of cultured inability to register these ideas or to see the value in them. The ultimate potential of a film emulsion may come close to having the photon as its basic image unit. So an incredible density of information is possible. While conscious objective perception uses only a fraction of the available information, we are subconsciously receptive to much more. All this information may play a part in our evolving sense of self and our ability to experience. Pixels on a sensor are sometimes described as photon buckets or counters. If we look at a pixel on a "4K" S35 sized sensor with (pixel) area of 35 square microns. On a bright day in the shade (1000Lux) we have 3.3million photons per 1/60 second arriving at the pixel (1). This is just averaged. So whatever subtlety was expressed by the relative value and distribution of those photons.....is gone. Yes, techos or geeks will speak up about it, also hopefully, artists, poets philosophers, film makers and hopefully some people identified with the main stream film industry. (1) Warren Marrs, Photon Behaviour, http://warrenmars.com/photography/technical/resolution/photons.htm

Hey Ethan, When someone new seems identified with Tarkovsky, I have hope. Most everyone else is traveling in the opposite direction. Tarkovsky had a natural but deeper than normal sense of life and experience. What lies beneath the surface (of life) is a kind of magic and his poetic sense in film was allowing a more direct access to that (for the viewer). But what does it mean when someone feels an "aesthetic" connection with his work? Are they identified with the underlying perceptivity, the window into life itself, or are they fascinated by the forms? Are they intuitively engaged with the philosophy or are they just being eclectic, preparing to borrow or paraphrase a "look"? As an entry point for an artist to begin his exploration of film? Maybe those differences don't matter, as long as the feeling is sincere. On a practical level. Do you already have some projects in mind of defined duration, scale or budget? If you are self funded and don't have any experienced helpers then you have a huge amount to learn in order to execute even a small project, regardless of medium. If becoming the cinematographer is critical to your creative process then maybe a period of exploration, learning, testing. Start by borrowing a 16mm Bolex, allow yourself 100' of film and shoot some short tests of your actor friends in costume, in character, in the environments or sets. Read a bit about lighting, but follow your feeling rather than a formula, get some advice, keep it really simple. You can do an enormous amount with a small number of simple lights, diffusion screens and flags (to cut light). As I gather you have realized, 16mm is a cheaper format to work in than 35mm. There's lots of opinion on different threads about the relative usefulness of different cameras. All the cameras can be cheap now, but you need one that has ben properly maintained. Reactivate one of those threads and ask lots of questions. See if you can borrow a camera, or visit someone who has cameras and experience who can help you learn. Maybe they can help execute one of your projects. I don't know if it makes common sense to approach the profound value of Tarkovsky with digital. It seems ironic. I started writing something relevant to that in this thread .......Film vs Digital. Impact on Art, Culture, Experience, http://www.cinematog...wtopic=58446= Where are you located? What access do you have to labs, rental houses, film editing equipment, experienced film makers, cinematographers? My writing here is a bid patchy, but your post effectively prompts a lot of diverse streams of information. Hard to know where to start. Cheers, Gregg. PS: I'm mostly thinking about The Mirror, Nostalghia, The Stalker, but yes Bergman's wonderfull Fanny and Alexander, Ok, but Kubrik is a bit dry and intellectual to include here (for me). Edit: Added PS