Kim Sargenius

To that I would add one major difference - primes have closer minimum focus. A few zooms have minimum focus that makes them rather challenging to work with, which means I generally tend to use zooms at their longer end. Quite a few zooms I have come across (although I haven't had a chance to use the Optimo yet) seen to have a bit of a 'dead' spot somewhere in the range. Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Phil, EI200 really isn't such a big deal! One of my better looking student films was shot on EI125, rated at 80, with nary a hard light in sight, pretty much all bounced off 8x4 polys at around 3 to 7ft away. I started the shoot with two Blondies, 6 redheads and a handful of 300W Arri Juniors. Of course, with all the gear coming from my school, within a day I had gone through all my spare bubbles (stingy school) and was down to one Redhead, on a public holiday with no chance of getting another replacement... After that, shooting EI200 seemed like a luxury! If you can get a 2.5k HMI I'm sure you can get some Blondies and Redheads. A few pollys or umbrellas or diffusion frames and you should be set! As for the meter -- can you rent one from anywhere convenient? I had to sell my own meter a while ago due to angry snarling sounds emanating from my bank account -- sure it hurts forking over that $$ every time you want to wave the darn thing around but it hurts a lot less than buying one... Cheer up mate! :) Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Hi, I've noticed this same thing on several occasions, and it seems like it's always coming from a strong point source from the side, something almost at the plane of the iris, if that makes sense, combined with very high contrast. cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

I feel ripped off! Last time I paid $27 Australian (approx US $21), and that was including a student discount... Even accounting for shipping from anywhere around the continental US you guys have no excuse for not doing this all the time! :) cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

The T250 is a great versatile stock, which compared to equivalent Kodak stock is a little bit softer and grainier, it is also a bit less saturated. The sharpness and grain is more of a texture and feel rather than something that really stands out. In 16mm I feel these differences are more pronounced than in 35mm. However, for some reason I like the colours of the 16mm Fuji T250 better than the same speed Kodak - a bit gentler, whereas the Kodak stock can sometimes tend to feel a bit harsher. Keep in mind I'm comparing to 7274, I haven't as yet tried the 7217 Vision2. And also, I'm talking *subtleties* nothing for or against either one, and wholly my personal subjective opinion. The 500D is something else completely and I don't think it quite warrants comparison to anything else. It is grainy, no if's, but's or maybe's - and I would definitely stay away from it for 16mm print finish or blow-up. On the other hand, I've never gotten creamier skin tones, especially rated at EI250, and it is amazing with mixed light - fluoro's, pracs, uncorrected tungsten (which btw looks sensational); anything you can throw at it, it handles. Overall it has a more muted feel than the T250. Hope this helps, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Hi, One book I've found quite helpful is Steven Bavister's "Lighting for Glamour" (ISBN: 1883403863 ), which is good because it has really good lighting diagrams, from a range of photographers. This book is part of a Rotovision series on lighting subjects such as, interiors, food & drink, nudes, portraits. HTH, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Insomnia I have only seen the original Norwegian version, and it is one of the very few movies I've seen where the light is one of the characters (set during the midnight sun season). A few others also come to mind: The Conformist Blade Runner Days of Heaven Touch of Evil ... and the list goes on and on and on... : ) cheers Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Phil Rhodes wrote: > I can't think of any other solution that wouldn't make too much noise, either with a pump or > trickling sounds. Video projector? : ) cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Hi, In my limited experience I find that the key is always picking backgrounds that work in my favour, ie if at all possible I want to shoot against backgrounds that I can control to match (mostly by picking the time of day), and then I can use whatever (mostly very limited) gripology I can get my hands on to control the foreground. Quite often this means building the scene space in the edit, eg reverse shots in different directions/locations, etc. Of course this gets *veeeery* interesting when you involve Technocranes and Steadicams : ) cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Michael Nash wrote: > I've found it's actually easier to jump from one project to the next when you're really busy, > because you get used to the rythm of it. What's hard is when you've been on a feature for > several weeks and then have to jump into a completely different type of project. THAT > transition always seems harder to me, because you've got kind of a groove or momentum > from the previous project to overcome. In my student days (not that long ago) there was an 8 week period where I shot 5 short films, a spec spot and a music video, and yeah, I really got a rhythm to it. The way I did it was I organised everything by tasks, eg one day of testing for as many projects as I could, one day putting together gear lists, one day meeting with four different Production Designers, etc, and the amazing thing was that I never ever got any of the projects mixed up, so I guess you just gotta get stuck in. cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

David Mullen wrote: > The CML is a good rumor mill for new equipment... Second that! It tipped me off about the upcoming Fuji Eterna stock, which allowed me to be the first person down under to request a test sample : ) cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Max Jacoby wrote: > Xtal Express are spherical lenses that have been transformed into anamorphic by I think Joe > Dunton. Panavision rents them out, there is a Zeiss Set (adpated Superspeed probably), Cooke > (adapted Cooke S3) and Canon. They all come in a BNCR mount. Watch "The War Zone", directed by Tim Roth, shot by Seamus McGarvey, BSC -- I belive they used the Cooke Xtal Express lenses. cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

"Set Lighting Technician's Handbook" -- Harry C. Box.

Arri celebrated their 1000th 435 not long ago (this includes, ES and Advanced models but probably not the Xtreme version) Kim Sargenius cinematographer Sydney

Have you had a look at "Dynamic Figure Drawing" by Burne Hogarth? ( http://www.bookfinder4u.com/IsbnSearch.asp...777&mode=direct ) It's a great book because it emphasises the figure in motion, which was always a problem with a lot of other books I've had a look at, they're all drawing static figures. I'm struggling the most with faces and heads myself and it looks like "The Artist's Complete Guide to Facial Expressions" by Gary Faigin is a great resource ( http://www.bookfinder4u.com/IsbnSearch.asp...285&mode=direct ). Would love to hear other people's recommendations! HTH cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer Sydney

Second that -- have played a bit with Frame Forge and quickly decided that it's not worth my time. I say *my* time because the usefulness of this program will depend very much on who the storyboard is aimed at and the background of the user. I can draw quick sketches in perspective and pretty decently matched to focal lengths -- they may take a few seconds to explain *exactly* what they're showing but for most people it works fine. My girlfriend bought it because she can't draw and doesn't have much familiarity with different focal lengths -- it does help her realise the real life pros/cons of different focal lengths but takes a *long* time to get anything done. HTH Kim Sargenius cinematographer Sydney

The way it goes here in Australia, there are supposedly three versions of the Zeiss Super Speeds, both 16mm and 35mm. The MkI's have relatively round apertures but do not have standard focus/iris gears, are all different sizes, and different front sizes. Decent sharpness, good contrast, decent with flares. The MkII's are the ones with the pesky triangular apertures. They are equal size (and even weight - according to a Steadicam op I just worked with), equal front size and standard focus/iris gears. There is also a 50mm (16mm) and an 85mm (35mm). Good sharpness, good contrast, good with flares but somehow they just seem a bit lifeless to me (very subjective). The MkIII's share the mechanical/size properties of the MkII's but have a round aperture and seem to have a little bit more snap than the MkII's. Overall, given a choice, I'll go for the MkIII's any day, although the MkII's are the most readily available here. On purely subjective taste I'd even pick the MkI's over the MkII's if I could. On purely technical terms the MkII performs better than the MkI but most times there's more to lens choice than just tehnical perfomance : ) HTH cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer Sydney

Interestingly the print I saw here in Australia had some problems - weak blacks and a little bit noisy. Other than that, yes it did look great! I spoke to a colourist at a Quantel iQ roadshow who worked on the DI (in what capacity I'm not sure, and I can't even recall his name right now) and he seemed to suggest that we might not have gotten Vision Premier prints down here.. Bummer.. BTW, Phil, had any chance to have a good look at Baselight yet? cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer Sydney

Two recent Australian movies, Alexandra's Project and The Tracker (both shot by Ian Jones, ACS) used the roundfront ones -- ranging from 25mm to 150mm. Mostly they seem to hold up very well but I doubt they were shot close to wide open. The 25mm has *massive* barreling and is apparently a monstrosity size wise. The lenses were supplide by Cameraquip Melbourne and are PL mount. Steve Morton is very knowledgeable about these lenses, and also very helpful! : ) cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer Sydney

Try a few different things but be sure to do some tests -- cheaper ones can have strange colour casts (eg green in the shadows) and uneven weave. As with all other things; you get what you pay for. I got my Fogal on a "student" price direct from the local importer (Australia) who was quite surprised to hear that his products were coveted amongst cinematographers : ) For attaching I've mainly used snot glue. cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Yeah, I was thinking of doing something like that. Any particular type to recommend? However, for anything 'critical' I'll rent some proper frames -- these are the ones I keep 'out the back' for those absolutely-no-budget shoots... cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney

Make them yourself - I don't know about the UK but here in Australia I made one 12x12, one 8x8, one 8x4 and one 4x4 out of 25mm hollow aluminium extrusion and plastic corner joiners from a local aluminium supplier. Add to that some polysilk and some silver/white polyester material (very similar to the Photoflex or Lastolite material) -- all for the grand total of AU$136. Granted, the rags aren't exactly Gridcloth or Soft Frost or anything like that but on a budget... A note of warning though -- this sort of 12x12 is not advisable for even a moderatly breezy day outside, way too much flex... cheers, Kim Sargenius cinematographer sydney