Spider

Hi, I am going to London from the 2.-8. of August. I currently work at Zentropa where I spark. I am just taking a short holiday before I start on a feature, and would love to get to know the filmenviroment in London - so if anyone...it would be great! my contact niels@opusmedia.dk

I will certainly remember them! I think they are great!

"And Hiring an HD tech would be Too Expensive..." There you said it! And where is the expensive grader, which will do a nice grade and make it ready to be shot out on 35mm.

No, the last feature Dod Mandle did was not Dogville but a film that has not yet been released. It is nothing like the dogma style of Lars but a completly mainstream (almost) high production value film. Actually Lars operates most of the camera himself on both Dogville and the sequal - not Dod Mandle. By the way Phil, what a beautiful comment: Because I find it interesting!!! Anyway I believe that HD is the future of film. Although the evolution of film is continous I think that HD will develop faster, not only the format, but also the tools for working with it (postsoftware, in-camera settings and software and so on), and that is perhaps why I will not in anyway avoid working with HD or degrading it from film, i would rather use a lot of my time to get to know all the different ways the format works and the advantages and disadvantages it has to film, so that one can improve it towards something even more interesting than film (perhaps). Anyways thank you for a very fruitful discussion. Spider

I really like the fujinon lenses!

No me is one who works for Zentropa, the company producing them!

It is mostly on the Digiprime zoom lens.

Well the last film Anthony Dod Mandle did, and I consider him a quite good DP, was shot on HD. I think he was quite satisfied to work with it - thats my impression when working with him!

I experienced that the interforcus of the digiprime almost looks like a small zoom. I don't like it that much!

To John! Yes ofcourse, film does the best job in the highligths, but I think the differences are so minimal that an ordinary audience wouln't notice or question wether or not this movie is filmed HD or 35mm.

Mike, I am not familiar with correct terms of upgrade, but I know that the f900 was the latest upgrade. What the upgrade in particular does, and this was very noticable when looking at the 750 shots, is the much better reproduction of highlights. We had a blown out window, which I graded to be a little darker in the lower corner and very bright in the upper corner. The f900 reproduced this grading in the light very nice and had drawing almost all the way into the overexposed highlight. The 750 could not manage this as fine. The f900 is also great when you take out some of the detail, desaturate and use the sfx2 filter. It looks stupid with the sfx2 on monitor, but when graded and blown out on film, the grain of the film catches the glow in the highlights and makes it very beautifull.

Well for example the Danish director Lars Von Triers new film, which has around a 10 mio £ budget, is shot on HD. And another Danish director Thomas Winterberg has shot his new film on HD too - and he has a budget of about 8 mio £. I would say that is enough to shoot on 35mm.

No the 750 is not interlaced what I know of - but i am also only a gaffer, not a HD specialist. I agree with you tenobell. I think HD and 35 should not be compared because they are two different formats. But I really think HD has a look and a colour reproduction that is great enough to tell any great story. I also know that quite a lot of cinematographers have been cheated to think that some of the films that the company I work for has done are shot on 35mm, when they are not. I disagree that HD is chosen because it is cheaper, because it is not. The post work to make it look nice and filmy is just as costly as some of the processes in film. It is not cheap to hire a leading HD specialist to be on set and a very good grader to sit around and play with the material for a very long time. If you rock and roll with factory settings, like it looks they have done on Star Wars, yeah it is perhaps cheaper. But if you want the film look it still takes a lot of work. In the end film and HD are almost the exact same price. Low key and high key! In a low key scene the majorty of the picture is underlit, but some parts are correctly exposed or even overexposed. In high key most of the frame is well lit with a lot of soft fill lights.

I believe the kicker in the final scene isn't orange but amber and I love it.

If the look of Dogville is rough it is intentional I asure you! I have seen the exact same cameras being used for other productions with the same crew, and you would not be able to tell if it was shot on HD or 35mm.

I see that there has been a lot of discussion about the quality and the look of HD vs. 35mm I have just gaffered a HD test between the Sony 900 and the 750. The reason we did the test was to see if we could match up the two cameras, because they are going to be used in a two-camera feature production. A small set was build and I did high key and a low key light setting in daylight. We also did a low key night interior on the same set. We ended the test with a cloudy exterior. It was quite easy match the two cameras on factory settings and film setting. We played around a bit with the settings and it was still very easy to match up the two. I really like the look of the HD camera and I was impressed with the really nice filmlook it has. I think it comes so close to film, that it is impossible to see that it is not shot on 35mm. Right now it is beeing graded and will be put out on 35mm next week. I am looking forward to seeing the final result, but I am convinced that HD is just as beautiful as 35mm and there is no doubt in my mind that if every setting is put up correct with HD and the right grading is done, nobody can tell that it is not shot on 35mm. Spider

I would bring some floppys and a couple big cutters to work with the incoming daylight. Then i would propably bring two 4 kW and perhaps a pocket par 125 for some close.

I am wild about the overexposure of Uma at Pai Meis temple in Kill Bill vol. 2. Although they must have used a camerafilter, such as WproMist, I also believe some of the work - the glow - must have been done post! In general I like the entire look of the film and the constant use of a slight overexposure.

I like your idea with doing some moonlight on the backgrounds. My experience is that you often underestimate the amount of light you need to get that fine exposure, that makes it look really nice and get rid of the lamp character. I did a shoot on a music video, in a forest, recently where we used 6 Arri T12 to light the background. We placed them aproximately 60-70 meter from set. It didn't come out just the way we wanted it. And personally I thought it was too obvious that it was lamps. I am not quite certain what you are going to do, but I would bring another 6 kW SUN if your budget allows it. Remeber it is always fun to have something to play with in post. About the 12 kW HMI. Depends on what diffusion you are going to use. If you want a beautiful backlight I would suggest getting quite a hard edge on those soldiers and not diffuse it too much. And perhaps do it a little whiter than the background. Well its all just advice that might not be worth much as I havn't seen the location and am not quite sure what you are doing, but I hope you do some great stuff - it sure sounds really nice. Good luck! Spider

I like your idea with doing some moonlight on the backgrounds. My experience is that you often underestimate the amount of light you need to get that fine exposure, that makes it look really nice and get rid of the lamp character. I did a shoot on a music video, in a forest, recently where we used 6 Arri T12 to light the background. We placed them aproximately 60-70 meter from set. It didn't come out just the way we wanted it. And personally I thought it was too obvious that it was lamps. I am not quite certain what you are going to do, but I would bring another 6 kW SUN if your budget allows it. Remeber it is always fun to have something to play with in post. About the 12 kW HMI. Depends on what diffusion you are going to use. If you want a beautiful backlight I would suggest getting quite a hard edge on those soldiers and not diffuse it too much. And perhaps do it a little whiter than the background. Well its all just advice that might not be worth much as I havn't seen the location and am not quite sure what you are doing, but I hope you do some great stuff - it sure sounds really nice. Good luck! Spider

I would like to comment upon Kubricks insanity or genius. I believe all his films to be great films because they are all films with a very strong message that related to something in his own life. He has made relativly few films and all of them differ so much from each and other. I don't think young filmmakers are fascinated by the thought that they too are 'artists misunderstood', but by the dedication one would go through to achieve ones goal - to tell what is on your mind. I think Kubrick wanted to tell, like any descent director, something in his mind and in his heart - and he succeeded in every case. His films cannot be misunderstood - that is what the young filmmaker is looking for. Battles are fought by those with the courage to believe. And sometimes the believer has a very unforgiving blade! To you Matt, I don't think that directors like Ingmar Bergman or T.H. Dreyer were always too easy to work with either - and they are afterall directors that will be remembered for there work for a long time yet - and I believe Kubrick is in that category too. Anyhow I can always watch a Kubrick film over and over again, and that is what makes him such a great director.

Depends on the look you want, does it not? But I would perhaps go for some softer sources above the battlefield, like spacelights (3-4), and use the 6kW HMI, diffused. to do some background and to do some backlight on the soldiers. I would make sure I have just the right exposure on the background. I think nightshots can look very stupid and quickly become flat if the background is not looking just right. But it is just a suggestion! All depends on how you want it to look! Spider

I would propably use a Chimera Lantern 20'' on a boom arm to give the fill. It gives that soft overall candle like feeling. If on the boom arm it is easy to follow the person if he is moving around with the candle.

How about doing some real overall soft light with a spacelight in a crane and just filling and keylighting with some 4 K's?