Jump to content

Isaac Brooks

Basic Member
  • Posts

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Camera Operator
  • Location
    Milwaukee

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi Folks, I am a moderately experienced 16mm shooter and VERY rusty editor, and I have a question about suggested workflow for a relatively simple project realized on standard 16mm, and scanned to 4K ProRes 4444. I have all the results from the lab, about one hour's worth of 4K scans from a standard 16mm (all Vision 3) camera original. This is a collaboration with another person who is even less experienced than I am, and she made a really messy file structure that I essentially am abandoning in favor of starting again and eye-matching to an export that she made of an initial cut of this work, it's about 9 minutes long. We need to use proxies to get this edited, something that I'm grossly new to. She did make proxies that are stored alongside the 4K files on our shared drives. I cannot seem to get these linked, however. When I try to toggle between the two, I get nothing, even after relinking. 1. Is there a clear way to re-link the proxies and the 4K original that someone could suggest? 2. Would making new proxies be what you recommend? Is there a method for doing that with a film scan that uses a 4x3 ratio that someone would recommend above others? 3. When making a new project / new sequence settings, should I make it to match the 4K scan? Any suggestions? Sorry this is so broad-strokes, but it is a simple project in that it is non-sync, very short, and kind of annoying in that simply editing the massive scan has proven surprisingly hard. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.
  2. Tim, I don’t suppose you still have that Arri Super 16 gate you mentioned previously? Thanks, Isaac
  3. Hey 16S People - Finally doing right by my 16S and am making up a set of Cooke Kinetals for use in a few upcoming projects. Camera is good to go more or less. In the past I have borrowed some old Zeiss primes for use in the bayonet mount, which I’ll miss certainly, but am happy to be using the turret again. With the standard mount lenses, what are people using for lightly greasing the standard lens mounts for use in the turret? Vaseline ok? I actually have the Arri grease as currently supplied by Arri. I don’t mind using it but if Vaseline works I’ll be happy to use that too. Also where are people getting older lenses serviced these days? The 50mm needs to be collimated and has some haze that I’d like a solid lens tech to have a crack at removing. Any info appreciated. Stay safe out there! IB
  4. Hi, Yes, I second the move towards an SR. You're looking at a camera of around the same weight as the M series, with a way better build, newer design, and WAY better mags. I'd recommend an SR2. An original SR in good condition is fine too, but regular SRs differ in quality from one another, and you have to make sure you get a later one that has a German motor and circuit board. If you just want a regular 16 camera, the SR2's are actually pretty cheap havable, now more than ever. Only the Super 16 versions go much beyond 2,000 USD. They are simply a newer camera, with improved features on a camera that was pretty much perfect already. The SRs, in general, should be more serviceable too, and are a better investment. The M and the Arri 16BL are both good examples, and sometimes are findable very cheap- but this is because the availability of parts and the earlier, less ergonomic and less usable design of the displacement mags holds them back. The 16S series is really the sole survivor of that era of Arri 16 cameras because if it's usability, quality, and the correspondly large number of spare parts available. That said, if you're set on an M, don't pay more than $750-1000 for good condition KIT, with spare mags, a few accessories, perhaps even a zoom, and some sort of explanation for the camera, like a service history or a conversation with the previous owner as to how the camera was used (rentals or more personal use). If you can get the extra money, go for as late a model an SR as you can find, and enjoy one if the greatest machines ever made.
  5. Hi, I have a few cameras, and the SR is solid and wonderful, but I'm imaging it being Ultra capable, and I like the idea. I'm looking for an option that doesn't cost as much as the super 16 mod, plus the cost of a pl mount being installed, which I would prefer if it was in super 16. I think ultra is pretty viable. I make films on standard 16 as well, and the camera will be more or less preserved in that capacity. CineLab, Cineliscious and few other places offer good deals on transfers on recently updated, high quality machines, and if a lab can process super and regular 16 both, ultra is possible too. That said, I prefer the generally improved quality in optics and camera features that accompany super 16. I recently sold my xtr prod which is actually haunting me a bit. But ultra exists as an option if you want a camera original / negative that is affordable but a little more market friendly. I appreciate the council though, as I hope to win back a super 16 rig at some point. So if anyone else has experience with the trusty SR2 in Ultra let me know. I'd really like to see footage too.
  6. There have been a few threads about this: some folks at a US lab did a pitch comparison between Orwo and Kodak. The Orwo has an irregular pitch length, and these folks were shooting the stock in both Aaton and Arri cameras with bad results: mostly jams and bad camera noise. Orwo needs to manufacture differently for the stock to run on more precise sync cameras.
  7. Hi, Has anyone converted an SR2 for Ultra 16? Been thinking about doing this on a 1985 SR2. Any hugely known pros or cons for how the format mixes with the SR would be of help. Is the gate usually replaced, or modified? Also, I have a viewing screen that is marked for standard 16, and quite nicely, as the camera is a relatively late model SR2. Via the CE speed control, the screen's markings are illuminated by the speed control panel. With a newly marked ultra 16 screen, will it be possible to have similarly illuminated markings? Not a deal breaker, but I like how the viewfinder is usable in low light conditions, and would not want to loose that function with a custom-marked screen. Any ideas would be appreciated. Thanks, Isaac
  8. Hi, So, post-travel, my Sachtler 20P system came out of the shipping tube, and the 2-stage heavy duty carbon fiber sticks got the usual examination for damage, and, suddenly I had CF splinters in my hand from a fair-sized crack in one of the outer sticks. These are the heavy duty 2-stage sticks, from a awhile back I'm assuming, as the 20P is a few models ago. I'll need to look into the stick model, specifically, sorry. If it helps I can take pictures later. But I assume you can imagine the damage. Anyone have any tips for repair? Is sending to Sachtler the main option? Experiences with any other Sachtler-ready outfits or shops would be most welcome. Also, what can I expect to pay for a new / replacement (single) stick (for the outer, upper stage)? Thanks a million, Isaac
  9. Hi, I'd try Bernie O'Doherty of Super 16 Inc. Isaac
  10. Hi, I have a set of used cables for an Arriflex 16S. They are a little cracked due to the substantially aged rubber – but worth saving if possible. Is there a preferred brand of compound for fixing power cables, something that can handle frequent location use? I want something that will bond with the rubber, essentially getting rid of the cracks / separations, but that will be safe for electronic use as well. Any ideas or recommendations welcome. Many thanks. Isaac
  11. Actually, one other thing, Is it OK to use cleaner (Pancro) on the rear element, if the bower isn't getting off the hard to get stuff? I seem to remember being instructed that it's sometimes best to let well enough alone back there unless it's a big emergency. Thanks. Isaac
  12. Ok, thanks Dom. Most of the stuff has actually come off. Pancro does wonders. Just the smallest mark or two left. remnants of time, no doubt.
  13. Hi, I have a Canon 8-64, which for the most part is clean and solid. Under ambient sunlight, even up close, the front element and coating are both mostly pristine. Under the beam of the flashlight with which I occasionally inspect the glass, however, there are definitely some marks. Some are tiny scratches that I simply know are the result of the lens getting on in age, but there are slight streaks too, broader than the scratches. Are those cleaning marks? I have my method down for cleaning, with a blower bulb to start (or the delta 1 camel's hair brush for really resistant dust) and then Pancro fluid for whatever gunk is left of the surface. But, obviously I want to limit my cleaning of the element for the sake of preventing wear, and I just don't know when to stop. Am I being obsessive? Or should I go until there is nothing left but the most obvious permanent marks? Thanks.
  14. Slightly old thread, but I have to say: Yes, if you're industrially inclined, location of a school can have a huge effect. Folks who go to film school in NYC or LA often end up working there or in one or the other. Other large and cinematically productive cities like Austin, Philadelphia, Chicago, Boston (just naming a few) also tend to be magnetic because of their smaller communities of professionals, companies, and collectives. If you think you might work in a place other than the area your school is located, then plan ahead. Make sure you know people. I will not offer the usual "the film industry is incestuous, it's all about who you know" because that is not the only truth at work. However, after experience has been acquired, and someone has learned enough to get some sort of job shooting or editing etc., your little sphere of people, contacts, and friendships will have a huge effect of where you land and what you end up doing. There is a practical side to this, and that is the hugely collaborative nature of filmmaking. It's only natural that people talk up other people and opportunities are had, and careers are launched. As far as a graduate program goes, I believe that graduate school offers the potential for students to involve themselves with the learning process in new ways, ones that are often less formal, more mentored, and more advanced. AFI, USC, NYU, UCLA are all world class institutions in film production, but be honest with yourself what educational priorities you are after. Those schools will orient you specifically within the artistic and aesthetic principals of the commercial film industry, the LA schools to a huge degree will push you within the bounds of the American / Hollywood standards, while NYU is a little more open the singularly driven "auteur" practices. Like I said, all great schools, all enormously wealthy, and otherwise they have all proven themselves as world class universities in every other field of endeavor (except for AFI, which is still superb within those bounds). But they are traditional. They hire people, sometimes famous, expensive and BUSY personalities to help teach their courses. I have heard from friends and colleagues that this can be the sort of experience that leaves some students at a bit of a loss, because teachers in a directing class (for instance) may not even require students to be done for their thesis project by the end of the year. I know of a few instances where this was the case. I won't say which school it was, but it was a big one, where people were walking away after having only shown rushes or something of a similarly non-advanced state. Now, I know people who, after five years out of leaving this program, are still picking away at their 20-minute movie. Big problem, and not practical, even for the so-called standards that drive the film industry, which runs on time and money almost exclusively. These schools have such a high success rate partially because 1) They are centrally located within their industries 2) Because of that the connections available are top-notch, and student have there choice of which area of the top-tier they will occupy. 3) Additionally, these places demand a certain amount of dedication, and in the grad programs especially, you can rest assured that none of those who are granted admission are non-workers. You will find yourself among a diverse array of students, and they are all there essentially because they are willing to out so much effort forth. That environment is one thing that these schools offer– a state of mind where one witnesses people constantly practicing what they are after with top-of-the-line facilities at their disposal. So I encourage you to call these places and see who you can get on the phone, see who will meet with you for a tour, see who is open to the projects that you are interested in. There are many great schools out there, far more than the five or six that are most frequently touted in this country, and you may find yourself suddenly attracted to an institution because of some unexpected factor. Lots of options.
  15. Hi, I'm about to shoot a scene where someone is pulled over in a car, with a traffic cop behind them. I don't have access to a real police cruiser, and was planning on filming it tight. It's sort of a dream-scene type thing, and the close-up of the driver is really what's important. I've got an omni light to do the whole flood / spot light that the cops sometimes do when the pull you over, but I was hoping to have something that mimics the flashing light atop the car. I'm looking at those magnetic lights for use on non-commercial vehicles. Anyone tried this? Or know of more effective, affordable solutions? I'm shooting on black and white reversal 16mm, and I've got a set of zeiss super speeds. Thanks in advance. Isaac
×
×
  • Create New...