Jeremy Burnes

Hi, I'm just finishing my first semi-serious film which we completed using a combination of T2i and GH2. I'm mostly satisfied with our lighting and shot composition. In post I'm seeing the need for a fully profesional camera. While we really like our DSLRs for practice and personal projects, rental of a Red, Alexa or BMCC seems like the smart thing. Problem is how do you become proficient with a specific camera when you just rent it? Technology trends are moving so fast it's hard to pick a pony. Thanks, Eris

Hi ... I'm trying to setup a wide angle shoot that roughly duplicates the FOV of classics like The Good, The Bad and The Ugly as well as Tarantino films like Resevoir Dogs etc... I've heard that at least some of the Tarantino films were shot at 24mm on Super35. I don't know for sure because I don't have access to the production details for any of those, but I'll try to back into the what lenses they may have used. Could someone do a sanity check on what I should use? 1. Super35 image area should be very close to the Nikon APS-C format, which is a 1.5 crop sensor compared to standard 35mm photographic film stock. 2. I'll be using a hacked GH2 which is a Micro 4/3 format and has about a 2.0 crop factor. 3. 1.5/2.0 = 3/4. So to correct 24mm on Super35 for Micro4/3 sensor size you multiply 24 by .75 which yields 18mm. In micro 4/3 the lens with the best combination of build quality, speed and closeness to 18mm is the Voightlander 17.5mm f0.95 which is roughly a $1300 lens and would be about a 22 - 23mm on Super35. Some have said that the GH2 is actually a 1.89 crop. 1.5/1.89 * 24mm = 19mm. That's almost 20mm. If my calculations are correct I might be able to find an old Nikon Nikor, Pentax Super Takumar or Minolta Rokkor 20mm fully manual. I also have a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 that I can adapt to the GH2. That might be a little too wide -- even at the long end since 16 / (1.5/1.89) is about a 20mm on Super35. I have heard of some films shot on 21mm, but I don't know what film stock they were using. So any help is greatly appreciated. I'll admit I'm just an amateur here having only one film under my belt and that one being DSLR and might be way off on my calculations. Obviously there many people here with a lot of experience on actual film, so I value your opinions. Thanks, eris

There's an interesting scene in Ladyhawk where Rutger Hauer's character has changed back into a human and can almost touch Michelle Pfeiffer character. The composition is with Rutger on the left, Pfeiffer on the right and they can almost touch. Vittorio Storaro goes for a Michelangelo/"Creation of Adam" closeup on his hand. It's backlit by the sun and the exposure is really extreme. The effect is one of powerful and almost posterized sun rays emitting from between his fingers. Very cool. I've done overexposed back light scenes before, but I've never gotten the same effect. Anyone know how Storaro achieved it? Thanks, Jeremy

These are all very good suggestions. A little more about the shot conditions: 1. Canon 550D, Glidecam HD4000, Hooded monitor down low for exposure / composition / focus monitoring. 2. Enviro: Baseball field, some shots showing actors, dry manicured dirt and sky, some showing actors, green grass, trees and partial sky 3. Lenses: Mostly Tokina 11-16 fixed f2.8, some selective shots using Rokkor 58mm f1.2 for shallow DOF and one macro shot using Zeiss Jena MC Flektogon which doesn't really enter into the equation. 4. I also have one shot that I'm doing on a track dolly which should be a lot easier using an ND Grad 5. Altitude about 5230 ft, so air is pretty clear, little haze. I've got static shots mostly under control with 4x4 filters (Schneider polarization and a .6 ND Grad) As far as lighting control goes I own the following: (a) Reversible fabric bounce ring (a little like a car dash reflector). It has a silver, gold, silver/gold and white fabric. I think the white diffuse fabric would be best considering all the movement. (B) I own 1 Mole 2k, (2) 1Ks and (2) midgets. I suppose I could rent some HDMI lighting like a couple Joker Bugs ? Either way I'd be renting the generator(s). Then I have to be concerned about color correction if I use tungstens (or maybe not if I wanted to accentuate morning golden-hour effect.) With our current schedule and field availability we would be mostly shooting in the mornings from 8am through lunch until 1pm. (Oh boy, Sun continuity monitoring :-) In the morning we would be saved from direct back sunlight as the field is at the bottom of a hill, but the overhead sky from about 30 degrees above the eastern horizon to full noon to 3:30pm is generating direct overhead light. Polarization should help a decent amount on the horizon as the sun climbs to its zenith. Unfortunately almost all of the shots include the ground, so it would be problematic to put a fabric drop on the ground, unless it was a closeup or a ground-up POV. I think the answer is going to be "whatever it takes" -- within budget. Additional bounce lighting, selective polarization (a little tricky on wide angle), and man-made if necessary. Probably have to do it shot-by-shot -- some much for free-form flying. Thanks for all of your suggestions. I really value all of your experience as I garner mine. (We're doing this for the first time as you can tell. If I had even a small budget, I'd at least be using a 7D or 5DMkII. Ironically the camera cost is a relatively small % of total cost even on our shoot -- around $10 - 12k) Oh well. Fun on a micro-budget. Jeremy

Hi, I'm working out the final part of our shotlist and I'm trying to remember the best way to avoid blown-out sky in Run and Gun / Steadicam situations. Normally I'd just drop in the proper Grad ND, but I've seen how bad that can look on my GlideCam. Any professional tips? Best I've heard is just expose for faces, people, primary components of the scene and fix the sky in post. I guess expose for the sky and use bounce cards could work, but not very well when you're moving. (Sorry if this is in the wrong category) Thanks