Karl Eklund

Ok, if you shoot 100 FPS, I assume you are working in Pal, which is 25 FPS. What it means is that when "projected/viewed" it will take 4 seconds to play those 100 Frames that a second of real time gives you. But lets say you project that in 100 FPS, then it would take 1 second to view, real time. 100 FPS = 25% speed of real time when projecting at 25 FPS 50 FPS = 50% speed of real time when projecting at 25 FPS At 100 FPS you would get about 4 mins.

Can someone give me some info on these guys? I've been checking Arri.de and done some comparisons, but all I really get is strength of the light and beam angle, no information really to the "quality or appearance" of the light. These 12K HMIs with Fresnel lenses have 3542 and 2490 Footcandles at 50 feet, while the Par 12K HMI got 1330 Footcandles using its spotlens. http://www.arri.com/lighting/americas/hmi_fresnels/arri_compact_hmi_12000w.html#_blank http://www.arri.com/lighting/americas/hmi_fresnels/arri_daylight_1218kw.html#_blank http://www.arri.com/lighting/americas/hmi_pars/arrisun_12_plus.html#_blank So what is the deal here? I know how Fresnel focus the beam and makes harder shadows, would be nice with some info as to how the other lenses affect that sort of thing. And I am not just interested in Arri lenses, but any brand and type that might be of interest.

Slow shutter speed will also create the same effect, but then we are talking shutters like 1-30 seconds... Obviously not so great for motion, but doing timelapses might work well, if the lens doesn't create the effect.

I will need to scan about 80 min worth of super 16 footage. I would like to get the film transferred to DPX in log, so it can be graded later on (we don't have the budget to grade it in a post house). But how will I make proxies for the editor to work with? I know DPX files support timecode, but can I give them timecode later on since we won't have a timecode generator while filming. Because then that would help matching up the proxies later on or am I off? FCP will be used to edit, and color correction in After Effects.

I got a problem on the light meter I am using (gossen, don't know which model). It boils down to, I go to get readings in darker areas, and I am using/testing lenses at F1,4 and F2,0 and it will not give readings under 1.0. So when I want to figure out if something is 3-5 stops under and if it will be underexposed but still there or crushed completely, I have to increase the ISO a couple of stops to figure out how much darker an area is. If I would be using lets say F8 as my working F-stop, I could easily get readings that F5,6 is one under, F4 would be two under, F2,8 would be three under, etc. Easy I can see if things gets crushed or not. But as I said, when on 1.4, I only have one stop that the meter will tell me. So is this normal for all meters, are there better methods for me to use?

Thanks! Just out of curiosity, how much can you rate down or pull Vision3 500T (other film stock too)? Like, how different will a 500T rated 250T be from the real 200T, or if the 500T is rated at 200T? Push-processing gives it more contrast and grain, but pulling lowers contrast and makes it less grainy (dynamic range is improved as well right)?

I'm in pre-production for a final student film. We are planning on shooting S16 on SR2, with prime superspeeds. So far, the Vision3 family are only 200T, 250D and 500T. There will be exterior shots, and I like to shoot pretty open aperture, with not too much ND-filters. So how well does Vision2 50D work/match compared to say using Vision3 250D and rate it lower, like 125 or 64? What would the grain structure and dynamic range be like? I don't worry to much about difference in grain, since it will be very different styles/tones/atmosphere between scenes, and I will most likely shoot each scene with a specific stock. But yeah, is it better to get 250D and pull or go with 50D?

Thank you so much for all the answers. I've been through the whole helping the makeup with lights and sound with c-stands thing too, and that is fine as long as I know they will need my gear or they ask for the gear the day at the shoot, but I really dislike when they or others will take gear without asking and using, and I have to run around like a fool looking special cables, or c-stands that should be available are missing... I just don't understand why people take things without asking, do they think I and the other gaffers carry the stuff to location just for fun and that we don't plan to use it? Well, next time I am in charge of all the gaffing/electricity I will speak to the Art Department and make sure I know what they need.

I just worked on a shoot as a gaffer, were I obviously had to deal with making sure we had enough cables and safety boxes, etc. for the lights. I've always more or less been under the assumption that the Art Department/Production Designer take care of their own practical lights, getting cables and wiring them up. Of course it is good for the head of departments to communicate and make sure PD doesn't steal all the juice and likewise for lighting crew not to take all the power. When I worked in Sweden on a 4 million dollar mini-series as a gaffer, the electrical/light department didn't not like to share and deal with the Art Department, it was pretty much hands off for anybody that wasn't a gaffer unless there were no other options for Art Department. I don't know if that is the standard way in Sweden since I've only worked on one production there... Anyways, then on that shoot, the art department had their own cables, that would blend well with whatever we were shooting, like and office or a home. However, on this recent shoot, low budget, they had nothing and ended up using our cables that were too long and most of them orange colored. Now, personally I have no problem whatsoever to help the Art Department and lending them gear and stuff, but I wasn't prepared for it, so we had to rent more leads and safety boxes. So, to sum up this long post, who is responsible for what, and is there a difference in the USA and Australia (where I am now)?

Yes, told them yesterday (wanted to confer with our teacher to see if he thought we made a mistake first, that would account for focus being off). We aren't shooting on BW anymore, it is Kodak Vision 3, 200T at 100f. They must love me, I've only used the ST cameras one time out of four where there haven't been issues for me to report.

Ok, thank you! Next time I check out gear I will try to see if I can test lenses/cameras quickly to see any differences. We shot a test roll before filming, to check lenses and camera, but the camera we used then had a broken diopter, which obviously made the whole test sort of useless... Then we had another camera which would not run at the correct speed, it would be 30 fps without load and only 20 fps loaded (according to the tachometer), but you could hear how it ramped up in noise/speed when cranking it... Well, you live and you learn...

Thank you so much for the replies, it seems to be what I feared though, that we should have gone with our eyes. Well, we decided to use lens values and measuring tape because that would eliminate the "human error", but I guess we just inserted a different "human error" then :) We, still have 7-8 more of 100f rolls to shoot, and I will shoot with the eye (which is tricky on the shorter focal lengths since the ground glass is so dirty and old), but at about 25 - 50mm it gets easy. We will probably get a different camera, and different lenses, same models though... Hopefully though we should get the rolls we shot back before the next shoot. I am trying to figure out a workflow to determine if the eye is correct and or the measure tape is correct, and if get it right, most of the times it would be the eye that is correct, but if the flange is off, it would be the tape? So how do I check/correct those things?

Hi, this is my first post here at Cinematography, so please be kind :) I was shooting for my cinematography class with Arri 16st, using 16mm and 50mm lenses (arri lenses with no backfocus) and the value of the lenses focus distance did not match what my eye (and of two other guys in the group) saw. We made sure the lenses where properly attached, that they were as tight as possible to the camera (sometimes the lenses will be off by 2-4 mm, which obviously would make them miss their target correctly, the film). Didn't matter really were the diopter was set to, it would just make it more out of focus by changing it from what we started with. However, there was no markings on the camera we used for guide frames and such, so a little bit harder than with, but still pretty close. Anyways, the lens would look very soft focusing at an object 6 feet away with lens set to 6 feet, and when we set it by our eyes it was closer to 10-12 feet. Just because there have been issues with the cameras, and they are not in top notch shape anymore, we decided to shoot at as closed down aperture as possible (instead of favoring using ND filters) to get deep depth of field. We shot everything using tape measure, and using hyper focal distance chart to try to save ourselves, on some shots we did shot both lens value and my eye value. So, right now I can only wait for 5 rolls to be developed and see what the verdict is, if the eye was good or the tape measure was good... However, I still wonder, if someone knows what would cause the big difference between our eyes focus and that of the lenses?