Tim J Durham

Hello there

 

Finally I have website.

 

If you have time please drop by and have a look.

 

http://www.marcelzyskind.com

 

All the best

Marcel

Hi Marcel,

I went to it on a PC and when it opened, it was 3 times wider than the computer screen.

Haha, thanks Tim! Good to see you around!

 

Along with my normal AC work, I also occasionally grip for ENG style shoots- and I can say that this one is very well crafted- and should be very interesting, at least from what I saw. I actually only did one day on it; apparently they shot for 9 months. So I have to commend them on giving credit to the crew! Thanks Tim for a great laugh this morning. For those interested in politics and media, from what I saw this one should be an interesting watch!

One day of work and four weeks of credit? Not bad.

Did they use a Pro-35 adapter and primes of some sort?

Don't know if any of you have managed to catch the 4-part Frontline special, "News War" (which is superb) but note the beautiful 2-camera interview lighting done by board contributor and super-grip Mike Pancenko.

It looks really nice, Mike!

I think the background light(if we can call it that) fades off into the void of darkness.

As you said due probably to large studio space. I do not watch the show regularly but

I do view it off and on. I believe the key light is a large soft source overhead as it def-

initely is not hard light. If its not overhead then its out in front from the ceiling. Its been

a while since I watched it last but I do not recall any shadows on the faces or the large

table. I think they are using just a large soft source and may be using fill up near the

camera. I'm not sure about robotic camera. It might be like the cameras used on the Don

Imus show and they are controlled in the control room and not on the set. I'll have to watch

next time and try to visualize camera moves. I do enjoy the show very much as its a breath

of fresh air.

 

Greg Gross

It's lit with fluorescents in front of a black cyc which is about 8 feet behind. There are 3 in-studio cameramen (no robo-cams) as WETA still has a pretty strong union (NABET 31) presence. I personally think it looks like @ss to put people in front of a black felt curtain but others seem to think it looks great. Go figure. It sure saves on set building.

i was wondering i its possible to capture 1080/50i intermediated on a macbook pro core 2 duo, & a macpro

 

& is it also possible 2 shoot dv uncompressed sd and capture it like that

 

sorry for my english i am doing my best.

 

hopefully someone can help me out,

 

peace

Hi,

You can capture 1080i50 in the DVC-Pro HD codec or HDV over firewire. I believe the Apple intermediate codec requires faster drives/transfer speeds and a capture card. As for uncompressed SD, if you're talking about Digibeta, you need a Decklink or Kona card for that so no, not on a Macbook. You can capture the Digibeta material witth the right deck, but it won't be "uncompressed", it'll be DV25. If you're talking about DV as in DVCam or DVC-Pro (25 or 50), yes, you can capture that via firewire.

I'd like to get some advices not only for lighting her main interview but also camera work suggestions.

as we plan to shoot a few interviews with her (and they could be long) i'm planning to use a tripod instead of hand held. vary between a medium shot of her sitting and a close up. maybe an extreme close up sometimes. but as she has some "marks" of age i'm not sure if I should get that closer.

I would expect that, since she's a pro, you might have to atleast reassure her that the lighting will be flattering.

And if her old friends the make-up artist and her husband the cinematographer are there when you show up with "cheap solutions" she may just send you packing. So lighting-wise, you better have your best game on.

Oh Boy, it's a... film vs... video thread. I can.. hardly ..wait to..... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Sir, Iam using DVCPRO50- SDX900 Camcorder.

That's a great camera. If you're doing anything in the dark, there is a setting called "digital super gain" which is great in minimal light. Try it out first so you know what it looks like (it looks like a really slow shutter-speed, so smeary) but it only works in 60i (or 50i if you're shooting PAL). Good luck!

They were British till the most recent film adaptation of 'Lord of the Flies' turned them American.

 

I love how the Yanks rewrite the rest of the worlds literature, that really warms me up during the holidays! ;)

There's an americanized version of the book?

Clearly content is king with a documentary.

 

But I wonder in this particular case where the fact that they don't have any electricity is a "story point" whether you'd actually want your lighting to be obviously artificial (like from an on-camera light) rather than simulate an off-camera source that couldn't exist in their world. I mean, would you put a big HMI on towers to create fake moonlight if you could, if in real life, perhaps moonlight was the only source at night? Or do you fake candlelight if candles are their only source of light at night?

 

Or do you just add some non-descript bounce light to see the action and not think about the fact that they don't live their lives in that kind of light, but at least it doesn't call attention to the viewer.

 

These are just some thoughts. Obviously there are all kinds of documentaries -- in a talking head interview, you can get away with more lighting since this is an artificially created moment anyway.

I think people get into trouble when they try to "prettify" the scene. If living in total darkness is part of the story, I guess I'd probably just talk to them about it in the daytime or at sunset, maybe. In a situation like that, there's going to be plenty of stuff happening in the daylight that is equally interesting.

It's hard to say how you would handle it without seeing what "it" is. That's what I like about doing it. Going somewhere with an idea about what you're going to see and letting the situation instruct you. The script is out there writing itself and you have to see if you can recognise and interpret it and that often means abandoning your preconceived ideas.

So you may go into a situation like this thinking you'll do X, Y or Z but you won't know what to do until you are there, usually. You have to be prepared for anything while carrying a minimum of gear.

Some documentarians (like from the Cinema Verite era) would question the honesty of artificially lighting a scene, especially if the fact that there is no electricity where they are at night is an important element of their lives or an aspect of their poverty.

 

You may want to shoot night-vision, for example, to show that, or just show the few candles they actually have and boost the gain a lot to see something.

You can go a step further and say the very act of observing something changes that which is being observed.

At some point you have to decide whether or not a story is worth telling and then do what you have to do to tell it. Adding a minimum of light is- by now- a pretty universally accepted practice amongst documentarians.

Ofcourse there will remain purists. I think if you're honest about whatever you had to do to record something, few would fault you for it if the story was compelling and truthful.

Iam about to shoot,a docuementry its all about child labour in rural village.

 

In that village,There is no power supply.My plan is to some nightshots,Obviosly

some lights to be use in that night sequence,so we need a battery powered light.

 

I have no knowledge about battery lights.

 

We have an low budget production.So,using only 2 lights.

 

Please suggest me lights and there brand name.

I'd take a couple of Litepanels with stand adapters and two fully charged batteries each:

http://www.litepanels.com/

The batteries last about an hour and they are 5600k or 3200k. Personally, I'd only take 5600k so you can use open-window lighting and fill with the litepanels. Also, don't forget a reflector.

What are you shooting? Film or video? If you are shooting HDV, some of those cameras- the Sony Z1u in particular- are deadly SLOW! Terrible in low light.

One reason Torchwood looks so awful is because the fools left the shutter turned off, so it has that horrible smeary videoey look. Hopefully they'll correct that issue with the next series.

 

Looking at the recent Christmas edition of Dr Who, it looked a bit more like it was HD. Certainly looked slightly different to the last series.

 

Although there are some instances where they really should use film. Whoever convinced the BBC that shooting Robin Hood in bright patchy sunlit forests with a video camera should be strung up.

Hi,

 

Can't see why you're chasing it anyway - seems to suffer from having been lit from the BBC Book Of Lighting 1967 Edition, wherein it is written:

87c: v) Science fiction will be lit with bright party colours regardless of tone or content. Everyone will wear tinfoil.

Phil

Dr Who looks loads better than "Torchwood". John Holland ,London.

http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=18049

I love how the Brits support each other. It really warms me up during the holidays. Weren't the kids in "Lord of the Flies" British?

Who's this lady with the mustache?

.....and I thought it was boring in real time..... why would you want to make painfully slow......slower??? :D

Are these the same guys that did the super-slo-mo for the "World Series of Poker"?

I am not a sound guy and we are shooting a HD feature on the HVX. I was wondering what audio equip I should budget for, I would love any suggestions.

 

Info-

Budget 500k+

Shot around LA and in the desert

Your audio budget is $500K?

I have to show a character bleeding heavily in a pool. I am shooting with an underwater housing in an enclosed pool and trying to figure out the best way to do this effect. Originally it was going to be all CGI but I would like to try and do it as a practical effect or at least shoot plates for compositing. Any ideas on what kind of Blood mixture would not turn an entire pool pink/ other options to accomplish this.

You could try oil paint which would stick together and not blend with the pool water. It would also be easier to suck up afterward with a wet-vac. You'd probably want to thin it.

Editing. Cover in camera - pan, tilt, dolly to tie scenes together. It's sloppy to cut afterwards, do it in camera.

 

:blink: :D

Huh?

I guess the main point of this post is to ask you, is this a possible project (don't worry about legal permits and stuff)? Will my crew remain healthy after wrap or will they grow an extra set of eyes? How will radioactivity affect the film (rolls are to be kept in the area only for short periods of time, I will have three 2nd ACs working on shifts with taking the film to the set and then to a lab as quickly as possible). And finally:

 

Would YOU do it? :P

 

Best regards

/Emil

The entire crew (3) of the film "Chernobyl: A Chronicle of Difficult Weeks" by Vladimir Shevchenko has died since (1986) from radiation poisoning. They were the first ones to attempt filming there and wore radiation suits. 20 years hence, radiation levels would only be somewhat reduced but not to the point where I'd consider working there.

Hi Folks,

 

I'm wondernig if anyone has used a Z1 to film a still picture/print, i.e. zoom and pan onto a printed still pic and if so what the quality was like.

I know there is a high-end specialist camera for this but I wonder if the Z1 with all it's quality resolution would suffice..

 

Thanks in advance

Ken

HDV is not the best to shoot stills with moves due to the single I-frame per 20 or whatever it is with long GOP.

That said, I've done it and it wasn't terrible. The Z1 does have a feature that lets you pre-set your zoom time and speed and repeat it again and again, which you may find helpful.

hello

 

i'm training to become a digital imaging technician

 

does anyone have any suggestions for training? courses maybe?

 

also are there any DPs out ther that own their own varicam or cinealta that would be intersted in mentoring me?

 

i've got a background in film and photography and i've spent the last several years working in internet which gives me an solid technical background with servers, networking, file management etc.

please let me know!

thanks

jg

 

My Reel <a href="http://www.jgfilms.com/reel/" target="_blank">http://www.jgfilms.com/reel/</a>

I was going to take the DIT workshop here:

http://www.gancietv.com/cgibin/eDatCat/GTV...tegory=Workshop

last year but got booked up. May try to hit the January one coming up.

Does anyone know why these things are so expensive? I mean, they're not all that big, yet, the cost so much.

Well, you get what you pay for.

So far we've been renting it with the adaptor for 2/3" lenses. A Canon 4.7 or Fuji 4.5 zoom is still pretty wide on the camera.

Can't say I blame you. When the 2/3" chip XDCam HD cam comes out I suspect these will be abandoned probably. Those 1/2" HD lenses are way overpriced when you consider interoperability and future resale potential. But that's where I am at the moment.

Im looking for the Chimera 5x10 F2 Light Bank to rent in LA but i would like to know where i can get ahold it for the cheapest. Im working on a shoot this entire weekend and i obviously dont have to time to look around. I would like to get it reserved asap by the beginning of the week. let me know if any one knows of a place. Thanks.

http://www.therosenthalgroup.com

What format/input do you use, Tim?

 

I wonder if the dispaly and basic electronics are the same on all three models, and the input options alone affect the price differences. For example, does component and analog composite look the same on all three monitors, or does it get better on the more expensive units?

I use the HD-SDI input almost exclusively as I'm shooting with an XDCam HD F350 and occasionally an HDW-730S and use the HD-SDI output from my Kona. But I've had occasion to use the SDI and the SVHS inputs and they're what you'd expect. It also runs on the same V-mount IDX batteries I use to power my camera which is very handy.