Tim J Durham

There is a scene in Garden State where Zach Braff is sitting on a loveseat, drinking a beer, and the rest of the party-goers are moving in and out of the frame as he sits back watching them. I really loved the motion effect used in this scene and wondered if anyone knows how it was done and more importantly, how it could be recreated with a 24p video cam? Thanks in advance.

Any chance you'd be willing to relate the pitch meeting for that video? I'd be interested in knowing how that sort of thing gets done. There are several different themes in that video, seemingly unrelated. Is the idea just three minutes of eye-candy?

What Tiffen claims they do is to spread light from highlight areas into the shadows. This would suggest that the detail lost in the shadows would not be retrieved but merely the area gone to black brought up to grey. What I've noticed that it ACTUALLY does is: because the shadow areas now don't make it down to the point of being crushed, you do retain detail there. It also has a minor halo-ing effect on the highlights but I happen to prefer that. Still, I use the black stretch much more often just because it's so easy and more controllable, and I like to have a black promist or black frost for the highlights. When you're shooting a scene with an 11 stop contrast ratio using a camera capable of registering an 8 stop contrast ratio and heading for a TV set capable of displaying a 5 stop contrast ratio, you have to do something at both ends of the spectrum. That's why I like shooting on overcast days, particularly when there's talent involved.

I'd also say that before I spent $1K on a set of Schneider filters, I'd do some tests utilizing the black stretch feature built into the camera (if the XL-1 has it, I have an XL-2 which does). You may find that this built-in feature suits your needs. Then you'd have $1K to blow in Vegas.

Well, looking at this test: http://www.cinematography.net/digicon-test.htm I have to say that they are not improving THIS particular picture. He does give a numeric evaluation of what they actually DO, though, and you can imagine situations where you'd want that. I happen to have Tiffen ultracons. Essentially the same thing and I have found them useful a couple of times. I suspect the Schneiders are quite a bit more expensive so on an XL-1 (lower res) I'd get something cheaper that does the same thing, if you determine you need that. I wouldn't say that you would cancel the effect (of the filter) by working the blacks in post. There will be detail in the black areas that would not have otherwise been there without the filter (if used in an appropriate situation) and so, would give you a higher measure of control.

Are you talking about mounting a video camera to a moto-cross bike? That's not something I'd consider doing with my camera. I might look into mounting a lipstick camera but those kinds of shocks and dust aren't great for video cameras. Maybe the new P2 solid-state cameras/recorders from Panasonic would work? No moving parts. I remember in the film, "On Any Sunday" they had a few POV shots but those were 16mm film cameras which are far more durable, generally. The guys at Filmtools could point you in the right direction for a motorcycle mount: http://www.filmtools.com/

www.litepanels.com Outrageously expensive.

You could buy Paul Wheeler's book, "Digital Cinematography". He was a Beeb film DP for 15 years, then went out on his own. His book details all his settings for getting a Sony DVW-700 and 790 to best resemble a film-look. He doesn't specifically talk about doing film-outs (progressive) because he shoots shows for TV premiere (50i) but the settings should be similar. Those 2 cameras only shoot interlace.

Here's an article about doing that job: http://www.shutterbug.com/features/1104sb_hollywood/ Shoot digital and get a camera blimp.

12v rope light: https://ssl.adhost.com/noveltylights/mercha...?pid=262&step=4

Get ready for some fresh ideas! Check this list: http://pro.imdb.com/inproduction/status-preproduction and this: http://pro.imdb.com/inproduction/status-filming and this: http://pro.imdb.com/inproduction/status-postproduction "Only" about half HALF! are either sequels, remakes or TV-show-turned-into-movies. The brilliant ideas are bursting through the seams, 'course that half represents about 80% of the production budget of all the films on those lists combined. No doubt it'll also represent 80% of the box office....

Sound is crucial. Spend your limited money to make sure you get good sound quality. For lights, you can buy three china balls of different sizes/wattages, three cheap light stands with arms to hang them from and you have a light kit for less than $100. As for a lighting scheme, here's a set-up for a large room: if you think about the plane between the subject and camera where the subject is at the center of a clock and the camera at 12:00, you can put your key light (say 100w bulb) at about 2:00 or 2:30, maybe 6 feet from the subject. Next, put your fill light (75w bulb) at 10:00 about 10 feet from the subject, then put your backlight (75w bulb) at 8:00 and maybe 10-12 feet away from the subject and about 2 feet above the height of his head or less. Make sure the backlight is not in your shot, ofcourse. Experiment with stand heights and distances until you get it the way you want it. Try to get the camera atleast 10 feet away from the subject. Then have the questioner sit between your key light and the camera and you'll have a pretty nice set-up. Keep his nose just right of center in the frame.

"People" also prefer Britney Spears to Mozart judging from record sales. I don't think theatrical release of films is going to go away anytime soon. However, the best film of 2004 (IMHO), "Touching the Void" did only $4.8 million at the box office: http://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0379557/boxoffice but has done three times that -and counting- in rentals: http://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0379557/videorevenue Criminally overlooked by the Oscar bunch. So that makes for a pretty successful documentary and that's all for the better. I think there will always be a segment of people who want to experience art in the intended medium and as with anything, a much larger segment of people who want to live it from the lazy-boy. How many people actually go to football games?

I have the Porta-Brace CTC-2. It's perfect for that camera.

That trailer shows Cobain playing the guitar right-handed. Wonder why they wouldn't just reverse the image? Every Nirvana fan is gonna be asking the same question.

I'd be interested if they were a pair of 12"x24" daylight panels that came in their own shipping crate AND replacement bulbs were easy to find on this side of the pond. The 15lb. isolation transformers would be a great thing to hang from the stand instead of a sandbag. It would also be good if they could mount vertically or horizontally to the stand. What's the output, fall-off like?

Prior art? I don't think so, Phil. The LitePanels are LED, not flo. As for price, they are charging $2500 for a 12"x12" panel. Ridiculous. The top-o-the-cam lite is something like $1300. Don't know about the ringlight. This company may very well go under even while their product is revolutionary (Not just better bulbs, NO bulbs!) because they are too greedy. If they came down in price to something near what they have in them, everyone in the world would have to have them. THEN they could start creeping the price up and make a profit. Like Toyota did with the hybrid cars. You can't make the early adopters foot the entire R&D bill. Stupid. Maybe I'll buy the company..

Haven't tried the Kino Kamio (post a link!) but as soon as these guys get their heads out of their @**3$ and bring their prices down by about 70%, THESE will be my favourites: http://www.litepanels.com/1x1.html They just need to recognize that they don't have to make up ALL of the development cost on the first 50 customers. As soon as they understand the pricing-elasticity-of-demand, everyone will own them. Dialable color temp, battery or AC, 10,000 hour LED life, no heat, lightweight, high output, etc.

Wow! Even Vittorio Storaro can't get the love... It seems like any producer with half a brain wanna would listen to the multiple award winning DP? I guess maybe since Frankenheimer became unavailable, and the thing ended up less than originally thought, perhaps they didn't want to sink any more $$ into it? I missed that one. Haven't producers learned anything from the "Major Dundee" fiasco?

It's never that easy. You'd also have to stock a full line of accoutrements for the lights you buy. Gels, softboxes, silk frames, stands, dollys, rigging, etc. Otherwise, everybody would just go to the companies that stock a full range of gear. Maybe you could rent out a nicely equiped field kit like an Arri 4-head with all the bells and whistles, but those run $3K+ fully stocked and you can get about $75-100 a day for it. Then, if they also need some specialized lights like a couple Kinos or an HMI (both expensive), you have to have all that stuff too. Or once again, they'll go to where they can get everything. You could apply for a small business loan and get stocked, but you'd need proof that you have business lined up and a well diagrammed business plan, not to mention 20% upfront. You'd still have a tough time competing on price with the big rental houses. You're better off renting yourself AND your lights out as a gaffer to small indie productions. Even then, I think you'd need quite alot of gear, like car mounts and dolly track but ask around and see what people want when they're doing that sort of thing. For the price of a new 1200 HMI, you can buy a Steadicam Flyer rig ($5.7K) and/or a doggie-cam rig ($XK) and rent yourself out as an owner/operator. If I were starting over, I'd sure give that some thought. Good Steadicam guys make a nice wage.

Would it be possible for you to get in your contract that you get to OK the post work? Then they could pay someone else to do it, and if you didn't like it, then they'd HAVE to pay you to sit in there as they do it right? Hopefully they'd recognize the folly and just pay you in the first place. No good? That sounds like a real bummer. What do you do if you have a gig lined up right after you wrap production?

I'd go with a big, uncorrected tungsten light at the appropriate angle as a strong edge light. I'd also use something like a black frost or pro-mist filter on the lens and make sure the light was hitting some reflective surfaces. A couple glasses of iced tea for instance. The filter would give the highlights a glow that you'd visually associate with a sunny day. Lastly, it'll probably be dark under the porch overhang, so key with as big and soft a source as you can get and try to make it slightly blue (1/4 CTB frame in an HMI with a really big softbox), which is the way things are when in the shade on a sunny day.

Well, even if you experienced reciprocity failure, you can still expose correctly. It just means that if you meter for a 2 second exposure at f8, for instance, you cannot count on f5.6 being correct at 4 seconds or f4 being correct at 8 seconds. You need to re-meter for each change in iris or shutter. Hence- no reciprocity. It's largely an irrelevent question. I was just curious.

Thanks Drew, I got some very comprehensive info from a couple guys on www.DVinfo.net. Remember 15 years ago when there was no internet (well, atleast not for the masses)? I'm not sure I'm any happier, but certainly am more easily informed.

Do you gents (or ladies) in the motion picture world have to deal with reciprocity failure? If so, at what point? I seem to recall in still photography, it occured (or became noticeable) when you exposed a frame for a number of seconds.