Jump to content

Travis Gray

Basic Member
  • Posts

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Travis Gray

  1. DX is what format they cover. DX is the 1.3 crop sensor, FX is full frame. I think on the 35mm there's even slight vignetting on DX (e.g.: D7000), but I haven't used it. I shoot some stills with a D7000, but have never used a DX lens on it. FX will cover full frame. You might be ok with a DX lens on the F3, since Super35 is close to a DX 1.3 crop. But not entirely sure.
  2. Are you sure it's G-mount and not F-mount? Most nikon lenses should be F mount, the D and G indicators are, basically, older lenses with an aperture ring (D) and newer models without an aperture ring (G). So as long as it's a standard Nikon lens, which the 70-200 2.8 is, it should be fine, you just won't have control on the lens for the aperture. I have a novoflex adapter which has a little ring built into it that controls the aperture tab without stepping.
  3. Do you have glass already? Do you have specific requirements you're looking for? I shoot with the FS100 and love it. The quality is great, and I like that it's a Super35 sized sensor. There's adapters out the wazoo for it. I have both a PL and Nikon adapter (since I shoot Nikon stills, and it's nice to have the option). Camera functions like a video camera too. Haven't used the BMCC, but from the looks of it, just about everything is on the touchscreen menu? FS100 is great for module stuff as well. I like that I can shoot cards and harddrive, and then I have the clean HDMI out for an external recorder if I want. I dunno. I love the camera. But, haven't used either of the other ones, and Canon has kinda disappointed me with stuff lately with price to feature ratio. I think the FS100 is great bang for the buck, and since it's kinda old now, you should be able to pick up a new model for a decent price, or used for even better.
  4. Ah, Pocket Light Meter. I just looked at the icon and it says light meter. Now I'm hoping I didn't pay for this haha
  5. I have one that's just called "Light Meter". Not the greatest thing in the world, but I've tested it against on camera meters and has been pretty accurate. Sometimes it's pretty off, but I got the best results using a grey card. The meter area is kinda big, so hard to really pick a good spot. No shutter angles, but does have 1/48 built in there so you could at least look at 180ยบ. It's not something I would necessarily rely on unless in a pinch.
  6. I'm going to go with par cans flashed to 100% (or just simply on/off for however long you want full intensity for). The ramp up/down time doesn't look like it's specifically tied to a dimmer control.
  7. While I haven't used anything else, I'm not a big fan of the SmallHDs. Image burn in is still an issue even after using the DP4 a lot. The EVF loupe thing is too heavy so if you have to invert the monitor (and have to have the hinge on the bottom), it swings down. I wish they had zebra lines, but they said they had no plans to add those. And the false color blacks don't ever seem to be read correctly, and highlights read differently than a histogram I think, so I just don't rely on it for color/exposure. Focus assist is decent as long as you don't have a grainy high gain camera (so at lower sensitivities it works fine), and I do like that it has multiple backs available so you can use nikon, sony, canon, or AA batteries.. and that there's a D-Tap power cable for it as well. (I got the full DP4-EVF bundle)
  8. Oh I guess that could make sense then. The coverage would be larger when on an adapter I'm assuming? I was thinking it would decrease if farther away from the sensor. But also not sure about flange distances on the two mounts.
  9. But, if you have a backup hard drive, backup computer, backup projector (which I'm hoping places would have), then you'd seemingly be ok. Say a film projector catches fire and the reel melts with it, well... True, you might be able to save some of it and just lose the melted piece, etc etc. I'm not advocating one over the other, I'm just saying everything has its potential pitfalls.
  10. Just playing devil's advocate... but... it's not like film projections can't have the same issues. http://chicagomaroon.com/2012/02/17/doc-films-hit-with-projection-problems/ And, you can more easily have backup files and projectors than you can a film print and projector (well, maybe mostly the print). Problems can arise in any format, it just depends on what people tend to publicize more. Just like swine flu. Technically more people die from the regular flu and complications more than swine flu but swine is just what got all the press.
  11. Storyboard. Plan what angles are needed ahead of time and then spend more time on takes to get the right performances if needed. Some people do overshoot, that's their style, but if you want to be efficient, plan the shots and have confidence in them. It'll make editing easier and save on wasted film/disk space. Again, some directors do that.. forgot which big names have done it, and that may be their style, but, I'm a big fan of efficiency and pre-planning to save time later.
  12. I tend to go with what looks good on the monitor (assuming it's appropriately set up to give an accurate preview) and then check the histogram to see if anything's clipping or all the way in the blacks... depending on what I'm doing. If I'm clipping a white cloud or something similar, I'll be ok with that, or if there are shadows I want to leave dark. But I may look at the image and think it's ok, but the highlights are a little below clipping, so I'll push it up a bit just to get a little more detail in there using the histogram. And I try to use a separate light meter when possible too.
  13. Yeah, I forgot to mention production design and filters and etc etc. And didn't really account for different viewing devices when thinking about them. Will have to A/B different stuff on the same monitor. But I guess there's something about the Newsroom that I felt just looked... crisp... but soft. If that makes sense. Maybe just a crisp black. Something similar to other things I've seen shot on film (Up In the Air comes to mind, others as well, but that's just the one that I first thought of). So I'm trying to kinda figure out what I'm seeing and then translate it into the look. Is it actually soft? Should I use a light diffusion filter? Are the lower end of the blacks crushed but just a small part of it, should I grab a small part of the s-curve and pull it down? But then what can I do in the production to facilitate that. That sort of thing. So maybe a dumb or too vague question and I just need to keep playing more. I have something I need to play with the grade for, but haven't gotten to it yet.
  14. So I'm still trying to figure out a lot of things here, and don't know all the vocabulary/translations into what things are in a look. And hopefully this isn't a "how do I make digital look like film" question, but more or less what are the factors that go into certain looks. But I was watching the Newsroom and was thinking the picture looked really good. Blacks seemed crisp, not too sharp, almost kinda filmy I thought. Looked and saw it was shot with Alexa (except the pilot). Then was watching Sons of Anarchy last night (not a usual thing for me) and was curious, looked up, and saw it was an Alexa as well. Two very different looks. I felt like it was a little more video-y. Obviously one's not better than the other, I'm not arguing that, but just trying to see if I can get a better grasp on what the factors that go into it are. Is it all the grade on the Newsroom to just take the black and crush them a bit? Aided by specific lighting in the set so they have that flexibility? (the outdoor scenes in the season finale I was less impressed with. It's the shots in the studio that I love) Or is it less of the grade and mostly how the lighting is done, and I'm assuming (I don't think I was able to find this anywhere) it's mostly space lights inside the main bullpen set? Or is it a different model Alexa/sensor? I don't know the camera well enough to know how much of a factor it would be. Kind of a newbie question maybe, but hopefully knows kinda what I'm trying to figure out and has something good to link to or point out.
  15. Cinecalc Pro is another decent app. Accurate too (but it's just calculations, so, I'd hope it's accurate). Good library of lights with photometrics in the database as well, so you can kinda plan everything out with distances and wattage, etc. I'll use it a bunch prior to a shoot to get an idea based on what I think will be going on, and then meter on set, but at least I go in with a bit of a plan.
  16. Agreed for the backgrounds, but his movements are still pretty well planned.
  17. I'd still say that it was choreography and dynamite talent. Or something that if you're doing a simple run and gun that may be out of the budget.
  18. The AT&T commercial (I think, right? It looks like an Apple thing too, but I think it was AT&T, more bars more places...)? I was thinking about it the other day. I'd measure everything, choreograph to a beat, and do multiple takes to see what lines up right. I don't think there was any camera movement really, so no motion control, all just marks and diligent choreography. Perhaps someone else knows of a way more technologically advanced way to do it.
  19. and yeah yeah, I know you can rent. Still though...
  20. I liked the idea of the Leica, and this in principle is kinda cool. But eesh. $42k. You'd have to be pretty sure that you want to shoot a lot in B&W haha When is someone going to come out with a body that you can easily swap the sensors out? I feel like that would make more sense...
  21. Definitely use the support piece for any part with a splice. Just to give it that extra support. Or some kind of support. Not sure how it'd be if you put 4' and 4' together. Haven't tried my 10' length of pipe yet. Bought it for a shoot and never pulled it out. But 5' by itself doesn't bow too much/at all. It think the splicers would hold it together fine without fear of them falling out, especially if both ends are well supported and stabilized, but I'd be more worried about bowing at the connection if anything.
  22. I haven't done this specific thing yet, but the Dana Dolly is decent at handling minor track issues, and I use electrical conduit for pipe. They do make connectors that you can join two ends together with a minor seam between them, and I think the Dana could handle it decently. From the Dana Dolly site:
  23. Flange distance will be off. You need to modify the whole camera to do it. I've seen it on a couple of cameras before, but no idea of what the process is. http://philipbloom.net/2010/02/19/modified-7d-pl-mount-camera/
×
×
  • Create New...