Brian Wells

I still think I can build it for cheaper than Kino's, All I want from them is the shell everything else I can fab my self.

No doubt. But here's something to keep in mind. A couple of years ago I bought some Kino Diva 200's for $528 each, plus a Hardigg Case ($200), and lamps ($150-200, I think). I used the lights for about a year and then sold them on eBay for $1500, plus shipping. After it was all said and done, deducting all sale-related expenses, I owned the lights for well over a year and paid less than $100 that entire time.

 

Being in business for yourself, it's hard to predict exactly when you might need cash on short notice. Owning (and liquidating) name brand goods can be an excellent source of generating cash in a hurry. Kino Flo lights hold their value better than almost anything out there (Dedolights, too!).

 

The value of low end gear doesn't even come close. Something to keep in mind.

Balser, Dalsa, Pulnix in scientific, applications... I find it 'simpler'

Hi,

 

For *most* cinematographers, that method is not simpler, IMHO. Hope this helps!

GAM makes a self-adhesive backed ND gel (WindowGrip?) that should work well for that. Has anyone here used that product?

Whatever you do, avoid the Shadow Telecine. It is not truly hi-def (at least not from my K3 footage). In fact, the Cinelab transfer of the same footage (using a Rank Turbo) looked about 90% as good/sharp in Standard Def as the Shadow looked in DVCPro HD, at 1/4th the cost. I am not saying the Rank is a great telecine, more along the lines of that the Shadow was a huge disappointment. Hope this helps.

I have that meter (L-608, non-cine) and it has a lot of nice features and is simple to use as long as you have a general understanding of exposure. So far it hasn't been very reliable for me. Maybe I just have bad luck, but the electronic display inside the eyepiece of the spot meter has "shifted" down about a half inch, inside the device. Needless to say, on mine you have to look at the exterior display to check the spot reading. Frustrating to say the least, especially since this is one of the more pricey meters around. All that to say: the more complicated a device becomes, the more likely some part of it will break.

I really want to strive to be a DP on features.

There is no doubt in my mind that you are capable of shooting a good looking movie. But, realize there are only a few hundred working cinematographers in the world. You have to be real good with people to rise to the top. There are thousands of good looking movies shown at film festivals every year. And new people enter the field all the time. They all think they will be recognized for their efforts and be offered more DP work on increasingly upscale productions. A more likely scenario is that you shoot a good looking low budget movie and be offered some PA work on a higher level production as a result. But, that's not so bad, is it? ;)

I was curious if Full Sail was the type of place where I could REALLY get the education I need.

What kind of education do you think you need? Only networking will get you into the film industry. What matters is that you get along real well with people. If you do, you're much closer to finding work than someone with a lot of knowledge that no-one likes to be around, imo. All the technical skills you need to know will come to you with experience, but a positive attitude and solid work ethic (can-do attitude) are the most important skills you can bring to a set... those are the skills people are looking for in new crew members.

is it possible to acheive a film look to VHS products and camcorders?

Can you make acrylics look like oils? Or how about making ink look like pencil? Film look more like video? You should embrace your brushes for what they are and what they can do. Trying to make them look like something they are not is foolish and misguided.

ideally, Aaton or Arri will make a competitor and build something more conventional in shape and thus, probably a lot more comfortable.

I fully anticipate once Arri is done "testing" the D-20 as a rental only item, they will introduce some digital backs for their film cameras. If they don't, someone else will. Super16 is awesome, tho. I recently saw a demonstration of Super16 and D-20 on a Cinetal HD monitor... Let's just say digital cameras are a hard sell as far as image quality is concerned... Where speed is the #1 priority, digital is clearly the winner, obviously.

The morning EXT of Palatul Poporului was nice..

I'll buy a couple of dedo's and start from there, just as Brian has suggested.

You should feel good about your decision. Dedolights are a sound investment in your career with strong liquidity for when times get tough.

Not picking on your post in particular, Brian, but I've noticed many here posting are wondering where all of us "DV wannabes" are getting the money to finance our cameras. Funny that so many here just automatically assume that all 1400 RED reservation-holders are all 25-year-old film school drop-outs with no experience and no money! Two of my friends are also RED reservation-holders, both of whom have six-figure incomes, have been working in the industry for over twenty-five years each, and are older than dirt.

It's ok. You're an old pro, much older than me, in fact. My post, however, was addressed to someone who made several references to private ownership of the camera by independent filmmakers with tight budgets, not professional cameramen with six figure incomes. I made no assumptions about the RED reservation holders. I only addressed one particular post. I'm not bothered by your response, in any case. Sincerely,

Hi Brian... And what do you use for mainly?

I mainly use them for edge, fill, and background lighting. Working with dedo's allows you to be a sort of lighting designer for interviews. Can you imagine lighting a theatre performance without dimmers or projected patterns? I can't imagine lighting an interview without them, either.

 

Do you use it combined with other fixtures or just that kit? Do you ever miss having other types of fixtures?

I also have a soft box with fabric eggcrate, but dedo's are the only small focusable instruments used.

 

Buying a mix of some omni lights, a couple of fresnels as Dan is suggesting and start from there with a couple of nice accesories (flexfills, magic arms, clamps, etc) sounds like a good start.

A good start is buying any kind of softbox with fabric eggcrate, flexfill, a DLHM4-300, and some small kit stands. When you have the $$, add another light, projection attachment, and soft case. The system is modular; you don't need to buy it all at once.

 

I'm not sure you can fully appreciate the value of dedo's just by reading a brochure.

 

A small fresnell will die instantly if you knock it over, and probably last about a week or so used all the time. Dedolights can be dropped hundreds of times and last over 1 year maybe nearer 2.

Eight months into one of my DLHM4-300, the cable between the transformer and light socket became frayed and quit working. It was a wear and tear issue, not warranty. The repair cost me $120.00. :angry: All the stories about the globes are true, tho. I can't find a way to break one.

I'm thinking about a Dedolight kit. It has what I'm looking for: 1 softlight with chimera and two fresnel lights.

hi- i have that exact dedo kit, with the softbox, two dedo's, one projector, large case, stands, barndoors, etc... i am not disappointed.

For many indies, spending tens of thousands of dollars more to get that extra 10-20% simply isn't a notion that's going to survive a cost/benefit analysis, assuming they have have the capital in the first place.

I look forward to this RED camera like everyone else. But, I'm also being honest with myself that dropping $25k on any kind of camera is completely out of reach for me. I'd like to know where all of these "indie filmmakers" are coming up with that kind of dough?

 

Most likely if I ever use a RED it will be a rental and the old Zeiss T1.3's rent for $60/day around here. I don't see the point in using anything less. Why bother with a 4K camera if you're stuck with a lens that can't be follow focused and an iris that can't be ridden?

 

I can understand using cheaper still lenses on something like the K3. That's what I do and it works for me. But, on a $25k camera? I don't think so!!!

 

Hopefully, companies like RedRock, and others will follow with support products...

Have read many poor reviews on the Redrock FF (sloppy gear, etc.). If it's built anything like their adapter, I believe them all.

Actually I don't see where this camera is going to be that obsolete so soon

I was talking to a television cameraman yesterday who shoots on the SPX800 at a local TV station. It was sad to see the nature of the news business today doesn't allow this man to afford proper dental work, but that's beside the point.

 

He was telling me about how "great" it is to be in a tapeless news environment, using such examples as the following: "When we're out in the field, it's just so handy to be able to dump the footage on a DVD from the P2 cards" and I'm thinking in my head "instead of, what, shooting??"

 

He said that 20GB of P2 cards just barely get him through the day. Then they have to be downloaded into the file server at a speed no faster than DVCPRO tape can be ingested with a high speed (4x) capture deck.

 

But, they're tapeless, and that's better, somehow, in their imaginations... ;)

Do you happen to have a larger version of that film? It looks very smooth as-is - but I'm curious to see what it looks like at full size, or maybe half size.

There's nothing like seeing it with your own footage. The full demo is available at www.revisionfx.com

I am reading the reviews for centry21electronics and I have yet to see one that complains...

Cory,

 

All the honorable dealers usually have prices within about 5% of each other... Sometimes you'll find a camera that's 15% less and that usually means it was imported directly from Japan, without a USA warranty.

 

As for Century 21 Electronics, that is merely the latest front by the Brooklyn Camera Mafia.

 

See here:

http://www.resellerratings.com/store/Century21Electronics

http://www.ripoffreport.com/results.asp?q1...p;submit=Search

http://donwiss.com/pictures/BrooklynStores/h0178.htm

 

BW

thank you so much for your time Michael, I will look into this but to be honest I cant wait to get onto film.

Twixtor works well with film, too! Here's an example from 16mm... I was shooting handheld on a 70mm lens, so it's kind of shaky. Twixtor held up, tho. This is 50% slo mo from 24fps.

No funnier than the HVX-200, which does exactly the same thing (with apparently the same number of pixels) but on 1/3" chips. A compromise, but useful. I'd expect a slight image improvement over the HVX, and a slight drop compared to the HDX-900.

I think you're right that the picture would be impressive, but I still feel disappointed with their offering. It looks like the latest in a line of trendy cameras that need to be replaced once a year to remain current.. And that's not the kind of camera I want to have. Sincerely,

this new Panasonic is looking pretty nice for that reason. you can use digiprimes on a 14000 camera with variable frame ratesand (finally) some bigger P2 cards.AG-HPX500

i followed your link. looks like that camera has the same ccd's as the sdx900, but now with a fancy "spacial offset" technology, which is so funny. wow. maybe next year they'll be selling 2K with the same chips.

Despite your experiences with a $250 camera, I think that it's dismissive to use that as a basis for criticizing the entire concept.

I think the concept is good. But to aquire a system of acceptable quality costs many times more than a basic film camera. Basically, I just don't see how it's a good deal for the kinds of projects you're talking about. Now, if your primary need was to shoot 1000fps slow motion shots all day, then there's no question that an industrial camera is the most economical way to make that happen. But, your needs are: small form factor camera for mos shorts and music videos. That sounds like a perfect match for an el cheapo film camera.

 

The type of stuff that I shoot (MOS shorts, music video, experimental) often requires the small camera form factor, so that's a big plus.

Which is sort of why I suggested a film camera to begin with. A Russian 16mm camera is well within your budget. The running costs are somewhere around $20-25 a minute, with exceptional image quality. The cameras are small and portable and are perfect for MOS shorts, music videos, and experimental films.

 

As I mentioned previously, I have been shooting video for long enough to realize that it's like formica. It's very clean, no texture, no soul. Film is lot like wood, and there are lots of things to like about that.

what happend to the aperture ring? is stucked?

Some lenses have a "pin" near the lens mount that must be "pushed-IN" to activate the iris function.

 

The problem is the K-3 lacks the mechanism to "push" the pin inside the lens. So, turning the aperture ring does not affect iris. Peleng does not have such a "pin" but every other M42 mount lens I have tried does.

 

How can I modify an M42 lens to work on the K3, short of using adhesive to hold in the pin?

Well, they fit... but how do I get the aperture ring to work?

<h1 class="itemTitle">Eclair NPR Super 16:

</h1>Looks like a pretty big camera, so maybe not the smartest for my purpose. Right now there's a kit with 3 mags, the camera body and the motor and the rods for like $1500.

Yeah, and it's probably Standard 16. The "Super16" upgrade costs about $2-3K and takes at least a month.

 

K-3

I have read many good things about this camera on this site and others. Looks like it is pretty small and built like a tank. I'm assuming I cant go wrong for $250 shipped, since I could use it for a POV cam if worst came to worst.

That's the camera I have. I had to buy several K3's to get a good one. The others felt like cheap plastic toy cameras. My current one has the feel of a well oiled machine.

 

It was modified to Super16 by Du-All in NYC. They also installed a TCS crystal motor with 12, 24, and 48 fps. It has a 28-69mm zoom lens. It also came with two batteries. Here's the best part: I paid $630 for everything. The downside is they only come up for sale a couple of times a year, so keep your eyes open.

 

You can also add an 8mm fisheye lens to the K3 for about $250... VERY cool idea for extreme skiing!!!

 

If you decide to get a clockwork (wind-up) K3, be sure to buy a newly manufactured cam instead of an old one. The new ones have a few convenient upgrades that make the higher price worth it (like the footage counter that "clicks" itself out of the way when you're loading the feed spool). Plus, the new camera would not be all worn out like a 70's-era Krasnogorsk. It's worth the extra change.

 

Arri 16BL with Zoom Lens

Looks like a killer camera, comes with two 400 foot mags, blimp, new battery AND charger, matte box (which I will probably never use) and a crystal sync unit. Its a lot more pricey but it is new. 4,500USD and its got a 6 month warranty. I happen to know that a lot of ski shots are done with this, particularly by Gary Nate of Warren Miller Entertainment.

Sounds like a nice camera, but maybe a tad overkill for what you want to do. With the 4,000 difference between the K3 and the 16BL you could devote a lot of money towards film, processing, and x-fer.

 

Before tying up that much money in a camera body, I would make sure I had the resources to keep it running constantly. It's easier to keep an inexpensive camera running because your capital is not all wrapped up in the camera. Just a thought. To me, it's a matter of, with $5k, do you want a $4500 camera and 20 minutes worth of film? Or, a $500 camera and 200 minutes worth of film, processing, and transfer?

 

At the moment those are the only ones I am looking at but any suggestions would be great biggrin.gif!

I would look for a Scoopic 16M with the macro capability ($500-600) and add a 72mm 0.5x wide angle lens (Collinscraft, $400 or off-brand cheapie $100). You would then have a 6mm rectilinear focal length (the widest configuration possible). I think this would rock for extreme sports photography. Standard 16 only, tho, and it can't be upgraded. Not a bad camera for under $1k, I think.