Brian Wells

Hi, I consider myself the "perfect candidate" for 8mm. I am 21 years old and have a primary background in video cinematography. I feel confident in my work being called cinematography as it's been more than point and shoot. I have exerted the same production values as used in film, but as a reality, I've had readier access to high-end video equipment more so than film. I'd like to start shooting film, and so that's why I say I would be the "perfect candidate" for 8mm. But, I have no desire to shoot 8mm. I'd rather learn using a modern Super16mm camera and telecine using the best equipment and learn that way. Surely, it would cost less to own an old Super8mm camera, but the restrictions of the format just don't seem very appealing when I could rent a modern camera like an A-Minima for $175/Day+lens and while the film and processing do cost more, but all things considered, I think I'd be better off to learn on the same camera system and telecine that would be useful in a commercial scenario. So--when I make the move to seriously learn film--I will do it on Super16mm with equipment that makes sense to learn on. I understand the only way to learn film is to shoot film. Then, great. The only way to learn to use a certain camera is to use that camera. I'd like to experiment with things that I don't feel I could do very well on 8mm and even if so, I'd still be better off to learn on Super16mm equipment. Being the "perfect candidate" for shooting on 8mm equipment and film, well, I don't really care to. I would feel better learning on a tool I could use professionally. Hope this makes sense. Sorry for the lack of coherence and brevity in this message. I'm a little sleepy. Thanks, Brian Wells

I have a DigiCon 1,2 I picked up to use on a DVX100a to capture more shadow/highlight detail as the Schneider folks have purported they do. Haven't really had any play time much yet. Looking to broaden my horizons. Sorry if this comes across as a "give me" type of post. I feel I've done as much of my reading as I can on my own and buy purchasing a couple of filters to see the effect.. Certainly there is application for these sorts of filters other than pulling more detail out of video's limited dynamic range.. Would be curious to hear about films that come to mind that may have used any of type of low contrast effect like the original poster described or any others that come to mind. Thanks, Brian Wells

I saw most all the Panther products at NAB this year at the Abel Cinetech booth. To be quite honest, I wasn't "blown away" by any of it. The German designer of the products was on hand to demonstrate the capabilities and he was very cordial and well informed (to be expected considering he designed the equipment) but the tripods didn't seem much different or really any better than the others I've used in the past. After talking to another Able rep on the phone the following week, I discovered this manufacturer is traditionally known for large cranes and possibly portable dolly solutions and just recently made an effort to target the small format video/eng market. The dollies they had on hand had some pretty nice features (like being able to fold up pretty small and have a storage compartment underneath and the dollies were modular, i.e. - buy a few parts now, buy a few more later to build a different dolly, etc.) but even then, it still seemed like the Losmandy product was just as portable and robust. Overall, the Panther products I saw and briefly demo'd looked nice, but I just couldn't see anything they offered as being "better" than any other products I've used. I have no axe to grind here. My honest sincere assessment was that I wasn't unimpressed, what they had to offer did look very nice, but I wasn't blown away, either. One of the guys at Abel says he's been using Panther products for seven years and has been working to get them in circulation in the states for a long time. I have no idea why, but he seemed to really like the stuff. Hope this helps, Brian

I've met several girls who collected these Super8 cameras in college are now into their careers and have more money to blow.. I don't actually think they're being used for taking pictures. Kind of a geeky girl thing I think. That's my theory.

Right. As I understand it, lenses for smaller formats require far more rigid specifications because of the smaller sensor compared to larger formats. Of course, no prosumer camera would have superior quality lens components than those made available for film aquisition, I would think... Brian Wells

There are different kinds of HD. 720p60 is 60Fps. (Progressive Fps) 1080i60 is 60fps (Interlaced fps) vs. 480i60 is 60fps (Interlaced fps, like a dvx100) You'll probably need to research this first.. Understanding the difference between formats is the first step. There are years of discussion on the topic all over the internet, so try a Google search. Trying to offer a kick start. Hope this helps.

Wiki's! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecine

Remember Panasonic uses the DVCPro-HD 100Mbps format not the 19Mbps HDV format.. Very important distinction there. There is a simple (well kind of) method of determining how much data will fit on a card. First, understand the various implementations of DVCPro-HD. In 720p60 DVCPro-HD the datarate is 100Mbps at 60 progressive frames a second. To figure out the data rate when shooting less than 60Fps, use the fraction XX/60.. So for example, 24Fps would be 24/60=0.4 or 40Mbps. Or, 40Fps would be 40/60=.67 or 67Mbps. In 1080i60 DVCPro-HD the datarate is 100Mbps at 60 interlaces fields per second. You can record various common framerates (e.g. 30Fps or 24Fps) in 1080p using a pulldown similar to how 30P and 24P are integrated into the DVX100's interlaced recording format. With 1080i/p the datarate will always be 100Mbps, regardless of framerate as there is not a provision for recording anything besides 60 interlaced fields in 1080i. In other words, regardless of shooting framerate, it would always lay down 60fields per second and you would remove the duplicate frames in post. Contrasted to 720p60, you CAN record only the needed frames and there is no pulldown process in post. So, it would be possible to record around 20 minutes of 720p24 to an 8GB P2 card or around 8 minutes of 1080p24 to an 8GB card. The HVX200 camera will hold two P2 cards at a time. Hope this explanation has helped. There is a very passionate group of small format 24p camera operators at www.dvxuser.com and plenty of in-depth information about the HVX200 and P2. Brian Wells

They install probes on the CCD's that bypass all camera-original processing. So, no white balance, no characteristic curves, nothing. What is output the USB2 port is a pre-DSP signal which can be sent to an Apple computer and recorded (@ 235Mbps, mind you) using the proprietary SculpterHD software they've designed. That is how they're doing it. Because of bypassing all DSP, you have to white balance and perform all color correction in post.. But, to answer your question, that is how they're doing it. I would suggest visiting the forums on their website to inquire more specifically about their product. http://forum.reel-stream.com/ Hope this helps, Brian Wells

Have you considered the Century Optics 0.7x and 1.6x converters? http://www.centuryoptics.com/products/prod...x100/dvx100.htm Hope this helps, Brian Wells

Much appreciated. Thanks.

I'm a bit of a newbie myself, so far be it for me to start making all kinds of suggestions. I cannot imagine, however, the economy of this producers envisage: third-shift filmmaking on 35mm. There appears a lack of rational inference in costs associated and reduced margin for error due to shortened days and limited "setup" time. On a side note, Charles Papert, SOC documents his experiences with the P+S Technik system in an article here: http://www.dvinfo.net/canon/images/images19.php Hope the link is helpful. Thanks for an excellent community here. Brian Wells

Having never had been involved in an anamorphic film project, I have been learning about the format. I understand the (rudimentary) differences between 2:39 35mm and matted Super35mm and the practical applications for each. I often read discussions about the aesthetic of the lens flare formed in an anamorphic. This appears a characteristic that cinematographers prefer and are quick to point out that rear-element anamorphic lenses lack this aesthetic. What I am unclear on is: How do you recongise an anamorphic flare when you see one? Thanks you, Brian Wells

That would be my choice as well. Turns out they're not shipping the Focus anytime soon. Truth is, I would love to have both. : ) Trust your shoot will go excellent! Best wishes, Brian

"Cartoni Focus is my new dream tripod. It requires zero adjustments to feel incredible." Though generally a no-no to post the similar messages on multiple boards, this is one instance I will admit to doing. I really liked that tripod. brian wells

Alex wrote: As far as what boom to have, what do you think? There is a pretty big range of options available. This is an often discussed topic. You use a completely different microphone indoors that you would outdoors. Microphones start around 400$ for something reasonable up to $1500 for something professional. You can listen to several samples of different types of microphones here: http://www.dvfreelancer.com/articles/shotgun_shootout.html Some of my favorites are: AKG Blue Line C300B/CK93 at $400, great dialogue mic for indoors Sanken CS-1 at $700, good all around mic for outdoors and maybe for indoors in a pinch Those are both excellent sounding microphones and yet are both made by top-quality manufactures. Hope this helps, brian wells amarillo texas

Hi, Abel Cinetech had the Cartoni Focus tripod setup at NAB last week and I had the pleasure of checking it out. I, like others here, am a recreational shooter with the DVX100. My rig consists of a Vocas mattebox and soon hopefully a Chrosziel follow focus as well. Naturally, I was looking for a tripod that would be a good match for my current MiniDV equipment and would also last for a while as I would like to evenutally use one of the smaller S16 cameras with it. (A-Minima, for example) Having used a Vinten Vision 3 before, I was pretty much set on getting one, but figured it to be worth a shot to check out some others as well, and honestly I liked the Cartoni Focus better than the Vinten and the Miller Solo DV10 I also compared. Of course, I will acknowledge that I am a student and have not owned world class equipment before, but I have used some of it at times. I really liked this tripod. I think the dual stage carbon fiber legs and Focus head are about $1,875.00. ZGC and Abel Cinetech appear to sell them.. I think it's pretty new as I haven't yet seen it on B&H. Hope this helps confuse your decision making even further! j/k : ) I would imagine everyone would agree the best way to find the tripod that fits best for your individual needs is to try several of them out. I did that, and for me and my tastes, I like the Cartoni Focus the best. Certainly others will have a different opinion. Does anyone have any constructive concerns about a Cartoni purchase? I liked the way it feels, but I wonder about the brand reputation, reliability, and service. Anyone care to comment? I feel I've done all I can in finding something I like and am kind of looking for some help and advice in solidifying that decision. Thanks. brian wells amarillo texas student / video cameraman

I'm not so sure that is correct. The Reel Stream Andromeda isn't a recorder. It's basically a USB2 output installed on the underneath side of the camera that goes into the Mac-Only proprietary software program, "Sculpter HD" and you record into a laptop or desktop over USB2. They do plan a future direct-to-disc HDD version at some point and have stated it would require different hardware than what they are currently using and that the only way to record for the time being (relative since they haven't even started beta testing, that commences April 30th) is directly to a computer, over USB2, into Sculpter HD software. brian wells

Hi Rik, I have some information here that might be helpful as a reference tool. I am certain this has been discussed in greater detail than I could possibly comprehend elsewhere on a forum and probably years ago. So, I apologise to reprint for those who have seen this before. Not interested in stirring a ruccus, though I recognise any reasonable discussion about the technical aspects of video formats can turn that direction in a hurry. I am a student and honestly trying to sort all of this out. Thanks. Original Sample Rate Before Tape 1080i & 720p Sample @ 74.25 Mhz On Tape Sampling Rate DV25 (480i) 4:1:1 13.5, 3.375, 3.375 DVCPRO-HD (720p & 1080i) 4:2:2 (15:7:7) 74.25, 37.125, 37.125 HDCAM (1080p & 1080i) 3:1:1 (17:6:6) 148.5, 37.125, 37.125 What I don't understand is how someone could derive from that information that the HDCAM format has less luma (Y) information than the DVCPRO-HD. It appears to me they are identical in chroma (U,V), but the HDCAM has double the information in Luma (Y). Could it have something to do with the way each format records a different number of lines in 1080 (DVCPRO-HD is 1280x720 in 1080i and I think HDCAM is 1440x960, but I'm not certain) Maybe that's it. These are all just numbers and it doesn't necessarily matter which is higher, of course... Only what looks good to our eyes.. and that is subjective so I won't touch it. Any insight on this? Ive tried to study as much as I can and am in a rut.. kind of confused. brian wells amarillo texas student / video cameraman

Hi everyone, From information posted on the company website www.reel-stream.com, there is information illuding the possibility of a 720p image from a DVX100. Essentially how they are doing this is by pixel shift in both the vertical and horizontal planes for a final frame size of 1124x720, of course this is different from the actual 720p frame size.. they recommend using the Panasonic anamorphic adapter to obtain the actual frame size of 1280x720 that is considered actual 720p. What is interesting to me is this is a similiar process (as I understand it, appreciate being corrected, but please don't chastise me for a misunderstanding) as the Canon XL1. The idea with the XL1's 270K 1/3" ccd's was an increase in sensitivity by about 4db. The image was pixel shifted to full resolution, but they were able to use ccd's with a reduced pixel density for better sensitivity. The converse of this method would be that color sampling is reduced to I believe 422. Of course, this is moot considering the available room on DV tape in both PAL and NTSC... well it didn't make any difference since that information would not have been used anyways. So, I think they are using a similar process with the DVX to get a 720p frame, but in doing so, it is no longer 444, but 422. They haven't exactly spelled this out in any literature, and even so, a 720p 422 DVX wouldn't necessarily be any different/better than a 720p 422 HVX, except for a possible difference in the sensitivity between cameras. I realise there are many things that can be fixed in dsp and imagine Panasonic will be on the ball to have similiar sensitivity on HVX as DVX, as that is (to me) one of the cameras nicest features compared to other MiniDV handheld cameras I have used. I agree with David that they could likely port the same ccd probes they're using on the DVX to other cameras and have indicated their position to explore that option. In that case, they could theoretically do the same with a 720p HVX, and probably do it at 444, based on what I have read/understood about the camera and rampent speculation about the possible ccd's it will have. However, the data rate for uncompressed HD, as I understand it, is 1.5Gbps, which is totally unrealistic for any sort of field capture I would consider practical for the type of work I do. Unless you're already shooting projects in the "vipercam" class, in which case the HVX/444 mod may seem a pretty good deal. So, I guess what I'm trying to say is: I've looked into this pretty deep and weighed the options. For me, I think the HVX would be a better choice... even IF they can do 720p with a DVX, it appears a mathematical impossibility to derive both 444 and 720p from this camera at the same time, it's kind of a one or the other option. That is my observation of the thing for right now. brian wells amarillo texas student / video cameraman

Actually, someone did. Thank you to the individual who sent me a private message during their layover at the airport. Much appreciated. Yes, I think you're right about my inquiry being about basic photographic knowledge or gaps of knowledge, at the least. I have pockets of information and gaps of information and today helped close quite a few of those gaps. For a long, long time (1.5 years) I have been trying to develop an internship with an aquaintance who shoots television advertisements on film and recently he has been more open to having me come along. I am trying to clear up a few misunderstandings (yes, basic knowledge) in the least obtrusive way I know of: a forum on the internet. I am trying to be respectful of everyone's time and figured this would be the least obtrusive way to ask since if it wasn't worth someone's time, then that person simply wouldn't respond and I won't jeopardize my trying to be a good intern for the one person I know that actually shoots with cine' cameras and film. I look forward to being an active, contributing member of this board and also being helpful to the D.P. who is giving me a chance to help out on his shoots. . . In the same way it is awkward to ask something basic on an internet forum, it is to me ten times more humiliating (and likely inappropriate) to ask your mentor during work hours. I am young? Yes. I have a lot to learn? Yes. I have asked stupid questions before that have caused seasoned professionals to ignore my telephone calls? Yes. I have a desire to excel in cinematography? Yes. I value a solid, well-grounded education from a university? Yes. I value learning at one's own pace and asking experts when you simply just don't get it? Yes. That should hopefully explain my post today. Thanks for all the links and personal reply's; your suggestions are valued. Thank you. Brian Wells

David, Please understand my questions are genuine and I recognise a genuine way of finding answers is by asking. I can and have searched online for some of this and will continue to do so. Perhaps my post should not have been as lengthy, but in no way did I intend arrogance nor any sense of expectation or entitlement to someone taking the time to answer them... I promise. I recognise those that are here are experts in this industry and that is why I posed my questions here, rather than say a video-prominent group. I have already received solid resources and support and I truly appreciate it. The Kodak student portion is filling my screen at the moment, and likely by the end of day I will have searched the archives of this and the CML forum and will have found the answers I am looking for. Thanks to those who provided a resource or clues to help out. Best, Brian Wells

Hello everyone, My name is Brian Wells and I am a resident of Amarillo, Texas. I am 21 years old and am nearing the end of my one year hiatus from school where I was studying to be an English major. My background related to capturing images has mostly been on various digital mediums (ie - video) and 35mm photography with a Canon SLR. While I have become fairly proficient at tweaking the look of video in the digital world (as nearly everyone else in my generation with a DV cam and a Mac has done) I recognise that I know very about film and I am trying, really, to grow and understand the complexities and palette of tools available to those shooting on film. Here are the things I am unclear on right now. Please tell me where I am wrong or if I am on the right track related to general characteristics on different film stocks on ASA speeds, cooresponding sensitivity and dynamic range, emulsion characteristics, and more. If able to offer some good, old fashioned advice, please read on. . . 1. Negative Stock vs. Positive Film My understanding is that negative stock is preferred for the following reasons: It has a preferred aesthetic; better dynamic range (I think also referred as "latitude") from shadows to highlights, and more defined colors over Positive film (I think also referred to as "print stock" or "slide film") and positive film has a different aesthetic (I don't know what that is) reduced latitude (like 5 stops or something) but can be projected immediately without a print, DI, or telecine-then-print. 2. Sensitivity has a direct connection to the amount of grain in a film? Yes or No? My understanding is that smaller emulsions create tighter grain at the expense of reduced lower light sensitivity and that stocks with larger emulsions, "soak up more light since they're bigger" at the expense of "bigger emulsions means you see them" hence more grain. 3. Shutter angle or shutter speed. My understanding of the effects of various shutter angles comprises contradictory information. One person explained steeper angles produce images with sharp, strobing images and a second person explained that using a shallower angle produced sharper images than the standard angle in a camera. I think the standard is 180 degree for many camera's with an exception being the fixed shutter on the Aaton a-minima which is 172.8 or something. My interest here is the effect of changing that angle to a steeper or shallower (proper terminology?) angle and the effect it has on the image. If you use, say for example, a 45 degree shutter on Super16 at 24fps, is your image sharper at the expense of strobing images if there is high movement? Or is it the opposite... would a 200 degree shutter provide sharper images with potential for strobing? What effect would a person be going after if they used a 90 degree shutter? Does shutter angle have a direct effect on your frames-per-second? Someone told me that a 180 degree shutter on a motion picture camera would be the same as a 1/48 shutter on a 24p camera, at 24 frames per second. Giving that, would going to 1/45 or 1/36 shutter speeds be approximating the look and feel of a shallower angle on film (like a 90 degree shutter would be 1/24, etc) or would it be like a 1/60 or 1/120 on 24p would be like approximating a "shallower" angle on film? Comparing shutter angle to shutter speed on a digital 24p camera is confusing to me. On the 24p camera using, say a 1/15 shutter does not give you a full 24fps. However, at 1/24 or 1/48, et. al. it does provide 24fps. Is there a similar connection to shutter angle and frames-per-second on a motion picture camera? Last on shutter angle/slash/shutter speeds. Does switching from a standard angle such as 180 degrees to a different angle change the way you would expose film? For example, would a change from 180 to 90 give you an extra stop to compensate for, or no? Would going from 180 to 45 mean two stops of exposure difference? Are you losing a stop (darker image at same iris opening) or gaining a stop (brighter image at same isis opening) all other things being the same? 4. Iris opening: f-Stop vs. T-stop comparison. I think this is a simple question with probably a simple answer: f-stop is light entering the lens (used on photography and video) and T-stop is.... I think a more exact way of measuring light after it goes through the lens and comes out the other side? Please help me understand the key difference between these two rating systems. 5. ASA vs. ISO speeds. A photographer told me recently that no-one uses ASA speeds in photography and it is all ISO speeds. He shoots with a digital SLR and is a student, so I am not necessarily thinking this is all true. What is the difference in these two systems, if any, and is there a particular reason motion picture film is rated by ASA speeds? 6. What does a 100, 200, or 500 speed film mean in terms of look and sensitivity to light? For example, why go 7218 vs. 7212 or 7217? Do you expose differently for each one? I didn't think I could get it all out. But, here it is; my complete misunderstandings of film. Please advise. Thank you! Brian Wells -- A Another one of those kids with a camcorder and a mac who is looking to learn a craft not a fad like many other kids his age.