Brian Wells

Yes, mine came in this week. I am extremely disappointed with the noise and rolling shutter. IMHO, the micron sensor is useless for any kind of professional imaging. It's as bad as a webcam. Speaking of, there are webcams that use megapixel CMOS sensors. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to learn they were using the same CMOS as the industrial camera. They are really awful. I can't begin to understand the fascination with using industrial cameras for professional imaging when there are HDV cameras that look better for less money. For that matter, film stock through a $200 movie camera still looks better than all forms of HD.

Hi, You can buy a USB2 camera with the same sensor for under $250 at Mightex.com.

At 32db, it's as quiet as an Arriflex 16BL, which was the standard for many years, before the SR series. I'm not sure. I think it uses an on-board re-chargeable. Most cameras do. Based on what little I've read about the ACL, it seems capable of filming speeds from 8 - 75fps, depending on what motor you have. I'm not sure about the intervalometer feature. But, that doesn't really seem like a basic requirement in a movie camera. Indeed, even the top shelf Arri SR3 doesn't have that function built-in. Based on modifications done to other cameras (see slowmotioninc.com), I think the ACL could probably be updated with an electronic control interface and intervalometer functions -- but it would cost about $6-10K per camera. To manufacture a camera of this quality today would cost about $35,000. Skilled labor of the type needed to make stuff like this is expensive. Otherwise, why would anyone choose it as a career choice?

Hey Adam- Here in the states some places offer a HD "dailies" service direct to HDD on a Spirit for a small premium over a DV transfer (like 25% more). Do you think it would be an acceptable compromise to grade in something like FCP with Colorista instead of paying 3x as much for a scene to scene transfer with an expert? Of course, all there info isn't there, but maybe with HD it's enough to still have a good look for a good price. With today's modern film stocks, I would think any kind of Spirit HD transfer would look good to begin with, without alot of adjustments. I mean, what does a colorist have to correct when you shoot properly? I'm learning here, OK. Brian

What about the Eclair ACL? On eBay, they can be had for around $1500. The Super16 conversion runs (at most) $2-3K, then BAM you have a modern Super16 camera with interchangeable lenses (PL, Nikon, etc.) for around $4K. Isn't that the camera you're talking about? A crystal sync, reflex finder, mirror shutter, 400' mag Super16 camera on the cheap? I can't think of any reason not to like it as a first camera purchase.

I hardly consider former HP executives clueless about generating profit from imaging technologies. They were the masterminds who came up with the $35 inkjet cartridge and said it was good for us.

I would strongly suggest buying the cheapest video camera you can get away with (DVX100 or something) and save up your money to buy 16MM film and processing after you've gone as far as you can with video. It's really cool in the beginning to see exactly what you're shooting, but if you're serious about cinematography you'll eventually become bored with the image quality from all video cameras, even HD. I think a lot of students believe that film is going away and there's no need to learn it, but it just isn't so. Good luck.

No. He's a 25 year veteran in imaging technologies, formerly at HP, and more recently, Kodak. He's taking the company in a new direction, according to the Business Week article: "[CEO]Perez found he had to replace a lot of executives to get the company on a new track. The film-era lifers just didn't get it. Of the company's 21 executive officers in 2003, the year Perez arrived, only three remain. Most of their replacements came from outside Kodak, and most had digital experience." Source: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/conte...48/b4011421.htm

Maybe it's too early to say, but how much do you think you'll save by processing your own film (considering all of your overhead)? Last time I checked 100' daylight load of S16 was only $14 for processing...

I don't think it really matters what you shoot on. Great photographers can shoot on any camera and create memorable images. I think it has more to do with the way you "work" people in front of the lens that makes your pictures great, not what camera you use.

I have no experience with such things, but am impressed by the Mako Head. www.makohead.com

I think it is because of the 1/3" sensors... There are a lot of wide shots on DVD that look awesome because they were shot on larger formats (35mm, 2/3" HD, etc.) Wide shots just don't look that good on MINIDV.

Section 179 (which permits a small business to fully expense tangible property in the year it is purchased, up to $100,000 per year) has been AWESOME for small businesses. It has allowed them to rapidly increase production capability (i.e. - tools) without paying ANY taxes on the income used to purchase the property. This was done to encourage GROWTH in small businesses by stimulating capital expenditures. I know of more than one lighting rental house that has taken advantage of that! Also (as a small business owner) you could have bought a HUMMER completely tax free (or any vehicle over 6,000 lbs.). That law was recently amended (in May, 2006) to commercial vehicles over 14,000 lbs. No more buying HUMMER's as business expenses. :-( *I am NOT a tax advisor. You should consult a certified public accountant before filing your taxes *

I tried doing this effect last month with a Kino Flo and 1/4 Plus Green and was not happy with the results. I wanted it to look gritty. Instead, it looked like green tinted video. In retrospect, I should have just used an old POS flourescent instead of getting fancy with professional lights and gels. I also should have experimented with an additional small light on a flicker box to simulate 60-cycle flicker, without all the nasty pulsating effects of a magnetic ballast . Anyways, that's what I would have done differently, in retrospect.

I'm nowhere near as experienced as the other members on this forum, but I'll voice my support for 216 as well. There's something very attractive about the light quality from an HMI or Kino Flo with a 216 diffusion frame that moves me in a way silks do not. That's not to say I don't see the value in having both as an option, but on a recent project I never even used the silk because the diffusion was so pretty!

Networking with production companies and/or advertising agencies is what it takes to get to the next category of work. And, you have to be a great person. Smile, shake hands, have unusual talents, be funny, etc. At least that's what I've heard.. I'm not there, yet!

A "Go-Cart" frame might be a good starting point for a homemade doorway dolly with soft tires and two wheel steering. Or, for the same price as renting a "professional" doorway dolly for one day, you can own this wagon: http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/disp...temnumber=37320

I have worked with both PAR and LEKO style lights and haven't yet come to terms with why a PAR is generally preferred over the LEKO. In particular, why would you pick a Joker over a Dedo in the 400W category? Both lights offer a 4 to 50 degree spot to flood range. Yet, the PAR is more expensive and takes longer to setup (because of the lenses). What difference does it make to pick one over the other?

NO, that's highly misleading advertising. What they are selling is metal halide. And, it's the "tungsten equivalent" of 800 watts... In reality, the metal halide lamps are only 140W, not 800W. And, they're 5200 degree Kelvin, not 5600 Kelvin (like HMI's). I've also heard (but not experienced) that metal halide ballasts can be NOISY! Basically, it's not a $300 Joker Bug, like the ad copy implies. Far from it. If it sounds too good to be true. . .

Try Pier 59 Studios. They usually have these sort of things.

Hi Bob- I returned from this trip one year ago, but you are correct! 50 cycle fluorescents (w/ mag ballasts) were a problem in Romania(in 24P). Although, the problem was a small one as the flicker was easily mitigated using the syncro scan shutter method you suggested. I also made sure to take pictures and make lists of all of my gear before the trip. I am happy to report the trip went very well and all of my equipment (except for a slightly damaged head) came back in great condition. Thanks for your concern and reply. Sincerely,

I would hire a professional cameraman and crew and shoot on film, if I had $25,000 to throw around and wanted to direct my own short movie... I would never shoot myself if I had enough money to hire a DP...

The daylight tubes are alright. I don't have too many problems with them in the Diva Lite 200. I still think a 1K Chimera with Full CTB produces a much nicer quality of light (softer and more controllable with a fabric eggcrate) than any Kino Flo. I have many options from which to choose in my personal kit, and the flo's are always a last resort for me. I mainly have them for using in automobiles on inverters because of their low power requirements. But, flo's aren't always the best choice for softlight... Far from it, IMO.

Surround yourself with the most competent people you can find. Work in some other area of the industry besides directing. Stay on good terms with everyone you ever meet.

Is that Mylar on the floor, or am I just imagining things? It's fairly common to see Mylar on the runway of a fashion show... Looks cool on film, too. Thanks for posting that pic.