timHealy

I guess he did not see the "member no: 1" under Tim's name. I am in complete agreement with Stuart's thoughts. respectfully Tim (not Tyler)

Operating and maintainence costs???? We are basically talking about a lamp cord with a household bulb in a socket at the end. One can't get much cheaper than that. Worst case scenario is you have to replace a porcelain socket or a male hubble. Or replace the whole damn thing if a truck happens to run it over. What are the chances? (I have never seen a truck run over anything on a film shoot..wink..wink..snicker) Over time one would be spending more money on replacement lanterns as they are only paper. The larger bulb they are talking about is a mogul based bulb but the main Lantern harp they are selling is a medium based socket which would be just fine for most film and video applications. You could get the mogul based one with the medium based reducer and be ready for all applications. I would stay away from using anything above an ECT (500 watt tungsten) for the medium based bulb version. The other company I couldn't remember is by a company called GEM. I think this is the same person resposible for the "Gem balls" which is basically a muslin chinese lantern and they were not mass produced. He has a Chinese lantern harp that is spring loaded and has a cage around the bulb that makes gelling easy. Perhaps some of the LA guys have a website for this guys products. I cannot find anything on yahoo or google. Best Tim

Other than a flashlight with diffusion on it have you thought about Chinese lanterns with larger than household bulbs? There are fairly cheap, lightweight, have built in diffusion, and are easliy powered by your average household electrical outlet. They work great on grip stands that keep them up right so the hot bulbs don't lean against the paper. Or you can hang them too. this guy advertises on this website and makes a good frame for a lantern that can be mounted to grip hardware easily: http://www.lanternlock.com/ There is another west coast guy who makes a spring loaded harness that works well too but I can't remember the name or the website Best Tim

There is no harm in calling a few companies and getting estimates. Some rental companies may want to charge your DP double if he's a jerk. (ok that's just a joke) Your inclination to get a camera for a weekend is good. They will probably charge a one day rate for a weekend. But better than that, tell them it is for a one day shoot on a Monday, You'll have to pick up the package on a Friday and then return it on a Tuesday. You can shoot for three days for the price of one. Also you may be able to rent it for a week and get a 1.5 day rate for the week and have it for 7 days, or perhaps 10 if you tell them it'll be picked up on a Friday, the shoot will be from M to F and return the following Monday. 10 days for the price of 1.5 days. Make some calls and see what you can find. Best Tim

This seems like a silly thread. Don't panic people. Shooting in a pool or near water can be done safely and it is done all the time. Where do you think they shot the storm sequences for "The Perfect Storm" for example? It was shot in a pool with actors on a soundstage surrounded by lights, electrical cable, wave tanks, effects fans and the like. While operating tungsten with DC is a great idea while around water, AC using GFCI's do work. And they trip much faster than the typical fuses and breakers on generators, stage boxes, and gang boxes. If you don't like the idea of shooting near water then by all means don't do it. But if you do, just get yourself experienced electricians, and as long as the production managers give them the extra gear they need to keep eveyone safe, then everyone will be fine. "experience" more often than not means a union crew in the US. And if anyone still has doubts call these people and talk to them http://www.ktec.org and some helpful tips http://www.hydroflex.com http://www.hydroflex.com/site/helphints/helpful1.html http://www.hydroflex.com/site/helphints/safelighting.html Best Tim

What would you like to do with your films and what level are you editing at? Avid is the top of the line system but would break the bank for anything other than professional film and TV work (unless youre sitting on a trust fund). I believe their top price point is somewhere around $130,000. They do have a lower price point software that I believe came out after Final Cut was released but I do not know what that cost is. I have been using Final Cut since it came out when I was considering buying a Media 100 system at the time, but I could not justify the price for hardware and software for a personal system that did not make money for me. If I recall it was about $10,000 for their low end system and close to $40,000 for their top of the line system. Working in the mini DV level, Final Cut got me started for 1000 bucks for the software and maybe two or three hundred for a dedicated video drive. I understand Final Cut is hardware independent so you can upgrade to a sd or hd system in the future. I have not done that but I would be interested in doing so if and when I start transferring directly to hardrives. Maybe someday. Final Cut has room for improvement and perhaps someday Apple will, especially in the sound features, but I love the way I can use it in conjunction with Photoshop, After Effects, Combustion, DVD studio pro and the like easily importing and exporting files or shots from one program to another for work Final Cut can't do or another program does better. I have never heard anyone who knew Avids to say anything nice about Final Cut. But Hey I don't know Avids, but perhaps ignorance is bliss. I'm sure it is a better program for 130,000 reasons, but FCP works for me and has been working terrifically for a few years. There are also a few other programs like Premiere or Vegas that may be worth checking out as well. I have used Premire a little and it was fine, but never used Vegas although it seems many people out there are. Best Tim

sorry. I meant Joeseph Cotton. Greg (Toland) was the DP. Tim

I had an old drafting teacher who described a plane as an imaginary two dimensional surface perpendicular to your field of view. For the younger digital media crowd...kind of like a layer in photoshop. In any field of view the number of planes can be limited only to your imagination. So in Davids image from Orson Welles, Orson is one plane the other actor (Greg something???) is on another, and the figure in back is one yet another. Understanding a plane also comes in handy with depth of field. So this leads me to a question perhaps David knows. I have always thought of Depth of field planes as being flat. But if say a lens has a depth of field of 5' to 6' from the lens on the axis of the lens itself. Will everything be in focus on that flat plane? Or as one gets farther from the intersection of the plane and the axis of the lens will things get out of focus? I hope I explained that right. best Tim

Have you tried to take two similiar wattage lights one from arri and one from mole and bounce it into the same sort of bounce media and make a side by side comparision? I have and arris run a little cooler. Try it yourself if you don't believe me. Maybe it only 100 or 200 degrees kelvin but it is differnent enough that is noticeable if mixing the lights. If you use all of one brand on a job you won't notice. Best Tim

When was the last time you believed in what a salesman said? The majority of B and H sales and customers are still photography not cinematography. Mole is doing just fine in the tungsten filmmaking world. Personally for me the Mole tungsten stuff is terrific, easy to use, and tested over decades. Except that Mighties and mickeys don't feel as easy to use as blondes and redheads to me. Arri Tungsten products are fine too except the seem to run a little cooler in terms of color temp than Mole. I would say that I would prefer to use the Arri version of blondes and redheads over Moles mighties and mickeys. However I have never been a big fan of Mole HMI's. They don't seem to be user friendly and the designs seem overly bulky. Arri's HMI's on the other hand are terrific. I like all their HMI products with 2 caveats. The 18k seems a little bulky and I like utilizing a sun ray 18 or the like, and the Arri 12/18 k HMI par is a monster! It may be too big for most electric trucks and may have to be carried on a swing or rigging truck. Best tim

Those look like old Studio Mole 10ks. I don't think they are the old Big Eye type. If I can reiterate what has been said, they are very heavy and not "ideal" for location work compared to the contemporary aluminum models. Being old they may have bad flood spot mechanisms. The wiring may be old, have dry rot, and may not be grounded like contemporary models. If you want to by them for a stage where they will live on stands 100 percent of the time (hence the name "Studio 10k's"), and you do your inspection properly, or plan to resurrect them, then maybe they would be OK to buy. Otherwise I wouldn't bother. They may need alot of work to keep them going. Just my 2 cents Best Tim

I'm curious about your workflow and forgive me if this is a basic question. How are you doing your post? Can these files be imported easily into Final Cut or Premiere for editing? I'm interested in doing this with some super 8 footage. With my 16mm stuff I do for myself I usually transfer to digibeta and work with a mini dv or DV cam dub. Thanks Tim

Stuart, This may be the wrong place to inquire about this. Try forums on creativecow.com. I have used Sorenson 3 and like it alot but have yet to use the new codec but am impressed by what I have seen on Apples website. I am far from a professional "compressionist" but many of the movie trailers we see may be using top of the line computers and hardware compression tools that achieve far greater results than what you or I could do at home using just software compression tools. Best Tim

The reason behind this is that I will be using my SR, but I am going to have family members like my dad who shot tons of super 8 when I was a kid, shoot super 8 at the same time. I just want it to be set it on auto exposure and let him go. Tim

wow juggling film and stills. Way too much work for one person. You touched on one thing I don't usually do. That is shoot the ceremony. It is usually very dark in a church or temple and I am not comfortable running around shooting during a ceremony. But that is just me. And I don't use tape marks or lighting. A zoom is way better than primes as it gives one some variety. Actually a zoom control on one hadle would be great for a camera too. I did use some lighting on one of them and it becomes another person with handheld lighting units. It can be done but complicates things. But it can be nice to make sure you get some light in a brides eyes. Overall I hope it makes my handheld work a little better and I enjoy making them. I get to shoot something with out all the other things that go into film making and edit a conceptual piece. Tim

Thanks I am glad you guys like them. I actually find them fun to do but they are a bit of run and gun. So I just keep shooting. There is not much time and almost never a chance to do something twice. So as I shoot I think get a wide then go for some closeups for editing. I even use some out of focus or bad handheld camera work shots to give it a slightly home movie feel mixed in with some nicer moments and composed shots. I agree that I did some moving a little too much especially on the Margie and Chris piece and I may have overdone the flash frames on the Perry and Ivie piece so I have toned that down in the future. I would love to have a moment or two of the burned out ends of a daylight core but that is a minor addition. I just usually use my Zeiss T2 10-100 and keep important f stops in mind that I have predetermined like full sun, full shadow, and the ball in half shadow. My SR does not have an automatic exposure feature so I have to do it manually. Which is not really a problem. Once I start shooting I can see what is too light or too dark and open or close the stop on the fly. Yes I have three 400 foot mags. I would love to have too more for my camera pakage for all shoots. I going to shoot my sister wedding this weekend with 16 and have family members and friends shoot super 8 at the same time, so I'll have another one (actually two, another from my cousins) in a few weeks. I couldn't see Rolfe's movie either and would love too if you can get it up on the web. I think I answered all the questions. thanks Tim

hello all, I was wondering if anyone has shot 500 speed film with a Canon 1014 super 8 camera. I am want to do some shooting of a wedding using the auto exposure but am unsure if a 1014 has the ability to recognize the way super 8 cameras read film speed off the cartridges. When these cameras were made I don't know if they ever thought of the possibilty of 500 asa film. Anyone have any thoughts or experiences with this? Do I need to check it out with a test or just shoot and don't fret? Thanks you in advance. Tim

Your biggest problem will be your widest shot. Your second problem wil be electric. I recommend running several extension lines from the house. Making sure that each one is on a separate curcuit. Folks in the past have talked about making an adapter to plug into a 220 volt dryer plug (in the US) where you can get 50 amps instead of 15 or 20 amps. But get an experienced electrician to do this for you. Most house hold outlets are 15 amps. Hospital grade is 20. You'll need 2-20 amp curcuits for the two 2k's alone. A better option are 1k pars that have punch but not much spread. So in lieu of pars you could use the 2k's full spot to paint splashes of moonlight across the background. You can use the smaller tungsten lights for backlights to carry the moonlight on the actors. You can use the actual fire to light the actors. Expose for the backlight and background and just keep and eye on the fire to make sure it is not too bright or too dark as it will vary from take to take. Then you could easily adjust forground and background in the coverage and close ups. There are certainly many variations on a theme here. Good luck Tim

Yeah please post your work if you can. I personally would love to see it. I have been shooting 16mm for friends for and family for a while, but do have a website up if someone wants to pay for the film. I have a few samples here in QT here: http://healyweddingfilms.com/portfolio.html It makes a great gift but can be a little pricey, but I thoroughly enjoy doing something special for family and friends. I'm lucky to have a few college friends who are colorists that help to keep costs down. They do make gifts that would are more personal than a toaster! hehe Best Tim PS for those interested I have an Arri Sr with 3 mags and shoot 30 fps and transfer at 24. I shoot mostly 7245. Transfer to digi beta (for backup and hopefully upgrading my system to a larger format somday) and dub down to DVcam, edit with final cut. Some shots I may fool around with after effects or commotion. And in a few weeks I should have two more added to the site.

PS Technik in Germany has a really terrific Super 16 conversion with many options that the Arri SR III has. There is a company they are paired up with in the US in florida but I forget which one. Being a German company it costs a little more lately with the Euro being about $1.25 in the recent past. Best Tim

Hey David, I mentioned your kick ass comment to Heather Norton who was the focus puller on the New York portion of Dark Water and she appreciates your comment. But she only did the NY half. The rest of the movie was shot in Toronto. Best Tim PS very nice stills. Clean, simple, and elegant setups.

hey Keith, Respectfully I disagree too. It is better to ND the windows in this scenario because not only does this reduce the exposure outside, it will reduce the exposure inside as well and reduce the light coming into the room. When I think of windows I think of two sources of light, direct sun and soft ambient light coming in from all directions. The direct sun will hit whatever it hits but the soft ambient light will bounce all over the walls floors and ceilings. That kind of ambient light fills everything making it look like daylight. reducing it helps to sell the desired night look. or maybe at least dusk. Personally, I would try to do this at night becasue it may be a hard sell, but I have been wrong before. One could use ND on the lens too to reduce the depth of field, but I would start with ND the windows. respectfully Tim

I agree with those who have said there are issues like composition and framing that can easily be shared with still photography, moving images have many elements that are unique to the moving image. So if you have a back ground in stills great. If not, that's OK too. All sorts of backgrounds may lend themselves to cinematography from art to architecture. I have always had the impression just doing it and learning along the way may be the best way to learn a craft whether it be shooting stills, shooting film, or directing commercials and films. And most importantly never forget that you will keep learning. Just when you think you know everything, something comes along that shows you don't. best Tim

where is this set built? On a stage or a large room? I assume you are seeing the stage walls. I wouldn't put dulling spray or anything like that on the glass. It may be easier to remove the unwanted source of the reflection. One you can turn off lights lighting the wall, but also you can use a large 12 x 12 (or something like that) solid rigged to one stand and put it where you see the source of the undesirable reflection. If you keep it on a stand you can move it easily when you make any camera adjustments. Or you can hangs solids all the way around the set, but that may be difficult for a student budget. Best Tim

where are shooting? I consider doing it if the script is decent. My reel is mostly film and would love to get more HD under my belt. e mail me your address and I'll send you a DVD reel. I have an online reel too but it is small and a little compressed. other than that, if you shoot it yourself a good gaffer. best Tim I meant to say: "if you shoot it yourself, get a good gaffer" Best Tim ahhhh so you can edit a post with the new format!!!!!