Zac Fettig

Given your list, I assume you're looking for insight into filmmaking, as opposed to a textbook on practices and technique. Here's a few I've enjoyed: Something Like an Autobiography - Akira Kurosawa Images - Ingmar Bergman (A little hard to read though). Every Frame a Rembrandt - Andrew Laszlo In the Blink of an Eye - Walter Murch Acting in Film - Michael Caine Rebel Without a Crew - Robert Rodriguez Textbook style: Film Directing: Shot by Shot - Stephen Katz Film Directing: Cinematic Motion - Stephen Katz Painting With Light - John Alton The 5 C's of Cinematography - Joseph Mascelli Cinematography - Kris Malkiewicz and M. David Mullen Special Effects Cinematography - Raymond Fielding Reference Hands On Manual For Cinematographers - David Samuelson The Filmmaker's Handbook - Steven Ascher and Edward Pincus

A camera is just a tool or an instrument. Buying a really good guitar doesn't mean it'll produce better music than a cheapo one. Heck, some people even shoot on Much like being a good guitar player, the secret is practice. Theory is abstract until you've done it a lot. It makes way more sense later than it does now. Auto white balance can be fine, as long as you have a target to set it by. And always view it like you can still learn more. No one ever knows everything. Every mistake is also a learning experience. EVERYONE makes mistakes. Last shoot I did, we did a crazy complicated dolly shot, and I never noticed the Director was standing in the frame. At least not until the film came back from the lab. We were able to cut around it, but I did have a sheepish moment. I won't make that mistake again. "Oh, look here, breach hull, all die. Even had it underlined." - Crow T. Robot

My bad, it's just Arri standard. In my head, they get lumped together, since they usually go on the same camera. http://www.fotodioxpro.com/index.php/fotodiox-arri-s-lens-to-micro-4-3-mft-system-camera-lens-mount-adapter-v2-w-aperture-control-dial-fits-olympus-pen-e-pl1-e-p2-e-p3-e-p1-e-pl2-e-pl3-panasonic-lumix-dmc-g1-g2-g3-gh2-gf1-gf2-gf3-gh1-gh2-gh3-g10.html

A cheap bayo to m4/3 adapter from fotodiox will be a lot less (~$40, I think). Give it a shot first. The Bayo was a good mount, it just wasn't well suited for long barreled zooms.

Beautiful! It looks amazing! Very clean picture. Makes me want to go out and shoot some 50D!

Anything is possible, but that doesn't make it feasible. I'm pretty sure they didn't light Citizen Kane with practicals! You might be able to pull it off if you can open those windows to let in some light, set the camera to ISO1600, and/or bump the practicals up to 250s or 500s (I usually prefer 250s since they're less likely to catch fire, and/or melt the sockets). Also, if you can, add more light sources. Practicals don't tend to throw light very far.

I would think it would normally be done multi-camera. One full shot of the instructor, head on and locked down. One off to the side, high and covering the workout area. And one or more handheld, covering the backup performers. Camera choice really depends on how fancy they want it to be, budget, what the rental house has, etc. It would be helpful if the cameras are all the same (so they can be cut together).

You'd think Kodak would have realized by now it is in their best interest to build some low cost, reasonable quality digital acquisition devices for film. Before the last viable part of their business goes the way of the Dodo bird. You'd think....

It's not so much resolution loss as grain reduction normally. My last project was shot on regular 16 (7222), then cropped 16X9. We had two cameras; a 16S/B and a Scoopic. It did increase the effect of grain, but it's not too bad. Your solution isn't bad, using the Bolex. It's how Nolan shot Following. Assuming you have a Bolex. That said, a BMPCC is going to cost about the same as 1200' of film/processing/telecine. And is even smaller, plus it doesn't look like a movie camera. Remember, budget dictates style, or style dictates budget. If you've got a shoestring, digital will be way easier. And it gets better & cheaper every day.

It probably is cheaper to build one from scratch in production, but it sure does look like a projector refit. Which is probably cheaper for low volume runs.

It looks a little dark on the faces. It was a bit hard to see them. But it looked pretty good overall. I think the darkness really helped set the mood. I think the compression artifacts make the darness stand out a bit more than it really should.

Mike, I have an XL2, and I loved it. I still use mine... sometimes. If you already have one, use it. But unless you get a really great deal on one, I'd avoid it. Listen to Adrian. He's spot on. A used XL2 will go for a little less than a new Blackmagic pocket cinema camera. A XL-H1 will go for more. It won't give you 1080 @ 24P. It won't have (anywhere close to) the dynamic range of the BMPCC. Shadows and light won't be subtle on the Canon video cameras (the harsh video look). The sensor on the Canon will be much smaller than the BMPCC's sensor. The interchangeable lens mount is limited to Canon XL mount lenses. They make nice video camera lenses, but nothing of great cine quality (in XL mount). The blackmagic will take pro cine lenses (or almost any other kind of lenses) with common, cheap, easy to find adapters. I haven't seen a PL-XL adapter in a while. The XL series is really front heavy. Your arm gets tired fast if you hand hold it. The footage will come out shaky. Nothing to be done about it. It isn't well balanced. The BMPCC is small enough that you can work around it. You won't have to do DV capture with the BMPCC. Just pull the files off a SD card.

It depends on the design of the lens. Sometimes, it's as easy as just turning a few screws. I think the Peleng was designed to be swappable. The mount itself is usually just a chunk of metal or plastic, and is an adapter of sorts.

Where on earth did you get double perf for that thing?!? I have one, but have never used it (I don't have a power cable or viewfinder). I want to try it, but haven't gotten any double perf for it. I'm amazed to see it in action. Kudos!

I know it's not helpful, but I have no idea! The manual says T-type core only. It looks like there's enough room inside the mag, so it might work. The footage counter won't read right though. And the torque motor will have to work a little harder. I'd test one with a dummy load, but I don't have any 3" cores. If it helps, 2" cores are fairly cheap. In the $2 to $3 range.

The SR1 and SR2 can be modified to s16. However, only the SR3 and some SR2s shipped as Super16 cameras; most left the factory as R16 cameras. All SR1s were shipped as R16 cameras.

Davinci Resolve is a color correction tool. A lite version of it comes with the BMPCC. Take a look at the difference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRDbINYkMyw I don't think it'll be a make-it-or-break-it difference.

Wow that's terrible! Get better soon!

Nice to hear you got back your Arri!

If you have the disk space and there is no price difference, go for 4k. It's always better to go down a step than up.

Film Directing Shot by Shot by Steven Katz? http://www.amazon.com/Film-Directing-Shot-Visualizing-Productions/dp/0941188108

Were there (non-cine) fluorescent lights at that diner? It could be an aliasing problem with the ballasts. Especially if the lights were older (the newer lights use faster ballasts).

eBay. I got my Nikon-to-CP adapter there.

Your math is right (I got 5290 dpi and 6490 dpi with 1080). It would be distinguishable by someone with sharp eyes, but the results would probably be good enough for most applications.

http://www.amazon.com/Cinematography-Third-Edition-Kris-Malkiewicz/dp/074326438X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1383160961&sr=8-2&keywords=cinematography http://www.amazon.com/Hands--Manual-Cinematographers-David-Samuelson/dp/0240514807/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1383161048&sr=1-3&keywords=cinematographer+pocket