Nate Opgenorth

I don't follow but if you want a 360shutter angle or close basically lowest shutter speed possible....so if your at 30fps go to 1/30th (or 1/33th on some cameras). If your shooting 24fps then go to 1/24th or 1/30th to get close...

Thanks. I plan on renting glass and cameras in the future and when I have a stable income I'll probably indulge with one nice camera that I can use for a variety of things. But I definitely want to have three prime lenses, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.8 (already owned), and the 85mm f/1.8 or 100mm f/2 (most likely getting this as a gift). I definitely using one or two focal lengths is the way to go. I know allot of famous film makers did this...I personally love the "restriction" and think zooms make you a bit lazy.

There's a variety of formats that "retain the best look", I'd say a format like Apple ProRes 4444 which has I believe a 3:1 compression ratio would be a pretty good alternative to storing a movie as a massive 16bit RGB Uncompressed file..or better yet make a new archival standard that can effectively compress the right stuff while retaining the good stuff! That said Celluloid can never be 100% replicated, its very sad indeed. We still need to be able to understand formats so that when we transfer over to digital the gamma, contrast, exposure, is not pardon my french raped..we've all seen some pretty bad transfers. The problem I see mainly is that the hard drive doesn't hold stuff for extended times like film reliably. I was looking for the original master to one of my videos I shot because I wanted to color grade it (it was just a short video I made like 3 or 4 years ago), well sure enough the hard drive bellied over and no dice...even high end hard drives won't last...we need to focus energy on finding a format that will hold data for a long time...even if its just 1s and 0s so long as in 100 years those 1s and 0s are in the exact same order as they were encoded onto the format originally or pretty close without corruption.

Sorry,my grammar is quite scattered brained...I usually go back and edit my posts after posting, but for some reason its not letting me edit this post and another I posted in another section on the F55....says I don't have permission. Anyways grammar is sort of my downfall, its quite possibly the primary reason I don't write often, that and a rare form of rheumatoid arthritis, thats besides the point however. I certainly don't carry my self in online as I do over the phone and, especially so, in person. If you could give me the benefit of the doubt and assume that I'm on an even playing field with the average Joe I'd appreciate that greatly.

Sorry,my grammar is quite scattered brained...I usually go back and edit my posts after posting, but for some reason its not letting me edit this post and another I posted in another section on the F55....says I don't have permission. Anyways grammar is sort of my downfall, its quite possibly the primary reason I don't write often, that and a rare form of rheumatoid arthritis, thats besides the point however. I certainly don't carry my self in person as I do over the phone and, especially so, in person. If you could give me the benefit of the doubt and assume that I'm on an even playing field with the average Joe I'd appreciate that greatly.

Global shutter sounds amazing! I think it will be a big deal but I have not noticed rolling shutter artifacts in major films or my own stuff....I guess people are just working around it good but I look forward to seeing potentially better cinematography because of the global shutter...though I imagine its not going to be something as major as going from interlaced to 24p or DV to HD... There was a cam operator who posted somewhere about in the days of film all you had to worry about regardless of whether you were using an Arri 35 IIC or a Panaflex of some type was the film stock...the camera was truly just a tool...it seams like even some pro's drool over digital cinema cameras more than they look at them as tools...did DPs and film makers drool over film cameras every time they came out? I don't get that feel...it seams like film matured fast and digital will never fully mature....not saying its unusable but the tech world changes too fast. Idk I drool over RED Epics and Alexa but its really only because I don't get the choice of shooting on those...lately tech's glory fades real fast...I look at my camera as a tool and on the rare occasion I DO get to use a nice camera the honeymoon lasts REAL short and the camera quickly becomes yet another tool as it should be...the only reason I care about bit depth, color space, codecs, etc. is because I care about what the image looks like and that is really the primary thing a DP should care about, everything should be secondary. I don't understand why we can't make some magical codec that contains ProRes 4444, REDCODE, CinemaDNG, etc. fused together! The Alexa really seams like a big deal with ProRes but I feel like camera makers are too interested in making their own codec than benefiting the film world overall and going with a standard or universal codec...I really hate AVCHD for example....I feel like this new H.265 or whatever is just gonna make me hate Sony even more...IMO new compression tech should really be focused on delivery...not aquiration...I will gladly fill up media faster with ProRes HQ than use H.264 or H.265 or whatever is around. Shoot > Edit (I know thats Arri's saying but it makes sense). Maybe their is a conspiracy theory going around about computer makers paying off camera makers and the brass who makes codecs so we have to keep buying faster and faster computers XD :D :D

Heard lots of excitement about the D800 and D600! You weren't kidding about the intro though haha...but this is some incentive for Canon to start putting Clean HDMI on other cameras than just the 5D Mk.III (which we have to wait tell April for...cool...). 1D X, 6D, 7D, and 60D should all have this....of course the things to keep in mind are the limits of even 8bit Uncompressed....Ill always be picky about Uncompressed/RAW if its not at least 10bit 4:2:2....there is such a huge difference in color grading 10bit 4:2:2 and 8bit 4:2:0...I believe the 5D Mk.III is getting 8-bit 4:2:2 so it'll be interesting to see how nice it looks! I've already seen quite a few 12 bit vs 8bit comparisons though..

Ok so I really want to become a cinematographer! I know your probably laughing as thats a big task but I'm willing to work my way up I just have a few questions...I have a family member who lives and breaths film as part of their job and is into it pretty heavy with allot of connections. I am visiting her and am going to be hopefully on a film set doing something...she works with Producers allot and scripts... She wants to see some of my work but in all honestly I don't really think its THAT good...its pretty difficult to photograph a film without actors and a killer plot and when I do get the chance I never get to REALLY show off the different techniques and all the knowledge I've got from reading..allot of my experience with the different aspects of cinematography are from doing little test videos on random subjects at my house..I'm sorta wondering if I wait to send my stuff tell I finish the short film I'm in pre-production for now or what. I'm a pretty good writer, at least my teachers have told me that but I don't necessarily want to write rather than capture images... Second, she talked about how allot of indy film makers or even serious film makers are looking for people and how I could get into that, I honestly don't care if I start off loading film (or carrying SSD's/media these days :\ ) or whatever...willing to work my way up and if I only ever become a 1st AC or Camera Operator I think I can be happy with that....What do Directors/DPs/Producers look for in a young person interested in film? When Im interested in a topic I try and master every aspect of it and so I've read allot but I don't want to come off as a know-it-all so I figure I should just listen? I mean I've had conversations with DPs and filmmakers before and they've always been surprised at how much I know for not working in it but my goal isn't to impress anyone its just to get my foot in the door (in stuck in that door for that matter!). Looking for suggestions for all of the above I guess... Any replies are much appreciated.. thanks.

Solid post. I love the 60D and prefer it over the 7D for video work...Sensor is the same size and noise is very similar if not the same from the 550D to the 7D...the 6D looks VERY promising but a used 5D Mk.II is a solid choice...I've seen them dirt cheap these days. Although the 5D Mk.III does have the all I-frame compression which is very nice. Full frame is great, its basically like a mini-VistaVision camera but theres nothing wrong with Super35 sensors at all and sometimes full frame DOF gets a bit annoying.. Magic lantern is a must! The assists it offers for focus peaking, higher bit rates, custom frame rates, etc. are great...grab a viewfinder magnifier/loupe for the LCD screen though...makes bright sunlight a non-issue when shooting video in live view..all that and you'll have a great video machine.

Sorry to necropost but I had a few questions about this. I can confirm the Red One MX compression ratios FCP X shows footage from Red One MX as Redcode 42 (7.5:1) or similar wording of that nature which is nice....really wish I could use CF card modules on Scarlet even at a reduced bit rate (my deliveries won't be at 4K for a while thats for sure!). Your comment about 4.5K mode for 2.40:1 is sort of confusing...I just dealt with some 4480x1920 footage and it looks BEAUTIFUL but you make it sound as if Scarlets 4096x1706~ or so wouldn't stand a chance....now I realize that every bit of resolution is helpful but many productions mix 4K, 4.5K and 5K happily....are you talking about the 4480x1920 on the Red One MX or 4.5K anamorphic? I think both cameras can do 2.4:1 quite nicely though I imagine that having your bit rate wasted shooting 2.00:1 or 16:9 only to be cropped would be less quality but probably not THAT much. I do realize Red One MX is a more polished/Proven system and if I was given the choice of Red One MX vs Red Scarlet I'd choose Red One MX because its a proven system, might choose Scarlet if I needed some Canon support (as I have Canon glass). I mean I think both systems are win win...so Scarlet isn't built for major productions in mind...neither were Canon DSLR's and we've all scene pretty nice film outs from that. I'm completely open to debate/correction I just don't see the reasoning in potentially jumping on something with disadvantages/more money/etc when you don't have to. (Aka Epic vs Scarlet).

https://vimeo.com/53270237 This is the first DSLR video I ever really did a little over a year and half ago. Didn't know much about the settings but I wanted to post it to get some advice...biggest regret I have is shooting at such a wide aperture. Really motivated to work on some more projects and I read about new techniques everyday...I only have a Canon DSLR but I'm expanding my collection of glass so that Ill have the crappy kit lens Canon 18-55 f/5.6, Canon EF 35mm f/2, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 and either the Canon 85mm f/1.8 or the 100mm f/2 (would choose the 100mm Macro but its a bit out of my price range right now) by the end of the year. Currently own the kit lens, the 50mm and waiting on my 35mm f/2 if it ever comes in the mail. Looking for constructive criticism. I shot/cut/graded/finished the whole thing and that goes for both sound and picture. Any advice is appreciated! Thanks.

+1. Projectionists probably don't really care or don't even know...I have a few friends I know who work at big chain movie theaters that work as projectionists and only one of them really knew what they were talking about and thats because they ran one of the last 70mm theaters! Not that I could tell the difference but I want to see the best image possible if I'm paying the amount for it! I bet if you complain they'll likely initialize a new policy about it...might take a while though.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1024648/technical Check out the IMDB page! Allot of RED fanboys argue that the ARRIRAW 2.8K sucks blown up to 4K but I'd be interested to see how many pixel peepers could tell on a 35mm print master or even the typical 4K distribution (though I see they used Hawk V-lites aren't those 1.33x squeeze or both 1.33 and 2x?). A true mix of cameras and formats. I love the look of 2-perf 35mm (which is what I think OP was talking about). I'd love to some day look at the 4K DI scans and possibly view it up close at 4K to see the grain pattern. Super 8 blown up to 4K! My God!! I wonder what speed stock they used! :o Probably had to be fast stock because the grains gonna show!

Couldn't he just have it scanned on an Arri film scanner for DI and then print back if needed? Just curious...3 Perf always seamed cool to me but people seam to avoid it like the plague because its harder to work with...seams like a good choice...Same with 2 perf...Saves film stock doesn't!?

I'm curious how this will turn out on the Blu-ray release...I'm assuming it will be 24p as with almost all movies on BD. The Blu-ray disc standard doesn't allow 48fps but I would be curious if they had maybe a 720p version at 60fps/50fps with some type of pulldown similar to how DVDs stored 24p in 29.97fps, probably not possible but just thinking out loud a bit. I'm curious to see this in theaters though.

Don't know if your shoot came up already but I find that keeping your pans nice and deliberate is the best way to avoid the "jello effect"...basically the CMOS sensor "creates" each frame from the top to bottom and if you jerk the camera rapidly you will get that jello effect. Really unfortunate but you have to work around it...as for specific shutter speeds...I'm assuming you'll want to shoot at a traditional 180º~ shutter angle. I think the best thing to do would be to grab any of Canon's DSLRs and play around with them...I've learned the most from reading posts from some of the great guys on this forum but with my camera literally right next to me. I learn something new everyday.