Lance Soltys

Just checked ebay, and they have an O'Connor 50 with Birns & Saywer legs for $448 OBO. Not sure if it has ever been repacked or if it leaks but I love that head. I'd love to get one, but as I'm using a BMPCC these days, the camera is way too light for the head.

I don't know, other than a slightly squarish head and an over-pronounced brow, I think you look fine. Seriously, don't you think this has always been the case? Definitely, good-looking people will always have an edge. That doesn't mean that there aren't many successful people who don't fit that bill (I certainly don't fit that bill, but then, I'm not successful). I really think if you looked at a lot of behind-the-lens talent, you'd find that there are many that are not rock stars (have you seen Mick Jagger recently, by the way), I mean, common on...Woody Allen.

Yes, it is one 4 pin cable.

I would think option 2 is the only way, only don't use glass, just an empty mirror frame. Google "Lucille Ball Harpo Marx" for an example. It will probably take a lot of rehearsing to get the timing perfect. If there's no sound, you could have a metronome going or someone calling out when to start moves. The key to the illusion would be establishing a "reflection" in the mirror and that would be up to the set department, e.g: having a lamp or something behind the main character and having an identical item placed on the other side of the frame as it's "reflection." If you see around the edges of the mirror frame (it looks like you're planning on using a free standing mirror and not one mounted to a wall) you could probably fix that with mattes in post. I've never done this effect, but that's how I would probably approach it.

Is there any motion going on in the miniature? Any atmospherics? If not, then frame rate shouldn't matter. As far as f-stop, going higher is better for the illusion. Imagine if you were actually shooting the real location, you'd be pretty far back, so the dof would be pretty large. Try to simulate that with your miniature.

So, this is just too weird. The matte painter whom I mentioned I have had some contact with, Mark Sullivan, is I think the same guy on the second page of the article Dennis posted. Admittedly, I didn't know him back then, but his age would be right, and that's what he was doing back then (stop motion). Is it a small world, or just such a big world that these coincidences become inevitable?

Creating atmospheric haze could be an issue with a small foreground miniature. And making the model big enough to put it far back would be one crazy large piece of glass. How about shooting the live action plate, then shooting the miniature against green? Or better yet, use an old time technique of doing a mask pass. Years ago when people had to comp in animated stuff, they would shoot one frame with all the beauty lights on, then shoot another frame with all the foreground lights off and putting a piece of white foam core overexposed behind it. You could then use that frame (black foreground/white background) as a mask in your composting software. Once your miniature is its own layer you can do whatever you need to create atmospheric haze. I suppose you might even be able to bring the model to location and do the same thing (that would make it easy to match the lighting on the beauty pass) but you'd have a hard time getting the foreground dark enough for the mask pass.

Yeah, and one issue with a foreground matte painting is you have to guess the lighting conditions (overcast, sunny, etc.). That's the great thing about foreground miniatures, the lighting works out automatically. Of course if you comp in a matte painting in post, this isn't an issue. If this is a paying gig, I have a connection to someone who did matte paintings for Lord of the Rings. Probably won't be cheap.

Wow, looks like a cool opportunity. Is that a wall that goes off screen right? Could the whole miniature be interconnected so as to be supported by a gobo arm behind that wall. Or better yet, have only the front half of the model sculpted, so the back half is flat and affix it to a sheet of glass. Just some quick thoughts.

The second movie I was ever on was The Babe. The operator who brought me on, the great Chicago cameraman and DP, Bill Birch, was old friends with Haskell from his Chicago days. Being able to hang around as they exchanged stories was remarkable. He was the only celebrity that I felt giddy meeting. Yet he was very kind and down to earth, even to some young kid who "was crazy enough to want to get into the picture business," as he put it. It really is a loss to lose not only such a talented DP, but also someone who seemed like such a wonderful person.

I actually just checked out Hayes Urban's web-page and the last update on this project was from March 2014, so probably nothing too new going on with this.

A friend just sent me this link: http://techcrunch.com/2015/12/15/the-nolab-digital-super-8-cartridge-could-digitize-your-old-movie-cameras/?ncid=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=sfgplus&sr_share=googleplus&?ncid=sfgplus Didn't someone make a digital back for the Arri SR? Did it ever take off?

Those are all good points, plus I suspect budget would be an issue. (though maybe at this large of scale, the period cost may not be so significant, I don't know) However, Mad Men really caught on (admittedly not a theatrical release), and I think the audience did really respond to the aesthetic. The suspense thing is tricky, but I'm of the mind that the details of his early exploits would have been kept secret. The public would never learn about Dr. No's laser or about what happened in Fort Knox. Of course we would know that the Mercury Project did work, and that Fort Knox didn't go nuclear, but we kind of always know that Bond will win (and likely end up alone with a woman), it's the getting there that's the fun part. But I think your right about the audience, I think most main stream audiences want to see his modern technology and perhaps deal with contemporary issues (and a $300mn movie needs a lot of people in seats). Probably do way worse over seas, too. However, I was just thinking about what I would like to see, not necessarily what's actually practical. Actually (again, just dreaming) I think it would be great to have two franchises, keep the modern one going and introduce Bond Classic.

I know this would probably never happen, but if they re-boot the franchise, I've always wished they'd set it back in the 1950's. Everything about the character seems to make more sense back then, and it would differentiate it from other franchises, like Bourne.

Thanks. I kinda guessed a beam splitter was involved, but I wasn't sure. It's an interesting effect.