Lance Soltys

Or the Alexa XX? Of course, I've never watched any porn, but on the few behind-the-scenes stuff that I've seen (purely for educational reasons) it seems like they use a lot of AVCHD cameras like JVC and Panasonic make. And looking at least at those exterior shots it does seem like it's a small chip camera, consider the extreme depth-of-field. True, it's outside so the stop would be pretty high anyhow, but it does look like some type of handycam.

I know I used something called a mesmerizer back in the early 90's on a commercial. My understanding was that it was a re-housed anamorphic lens that mounted in front of the camera lens. I don't remember who made it though.

This thread and BBS has now registered on the radar of Homeland Security. Ha!

Because it's really a modular camera. You're really just buying a sensor. So, while, the BMPCC has a screen on it, it's kind of useless when you're in daylight. As I'm sure you're aware, this is just a loupe so you can see the screen, very handy and light weight when you are run-and-gunning. While it is much more expensive, it's also nice to have an electric viewfinder, and keep in mind, this is no different then Alexa's and Red's, which both use, arguably, 'cluncky' external viewfinders. I own a BMPCC, and it's a great sensor, with a nice codec that can be had for a very reasonable price. Off topic: thanks J.D. for your response and link for cabling. I guess it seems like it's a personal choice as to how to wrap cables.

A while back, there was a discussion about how to coil cable. Mr. Hartman pointed out that the over-under technique was for coaxial cable but not the proper way for power cables. So now I've been thinking I've been doing power cables all wrong. (Really, do I just wrap it around my arm?) Would anyone like to chime in on the "proper" way to work with the different types of cable? XLR cable (over-under in my experience), power cables, etc.

Actually, I think it's different. Piano wire is steel and tungsten wire is, actually, tungsten. I'm sure piano wire would work similarly, but tungsten would be thiner for the same strength. You can purchase it at McMaster-Carr at what ever thickness you want. By the way, Mr. Hartman,I've been meaning to ask you about a post you made awhile back about how to coil cable. It's probably best if I start a new thread so this one doesn't go off the mark, but please respond if you have the chance. Thanks.

For flying effects in stop-motion we used tungsten wire. Super thin and very strong, just have to be careful not to kink it. That might work for the glass.

I'm not too much up on what the pound is going for these days, but cavision has some filter cases in the $30 - $45 USD range, though I would think the $35 one is roughly half. I have one of these cases. Construction isn't great, but it's a case, it works, and you get what you pay for. (my handle did break off, but isn't hard to fix). http://cavision.biz/filterpouches-2.aspx

I found at least one string on square filters. These are Skier filters and they are IRND's, but I guess now they make a plain IR cut with no ND, which is what I'm thinking of trying. It's around $160. They seem to get good reviews, but i have not used them myself. http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?4888-IRND-4x5-6-Tiffen-vs-Skier

There was a great test by CaptainHook on BMCuser about this and he had test shots with the BMPCC and different brands/amount of ND with different IR filters. Sadly, he was testing screw-in type filters, though I do think I remember a square filter test somewhere too. http://www.bmcuser.com/showthread.php?6403-New-Hoya-ProNDs-Rolling-Report-Thread&p=97497&viewfull=1#post97497

Doesn't this seem like a classic case of IR pollution? Are you using IRND's? I got a cheap set of ND' s and I get this all the time. I got a cheap hot mirror but it doesn't seem to help much. Maybe this is stupid, but I'm thinking about hanging on to the cheap filters and get a good IR filter. Does this make sense? Since I mostly work just as a hobby, I can't justify $200 on one filter.

Here is a pretty nice resource for looking at different types of diffusion. You may have already seen it, this video seems to come up a lot when people discuss diffusion material.

The locker is a brilliant idea. Does any rental house currently have something like that? As a really low-budget filmmaker, renting is often not an alternative because I'd have to take days off work for pick-up/return for weekend shoots.

Yeah, finding locations for no-budget stuff is really rough. However, with your cave.. First off, the make-your-own-cave idea might not be so bad when you consider all the perks. If you were in a real cave, how would you light it? Where would you get electric from? If you could find a big room somewhere, or even a large self-storage locker, and build your cave set, you'd have the luxury of shooting when you want to for as long as you want to. Also, by building in panels, you could make some break-aways so you could put in light. Also, I picture the inside of a cave as pretty dark (maybe lit by fire?) so the darkness would help cover up any issues with your set. Also, if you find a real cave, you have to get your actor and crew out there and probably put them up. I think there are a lot of pluses to shooting this in a studio type thing. If you still want a real cave, keep in mind, there are a lot of decent size caves on private property, especially around Kentucky. We stayed at a rental house once in Kentucky that had their own cave on their property. It wasn't huge, but might be usable depending on how you shoot it (also you might be able to use their electric.) There's also a great big cave in Pennsylvania called Laurel Caverns. They run it as a tourist wild cave business, so they would probably want some money, but maybe not much, it's a small operation. I remember them being kind of fast and loose with proper cave maintenance so they might let you shoot in there. You may want to try contacting your local spelunker society, maybe go to a meeting, and they may be able to help find you an accessible cave. Please keep in mind, that real caves (as opposed to tourist caves, or sets) can be quite treacherous to get around in, especially with equipment. If you go in by any more than a few feet they get dark really quick and very often have nothing even close to smooth surface to walk on. If you can, I would go with the set.

I did a shot outside and did all the flare and lighting effects in Photoshop. Basically duplicated the frame onto a new layer, brightened it drastically and warmed it up, then figured out where the light from the flare would hit (faces, trees, etc.) and erased everything else out. Since it's only a frame or two per shot, it wasn't too much work, and I think it looked pretty good for low budget stuff. As Mark said, it seems everybody and their brother has an online tutorial for this. This probably won't work for you if you are in a dark environment though. Maybe you could do a wire, tape & rubber band approach by mounting a small photo flash (maybe gelled warm) near the shooter but hidden (maybe even on the shooters arm) and use a slave trigger every time the gun is supposed to fire. That would give you a bright flash in the general area of origin. Just a thought.

It's still possible. This film is very popular in the revival theater circuit, and at least here in Chicago, there's a few houses that will show it on 70mm (I've always assumed that 65mm was an origination format and 70mm was a release format, presumably to accommodate the sound track). In fact, one of the theaters, the beautiful Music Box theater has a week where they only show 70mm prints (usually Lawrence is one of them also). And I'm pretty sure that when the released 2001 on Blu-Ray (one of the first titles, I believe) they also struck new 70mm prints. I might be wrong about that, but I do think they've mad e some new prints in the last 20 years or so. The prints they show of the film are in very good shape. Opportunities to see film like this is certainly one of the perks of a bigger city. The downside is spending a large chunk of your life stuck in traffic.

I have both and I do find the DP's can be handy if your bouncing it off something. It's a nice light for bouncing off the ceiling to bring up overall light level. The fresnel are more versatile though. Good tip about looking at other manufacturers. Moles are built like tanks and you can pick them up pretty cheap.

Like Adrian said, I would stick with the small locally owned places, I've had luck shooting at those and just paying for a day. I think the large franchises would probably want insurance and stuff, and would most likely have to run it through their whole corporate chain. I would definitely run it past the owners. Even if you didn't have a 1K out the window, you'd probably raise an eyebrow when 5 or 6 people shuffle into one room with a bunch of gear. Also, you don't want to get an hour in and then get kicked out and you'd still have to find another place. It's kind of funny, the last time I shot at one of these, my biggest concern was reassuring the owner, "no, really, we're not doing porn."

The technique i use is to draw a vertical line down the script that represents each different shot and runs the length you want covered from each angle. For instance, let's say there's a scene where two people enter a room, approach each other, and speak. The first shot, 1A, say is a wide shot and you want the whole scene from this angle, so I'd mark 1A at the top of the scene and run a line down the entire scene, onto the next page until the scene ends in the script. Then say for your next angle, you want OTS's on characters after they have gotten close together, maybe that's three lines into the scene, so at that part in the script I would label 1B - OTS (character name) and that runs for as long as you need it, then 1C might be the reversal. 1D might be any other random shot, maybe a pivot or camera move in a wider lens, and maybe that's only covering 2 lines of dialogue, so that vertical line would only run through those lines. Obviously, the shots above are just examples, but this is a very visual way to plan your coverage. The script supervisor can check off the shots as they're completed. I remember being taught that this was a pretty standard way of doing things, though I'm not sure. It does work well for me at least.

You may want to look into getting some scrims (wire mesh that goes in front of the light). They come in various configurations (I especially like the half scrims) and are not expensive. Arri makes them, so if those knock-offs has the same lens diameter, I imagine they would work.

Yes, you can leave the Union anytime. Technically, I think you should notify the Union that you are resigning. You could also just stop paying your dues. Keep in mind, if you want back in, you have to go through the whole initiation process (and fees) again. I left 600 about 15 years ago, I often wish I hadn't, but at the time I wasn't getting enough work to justify the dues. I'm still a big Union supporter though. An awful lot of people get a fair wage, insurance and pension thanks to the Union.

QuickTime is just a wrapper, so as long as you use a high quality codec, image quality should be fine. Like Satsuki recommends, if you use any flavor of Pro Res, you should be fine. You could even use Apple's Animation codec which is lossless. Keep in mind, most big budget stop-motion films these days use DSLR's. Henry Selick has been using them on his projects. You may not want to rule out shooting on 16mm (especially if you're doing cell animation, where lighting is fairly straight forward). Shooting ratios are essentially 1:1, and you can cheaply pick up a used Bolex (any model would do), or better yet, an old Mauer camera which are pin registered.

Have you thought of looking at stock footage collections? Seems like something they would have, and maybe cheaper than renting equipment.

I've had the CAVISION matte box and FF for about 4 years and it works fine, I've never had any problems with it. Admittedly, it's no Arri, but it's also not $1000. Years ago, I was a Union A.C. and I appreciate how good the pro stuff is, but I'm really just a hobbiest now and can't justify that kind of money when it's not really earning me anything. I generally do 1 or 2 projects a year, so they don't get extensive use, but they seem solid. Regarding the focus rings, coincidentally, I just ordered a custom fit focus ring from the ebay guy, helicoptersean, that Gregg mentioned. I should be receiving it this Thursday, so I can let you know how they are. Frankly, I'm a little skeptical because it's a press on fit, and I hope it's going to be snug enough. But I thought I'd give it a try. I'm not trying to over sell the CAVISION too much, but I do think it is good low end gear. The matte box holds my filters and keeps glare from hitting the lens, and the FF allows someone to hit focus marks, so it does what I need it to do.

The point about the focus barrel moving is why I went with the Redrock focus rings. They appeared to be the widest I could find. However, they are only a half inch, so if the barrel moves more than that you could have problems. I suppose you might be able to stack them, but I would guess that the transition between the two rings wouldn't be too smooth even if you lined them up carefully. By the way, I notice you're in Chicago, so am I, if you wanted to look at any of this stuff, (cavision stuff), let me know.