anamexis

Thanks, Rik! I'm applying to NYU, but am probably going to run into difficulties paying for it. That looks like a great, cheaper alternative.

The 720p formats use about 19Mbit/sec, true, but 1080i, which at least today is the more common of the two, uses 25 Mbit/sec.

I'm assuming you're working with HDV. The thing about HDV is that it is much more compressed than DV, so is more data in the same space, so to speak, and also, it is a keyframe-based compression scheme, at every 15 frames. What this means is if there is a glitch recording to the tape (dirty heads, dust, whatever), you will lose a half second of footage, which is much, much more noticeable than the 1 or 2 frames you would lose on DV. The HDV tapes, as I understand it, are just higher quality, both the emulsion and the magnetic data layer, in order to avoid these costly dropouts. However, if you haven't been having any problems with the MiniDV tapes you're using, I don't see a reason to switch.

Viruses are for nearly all intents and purposes non-existant on the Mac. I regularly use both Windows and Macintosh computers-- I have no bias. I can honestly say neither me nor any of my very numerous Mac-using friends have ever gotten a virus. I also volunteer at a site giving free Mac OS X troubleshooting. In the hundreds of cases I have reviewed, never have I come across a virus. Generally, the only way to get a virus on the mac is to have someone with specific malicious intent as well as administrator access to your computer mess with stuff.

You're right, I forgot about the last scene. I will have to watch that again.

I recall listening to that commentary, and as I recall he did not use halogen work lights but rather what he called "budget busters"-- those cheap clip-on scoops that take regular household (or photoflood) bulbs. These, too, though, are useful in dirt cheap film.

There have been several discussions about dirt cheap lighting, but I am wondering how halogen work lights fare. I ask because in today's paper there was an ad with them on sale for $10 including a decent looking stand. Would they work fine for cheap student films? Do they balance with tungsten?

For the record, Rosco full CTB (3202) has 36% transmission, or in other words, loses 1.5 stops. I assume Lee is similar.

Here are some good instructions for constructing your on photoflood china.

Also, the low resolution of MiniDV would be more apt to alias than shooting straight to VHS.

Well as Mr. Keth mentioned, it's really an issue of video resolution. The lower resolution, the more aliasing you experience. And as he mentioned, there's no real good solution, except to use a higher resolution (HD) or of course film. This is the same phenomenon as you will find in zooming in on any digital image, it is just especially apparent on diagonal lines.

I generally use The Princeton Review for information and statistics about colleges. They have good overviews, such as average GPAs and test scores, admission/enrollment statistics, tuition, etc.

Judging that the session goes from August 7-14, I'm thinking week-long.

You nearly made me snort water onto my keyboard on that one.

I agree with Mr. Schmidt and Mr. Mullen. I got the opportunity to intern grip for the DP on a very small film (as part of the 48 hour film festival, for those who are familiar with it) and I cannot stress how much I learned from just one day on the set. I just moved lights and dressed cords, but just learning the most basic of how things work on a set was invaluable. (And also, learning how to rip gaff tape.) I thoroughly enjoyed the experience and would love to do it again. And to work under someone with as much experience and knowledge as Mr. Mullen would only make it more wonderful. I would probably pay to do it, it sure as hell is cheaper than film school. :) Anyways, this makes me wish I lived in New Mexico. Oh, and unpaid internships certainly are not specific to the entertainment industry. They are found all over (I would know, I've applied to quite a few.)

Indeed, a full (single layer, one-sided) DVD holds approximately 4.7GB, far beyond being feasible to transfer over the internet. As you said, you must first "rip" the DVD into a compressed format. MP4 and Quicktime are two such formats. How much you compress it depends on how much webspace and bandwidth you have available as well as the connection the person will be downloading it. For people on 56K/dial-up, you ideally want to keep the size under 10MB, where as with DSL or Cable, sizes can get in the hundreds of megabytes, although the larger it is, obviously it will take longer to download. Anyways, there are several free utilities to rip DVDs, try searching http://www.macupdate.com/.

Having worked in theater, that sounds like your standard DMX intelligent light with a gobo as Phil mentioned.

Thanks, this is really valuable information. As someone looking into film school next year, I am getting as many different personal opinions about many different schools as possible.

I was wondering, has anyone here had the opportunity to see Baraka projected in 70mm? As I understand it, there is no comparison to the 35mm print. Apparently, however, it was only shown in 70mm once, when it premiered at the Toronto Film Fesitval in 1992. Was anyone lucky enough to catch this? I think this is one film that will benefit greatly from the upcoming HD DVD format.

4:00 and 8:00 refer to angles like those on a clock with 12:00 being directly forward. (So 6:00 would be backwards, 3:00 your right and 9:00 your left.)

Firstly, I'm sure I will not be the last to tell you that you should only post a thread in one form, as cross-posting to more than one forum creates confusion and clogs up the boards. That said, I am a fellow 17 year old in film. I can tell you that there is a lot to be learned firstly from books and secondly from this board. I read everything here, and have learned a great amount from it. I tend to just sit back and read; while at times I feel I could answer a question, I can always be quite sure that someone else can answer it better. As for getting on a film set, I can tell you how it worked out for me. I noticed there was a 48 hour film festival happening in my city (you may want to check if there is in yours- check here). I contacted the organizer, telling him about myself, that I was interested in a film, and that I was offering my help on a set. The day after he sent out an email, I got an offer from 3 teams. The organizer (Ira Livingston for any of you in the Twin Cities or Chicago) also is keeping me updated on another project he has going that I will be able to help with. I ended up picking a team for the 48 hour film, and I gripped/gaffed for the DP. This was really fun, and all of the people had experience in the industry. I cannot stress how much I learned just from one day helping out on a set. To the 2 teams who I had to turn down, I made sure to tell them that if they ever wanted help I was there. Lo and behold, a week after the festival, I get an email from a producer saying that they are about to start filming a feature-length film and that they could use my help. And that is how these next few weeks of my summer will be occupied. All of this from just one email offering my help. Also, one thing I really recommend for teens interested in film is a job at a video rental store, if you can find one. The benefits are two-fold: get money to spend on DVDs, books, or film equipment; and then, get free access to the DVDs to learn more about film. Most all video rental stores allow their employees large amounts of free rentals, albeit usually overnight. I think if you look through the forums, you will find a lot of your questions have been discussed at great length. Of course, note that these forums are cinematography-centric, so if you want to learn more about film direction or acting, this isn't really the place to look. Check the Education forum for information about film schools. Check the recommended books and films section. Search on the internet for local independent film organizations, give them an email offering your help. Always be on the lookout for opportunities, and when they come up, seize them.

The HD successor to the DVX100A has already been announced, it's the HVX200. And it doesn't use HDV, it uses the DVCPRO-HD codec stored onto P2 flash cards. However, there has been some talk of it natively using hard drives, which in my opinion would be ideal. I actually got the opportunity to work on a film set that was shooting with the HDR-FX1. They are shooting with Sony's special HDV-optimized MiniDV tapes, which seems to help on the dropouts, but when there are dropouts, it's quite noticeable, and every once in awhile, you can tell that the compression is there. You mention something about 2 to 3 times the data rate with the frame twice as big. The problem is, I assume you mean the dimensions are twice as big, which yields an area which is 4 times as big. This means that the area increases more than the data rate, meaning it is actually compressed more, which I believe is the case with HDV over DV.

Now before you dismiss this for having "film or digital" in the title, which I understand is a bit of a worn topic here, read on, as I believe my problem allows for at least a bit of new insight. I just wanted to bring a dilemma I've been having recently to the light of much more experienced people than I. I am in love with movies and cinematography, and up until this point have just been doing a lot of reading on the subject. I have been hoping to start making my own little films for quite some time. And from this has come my personal dilemma of film vs. digital. I (as seems to be the mostly unanimous choice of cinematographers) prefer the look and feel of film. Ideally, this is what I would like to work with. However, given my quite limited budget, I don't know what to do. My options basically boil down to save up for a long time, and then rent film stuff, shoot a short, and really hope that it turns out decently as my first time. Or, I can save up and buy a decent digital camera. (Probably looking at the DVX or equivalent.) This would allow me much more hands-on learning and filmmaking, but of course lose the film. I really do love film, but I am having trouble justifying it when I could either have 1 shot at shooting a short in film, or have much less limitless options in digital for around the same money. As I see digital becoming more and more prevalent, especially when I look ahead to the time when I will be more in the job market after I plan to go to a film school, it complicates things further. Of course I want to get more experience in film, but will this be relevant when I begin working? And I also understand that film will probably be sticking around in the big budget stuff, but I think that when I am starting out in the low budget, this will be the first niche to go to digital. And should I have the luck and talent to move on, I imagine I would have a bit more money to play with film on my own time then. ...but I still love film and would love to work with it. What do others have to say about such decisions?

Thanks, that book looks great.

Hello, I am doing a lot of reading on cinematography. Having been reading these forums a lot recently as well as other books and random things, one of the things I am most anxious to learn about is the different types of lights and their applications. Something that can tell me about what things like Arris, Mole Riches (Tweenies, Fresnels, Midgets, etc.) are, and what they do, and then what HMIs, Kino Flo's, sun guns are, and so on. I realize that there are several recommendations on lighting books but I am not sure which if any of them would give me this kind of information. Does anyone have any recommendations on where I could get a good look at the more technical side of lighting for film?