AJ Young

You can do it via overexposure as well! John Seale did it for Mad Max: Fury Road on their day for night sequences. Source

I tested this thought of dynamic range remapping, aka redistribution! Here's my results: http://www.ajyoungdp.com/articles/blog/OverUnder01/ http://www.ajyoungdp.com/articles/blog/TWC_underexposure/ Hope these help!

"Painting with Light" by John Alton doesn't talk about the history of technology, but is rather a time capsule because of when it was written: https://bookshop.org/books/painting-with-light-9780520275843/9780520275843

Thank you!

I firmly believe this technology will only get cheaper, and quickly. Unreal Engine (the software used on Mando) is already free to use. I would imagine small LED studios will start popping up soon across major cities at affordable rates soon. Hell, you can even use this tech right now with a big LED TV! ? (Albeit, for insert shots or ECU's)

I completely agree! I haven't used the Micro Cinema Camera, but I would imagine it to have little to no latency as well. I would caution the Black Magic cameras when it comes to pairing it with the Aaton. It has no log profile, so they definitely won't match on set. The high fidelity files the camera records, however, are easy to grade and can match in post. ?

All of those EVF's seem great! My only problem with them, physically, is the inability to quickly change them into an onboard monitor. What I really like about the Amira, Alexa Mini, and FS7 are the ability to flip out an onboard monitor. There are tons of times, not just when I'm shooting documentary work, where I can't physically get my eye to the eyepiece. The EVF's I mentioned can either flip away the eye piece to reveal the onboard monitor (FS7) or have a second monitor on the EVF that flips out (Alexa). BUT, there are few EVF's which do that AND are not already part of a camera system. (The ones I mentioned come with each camera) The closest EVF that can do that is the Alphatron EVF, but I'm not too sure if the resolution is good anymore nor on it's ability to load LUT's. Generally speaking, though, I've never needed to load LUT's to an onboard monitor because most cameras have the ability to load LUT's. (Exceptions, of course, are older DSLR's like the GH4)

In my experience, I've had great HDMI latency with: Canon C100's, C300's Sony FS7's, FS5's (I would imagine the same with their FX cameras) Black Magic Pocket and Ursa cameras (recent versions that do 4k) Panasonic EVA1 Is latency the only issue you have with EVF?

Hardcore DNA's contact info is elusive to me as well, but someone in this facebook group may be able to help: https://www.facebook.com/groups/anamorphicshooters This is what I could find from the company, Rectilux, though I'm not sure if it's up to date: https://www.facebook.com/Rectilux-704770636267200/ I've personally used the DNA and liked it. However, I would recommend Rapido Technology's FVD-16a or FVD-35a. Just as sharp, but easier to purchase and slightly cheaper. Plus it works with Rapido's clamp system which is one of the best in my opinion. Here's their website: https://www.rapidotechnology.com/

It depends on the type of work you shoot when it comes to the lights you should own. If you shoot very soft key corporate videos, then a fresnel wouldn't be ideal. You're better off with a softer source to begin with like a Kinoflo or Litemate. $1000 is a tight lighting budget, though. You may have to get very used tungsten heads and shoot them through diffusion, but then you have to buy enough c-stands, sand-bags, and flags to control/shape the light. That $1k runs out quick. This light seems like it can check off a lot of boxes outside of soft light: https://www.newsshooter.com/2020/11/19/came-tv-boltzen-150w-fresnel-focusable-led-bi-color-review/ It's about as bright as a 650w fresnel but has the added advantage being bi-color. It is $500-ish, but could be a good workhorse light.

I've noticed that too. I asked my CPA about AB5 and he said it basically boils down to where the production will be paying their taxes. If they're filing in CA, then the state will find out who was mis-classified when the cast/crew submits their 1099's to the federal government. That's when CA will penalize the production, which apparently is hefty. Before and even after the lockdown I've still done a number of non-union gigs that pay via 1099 in CA. There's no risk on my end because the penalty only applies to the productions who incorrectly classified me. BUT, this is the first year the law is implemented and whether or not it follows through come tax time in 2021 is yet to be seen.

Stuart is spot on and I want to expand on what he said: The hard part about calculating OT is that gigs are given out on a day rate basis, usually $$$/12. Figuring out OT requires your hourly rate. But, that $$$/12 already has four hours of OT in it. That means you'll have an incorrect hourly rate if you divide $$$ by 12 hours. The best way, in my opinion, to calculate OT is to find your hourly rate from the initial offer (for example $500/12) and then multiply that by the total hours worked after converting the OT into regular hours. What OT is depends on your country and then state/province. Let's assume we're talking about California, USA.* In CA, overtime is 1.5x after 8 hours of work, 2x after 12 hours of work. Source To calculate your hourly rate, first convert the OT hours into regular hours. If you did a standard 12 hour day, then that means anything after 8 hours is at 1.5x. So, you did 4 hours of OT at 1.5x. Multiply 4 hours by 1.5x and those hours are actually 6. That means you worked a 14 regular hours after converting the OT. Now you can divide the day rate ($500) by the total regular hours (14). Here's the math: $500/12 8 hours regular, 4 hours 1.5x 4 * 1.5x = 6 hours regular 8 hours regular + 6 hours regular = 14 hours regular $500 / 14 hours regular = about $35.71/hr Now that you know your hourly rate from the initial offer, you can then use that to calculate OT. Again, it's about multiplying the hourly rate by the total regular hours after converting the OT. Let's look at another example with the same rate: Initial offer: $500/12 Actual shoot day: 14 hour day //Calculate Hourly rate from initial offer: 8 hours regular, 4 hours 1.5x 4 * 1.5x = 6 hours regular 8 hours regular + 6 hours regular = 14 hours regular $500 / 14 hours regular = about $35.71/hr //Now convert all OT hours into regular hours 14 hour total day = 8 hours regular, 4 hours 1.5x, 2 hours 2x 4 * 1.5x = 6 hours regular 2 * 2x = 4 hours regular 8 hours regular + 6 hours regular + 4 hours regular = 18 hours regular //Calculate final pay $35.71/hr 18 hours regular $35.71 * 18 = $642.78 It's a shame that the industry, at least in my experience in the non-union world, doesn't offer gigs by saying it's $$$/hr. But, it's nothing too unusual and, like David mentioned, it's rarely something you need to calculate yourself if the job is paying you through a payroll company. As long as you accurately report your in/out times on the timecard you'll be paid according to state/country law. --- * - This all changes when it comes to gigs that don't pay through payroll. If you are classified as an independent contractor, then it's all up to the agreement between you and the production. OT applies to labor and not independent contractors because, by definition, an independent contractor is a business and not an employee. The subject of independent contractors vs employee is becoming quite an issue in CA with the passing of Assembly Bill 5 (AB5). Currently (11/23/2020) the law is interpreted by the courts to mean that paying crews as an independent contractor is illegal because the productions are incorrectly classifying them. By the current interpretation of the law, crew members are considered employees of the production and must be paid via payroll. If a production doesn't adhere to this, then the production will face stiff penalties when they file their taxes (not the crew member). This issue is still very young and the CA courts are still defining what the law means, who it applies to, and if it's even legal. At the end of the day, if you're hired on a non-union production, get it in writing on your crew deal memo that OT will be honored and what specifically that OT is.

I used on the Ninja V on a micro-budget feature I shot earlier this year and was disappointed in the picture quality of the monitor. The blacks clipped waay to quickly. Otherwise, it was a good small monitor! If you're looking for something like that, I recommend the PIXE5. It runs hot, but also checks all the boxes you're looking for.

The Small HD 502 and 702 are work horses! They check off all the boxes you're looking for. ?

Have you thought about using scaffolding instead of a crank stand? It might be easier to get the height you're looking for while securing the scaffolding to the dolly track.

I've personally experimented redistributing dynamic range for a filmic look on a number of projects (ie highlight response). Here are two breakdowns I did explaining my process: http://www.ajyoungdp.com/articles/blog/OverUnder01/ http://www.ajyoungdp.com/articles/blog/OverUnder01/ Here are two films where I did the technique: http://www.ajyoungdp.com/articles/narrative/ashburn/ http://www.ajyoungdp.com/articles/narrative/TWC/ Both of those films were shot on the Alexa which, out of the box, already has a filmic look. (the C in LogC stands for cineon, afterall) Pushing the exposure to an extreme helped build the look of the projects, but I also could've stuck with proper exposure and would get largely the same results on film or digital. Personally, I believe that replicating film is less about being scientifically/objectively accurate and more about how we feel film should look. In practice, I've found that emulating film on a project is unique from movie to movie because other factors play into the look/feel of film like production design, framing, lighting, etc.

Thank you!

Thank you!

Thank you! I'm not sure what the budget was, $70k seems a bit high. Remember, anyone can edit IMDb, there's no vetting process. The process was like any other movie I shoot. Lengthy discussions with the director in pre-production about the look, blocking, framing, etc. The couldn't afford to fly me out for a tech scout, so I planned the lighting around the location photos. I had a very small crew and lost a crew member after day one (they had other obligations). Essentially, I had a 1st AC and a Gaffer. We were all pulling double duty to make the film happen and I appreciate their hard work!

Thank you! The opening shot was down a hillside. At the top of the hill, we set up a 4k PAR HMI with a wide lens acting as a back light. For the key, we used a 4x4 bounce card. For the exterior shots of the cabin, we used the same 4k as an edge and brought in a 575 PAR HMI shooting into an 8x8 ultra bounce for key lights, but we really only used the 575 for the wideshot of the cabin. The 4k was enough for almost everything else! @Miguel Angel: Thank you! I really enjoyed their lenses, especially the 32mm. If I had only one issue with them it would be how easy they flare; the final edit of the film cut the opening shot in half because we couldn't hide the flare enough from the backlight. Other than that, they're great!

Thank you! We did the fire gag with a hand squeezer and an open face tungsten. Any recommendations on LED's that can do a fire gag? We toyed with Asteras, but they were SUPER red.

Howdy! I wanted to update on my recent experimenting with AI for animating (because I'm a DP who only wants to focus on camera/lighting). Here's a video I whipped together showing my experiment with animation: I wanted to test out and see if I could get motion capture data from pre-existing video. VIBE (and a handful of other programs) utilize AI/Machine Learning to discover poses from video. I took Fred Astaire from Second Chorus and ran it through VIBE. I converted the VIBE data to an .fbx file (common 3d modeling file type) and brought it into Blender. The armature didn't move around, so I had to manually match the location while the individual bones did the rotation from the VIBE program. There was tons of clean up needed, particularly with getting the poses to work with my Batman model and making some of the moves more dramatic. I feel this test really put VIBE through its paces because it wasn't an ideal video for it to guess poses from. Nonetheless, an interesting learning process! [If you have trouble viewing the video on Twitter, shoot me an email: AJYoung.DP@gmail.com]

Thank you and you're right, difficult to see on their link. I'm curious if there is a suitable sized barn door from an old Mole/ARRI/etc that could fit. The price is alluring, though!

Very cool! For the US version, I notice the plug is a twist lock on the link you shared. Is there a way to modify this light to work with edison plugs? (I'm not keen on this side of electronics)

I've re positioned the handles so I can hold the camera like a scythe when shooting in the way you've described. One handle is on the front rods and the other is on the back opposite rods. Both are pointed up and I hold the camera at or below chest height. This is good for short bursts, but depending on how much AKS is on the camera + the lens, I wouldn't be able to hold it steady for longer than maybe 5-7 minutes. That's where the easy rig really helps. As an alternative to the easy rig, check out the ergo rig: https://www.ergorig.com/