Jump to content

Jon Kukla

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jon Kukla

  1. Kodak 5207 - 250D Vision 3. Confirmed this morning to me by a very apologetic Russian representative who was offering to let me use their first rolls this week (due to a possible manufacturing defect with the batch of V2 we ordered). It is officially going to be introduced in April, apparently.
  2. Ahem, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eidoloscope - the ratio goes back to the birth of cinema, although I'm certain that this is coincidence.
  3. The first experimental models of what was to be called the "zoom" lens appeared in this period. These had a number of shortcomings, in particular that their maximum aperture was only about f11, which made them difficult to use for studio work, or even for exterior shooting under poor light. As well as that, their focus had to be adjusted at the same time as the focal length was changed with the "zoom" control. Although these experimental zoom lenses were not taken up for general film-making, there are a number of American films from 1926 onwards which contain one or two zoom shots, nearly all made at Paramount Studios, such as "The Grand Duchess and the Waiter". The exception is "After Midnight" (1926) made at MGM, but since the director, Monta Bell, had Paramount connections, the same lens may have been used. Most of these examples don't do anything special with the zoom effect, but in "It" (Clarence Badger, 1927), there is a striking zoom out from a sign on the top of a department store, followed by a tilt down and zoom in on the front entrance. Excerpted from Film Style and Technology: History and Analysis, 2nd edition, pp. 185-186 by Barry Salt.
  4. I've started to hear some rumblings that, unfortunately, he may have died last night. If this is true, I have to say that I'm very upset to hear it - I had the good fortune to have hung out with him several times, and his autobiography is intelligent, wry, and hilarious. As for his films, where to begin? My roommate just recently acquired the entire set of BTF DVDs the BFI released. I shall definitely be checking these out soon to see his earlier work that I'm less familiar with...
  5. Just wondering on this sorta thing, you'd need to tell the rental house and/or insurance company that you're using polyester ahead of time, no? Otherwise, the insurance claim could conceivably be rejected on the basis of negligent or reckless usage. Something worth thinking about... Personally, I'd use a crashcam-type camera, just to minimize the cost of potential damages. (Plus some of those cameras have less pins and claws to potentially damage.)
  6. No, ArriCode - http://www.cinematography.net/Pages%20GB/ARRITC.HTM
  7. The pitch adjustment is on the "dumb" side; however, it tends to get used less than on 35mm cameras largely bc the film isn't moving as fast, so the camera has less ability to make such a racket. There are other reasons of course, involving movement design, and sometimes it's loud anyway, hence the need for 16mm pitch adjustment. But I'd say it doesn't get used nearly as much as 35mm cameras need it.
  8. If you can't get a supervised, I would at least argue hard for a best light (with your attached notes, of course).
  9. It's still a bit early to actually see much work that's been shot on Vivid - it was only released earlier this year.
  10. The only thing you'd need to calibrate it for would be if you were actually going to be using the ArriCode timecode system or (in the case of the older models) the in-finder light meter. But no, otherwise, there should be no operational difference between Kodak and Fuji.
  11. 4x4 for most spherical applications, 4x5.65 for PV-size, 4x6 for grads, and 6.6x6.6 for anything with a large front element. Personally, I'd go for 4x4, but that's because when I was in the UK, we mainly worked with either S16 or spherical 35mm, so it could handle most of those. What is most common in LA, I have no idea (yet - moving there later this year). Some matte boxes can handle both, like the LMB, where the 4x4 and 4x5.6 trays are the same size because the 4x4 trays have a narrower width inside the tray, but the "normal" MBs tend to be one or the other.
  12. Being as we're this close to Camerimage, I would anticipate that there will be a demo (if not debut) by then (about a month from now). Just my idle speculation.
  13. South London Filters have a set of filters called Blue-Greys, which I used on a shoot earlier this year. It's a more subtle blue that doesn't pop as much but supresses more of the warm tones, so you might want to look into those. As they specialize in filters, they also might have some good ideas for similar filters if that particular set doesn't do it for you. Storm Blue filters might also be close in tone.
  14. I'm presuming these are also fully compatible with capping shutters?
  15. :unsure: No offense, but that probably wasn't the best way to phrase it...
  16. The Varicon isn't camera-specific, because it slides into the Arri matte box (takes up a full 2-stage section). Khondji definitely never used the Panaflasher prior to Seven, because he mentioned choosing the Panaflex for that film since he'd never worked with Panavision cameras before.
  17. How do you figure? I'm just wondering bc I would've guessed the other way around - his forehead reflection and fill light angle look to me like an overhead, while her arm shadow and level of illumination down her left side look more like a Kino on a stand. Of course, you've been doing this far longer than me, but I'm curious what your analysis method is. :)
  18. My point is that there's no universally needed piece of equipment for production I really wish you'd get around to finish reading my posts... :P Some guys only need film and a pen, others just need a computer. I know one animation student who was doing shots frame by frame with a pinhole camera, so you can have a camera without a lens. One director whose name escapes me regularly gets old old junk negative from post houses around town and trace-scratches the image's lines with a razor. These are extreme examples, I am aware, but by now the refrain should be clear - there is no single physical sine non qua of production.
  19. Who said live action? My point is that there's no universally needed piece of equipment for production - everything is circumstance-dependent.
  20. There is a school of thought which is "why are you spending your own money anyway?" But again, that's down to how you're comfortable working and what you prefer re producing. It's something I could never do myself - I use to hate doing grant proposals back in the day, so I'm certain by extension I'd be a lousy producer... But no, you don't even need basics like a camera, for example - there's plenty of great work by Len Lye, Stan Brakhage, and Norman McLaren to prove that point. And that's before computers. So even using a camera is a choice. Yelling at someone for not using a particular piece of equipment is pointless. But so is not using that piece and expecting identical results. The only thing that matters is what you're trying to achieve (and doing so as efficiently as you can given your resources).
  21. You don't NEED anything. But you have to be willing to accept the limitations that come with the lack of certain gear. And of course each shot has its own particular needs. While I don't doubt that Savides has shot material without one before, there are a thousand reasons why that was so - from actually wanting flare to having a lens too wide for one to needing to get the camera closer to a subject without either hitting it or creating a camera shadow. And so on. But I am also fairly certain that he uses them most of the time. In any case, it's not really relevant - what do YOUR shots require? That's what's important. Of course, the other issue which is often discussed to death here is whether or not it's worth owning all of this equipment in the first place or just renting what you need when you need it. There are different arguments pro and con, again largely circumstance-dependent. I understand your desire to be discerning about which of the thousands of potential pieces of equipment you really need - most are not casual purchases. But at the same time, the desire to "control the means of production" (so to speak) should only be undertaken with the acknowledgment that it carries the burden of responsibility that you may need to continually spend time and money investing in your gear to bring it up to your requirements for particular projects.
  22. If using store-bought paper lanterns, I would always spray down the paper with a fire retardant material well ahead of time - it's common sense and no hire house would supply ones that hadn't been given such a treatment. That being said, it's not a safety blanket - you still need to keep an eye on them. (Also give your photofloods LOTS of time to cool. I was taking out a bayonet mount one that I thought was cooled - but since my pain receptors decided to wait two seconds before screaming otherwise, I had to hold onto it until I finished climbing down the ladder - it was one of our last surviving bulbs... It's no fun having cooked flesh. :( )
  23. Well, that's Geoff Unsworth for you... (That's not to knock his work, but I've heard a small handful of anecdotes about everything from his competitiveness over pay to the overdoing the Double Fog filters, so he's a bit of an easy target. Much respect nonetheless. :) )
  • Create New...