Jon Kukla

Is the 150 mm lens still coming in at the same length and diameter as the rest of the series?

I'd say it's sorta like the 35BL - it's not that it's a bad camera, it's just that it's been around so long that plenty of new options have come around since. Truth is that the SA is not that different from the Compact aside from what's already been mentioned.

Amen. I'm with you on the pancakes - haven't had a decent one since I've been in England. (The UK claims to have pancakes, but they're really just fat crepes.)

Why would you need it? I most frequently see them on music video jobs, and it's always supplied by the sound guys.

No, 1/48 second shutter speed will be identical to a film camera at 24 fps. Don't forget that half of each frame-time the shutter is closed while the film is being pulled down. Shutter time is equal to shutter angle / (360 * fps). Therefore, assuming a 180 degree shutter opening and 5 fps, your shutter time will be 1/10 second.

Here's the advert, btw.

The advert only lists the Arricam ST, LT, and Arriflex 235, although I could've sworn that I heard someone there mention the 435... In any case, I've always been under the impression that all the movement blocks were very modular and relatively easy to change out - but not easy enough that you'd want to do it in the field unless you were a trained tech. Therefore, I'd have to assume that they'll make some dedicated 2-perf cameras. My guess is that Clairmont will be the first in LA to get this, since they have more direct relations with Arri, IIRC.

If you wind up not being able to test after all, then your best choice will be to simply bracket your exposures. At 5 fps, I suppose that won't cost you too much in the way of footage.

I saw them at the BSC show. They're already out. They even are advertising it in the British Cinematographer magazine. When I talked to the reps, they said that Arri Media and CSC were the first two getting it, so I have no clue when the LA roll-out will be; I'm guessing the London and New York branches were tapped first since they are the obvious markets where this would be ideal for first. --- I don't know Keith; I don't see the 35 Aaton getting out that much to begin with, so I have my doubts that the Penelope will be so wildly successful on those merits alone. Plus let's face it, few documentaries shoot on 16 anymore, much less 35. If I need a lightweight camera for 35, I'd rather use a Moviecam SL or Arricam LT. Any case, I wish 2-perf in all its incarnations the most success.

Ah, they took too long to get this one out the door. Now Arri's already released their 2-perf movement for their cameras, I've lost my excitement for the Penelope. (Plus you can run 1000' mags with Arri.)

I'm going to be dropping in on the London office next week and will try to score some. Will keep you informed if that goes through quickly enough...

I'm sorry but the film industry no longer comes from the BBC guys anymore. That's a much older generation. All of my colleagues have either always been freelancers or got their start as in-house runners at miscellaneous production companies in town. The idea that the BBC is the only way in has been a fallacy for many many years now.

Yes, exactly.

So much for our two countries' "special relationship"...

Believe it or not, America!

You said it, Adam. I'm tired of Phil polluting the board with massive misinformation to suit his own ego, and am a hair's width away from requesting that the board admins censure him on the grounds of bad faith postings. As far as London being expensive - yeah, it's not the cheapest city in the world, but at least those of us who live here get paid in pounds! Personally, for the cost of living, I find it preferable to what many of my NYC friends are doing to scrape by. I myself am leaving London sometime in the near future, but not by choice. Unfortunately the Home Office has decided to trim out as many of us expats as possible, and I will not be able to renew my visa this time. It's a shame, since I've finally started to get into a comfortable working pattern of good jobs, excellent network of contacts, and so on. But that's an immigration gripe - were it not for that, I'd be first in line for getting a path to UK citizenship. Btw, Milo, please do not title your threads in all caps - it's considered shouting and regarded as impolite. Thanks.

XTRprod is a good choice - it can go from 3-75 fps and is an excellent choice for handheld, if that's going to be your predominant mode of shooting.

Lies, lies, and lies. For shame, Phil!

And remember that if you DO ever use skip bleach, you need to underexpose the film by about a stop (and beef up your fill light).

Don't forget that the anamorphic power also is aligned with the plane of focus. That's the original Panavision concept.

First of all, a great book to move onto once you've finished with Elkin's is Douglas Hart's The Camera Assistant: A Complete Professional Handbook. It does answer many of these questions, at least in some detail. With short ends, if there is something already wrong with the stock, there's very little you can do, to be quite honest. For paranoia's sake, you can always tape up the mag edges, even if it's new equipment. However, errors resulting from equipment or loading are usually very particular and can be caught out on the rushes. Bad short ends tend to exhibit the normal characteristics of stale film, which are more general things like decreased responsivity and higher grain. The nightmare situation, I suppose, would be if the original loader for that roll had somehow fogged the roll, but on the other hand, I would imagine that a lab test would likely catch that one out... Honestly, it's not something worth sweating out - you didn't make the call to buy the short ends. On recans, it's often a tough call. It's always worth trying to assess the situation, because sometimes it is obvious and being on top of the situation on your own always looks good. BUT, if there is significant doubt, definitely ask first, at least to cover your ass. I was working on a music video once where we had three different stocks (50D, 250D, and 500T), but we were also shooting at 2 fps, so there was a lot of time before I had to worry about reloading. We started on the 50D, and when there was about 75 ft left, I asked if I should load another and did. Then as it got darker outside, the DP asked me to have the 250D standing by. As the light was falling, we still had the stop for 50D. Suddenly dinner was called, and next thing I know, we're going to be moving onto the 500T afterwards. So I loaded that up, and as it progressed, it turned out that one of the mags we were shooting only *JUST* had enough footage left for the last three slates if there were no second takes. So I quickly dashed to load another 500T, because I didn't want anyone waiting for another mag to be loaded at 10 PM just at the end of the shoot. Next thing I know the runner comes up to me as I'm finishing the loading and says that they've wrapped. I think we wound up shooting four rolls, and then recanning one of each of the stocks! I wasn't happy about the way that looked, but on the other hand, I don't see how I could've done otherwise. Sometimes it just happens, especially if you work on anything involving lots of high speed (or in this case, low speed) work! Having less stocks to juggle obviously makes it easier, too.

Looks like it is S16mm, SR3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrKGueFHLh4 (towards the end)

Your next best bet, then, is to get some good intel about features which are imminently wrapping or about to wrap, and ask them if they'd be interested in selling their short ends. In fact, I've sometimes even been able to wrangle some free stock this way, depending on the production and what I plan to use it for.

Yes, there should be more grain on the highlights than the shadows, assuming that you did the bleach bypass on the negative (or internegative). You're basically retaining a b/w image within your color image, so areas receiving more exposure will have more silver left in the negative, while the shadows will have little to no silver, and thus look much closer to an un-bypassed image. (Of course this is less apparent, since the shadows are by their nature dark.) It is because of the extra density, particularly in the highlights, that it is advisable to underexpose the stock by around a stop - however, since the extra density is not equally spread across the exposure range, this is also why bleach bypass normally requires much more fill light/lower contrast ratios, since the shadows are now being underexposed without benefit of much extra density. If you want grain and desaturation, but are worried about too much grain (esp a valid concern if shooting on S16), then you might want to look into bleach bypass AND pulling the stock a stop or so. It shouldn't affect your lighting too much, since in theory the two processes more or less cancel each other out as far as rating the stock. But it will enhance the desaturation while providing a slightly more graceful contrast (you can always add more in post) and slight compensation on the grain.

Your best bet is probably just to contact some of the more prominent production companies and ask them if they'd be willing to sell any of their short ends. Mind you, it isn't as "guaranteed" as a company specializing in this, but if you approach prod co's which mainly work in promos and commercials, there's a very good bet that there is nearly-fresh stock lying around from last week's shoot or that sorta thing. AFAIK, however, there are no shortend/recan companies as such.