Albion Hockney

Crackle is the distributor and plays the "studio" sponsorship dollars are generally based on viewership and it is not an exact science although lots of companies are in the bussiness of trying to make it a science. You'd have to see the viewing stats to make a call on this but you know if 100,000 people view it that is not bad. although small compared to tv obviously. with a star like jerry seinfeld and the fact the show costs very little to produce and I'm sure he doesn't need a ton of money to make it happen and I'm sure at this point seinfeld is not looking to make a lot of money anyways so it worked out....I would assum the show was seinfelds Idea and something he just wanted to do and he was just looking for someone to cover the cost of it and throw him a bit on top.

I think your best bet wouldbe to talk to the people who made that video and are trying to sell that product.... I have never heard of a spinning snoricam till seeing that video. with an epic the weight is for sure going to be tough.... the rig needs to stabilize the camera to spin so it becomes more like a reverse steadicam then a standard snori which is just a bout a rigid mount.

Yea but I'd think the 70-200 even with extender is sharper then the cheap sigma.... maybe not though? super long lens is tough on big sensors especially if you need a decent stop.

yea i dont know if it will get better then 70-200mm with extender.... there is the canon 400m 2.8 but its a sports lens and is enormous and very expensive and no zoom range. if you want to be really cheap there is the BIGMA ....sigma 50-500mm but not a constent aperature through the range and i think a 5.6 on the long end.

I have shot a couple football games and talked abit with the NFL films guys.... they use a bunch of cameras all with differnt glass when I was doing it they hand't fully gone over to alexa/amirra yet but even so they lenses are super varied some guys with long eng seems b/4 mount some with super wide stuff. the fuji lens is only what 90mm or something? for some stuff these guys are shooting super long lens

Yea I would shoot during daylight when sun is opposite like Mark said that will help alot. you might find with only having 2 2ks that you can't get an exposure without blowing out the window....that might ok but like mark said curtains would help you out a lot.....sheer curtains are a dp's best friend for day interior. I would suggest taking both your 2ks and putting them through a little diff outside the window and firing them in to maximize the punch you can get.... when it comes to mimicing the sun I think the bigger the light the better. then inside the room I would use a smaller source bounced off something to fill.....a very soft source.

maybe show an example of the type of work.... what cameras do you shoot on? an expereinced DP for well done corporate interview kinda stuff in my experience is $1,000 and up Gaffer 600 and up grip 400 and up if you are shooting skeleton crew on a 5d and making a shoty video for youtube the prices might be different as you can hirer younger guys with less knoweledge but if you are shooting on a cinema camera and want good crew those are kinda the bottom rates that I work with as a DP doing that kinda thing.

My personal feelings creativly and alot of the directors I work with as well. Shoot less coverage and no your cuts when you shoot ....obviously depends on the film your making but it gets rid of all the silly worrying of continutiy and allows actors to drop themselves in to the roles. all of the "oh no you picked up that pen with your left hand" .... "oh no you ate the carrots first last take" .... it is also worth mentioning vetern actors usually have this stuff pretty dialed though.

what did you end up doing?

Honestly don't think his work got super good till later. he seemed to learn how to be more subtle over time. the work in dark knight was great very natrual yet stylized

this is a great thread! I'm off today : (

when a lens vingettes around the edges so it is darker in the corners.... giving a effect of looking through a porthole most leneses wide open "porthole" or vingette atleast a little bit even if it is barley noticeable. some older vintage lenses porthole quiet a bit especially wide open.

Can you some explain or link to an explanation of how over exposing cuts contrast? is this just contrast in the shadows that it increases because I would think the overexposure would leave less room in the highlights and you could potentionally reach a clip point. Along with this my 2nd question does the pull process actually increase latitude of the film stock? This is very much the opposite of the digital process (underexposing and pushing usually leads to increased latitude in highlights...atleast thats how 800ISO on the RED works). I don't get to shoot much film but hopefully soon. the images you created look great btw!

If your looking for information on achieving the look you should move this over to the lighting part of the forum. as for how much space well it depends on how wide your shots are in the first video at 6 seconds when they are huddled together if you want that then I think you are looking at a 20 -40ft wide white cyc. the key to lighting for videos like this is to seperate your talent from the backround as much as possible so you can light the talent and backround seperatley.....but the farther the talent is from the backround the bigger the backround you need.

I dont think Log C is something to talked about as necessary or not. There is a reason that camera's of differnt technology grades look better or worse and latitude is a huge part of that reason. Latitude is not just shown in the way you light. in other words just because you condense your DR by lighting flat that doesnt mean you are not going to benefit from having the latitude. your picture will have greater subtilities in contrast in LOG C. the only reason I could see not to shoot log is if you were shooting for a quick turnaround with out a color grade....I can't see there being a benefit to the rec 709 curve at all.

Hi Guy your link didn't work but that table would be great to have as reference ....can you try the link again?

nobody noticed this post.... just wanted to say well said. and ways of seeing is great, read the book and have always wanted to catch the little tv series too.

Thanks Guy, we don't have continuty issues really so luckily I get to be a bit looser for the most part which is nice. A question though, can you run a 2.5K off a honda 3000EU?

I'd use one 1.2k par through a 4x of 251 as my key on one side of the car.... on the other side or even kinda straight on I would get as big a frame as you can with some sorta bounce material and get it up a bit over the car and hit that with the other 1.2k or a 575 to play as your ambient fill. you could even use 2 frames one that puts light through the front windshield and another that brings in some ambiance through the side windows but you want it really big and soft. for the passing infront of stuff I would literally go out and grab some tree branches and during that take just figure out a movment that looks most natrual. keep in mind the feeling of the car moving has a lot to do with sound design and the feeling of the scene lighting changes will help but its not a huge sell.... lots of scenes in cars even at night use consistent lighting and people dont notice. You also can bounce the camera around a little that might help I wonder how you shoot people in a car without seeing outside of the car in some way though? there are windows everywhere!

awesome satsuki that is great!

thanks guys that helps.... yea this is a fashion film and the production is a lot like yours satsuki kinda running around. but there is some more planned out wider stuff that I want to be able to control a bit more I think that reason to bring out the 12x. Nice to see those images nice frame of reference to have I think we can get away with a bit more then I thought. We are going back on another location scout with a tighter shot list. I'm thinking instead of bringing out frames if we can contain the production maybe I can just canopy an area actually with 1/4 grid or something and just shoot.

yea I think I will go in before this next shoot and take a look at 1/4 and 1/8 on a camera. would love to see some examples of real world footage shot with 1/8th on alexa or red ...cant seem to find any

Hey Guys, I have a shoot coming up doing day exterior in a forest, i have some ideas of how I want to approach it already but I'm really curious what other peoples expereinces have been and if they have any references to share. My biggest concern is the high contrast, we are shooting on a RED and with deep shadow and sun spots in the forest I am really worried about the contrast handling. Orginally my plan was to do this very natrually and bring out a 12x of ultra bounce and shiny board and find clearing where we could make sure the 12x would get exposure to the sun to bounce fill into frame but that looks like it might be difficult to do. We scouted the forest yesterday and it looks like there are kinda clearings with enough space to get the 12x up but I think the light hitting it will be pretty patchy and I don't know if it will really do much without full expsoure to the sun. The other option of course would be to convince the producer to get us a geny and a M40 or something but I really wanted to avoid that on this one. just curious if anyone has had any good expereince shooting with natrual light in the forest or has any references at hand from films. I want to creat a natrualistic asthetic and high contrast/having the talent underexposed is all good as long as the highlights arn't clipping and I keep enough shadow detail.

Hi, I have heard a lot of people are putting black pro mist infront of the lens with the digital cameras to get a more organic picture. I have seen some various footage and have been pleased with the results I have seen and was interested in trying it out. The one thing I couldn't really get a handle on was how strong to use it. from peoples experience is black pro mist 1/8th enough to do anything? I just want enough take the edge off so I don't want to over due and have a super bloomy picture that looks like a stocking over the lens or something. I have heard the effect also intesifies over longer lenses so some people swap it out and use a lesser filter on long lenses? how true is this I couldnt really find examples.... was worried about continuity as for this shoot coming up all be shooting on both wider lenses (28mm or so and then long 135mm +)

Well this very much depends on the camera you are using, it is true a technique often used is to light a little brighter and bring down the picture in post to help aid in less noise. The larger issue is basically if you light a low key scene where you are working in the shadows you cant really raise the picture in post as it will get super noisy so you need to be sure you look where it is on the day. This is especailly true when shooting a higher iso. Either way without shooting raw or log you really want to get it right on the day. I think its fine to do this but with that said you still need a stronger key I think I dont know if you have a light meter but your picture is still looking pretty flat to me and your key seems substaintly underexposed. to me it is also too warm in an almost monochromatic way.... it looks like it lit with sodium vapor! as for reflections....again reflective light is not about lighting so it will not necessarily make your picture any brighter....if you simply but more light on the curtains you will see them reflected stronger in the piano and still keep a low key look. when I talk about pull the piano away I'm talkng feet for sure ....I was talking about those curtains in the backround.... honestly I would probably frame differnetly as well and take out most of the wall on frame left by shooting more profile or on a longer lens this is of course without knowing the context in your story and such so that might not work for you.