Felipe Perez-Burchard

This is a good point and reminds me of an episode I had a while back. Some trickster put a square of scotch tape on the lens mount when the flanges on the lens sit. It threw off the FFD noticeably and was invisible to a quick or casual glance. If I ever find out who put that tape there, I'll shake their hand while I wring their neck! :lol:

Thanks for the info/ advice... I just hope I get my hands on the camera before it goes out again; Clairmont is a bit far off and since the camera belongs to one party and the lenses to another party, it might be hard to get them in synch again.

But you guys just triggered a flashback to my very first RED shoot, when it first came out and there were only 4 of them ; At some point in the day we were going to put a net on the back of the lens and it threw off the focus even though it was perfectly and neatly put on so we went without it.

That flange tolerance is just on the margin...

Thanks again.

I have flange issues all the time with the Red. I mainly use them with Super Speeds (rotating between about 4 different sets and five different bodies). Part of the problem in my case is that only one of the rental houses or private owners whose gear I work with get their lenses collimated on a regular basis, but I always take note of how far off they are in prep and none of them are off by more than 6", most by less than 3".

 

Even so, at some point in the day, sometimes twice a day, the flange will go way out. So I'm curious whether the original poster tried resetting the flange in the field before sending the bodies back. I just expect to have to do it now, but now I'm wondering if other AC's have the same issue on bigger shows. That would be a total nightmare...

Thank you all for your replies...

I'm still puzzled by this though. I agree with John that it seems heat is definitely out -- can humidity contract objects (even though that is probably not it either as I mentioned)?

Regarding Satsuki's question; well, we adjusted the back-focus on the body the first time as opposed to the mount on each lens, but it ended up being ridiculous because we had around 6 different back-focus marks for our 10 or so lenses... you see it didn't seem to be off by the same distance (although always in the same direction) on the 18mm it might be off 20' and on the 85mm it might be off only 5' -- which makes sense I think for the distance the barrel was moving.

I'm going to try and get a hold of the body and lenses when 1st unit wraps before they go out again and do some more thorough testing, but I'm also not exactly sure what I should try other than see if it happens on other bodies or with other lenses in the exact same situations (which I did already but it was a bit rushed).

On another note, I agree with Satsuki that high-speeds or super speeds are useful when shooting HD to get rid of that hard edge (if you are going back to film then I think you will gain the softness on the print, but for TV definitely); I've done this with the F35 and never had these kind of issues (had other issues but purely camera design related).

Thank you all for your time and thoughts on the matter...

Hi everyone, its been a while since I last posted here...

A quick search didn't yield any results for this issue, but maybe I didn't dig deep enough, please let me know if you've seen this or read about it:

I've used the RED quite a bit since its introduction, I've been out with it in the desert in high budget and low budget productions of all kinds, but in the last film I did an issue presented itself that I had not encountered before regarding a shift in back-focus or collimation I think.

Let me mention, in the past I've put Ultraprimes, master primes, cooke S4s and Nikon mount lenses but particularly with the RED I hadn't used the Zeiss High-Speeds; pure circumstance of the projects, this was the first time.

So the first time we saw this issue we were shooting in some damp tunnels in Guanajuato and half-way during the shoot the 1st ACs marks didn't work, even on an 18mm (in fact it was most present in the wide lenses) something that was about 30' away he had to focus to about 10' in order to get focus (they were working fine at the beginning of the day) and on the long lenses close to infinity wouldn't seem sharp.

I know the rental company very well and they get the backfocus adjusted at Birns and Sawyer in LA and I trust them, but another body was ordered and the next day (we were on night shoots) it arrived and we swapped it and tested it and it had the very same issue... so it wasn't the body... my guess was that given the humidity of the place and old lenses there had been a shift in the flange distance somehow.

When we were back in the city with the rental house resources we went to check them again... they were fine, everything worked properly, but we switched the lenses anyway just to be sure (for another high-speed set).

A week later shooting in a park (yes it had been raining at it was damp) half-way through the shoot the same thing happened... all the more confirmation for my theory I thought -- it had been raining.

That evening we took the gear to the rental company and while the lenses were still wacky, we tried a set of ultra primes and everything fell in its place, totally perfect... it had to be the lenses!!

Well, that was close to the last day of shooting of the 2nd Unit (of which all this was on) and the production decided to stay with the lenses and they were mostly fine the rest of the shoot (the weather was cooperating).

Since we wrapped the camera went to work as the B camera on the 1st Unit with another crew and another set of zeiss high-speeds; with perfect weather in the last couple of days the same thing happened to them, and in fact they stayed funky... and are still giving the 1st AC problems.

Is this a known issue with high-speeds?

has anyone seen this before?

Im sure its collimation of the lenses, but it happened on three different sets, and the main camera in 1st unit, I hear doesn't have the issue (havent seen myself)...

This is very puzzling and mysterious, if anyone can shed some light on the matter I'd be very grateful.

Thanks for your time and responses.

Best,

-felipe.

Ditto David: its been close to nine years for me now... gulp!

THANKS!

;)

Hello all,

I'm working on a TV show, we are shooting on F35s.

Upcoming is a scene that involves putting the cameras on a roller coaster and we are all a bit worried about what the effects of the g-forces created by the high travelling speeds might be on the tape based format (HDCAM-SR) and on the camera itself.

The DP said he had a bad experience before (with F900s) and I myself have never put the cameras under such conditions.

Going to another format is a viable option, but I'm just wondering if anybody has had experience with this before, be it good or bad.

Thanks so much!

Best,

-felipe.

I have less than a year to seriously figure out what to do with my future. It scares me as hell, because I can make a huge mistake very easily. I feel so lost! I?m not sure if I could handle the pressure of film industry, but I definitely do not want to spend the rest of my life behind a desk. I need a job which require a lot of creativity.

Being scared and wondering about mistakes are the kind off things that mix around rational thinking and gut instinct to steer you in the decision making choices continuously coming towards you in life... Why don't you try to meet some people in the field locally, and see if you can get a taste of what its all really like.

Even if the polish film industry isn't where you want to be necessarily, it wont hurt to see that end of it... filmmakers around the world are similar, and it can help to see it in a smaller industry; and you might find there are some exciting things going on in your turf also... BUT, going "outside" is quite a valuable experience as well.

The whole point is to find something that you love doing; and many find out after some time of pursuit that what they thought they want isn't what they enjoy, and they find it hard to move out of it... others relish at the excitement of new experiences and the process of learning.

That?s so unfair! I wouldn?t like to end up as assistant to bringing coffee or something.

I think what Mark meant was to work as a camera assistant position... which is not about bringing coffee, its about supporting the director of photography in the camera dept.

the 1st AC (assistant camera) is kind of the boss of the camera dept (under the DP) whose primary funcion is to pull focus and maintain the camera

the 2nd AC is in charge of supporting the 1st with all his immediate "gear needs" and also slating the shots and taking camera notes

the loader is like the Best Boy of camera_ he loads magazines and also orders equipment

The operator does just that... in smaller industries, usually the DP operates, in bigger industries, the operator is like the right hand man on-set for the DP (the gaffer being his left hand or vice-versa) and "executes" the shot with the entire support team...

Anyway, I mention this because getting a position like this would be a worthwhile experience to see if you like the whole "work" aspect of the jobs.

I personally know a lot of women camera assistants who are tremendously good at their jobs; I've had mixed responses from them in terms of how difficult it has been for them in "a man's world" -- some I think have had a tougher time because they've felt they had to "prove" to the boys they could play just as well/better, others I think had an easier time because they told me "they didn't care about that" and just went on and did it...

Anyway, trust that you'll make the right decision for you ultimately, and in the meantime EXPLORE...

Hope this is helpful !

Best,

-felipe.

I don't know that he is necessarily drunk or on drugs... in this clip anyways... he is just a fun, eccentric (and knows it, and likes it, and pushes it) guy.

I love him as much as anyone on this forum; he has been a tremendous influence.

I certainly think his work without WKW has not been as good as his work with WKW, but that can be said about a lot of famous Director/ DP team-ups.

However despite this, it irks me a little bit that no one ever acknowledges Mark Li Ping Bing's work when they talk about "In the Mood For Love" ... Just as a note, I was told by a friend in HK (but he wasn't actually on that film) Li Ping Bin shot about half of the film; he was also second unit DP on "Fallen Angels".

Either way, though, the fact remains, Doyle and WKW collaboration on their early HK work was tremendously influential and I love them for it... weather Heineken is his inspiration or not.

(I've also heard an anecdote of Doyle rolling around on the ground while "Lady in the Water" was being shot; not caring much at all; unprofessional was my first thought... but then I actually saw the film; who wouldn't be doing that :-D [jk]

Just my 2 c.

of course...

under-cranking, like over-cranking is done through the "Vari-speed" mode...

In Timelapse, you can choose to shoot a frame at a time in "one Shot" trigger mode.

Best,

Bob, Elhanan,

So did you end up shooting in S-Log, or another setup?

I've used the Genesis a bunch, but not the F23 yet (but its coming up) -- it seems S-LOG is pretty similar to Panalog, I would think shooting in that mode and using a LUTHER / GAMMA BOX would be a good combo... But I also understand it can spit out a REC709 Monitoring image, is this right? without affecting the recorded image, correct?

Thanks for your input.

Funny, I left a show in New Orleans just as Robosapien went there... I wish I was reading the threads (its hard to find time), I would have said hi.

Thanks.

I can't totally speak for the F23, as I've yet to use it (very soon I think), but on the Genesis (witch uses the same SRW-1 deck), the main reason for switching tapes when doing high-speed work is because you have to switch to 4:2:2 -- not a problem for Matt since the whole thing is 4:2:2, but in general, if the 23.98PsF material is being shot at 4:4:4, the trouble is the Editorial Deck won't do an automatic switch, and somebody would HAVE to be there... if that material is shot on another tape, it simplifies the workflow and I think its better practise... but it technical terms I guess not necessary.

With solid state media or clip based recording (RED, P2, SxS) every shot carries all the necessary info and there is no linear deck involved, so mix frame rates and formats as much as you want.... Timecode is also much easier to deal with.

Hope it helps.

David,

I had been a bit busy and had not yet had time to read this wonderful thread.

First of all Thank you!

Sometimes one is thinking about the whole life/career thing, and seeing your great work, determination and attitude is truly inspiring!!

Regarding Post Path -

I've done a number of RED shows now, and one of the main things that I think we havent quite been able to get right is managing the "Look" 100% through dailies. Was this at all a concern for you (given there were no studio execs looking at your work) or did you figure out a good system?

What I mean is that usually if a very specific post look is desired and created by the DP, it is not usually kept for editorial even though its an "offline" (for TV people are also starting to deliver ProRES as the final format) so as to preserve as much info in that part of the process (makes sense, but the issue of getting used to the incorrect image arises).

Regarding NDs / IR ; I finished a small film shot all in the desert back in May ... we used Panchro HM-IRs to be at around 10 ASA instead of 320 (with pola) -- they were great for IR -- the images were wonderful, the only danger was that you can't stack these kind of NDs because of heavy Double-image problems; luckily, they make them in more steps than regular NDs... I hear Tiffen now has a set that goes up to ND2.1.

(By the way, the 1st Ad on that was Mark Mathis, who I think you might have worked with recently -- great guy).

The Re-shoot shot you posted is quite educational about how lighting is about emotion... the one from day 20 feels like a storybook americana "smile" (which is obviously what you were going for) while the first pass feels much more gloomy and foreboding; despite the fact that the sky itself is the same, the density of it drastically alters mood. Thanks for that little example.

Anyway, good luck on the next shoot!

I hope your hours change a bit though...

Best Regards,

On his last three films (the Dark Knight, The Prestige, Batman Begins) at least (according to AC mag) he shoots primarily one stock for day (250ASA 5205) one for night (500T 5218) usually pushed one stop to 1000 ASA -- Regarding this, it was my impression that The Prestige was the one with the nicest print, with deep blacks... Both the Batman films I felt had a softer toe (not necessarily a bad thing at all).

Does anybody agree?

I also wonder if its been the projection, which definitely contributes to assessing the quality of the print; I saw the earlier films at the arclight (with "the prestige" having one of the best prints I've ever seen), while TDK I've yet to see it in a better theatre (the focus was a bit off and I bet the bulb was a little dim), let alone in IMAX... hopefully this week get around to it.

There are definately issues with the cameras, no doubt, but I recently was operating on a shoot all outdoors in the Baja California Norte desert (it reached up to 45ºC / 110 ºF on the hottest day).

We had three bodies: two working and one backup. The A camera was a more recent model and never overheated (but did produce the heat warning at some point) The B camera was an early model and on two occasions it did overheat "critical shutdown" it says, we swapped it for the Backup body which was also an early model and that also overheated, but by the time it did, I was able to go back to B camera and continue working.

I must say, I've also used the Genesis at around 120ºF and it performed very well.

The key I think with these electronic cameras is to have umbrellas to keep the cameras in the shade [and its nice on the crew too :-D ], and when possible have the ability to blow air on them (just keep it moving, not necessarily have to have it be cold air).

I hope my 2 cents are useful in some way...

Best,

-felipe.

For me, "The Birds"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncZw7kvG4RY

also, it had one of the best trailers ever:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4Wm1xFu2P0...feature=related

:)

Hello everyone,

I am in the very early phase of starting tests for a theatrical release shooting with the new Sony XDcam EX (pmw-ex1).

Im currently working on a project for TV that will be using them as splinter unit cameras and hopefully I can begin the tests in the weekends...

I was wondering if I could get some suggestions of what the most revealing tests would be.

Obviously, the goal is to take it all the way through a DI and Filmout to see the results on the big screen and judge it based on that ; the outcome could be NOT to shoot with it, but basically Im going to try to see when the image in different conditions fails and when it might be most pleasing / acceptable.

I am also wondering about testing with all those redrock / letus / p+s mini35 type adaptors -- I've never actually used them. What do you guys think of them in terms of what it does regarding optical degradation & maneuverability?

Ill shoot focus charts, latitude tests, night scenes, day scenes, motion blur, close-ups, wide shots...

What else?

Thanks for your constant feedback, input and time.

Regards,

Collateral was nominated for the BAFTA & ASC awards as well, but not Oscar...

While I agree that a cinematographer is there to serve the story, and that dictates the "style" ; and so as a DP you might one day be totally expressionistic while another day pure realist BUT, going along with what David said, you bring your personal TASTE.

I think that is a better word to use than style.

And your taste is your preference for story-lines, for lighting styles, for lensing etc.

Say if Ford Coppola would have had Storaro shoot the "Godfather" and Gordon Willis shoot "Apocalypse Now". (two of the three I consider the best modern cinematographers). The films would each have looked totally different, yet they would have each been done in a way that serves the story, but its the cinematographers taste (and the directors too -- he chose the DP) that guided them to their solutions.

Maybe both Storaro and Willis would have arrived to a toplit rendering of Brando for the Godfather; Willis, as he has mentioned because of the makeup situation, not reading his eyes to disguise what he is thinking, and keeping light of the walls. Storaro might have arrived through a more philosophical standpoint, but they would probably have handled the contrast very differently because of their taste. Storaro might have arrived to using more color compared to the monochromatic solution of Willis.

Of course we'll never know and I think the choice of DP that Coppola made are absolutely right for those films.

Just my thoughts.

I think Deakins will finally get the oscar, probably for Jesse James (its hard for me to say this, but I think "No Country" deserves it more), and Robert Elswit will probably get the ASC award (note its the very same nominations).

But then again Atonement seems like the "pretty" film (I haven't seen it, not out where I am right now) which could swipe the award from the truly deserving Mr. Deakins.

my two cents.

-felipe.

It's so true. Even when I read any particular thread, I'll skip to the people I recognize and read whatever they wrote. It's funny, because I know when I post something, it'll probably be skipped by most people to get to the people they recognize.

 

If that makes any sense...

 

I guess it doesn't matter, because this post will most likely be skipped.

you are probably right...

Thanks for the comments!

:)

Ive been reading this forum now, in its various incarnations, for over 7 years (!)

I used to check it multiple times a day, to the point of obsessivness, but as I've actually started to work it gets harder and harder... with the odd hours or remote locations and lack of internet or other things.

There was a time where I read every new post, now I ignore most and just read a select few due to time (I'm postponing some stuff I should be doing right now) and if I see something that is around 5 pages, I just wont go into it :(

My question is, how do you guys do it?

(plus most of you are also on CML and many other forums)

Are there some obvious tools I'm completaly unaware off? (I dont "mark as read" because I havent read everything).

Anyway, Im glad you guys are able too, because even if I check sporadically now, I always gain so much.

Thanks.

-felipe.

I think No Country is the best photography of he year so far (and best movie), but I wonder if it will be "noticed" for awards because of the simplicity (its perfect) instead he'll be up for Jesse James which is also greatly inspiring.

(along with Lust, Caution, American Gangster, and my other bets are There Will be Blood, Atonement, and the Diving Bell & Butterfly... but i havent seen those last three yet ; just guessing).

Anyway, I also thought the print was fantasticlly sharp and thought it was contact, at the Arclight, but then I saw it again in Atlanta and it was just as good. Will see it again in Mexico City as soon as it comes out and see if its the same... could be whole run be contact? I would imagine not, its more expensive right?

Saulie, if you dont mind, you said you visited the set a few times... what stop did it feel like he was shooting at? I thought he tends to work pretty open but thinking of the sharpness and contrast I'm wondering if he shot this movie deeper than he normally does?

Thanks.

-felipe.

Like most schools it depends on you to push hard. I saw people go by that didn't do much or showed up in senior project class that I had never seen in 4 years. Others of course are always working.

I was there during a transition period with a lot of faculty changes. In 2000 it was "what's a Scad?" by 2004 it was "oh yeah, of course I know about SCAD".

More and more I see people in LA who went to SCAD working in different sides of the industry.

I highly recommend this forum -- during my time there I learned more from David Mullen than many teachers, but luckily they are pretty good about letting you take out the gear, so go, shoot.

Also use the Jenn Library, they have so many great books, including bound issues of ASC mag from 1978 onwards (i spent a LOT of time with those).

Like the previous poster said, definately pay attention to the foundation courses - drawing, design, all that stuff is integral to cinematography. I took photo classes too that were great.

Annette Haywood-Carter, Matt Akers, John Drop are some of the better teachers that I had in the film dept. , but like I said, its up to you (Evan Smith I think is gone he was fantastic, but there is a lot of "new" blood that I hear is great of people with real industry experience).

However, the big disadvantage is the location. Since I went to LA, I worked with people from many difeent schools, and many are better trained in REAL set etiquete becuse they start working in the industry while at school. Camera wise, Chapman seems to prepare people technically really well. USC seems to "connect" better, but just develop youself during that time... formative years and all that.

If you have some more specific questions feel free to PM me.

(i try to check this site everyday, but its getting harder and harder when one is working)

Good Luck.

-felipe.

Finally got to see it... wonderful!!

Reminds me of course of Alan Pakula films (and of course that means Gordon Willis, as was the intention).

I'm curious, did anyone feel like the first moments of the film, before the "4 days earlier" caption, it looks like the film is pushed, with a bit more grain and lower contrast but when we return to the same scenes at the end of the film, they retain the higher contrast and less grain of the rest of the film ; I imagine this is intentional; did anyone else feel this, or am I just seeing things?

Thanks.

i will be the key grip on a show shooting for 5 weeks in panama. we will be in the jungle and it will be the end of the rainy season, mid-november. i've never worked in the jungle before and i'm not really sure how to prepare for it. any thoughts?

 

cordially,

 

tanner

I'm not a grip, but I have worked in the jungle and I would say be prepared for a LOT of leveling, with LOTS of apple boxes and all the wedges in the world... Once we had a long track that started with two wedges on one end and was at least three or four full apples on the other end.

Trees were used a lot with ropes to rig the diffusion... cranes are great but figuring out the safety of where to place them and how was of prime importance.

Maybe this is obvious, just trying to help...

good luck!

I went to NYFA in the summer of 98 for a 6 week course... I was 16 and had never shot with a motion picture camera; it was fantastic!!!

However, if you are already in film school I would almost say skip NYFA, it is immersive but it is introductory (how can it not be if it is 4 or 6 weeks)... When I later went to film school, my "Intro to Film" course was quite similar only in a college setting -- I was ahead of the game in that sense because of my NYFA experience, but ultimately it might be too basic for you (and it was expensive) -- then again we are talking 10 years ago... they weren't all over the place like they are now.

I did meet great creative collaborators, though, which is always enriching.

Hope my 2 cents help.

best,