Dan Hasson

Film is great but I do not think the medium is superior in anyway to digital. That is just down to opinion, if you prefer one to the other thats fine. I personally think digital is amazing because it has given people the chance who never had before to tell their stories in a movie. EG this video about teens in Nigeria making films with their phones. This example shows how films are stories. Being able to be told stories by voices we have not heard before (you could argue because they have no had access to the equipment to do so before recently) is fantastic and refreshing.

On the special features, was the footage the people were viewing on a monitor that looked like this? Notice on the left side there is a grey box thats says RAW. This shows the camera is recording to RAW. On the right side there are four grey boxes that say LOOK. Say the monitor in the image is MON1. So they have applied a LOOK to be outputted to MON1 for on set viewing. So for the film you were watching, most likely the DP (and sometimes with the DIT) would have either chosen a pre-existing LUT (LOOK) or they would have made their own. That would explain the 'film look' you would have been seeing for the films on set monitors. You can make your own LUT's on DaVinci, export it as .cube, then via Arri's USB (that usually comes with the rented camera) and the programme Arri Look Creator you can put it in the camera to be used for on set monitors. Hope that helps. Dan

Is this the Tinker scene you're talking about here? The the film Too Late was shot in five 22 minute unedited take segments. The first segment used a 30mm-1200mm Angenieux Super Tele. A lot of Barry Lyndon uses tele lenses and is well known for it. Haven't seen it in a few years so can't remember how much in scenes they're used.

Cinelab London: https://www.cinelab.co.uk

Ridley Scott's view of storyboarding is great:

My favourite place in the UK for Super8 is Gauge Film. It seems to be the cheapest place in the UK from research I've done. Mainly for the packages you can buy through them - stock + process + scan all in one payment. Tri-X Reversal is the same cost as the colour neg but Ektachrome is a lot more costly. But I guess if you're not scanning and only projecting it is going to be cheaper.. Hope some of that helps.

I've just began watching the film. 20 minutes in so far. Such a fantastic film and so terrible for the guys who died at the wheel. The longest day I have done running was around 22 hours (also did 5 18 hour days back to back). Fortunately I was not working the next day. However production made all crew be on a 13+1 day (UK APA is 10+1 for all crew and 11+1 for runners)... Plus I and the other runners call time was 2 hours before the main unit call. I then had to drop the rushes off and was waiting around outside for someone to come meet me for a long time. It was not even worth the extra £50 they gave me at the time to do that, though I needed to pay bills at the time. Its terrible the amount of jobs I hear about that offer next to no money in exchange for it 'being a fun project with a fantastic director/dp/actor' or whoever it is. Phil is so right. I've worked on big shows/commercials and the crew (also a lot of cast) are forced to squeeze a huge amount of work into a tiny time gap. What I see in commercials is an idea that is big and involves a lot money and manpower to make happen. Production aren't given enough money. They tell the client they can do it otherwise another producer/production company will. Then crew are asked for deals and worked stupid hours in a location(s) usually far from their homes. But we were talking about Ron Howard, sorry to go that far off...

I didn't think of it that way. Thanks for the info, good to know!

Pfister talks about it here, "says Pfister. “I can underexpose it by 3 stops and overexpose it by 5 stops within the same frame and see the entire spectrum on the screen." He doesn't give an example of a scene he did it on though.

Thanks for posting that! His East 100th street photos are brilliant! Of course as well as all his other work.

I only drag from the card to the master drive. Then once my files are copied to the master (from the SD Card or whatever I'm using) I use Path Finder to sync to the backup drive. I'll then check the byte sizes are the same on both folder/file on each drive using 'cmd + i'. If they're the same then Path Finder has synced everything fine. I do the same if the files I'm syncing didn't originate digitally on a (SD) card EG, film scans. I've spoken to DIT's on set about offloading, syncing, backing up etc. From my understanding, a DIT's workflow on set usually goes something like this (programs may differ DIT to DIT): Insert card (video and/or audio) to card reader > use Shotput to offload and create checksum verification > sync to clone/backup drives using Path Finder > check byte size on each drive and make sure size is identical on each. Sometimes they will create LTO's on set. However I've found this to be rare and it usually happens later in post. Then the drives go to wherever they need to go, usually one stays with production the other is sent to post. I don't know what the workflow is like in the US and other countries, but what I have explained I have found to be pretty common in the UK.

I don't know the most modern standard 16mm camera, I'm sure someone else will. However I read that mid90s was shot on the Arri 416 Plus. This is also the camera listed on IMDb tech specs and other Google searches for the movies camera. On Arri's info it says the cameras gate is Super16 only (see technical details). My guess would be that their video taps/monitors on set, had an overlay for 1.33 : 1 so the crew could frame up in that ratio. This can be done using QTAKE. Then when it came to editing, they would have thrown the same ratio on whatever programme they were using. This is all just my guess and my technical details may not be 100% accurate. I'm sure someone else on here who knows more about 16mm can answer your questions better.

Great piece of work Stephen! The editing is fantastic. Will this be used as an ad campaign?

Love the b&w, it looks brilliant Stephen. Yes, Cinelab London are wonderful!

Hello, I need to export a project I'm editing from DaVinci for a sound mix. Its my first time using DaVinci to edit, previously used FCP. I did not really plan ahead for having to export for the mix. So my question is, does anyone know of a way to get an OMF file or AAF exported from a project in DaVinci? I have seen, file > export AAF/XML. But annoyingly there are no further settings for the AAF file. The sound mixer has asked for the following: 48000hz, 16bit, 'Encapsulate' in File Menu and 'Complete Audio Files' in the Render Menu. I do not have FCP anymore and I guess I could buy Premiere and export to an XML and then create an OMF or AAF from there. However I'd like to see if anyone on here can help me without me having to pay for one of those programs yet. Thanks, Dan I was unsure whether or not to write this thread in 'Sound' or 'Editing' so hopefully it won't cause to much of a problem being under 'Editing'.