Dinis Rodrigues

I've pretty much tried them all. I think the best is the WCU4, has great integration with arri cameras. Preston is great but a bit bulky on the camera side. Love the single channel controller. Scorpio also nice but bulky. Bartech don't like it. It is funcional and sturdy but that's all it is. Same with Heden Carat, but a bit less sturdy. RTmotion, I own one. Love it. It's light on camera side, sturdy, reliable, a week battery life, enough functions to adapt it to your style and feels great using it. I just miss being able to power the receiver and start/stop it on the same RS Alexa cable instead of two separate ones. Support is great too. DJI is great for the price, but unreliable.

Not sure if this question was answered, but can I use a 3pin Lemo instead of a Fischer 3pin connector? I wanna buy a couple connector ends to make my own cables, but this company sells only Lemo connectors of most kinds, including 3pin, but not Fischer connectors. Does it work the same?

You completely misunderstood me then. :P Yes, in that case 10 bits mean 10 values, but at the limit of those two darkest stops, if light stops weren't exponencial. What I mean is, that even though 10 bits are indeed 1024 values, the number of values captured between the darkest stop and the next darkest is zero, while the number of values between the two lightest captured stops should be 510 values. When that exponential behavior is converted into logarithmic, then you get a constant and even distribution (theoretically) of bits between those 11 stops, like 102,4 between each stop, but if you had no information in the first place between those two darkest stops, then there's no information to distribute between those two stops when it's converted into log. But as David said, noise makes a lot of sense as a reason why we don't notice those harsh differences. In a way it's selective dithering to the darkest parts of the image.

Great discussion. Just read it all. It seems there's been a lot of confusion between what the sensor "sees" and what it "shows", regarding bit depth, but many seem to have got it by now :) However, it seems the original purpose of the post have faded away, which was the limited bit depth of the darkest values pre-log conversion. If the difference between the darkest stop and next darkest stop is just one value/bit at capture, it doesn't matter if the ADC converts that difference to, let's say, 100 values, there's still not gonna be any usable values in the between because a linear sensor doesn't seem to be able to distinguish 100 shades between those two darkest stops. And after converting those linear values to log in order to ~evenly~ distribute those stops into a 8/10/12 bits image, those two darkest stops will still be easily distinguishable by us, without any usable information in between. The example above is a depiction of the 2 darkest stops after ADC log2 conversion, considering an image captured with a camera able to see 10 stops and 10 bit capture sensor into a 8 bit image. (I just put a black square next to a 10% bright square on a 8bit image) It's clear the difference between those two shades, and without dithering there might exist clear banding on the darkest tones of the image. But this doesn't seem to happen in reality, as it would be too noticeable, right? Maybe because of contrast curves or because the sensors don't use the lowest range they capture, maybe because of noise, or most likely because I'm misunderstanding something with the sensor's capturing process.

Thanks for great advice, Greg :) And everyone else. I think I feel ready to try pulling on 35mm handheld film without having a heart attack. :)

Wow, that's just sick :o I didn't even think it was possible in those conditions on 65mm. Do you have to rely big on the cinetape in those situations, or can a person learn to eyeball with such precision not to be off more than an inch on like a 4 feet distance, in those situations where only one actor's eye can be in focus? Like, how does a person pull focus with precision on 65mm? Sorry for the interrogation, I'm looking to get better and it's definitely not every day you get to ask advice from a 65mm focus puller :rolleyes:

Thx for the responses guys. Greg, about The Fighter, how was your camera setup to help handle those exposure levels? Did you use cinetape and hd monitor to nail specially those most complicated shots on tighter lenses, or was is just milimetrical amazing eye distance-guessing?

Great info, thanx :) One question though, about sending the 2nd AC to the big monitor. I don't have much experience with 35mm cameras, but can they output hd/fullhd video or just sd? We'll be using a Penelope, and this one only takes out composite sd, but are there 35 cameras outputing better signal?

Thanks I guess Cinetape will make a ton of difference in some situations, I've just tested it once, so I gotta test its limitations better so I don't get too dependent on it. :) I'll try to be a pain in preproduction then, and production, so they don't get the wrong expectations. The Dop refered some movies that seem to have been shot in tough conditions, meaning 35mm handheld with some tighter shots: Argo, Biutiful, Babel, 21 grams, 8 mile, The Tree of Life, The fighter, Call girl, Dancer in the dark, Breaking the waves, Three colours blue... While some of them are a bit questionable, pretty much all the Inarritu/Rodrigo Prieto films seem to fit the description. Any idea how their puller might have manager those tougher shots, or are they less difficult than it looks like, and shot with maybe at least T4?

I've been focus pulling for about 4 years now, and even though I've done some 16mm film back in the day (I started focus pulling on 16 film), I've adapted to the usual 35 digital Alexa/Red setups which seems to be the standard in Sweden. The thing is, at least here, with digital, the camera rehearsals disappeared or are recorded, the actors markings disappeared to give room to more improvisation and time saving (no one wants to wait for the 1st AC anymore), 1.3 to 2.0 open iris are now common and often the standard, free moving handheld and steadycam are now also common with disregard to the difficult level to the focus puller, 1/2 to 1 inch depth of field is not a surprise anymore... I don't know how you guys in hollywood, independent or anywhere in the world work nowadays, but floor marks and distance guessing are often worthless when the camera is often moving and 1 inch missguess on a 3-4 feet distance is enough to miss the focus. Of couse one can still pull focus by eye for many of the 16-25mm lenses shots, when the camera doesn't 'poke' the talent in the face, which is not uncommon either, but because of all of that, me and I guess other focus pullers in similar situations, have developed a monitor dependent style of focus pulling. Of course still trying to use markers when relevant and eye-guessing if possible. (I'm not such a good eye-guesser, probably because of not doing much guess work throughout the years) Anyway, soon I will be pulling on a 35mm film project, and I know the dop loves spontaneous handheld, and using 500T probably will call for open iris on interiors, so I'm starting to feel a bit nervous about it. How do you guys think I should approach this situation?