Christian Tanner

hey jeffrey! might be probably too late since you posted on 6th of july already - but here you go...: i just shot a piece on a hvx +mini35. i created a flare on this shot here: the flare was created by a 1200w hmi - sitting outside the window on a wind up stand. lens used was a zeiss hs. i think it was a 25mm or wider. the spex is on youtube as well if needed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAihsx7II50 hope that was of any help. tanner

hey guys! i'm shooting a viral for a watch maker. inevitably... there's going to be some shots of a watch and its components. (the larger the parts will show on screen, the better). i was researching and found some kind of periscope probe lens system that would do the trick - unfortunately the rather huge price doesn't make it an obtion for this productions budget. i'm shooting with hd and a depth of field adapter. pl mount. so here's the question: what's the 35mm lens i should go for to get that kind of shot? i was thinking about a 200mm but i'm worried that it's: a.) not that feasible for that kind of "table top photography" and... b.) it won't get me that "super close up" i'm looking for. (i can't test the 200mm at the moment by the way - so i had to make up my oppinion by researching on the web only). is there a macro lens for those kind of shots? (one that is aproximately within the price range of a "normal" lens - if you know what i mean...). anyone had a similar problem in the past? any help and/or input greatly appreciated - as always! cary

thanx fred - good one! tanner

thanx bryant! tanner

hey guys - me again with another shutter angle question... i was wondering if i have to be concerned about hmi's if they are flicker free - when shooting with a shutter angle of 90° that is. last shutter angle question - i promise - for now... many thanx! tanner

i'm shooting super 16. thanx for the help guys. that notion on saving privat ryan was exactly what i was hoping for. will go with 90° then. tanner

hey guys! i'm planing to use a narrow shutter angle for my next project. i'm not able to shoot any tests - so i was wondering if you guys can point me into a certain direction - giving me examples of different shutter angles looks. something along the line of visual references like movies that you know of that have been shot on a certain shutter angle maybe? i believe that saving privat ryan was shot on 90° - and i wouldn't wanna go more extrem than that. i was thinking maybe 120? or is that already too subtle? hope that question isn't too abstract for you guys. many thanx! tanner

hey jason! would you mind explaining a little more about that last bit you said about underexposure/thin neg/less grain - because that DID make me slightly confused. i was under the impression that over-exposing (around 2/3 of a stop) reduced grain on low key scenes as grain usualy doesn't like the toe bit of the curve of the common stock... plus: a "thick" or "thin" neg as i thought refers to a negs exposure in terms of how much information there is in the highlights and shadows. (so a "thick" neg refering to "no lost info" in the shadows and highlights). that's why your comment on just using a brighter light-level to achieve a thicker neg slightly confused me. " so i was hoping you could shed some light on this - same goes for everyone else of course, if you care to help. many thanx! cary

thanx for the help guys. ...and sorry for not beeing able to use the search tool properly it seems :) shame about the angle though - was planing to use it on a helicopter one take where i follow the artist in and out the chopper. i would have loved to shoot the rotating blades with a closed down shutter angle. cary

does anyone of you guys know if the shutterangle of the aaton minima can be changed at all? the tech-specs on the aaton site sais "revolving shutter" - which kind of confused me as kind of every shutter is revolving isn't it? many thanx in advance! cary

hi guys! i actually thought i know how to read a curve - but it turns out i might not... attached is the curve of the super8 64t ektachrome. am i right by stating that this film has a latitude of only four stops? where's my mistake? thanx in advance! tanner

thanx tim! actually because of what tim said i start to wonder if it makes much sense to go through the trouble of using smoke at all. as the rain would take care of the beams of light already, coming in through the windows, smoke would only create some more depth - but then again, rain is doing that as well... sorry to stress the topic of the type of light itself. having used nothing but fresnel lights, kinos and open face, i was just wondering if there would be a better type of light to do the job. considering the huge variety of lights out there i mean. cary

thanx david! any suggestions on what light i should use in the studio? (don't know what range the studio has atm) imagine the set as a fairly big living room. i was planing to narrow the shutter angle. any thoughts on a certain angle? how extreme could i go? last but not least - any thoughts on using smoke AND rain at the same time - i imagine there's nothing to consider at all. but then again - maybe there is :) thanx again! cary

backlight rain for it to show. so far so good - but: i was wondering about the back lights quality. soft or hard? big ass buterfly? just some diffusion on the 12K? etc... but it's not just a question out of curriosity. i'm shooting a music video where it rains inside a house. i'm trying to light a pretty dim atmosphere. smoke for some beams of light coming in from the narrow windows. just in case you where interested i mean... many thanx! cary

thanx hal! very interesting thought. for this very next shoot i have to try it simple way though i think: shooting a couple of takes and hope for the best... but seriously - will try that when i got the time. cary

first of all - thanx a lot guys! michael - sorry for the missunderstanding. with "throughout the movie" i ment "all the close-ups". my misstake. for the medium shots i personaly don't mind a bright, but small eyelight. (so i usualy try to get the keylight "hot spot"). and for the wide shots, to be honest, i don't mind no eye-light at all... true - because no-one let me put-up a 8'x8' traceframe behind the camera :rolleyes: - i started using a bounced poly or a small traceframe right underneath the camera - just making sure that my focuspuller doesn't get to angry... i've seen this movie - unfortunately i can't recall its name, it's story, nore a single actor in it (yes, it was THAT sort of film...). but i do remember HUGE eyelights throughout. knowing the feasibility behind that, i was wondering if eyelights are manipulated by computer these days. do you guys know about stuff like that? or have even done it yourselfes? cary

hey guys! just to clarify: with eyelights i mean the hotspots that shows in the pupil/iris. well personaly - i adore HUGE eyelights. i tried to create them with some semi-success. i believe to have observed a couple of things - and i was wondering if some-one has any suggestions. (remember, it's HUGE eyelights we're talking about here). this is it: the best position seems to be as close as possible, meaning, a traceframe. so, idealy the fill i'd say. also, i think it should come from below the actors face. that might not be ideal in terms of modelling, but it just seems to be the perfect spot... what i still want to try is to get a light right around the lens. but not like they do it in music videos with patterns of tubes and bulps (if you know what i mean), but with a traceframe. i guess to optain a huge eyelight throughout the whole movie would be a pain in the ass too. so again (especially since this is a topic that kept me busy) if you have any suggestions - PLEASE! - very much apprechiated... cary

thanx stephen! would it help to alter the shutter angle - to increase the chance ot see the flash at all?

hey guys! i was wondering what is going to happen when an actor is taking pictures - using the stills cameras flash? - what would i have to expose on? (under- or overexpose?) - what colourtemp. it would be? - and if i'd have to light in a certain way to get a good result... thanx in advance guys! cary

talking kinos... i thought about keying with kinos. because i think it hasnt been mentioned that the kinos have a nice fast drop off. my theory is... that if keyed with kinos - that drop off shows on the actors/actress face. i believe to have observed that - and i quite liked it. but again, just a theory. anyway - what reasons not to key with kinos?

....so... what about that "little experiment" would go wrong - i was just wondering. would the bulp just blow? or just the fuse right? and if so - would the rental house probably charge me for that (not treat it as a "normal" case of a burnt out bulp etc.)? hmm...

thanx guys! that helped a lot - just changed my order to 2.5k pars... beleive it or not - but i was told (and i believe that source word for word...) that i could use a 4k bulp in a 2.5k hmi - and still run it on 230v (in the uk) mains. well - i guess at least worth a try... so, again - thanx guys - i let you know how it went. cary

thanx michael! i´m shooting in the u.k. - at 220Volts. (or is it 230? - i'm confused... :) usualy they're on 16amp fuses. so i guess that explains why i was able to run 2.5ks so far. anyways: should i use par lights? or the usual fresnel? plus: the tricky thing is, that i shoot on location - not studio. meaning i got some sunlight coming in as well. luckily, i don't see windows in shot. would it make sense to build some kind of a "tent" with black cloth (hope you know what i mean) to get i darker - in order to cope with the 2.5ks? ...how much more expensive are stronger hmi's anyways? over all - would you say it's feasible at all to do beams of light with 2.5k? or should i abandon the idea in the first place? question after question...

hey guys! i´m planing to use "visible light rays", "beams of light" as part of my lighting strategy for a shoot coming up. i had just one or two goes at that before. and i can´t say i was entierly happy with the result. there are actually just those three things i apply to get my light visible...: smoke of course backlight or at least cross. the harder (and stronger) the better. obviously you might think. that´s why i was wondering if anyone could give me advice in how to handle that tricky bit of lighting. for instance - how strong should my lightsource preferably be? (a geni would stretch the budget - so, running 2.5k hmi´s on the normal hosehold sockets 13amp sockets would be ideal...). also - i noticed that there is a certain angle a hard light is especially visible. that angle seems to be extremely tight. correct? and last but not least - is there a trick i can check on how the beam of light is going to show on screen? many thanx in advance guys! cary

(thanx filip!) and sorry to bother you guys again... but does anyone have ANY idea how to recreate that IN CAMERA? i mean the "sort-of" version? apart from black pro mist filter, increasing the grain by push/pulling and saturated colors in set design? i would appreciate ANY response. thanx a lot! cary