TJ Williams

Going back to LeMaisels original question, how to get the look of film as best he can on his video camera. he said: I can't really put my finger on exactly WHAT makes "film" look like film... but what can I do to get close to those results? Maybe this will be of some help: This camera you have may have the ability to use a film style softer shoulder gamma curve look for it in the setup menus. I know this is available in the Z model camera. this will help you. probably setting the detail way low and the color a little saturated will also make the look better. Tend to slightly underexose and video underexposes better than overexposes, more like reversal film than negative. use soft lights in front and be sure the key exposures are near the limit of exposure ie just before clipping or color degradation. use matte makeup on those appearing on camera, get costumes in middle tones, do some serious set decoration. A lot of the look of film is actually careful lighting shot planning and sets carefully prepared. All this should make your work look better maybe even more like film. Ultimately film at this point is still superior. Especially outdoors where the environment will run beyond the lattitude of your camera and the overexposed skys and or too deep shadows will give away the electronic nature of your shots. For these conditions use careful selection of sun angles and times of day combined with neutral density and colored grads and polorizers. The biggest thing is an attitude of craftsmanship. get books on film lighting and study films you like. try to duplicate the lighting setups in some of the scenes you like.

Boy have we drifted from your topic! let me respond to you below. As a camera operator which camera (XL2 or HVR-Z1U) would you guys rather shoot on? We'll be purchasing some new cameras soon with a budget of about 10,000 for each camera and its needed accessories (tripods, shoulder mounts and all). I know all about the hd vs. dv thing and the progressive issue, but what I'm more interested in is how these cameras feel when you're out there shooting with them. We'll be doing a mix of documentaries and television-oriented programing (no blown up film stuff, although I much prefer the progressive look). What are these cameras quirks? Also which accessories would you suggest? I know a good bit about the XL2 and will recommend the standard lens and the 16x manual lens. I don't know much about the sony version so any info would be appreciated. I'll post the same topic in the appropriate hd section too to get an even response. My son just B camera'd a baby feature shot on 2 XL2 cameras, I have just purchased a Sony HDV Z camera after much soul searching ahd head scratching and have now used it on several corporate and doc. jobs. though no drama yet. Since I have a son working in the biz you can guess that I'm pretty old. and yup started when tv was shot on film. Both these cameras seem bizarre to me as they do not feel like either film or eng cameras. So your more experienced camera person looses the ability to reach the control in the dark and quickly without looking which is part of the reflex from years of shooting with similiar camera controls. The wierdest part of these cameras is the focus ring with no end stops which is actually not the lens ring at all but a ring attached to a focus driving motor. the variable rate of focus programmed into this ring meand that if you install a film style focus. zoom in and mark the disk for two focus points then zoom out half way and try to pull focus with them, the marks will be wrong. At least the Canon allows you to buy special aftermarket lenses only from Canon, not regular B mount or any othe standard mount without an adapter to for instance PL mount from 500 to 5000 can quickly be spent to adapt to other lenses. The nice thing about the Sony here is that the flip out monitor can be set to show focus distances on the screen which is at least some kind of work around. Both these cameras can support several times their value in accessories. I saw one XL2 at NAB with more that $25000 in support and accessories. including Sachtler heavy duty support with dolly, chrozeil production matte box. studio follow focus on Arri style rods with sliding base plate. extended film style eyepiece with arri levelor rod. articulated arms for french flag beside the eyebrow and side brows on the matte box and another articulated arm supporting a 5" 16by9 color monitor. Maybe its just me but I thought this was pretty goofy. For this they could have bought a pretty good used digital Betacam.... One accessory I really like that will work with either is the bobab (sp?) zoom control which is very adjustible and easy to use with very nice feel. One feature I like on the Sony is the second zoom control on top of the carry handle so carrying it low in hand held I can zoom very nicely. Overall the sad thing about all this to me is that with all these cameras so different camera operators coming up today will never be able to grab all the controls as smoothly as we did back in the day... when the cameras were much more simple and the controls of all the different manufacturers were all pretty much in the same place. From a picture quality standpoint the HDV camera wins in every quality: color rendition, resolution, and lattitude. This is why I bought the HDV camera. Now here is where I go a ways off the subject. I think 24P and the other progressive speeds are overrated. If you make TV then being in the native frame rate of broadcast will reduce artifacts. Artifacts are just technical mistakes they are not ARTifacts. For years when we shot commercials in 16mm we would shoot at 30fps to make it look better. 24 frames per second is not the look of film. A dozen stops of lattitude and wonderful gradiations of color and tone are the look of film and no electronic camera can duplicate it even now. Recently we shot a doc in 1080i HDcam which was converted to film. To do this they first reduce the data rate to 24p and make all the fields into progressive frames. The results were rather stunning. The big trick here is camera set up and lighting not 24P origination.

I saw the new JVC, at NAB I don't think that is a B mount. so I believe you have gotta get your other lenses fm them... It costs more than the Sony. the lens on the Sony HDV is a Zeiss HD quality lens. There are adapters available to extend it wider and probably soon tele. The Sony has a 16by9 native chip set. The Pictures being shown on big screens at the Sony and other booths looked better than anything JVC was showing, which seems to me usual as I've never used a JVC camera where I liked the pictdures. One camera company rep told me on day 3 of NAB that they already had sole over 150 Sony Z cameras at the show. There were several box houses and full service dealers at the show.

HDV version of the editing software? www.cineform.com for computer specs for HDV as their software works with the least computer so far.

A couple of new things re HDV post at nab. 1. an upconversion box fm HDV to Hd Cam fm Miranda about 3K list. 2. Wavelets baby!!! Premiere has started using the software of Aspect HD by cineform this real time converts the Mpeg to wavelets output in anything fm HDV to wmedia9 or cine ready digital intermediate files soon. This is appearantly lossless. not just visually lossless but the real deal. The examples were really good looking. and computer overhead is reduced so more realtime performance. and no card needed in the edit system.

I got the Petroff matte box and follow focus, which are very nice and less expensive than the Chrozeil. They are made in Canada marketed in the US by www.ste-man.com in LA The dealer was really helpful to me, sending me several different size parts etc. also the Petroff has a much better system of rotating filters and better locks on the eyebrow and side brows. Their extra wide box will not vignette even on a 50% wide angle adapter (thats the really wide one from vfgadgets that won't zoom thru) all in all I'm a very pleased customer. I've seen the cavision which is cheaper but in my opinion looks it. also in the lower end of clip ons tiffen makes one.

but it does record PAL or NTSC right?

David, That really catches the center of the problem of criticism of Dps for lighting choices. Ultimately, it seems to me, the look of the film is often, decided by others, often very untechnical others. I suppose Rembrant didn't have someone over one shoulder saying make the dark areas brighter and over the other shoulder saying get more paintings out today.

matte box allows placement and movement of filters. So if you use filters it is good Everyone who makes good pictures uses filters sometimes to improve specific situations. Just using indoor film outdoors will require a filter. Second matte box, eyebrow and side brow prevents backlight from hitting the front element of the lens and flaring or reducing contrast also pretty important to most folks. Be careful about the TV lens. some TV and security lenses were for a diferent rear element to imager distance than your bolex. Even though it says C mount it may not be compatible, try it first, be careful when putting it on it may be too long and hit stuff inside the camera lens mount. Best of luck starting out with your Bolex they are a very nice beginning camera.

We had this same problem last year on a sony HD Cam. Little dancing white pixels all over the screen. Hard to see in the viewfinder but huge on the color monitor and also, sadly, there in playback. We did take of the sides and tried wiggling and tightening everything in site but without avail. Our local tech also tried to wave the magic over it. We rented a backup body and were delayed less than an hour. Kinda wrecks the ole day rate though. After several trips to Sony(US repair facility) and much head shaking. Many different and contradictory explanations, several delays, they finally (appearantly) replaced enough parts to cure this, and this problem has never come back...... Perhaps these things are finally complex enough to produce true "Ghosts in the Machine" it sure makes a little film scratching seem tame.... And OH yes Cosmic Rays..... Which are much heavier in Thailand....I noticed it also when I was there. In fact I got quite burned at the beach.... Our(US) Sony guys had a bunch of explanations but..... even they didn't go there come-on guys equipment failure is just equipment failure....

Might also try the Petroff matte box superwide version very nice and somewhat cheaper than the Chroszeil in the US since the dollar is so soft against the German money. try: http://www.petroff.ws/contact.htm

I agree with Mr. Lucas's comment to the effect: Camerapersons should make the same income as the president of the US. So how many of you made more than GW last year? Hey George every industry, sport etc has superstars and they all get paid the big bucks. I have, however, seen some very nicely photographed films made by Dp/Operators who did not make more than GW that year. And how like the president we are: His love of power as motivation not his salary, just as we hopefully came into this business out of a love of making pictures and telling stories not because we thought this would be the biggest salary.

Maybe there is a principle here about choosing dolly or steadicam: Small moves with steadicam save time and money because, the dolly dance floor or track and rehearsel of the shot for dolly crew takes longer, This is especially true where wider lenses are ok so the Steadicam assistant, doesn't need as much rehearsel. Long involved Steadicam moves, work more efficiently outdoors or on large pre-lit stages. (especially top lit. or dimmered) When the location has to be lit for a long involved "all in one" steadicam move there is delay for light placement, difficulty keeping good framing while missing all the lights, more rehearsel and soft takes, as longer lenses are needed to keep the amount of background out of the shot. Many directors seem to feel they can do pages of stuff in long steadicam moves in indoor locations and save time. This attempt to have the cake and eat it is just wrong.

16mm Bl Body, 2 400' mags, Tobin crystal motor, 10 to 100 zeiss very sharp with blimp and shade in case. misc acc. First $3000 ir trade fir Steadicam stuff etc.

What a strange ordering of quality we get into when we go below 34mm 16mm 24p hd.... then next is mini dv. whoaaaaa here what about wide screen digital Betacam and 1080I HD I feel mini Dv is at the absolute bottom in terms of image quality.... more compression, tiny chips, low color space... What gives??? what is this desire to film with low quality because it says digital on the side of the cheap camera..... Heres mine S35mm 35m S16mm 16mm 24p hd 1080Ihd 760HD DigiBeta BetacamSp, HDV, Dvcam with a better camere like the D35WS and finally miniDv from the tiny chip cameras. TJ