Jump to content

Max Field

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Max Field

  1. Have you ever used an F900R before and it didn't have the menus?

    I recall asking someone about the R camera in 2017 and they might've mentioned it also needed a Miranda converter for a truly clean capturable signal. Stating that none of the 900s could go straight SDI out

  2. 12 hours ago, Larry Stone said:

    This is a small one person crew, I'm only looking to light one person for Interviews or Short Narratives Shots. 

    As someone working similar shoots most of the time. Tungsten is a good investment given how cheap it is. You can always ditch them for a quick buck later on and upgrade to something fancier.

    The heat is a complaint for some talent (usually when they're in coats or overweight) but 650s or 1Ks still pack a nice punch even through very saturated gels. It can be annoying to have lights you need to be careful with especially as a one man crew, but you quickly learn to adapt.

    • Like 1

  3. Shane Hurlbut actually had a good piece on this when it came to shooting height differentials for The Greatest Game Ever Played (child and adult actors in one scene). Picking an aspect ratio of 16:9 as opposed to cinemascope can really save you when trying to keep all the characters in frame.

    As for the close up stuff, have your shorter talent stand on an apple box or have your taller talent widen their stance to land a bit lower. People aren't going to thoroughly dissect little height difference cheats if your script is engaging. You'd be surprised how much stuff you can get away with that the lens isn't pointed at.

    • Like 1

  4. 10 hours ago, Ben Ericson said:

    Here's a good example. Newest Drake track, Shot on 16mm with with the Arri 416. 184 Million Views. Does it get more Gen Z or Millenial than that?

    Yeah I love scrolling through the comments to see virtually no one commenting on what the video was shot on. They could've shot this on an iPhone and the feedback would be identical. My point is in the ROI margins.

    Also most Gen Zers kinda view Drake as a meme at this point.



    The two biggest features of 2020 are film; Bond and Tenet. Wonder Woman is 65 and a quiet place 2 is 35mm. Nobody is shooting a feature on the C500 Mk2, Ursa 12k, or the Sony FX9, but those cameras are able to exist. Maybe the market in general is bigger than you think. 

    I'd like to think we're discussing productions that don't have the entire machine behind them? Billionaires can spend whatever they want, half a million is a drop in the bucket to them.

  5. I fail to see the logic when everyone here seems to agree that regardless film or digital, it's all about the screenplay and production design for making a good movie.

    So with that in mind, multiple posts here have stated that just producing a final feature print for projection is around $10,000+?
    Why should we cling on to far more expensive methods when the majority of moviegoers won't even care?

  6. 1 hour ago, Simon Gulergun said:

    16mm is still core curriculum at CalArts. Half our classes are film production on film (from A/B cutting to experimental hand-processing and contact printing) and half our screening classes are on film, from 8mm to 35mm.

    Not arguing that but what percent of active CalArts students make up the total number of people in narrative production? Less than 1%? How many of them continue trying to secure film for their projects after the school is no longer providing handouts/discounts?

    I'm getting at an economic issue. Rather than trying to save film we should be pushing digital companies into better color capture methods.

    • Downvote 1

  7. 1 minute ago, Robino Jones said:

    I have no idea.. you can call them they're in L.A.

    What is "gimmick shooting" and why do you care so much about how many?

    The average age on this forum is well above 40 trying to comment on what kids are doing. I'm on sets and productions with Gen Zers all the time and none of them even consider film for a second. Betacam and early CineAlta is the cool vintage scene to them. The only time I ever catch wind of someone under 30 shooting film is when it's for gimmicky skate-footy

  8. 42 minutes ago, David Mullen ASC said:

    Maybe 20 years ago I walked into the Navy Museum in Washington D.C. because it had a sign outside that said "70MM!" (for me, that's like a sign that says "GIRLS, GIRLS, GIRLS" for some other gentlemen...) So I watched this IMAX-like doc on aircraft carrier life that was projected in an aspect ratio between 3:1 and 4:1 on a curved screen for a pseudo-Cinerama effect.

    I recall IMAX screens being a surprisingly regular thing at various DC Smithsonian Museums. Did you view any of the other IMAX screens on the mall?

  9. On 7/10/2020 at 6:44 AM, Mark Kenfield said:

    Not quite the look I'm going for Max 😆

    Well yeah but VHS and tube camera aside, I was amazed at how easy it was to get full coverage of the face without any strange double shadow artifacts on the nose in specific. It's weird how we all go through the gauntlet of film education but then find beginner's assumptions coming back in handy for certain looks. When starting out I never utilized any form of bounce or diffusion and solely relied on a symmetrical raw fill source.

  10. On 7/6/2020 at 5:36 AM, Mark Kenfield said:

    I'd love to know the recipe. Is it really just a single hard key and a single hard fill source (I assume it must be to get such a clean result)?

    I did a fake talk show that was literally 2 1K MRs at equidistant sides to the face (Starts like a minute in)


  • Create New...