Ryan Constantino

Thanks for your reply James, I ended up ordered them directly from Arri. Yes the vertical trays can be rotated into a horizontal position but what ends up happening is the knurled knobs for locking the rotation and tray itself blocks the swing arm from opening so it's all good. They are pretty expensive but I needed to have them. For anyone else searching, I found them at abelcine's website, but the price is exactly the same as if you were to order them directly from Arri, which I ended up doing.

I think I see what you're looking at, is it the silver round thing on the photo on the right that's hanging in the wall? Pretty much the same methods still apply that I mentioned before. For the second shot, very easy. What you do is take a still frame of it and clone stamp it out /paint it out in Photoshop then you motion track the slight movement and "patch" the piece onto it. For the first shot, same thing you have to take a freeze frame and paint it out then motion track it into the scene and rotoscope the heads passing in front. If you're serious about doing it yourself I can make you a little tutorial if you'd like.

Try imgur.com

To answer your question about logo removal. It would be a VFX process. Are you talking about the text on the red canopy in the background? Looks like it just says "10$ dances" is that even a logo? Anyway, an advanced artist could remove the logo from the second shot easily, 15 minutes using mocha and after effects. The first shot is more difficult because of the extensive tracking and rotoscoping. It would need to be tracked probably using mocha and then patched over / painted out with a blank red canopy and then the heads of the people walking in front of it needs to be rotoscoped. That's likely a half day job. It's probably not worth hiring a VFX just for a demo reel. I don't think it matters anyway. If you wanted to learn how to do it yourself feel free to ask I could point you in the right direction, I've done VFX for over 6 years.

I'm a bit confused and wondering if anyone has some experience with the Arri MB-18 mattebox. I bought one second hand recently and didn't realize that it came with vertical filter trays which I thought was a bit strange. But I was looking at Arri's parts catalog https://sparepart.arri.de/catalogprod/app?__bk_&__rid=ICU1520134870835#2V10C9D9248E4C6405 and it says that yes the trays that comes with are in fact vertical. Does anyone know if Arri makes a horizontal filter tray that fits into the MB-18? Because I can't seem to find it. Anyone have experience with this mattebox? Thanks! Edit: you know what I think I may have answered my own question: http://www.arri.com/?eID=registration&file_uid=10061 it says in the Arri filter trays PDF that the F2 style tray works with MB18 Where can I get a set of these at a reasonable price? :unsure:

I can certainly see how being forced into a location has it's drawbacks. And how using shallower depth of field can combat that. And of course these techniques will always be a creative choice, which is empowering to filmmakers everywhere. When I look around the world, my eyes see more things in focus than not. And I like that! Similarly, I enjoy great set design and like seeing when then camera has deep focus I feel more immersed in that world. But of course it's all personal preference!

As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, I believe that the use of slow motion is one of the easiest ways to make a shot look cooler/better. So I believe it has in some instances been used as a substitution where something is lacking. Subject matter/lighting etc. However, I'd like to comment about the other half of your (OP) statement; that shallow depth of field is inescapable. I have been lecturing people for many years now that shallow depth of field is an epidemic. This of course is caused by many factors, but I feel there are a few major violators worth mentioning. Budgets seem to be getting smaller and shoot schedules seem to be getting shorter, which in turn causes DOPs to have less access to lighting equipment and thus, the need to shoot at wider apertures causing shallower depths of field. And secondly, I feel that not as much money is being put into the production design as it used to, and the easiest way to hide that is to hide the background. Fill the frame with a face. Do another close up. We don't have time to dress the set behind them! Just shoot it and blur it out back there! (focus puller rolls eyes) It gives me such a headache to watch an entirely blurry scene where I have no idea where the characters are in relationship to their environment. I thought that was cinematography 101! Sensors are getting larger causing shallower depth of field at equal apertures, making things worse. Newer filmmakers are constantly chasing after the "cinematic look" and when they watch their favorite blockbusters, they see shallow DOF and think to themselves, hey I can do that! And end up choosing shallow DOF for most of their movie because it will make it look more like a movie movie. It turns out that what really makes a cinematic look is the opposite. If you watch older movies, the close ups and the shallow depth of field were used sparingly to emphasize key moments. Deep focus allowed the audience to soak in the movie and get a lot of detail and information out of the frame. Now a days people just want to shove the camera into an A-list celebrities face. Look!! we have Morgan Freeman in our movie! And of course there's a part of me that is ranting about this whole thing, but I always feel the need to stress the importance of not getting sucked into that filmmaking style, because it does a disservice to the audience. As creators our job is to take the audience to another world, another place or time so they can enjoy that 2 hours without distractions. If all they see is close ups and shallow depth of field, it's going to feel like running around while looking through a paper towel tube the whole time. Filmmaker IQ did a good video about deep focus and hyperfocal lengths which explains a lot too:

Cool thanks, this is good advice. Maybe I'll get a small pelican too.

Just like the title says, what do you do personally when it comes to handling and storing filters? Obviously grab it by holding the edges to prevent smudges but do you use microfiber cloths to grab them or are there some ac's out there that wear latex gloves? Just curious. When storing them do you just keep the filter in the pouch with nothing on it. Or do wrap a cloth or tissue paper around it before sliding them in the pouch? Do you store them in a box or a bag in the closet or what? Just wondering whatever everyone is doing out there.

I'm so bored of the high resolution debate. Steve Yedlin said some really interesting things about high resolutions which make a lot of sense. Check it out here: http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/ I'm sure this link gets tossed around a lot. But when he talks about compression of data rates for exhibition that it jacks up the image so much, there''s not much point of "watching 4k" when your internet is too slow to sustain the high bit rates needed for true actual quality 4k images. The debate is never ending, but I'm with Keith, I really believe that manufacturers just want to sell you the hot new thing you're willing to buy.

Wow! very informative. I couldn't have asked for better info. Thanks very much for taking the time to show the lenses here. Sounds fairly straightforward, I don't think the digiprimes are for me. But it's nice to learn just a little bit more about them! Thanks again.

Thank you very much, that's very informative! I saw that west coast cine video has one that was overhauled by duclos, so that's reassuring. How heavy is heavy? Also, would it be possible for you to share a video clip or two of something you've shot with it?

I'm very interested in this lens but am having a hard time finding much information about it. Anyone know where I could find some test clips? Or if anyone knows a movie that would have been shot with it, I would like to check it out. Any owners out there? Would such a lens be good for an all around production lens?

I understand what you mean, the digiprimes are awesome, but sensors are just too big now a days... From what I understand about metabones, such a piece of equipment wouldn't be possible. The speed boosters take a larger image circle and shrink it to fit on a smaller sensor. But in this particular case, I'm trying to take a smaller image circle and project it onto a sensor that's larger, in which case would need something like a magnifying glass inbetween the lens and the cameras sensor. Someone else with more experience might be able to elaborate. I wonder if it's possible to create such a thing....

Interesting, yes the Gh4 and Gh5 have the same sensor size (17.3mm x 13.0mm) albeit different sensors. Are you theorizing a focal multiplier like a 2x tele-converter that would be B4 to MFT and 2x teleconverter all in one? That would be pretty good.....

I'm having a hard time finding information about the Zeiss Digiprime image circle. Anyone have some experience with it? I found this brochure but cannot find anything about coverage: http://www.hdgear.tv/images/catalog/product/docs/DigiBrochure.pdf I might have an opportunity to buy some digiprimes and wanted to know if the would cover the Gh5s sensor. Was thinking I would need an adapter like this: https://www.amazon.com/Adapter-Fujinon-Panasonic-Olympus-BlackMagic/dp/B00B3FSMAQ Any insight greatly appreciated!

That's an interesting request in a lens! Not sure what kind of budget you're working on but if it's pretty small and want to go for something a bit...let expensive you could check out the SLR Magic Anamorphics. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1233204-REG/slr_magic_slr_ac502xmft_50mm_2x_anamorphot_cine_lens.html I was at NAB last year and checking one out on a GH5, it was interesting. I remember seeing a decent amount of breathing and barrel distortion.

I see this is an older post, but Film Riot did a tutorial for something like this on youtube once: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gUc3wFrN1g

Haha, all day every day! Damien, if you are dead set on wanting to shoot this sequence straight on, and not do the angle: It is possible to accomplish as VFX. Here is how I would execute it: - Shoot the shot/plate without the glass in the frames as you suggested. - On the day of filming, clear out the room of any crew or lights or production equipment and shoot a HDRI refection map. It looks like this: http://goo.gl/LomZqE you can make one by taking your widest lens and shooting still images like this: - when in the VFX phase of post, provide the reflection map along with the shot and the VFX artist will motion track the shot and insert individual pieces of glass into the frames and use the reflection map as the contents for the reflections. Shooting 100% in camera certainly is easier, but it can be done.

Are you strictly limited to having to do the effect in camera? Or do you have some flexibility in post production to get it done? Reason I ask is because there are a few different way you could go about doing it. In camera 100%: What about getting some orange chalk and rubbing it onto a chalkboard and then cleaning it up with the erasers and then smacking the dust in front of cam? Close so it looks like a plume of smoke? That could work. in camera compositing: You could shoot your own VFX plate kinda like this: https://www.actionvfx.com/collections/dust-waves-vol-2-stock-footage use a strong backlight shoot on black and then composite it over your footage during the editing phase. The editor should be able to tint it orange and use a blending mode of "screen" so it becomes transparent over the footage. (or just buy a plate from the website i listed above or video copilot: https://www.videocopilot.net/products/action2/ ) 100% VFX method: There are several programs that a VFX artist (and a smart individual watching youtube tutorials) could use to create a full smoke effect. Such programs are- trapcode particular: https://www.redgiant.com/products/trapcode-particular/ FumeFX: http://www.afterworks.com/FumeFX.asp Turbulence FD: https://www.jawset.com/ If you go this route, you would just need to make sure that if there is camera movement there is something that can be motion tracked. There are more out there too but of course require a VFX artist in post. Good luck!

When I read your headline I thought perhaps you were going to say something about the speed at which the market changes technology. After reading your post, good luck! I used to live in Valencia. I biggest tip for finding a place out there might be; try finding a place that's near the freeway. I used to live smack dab in the middle of Santa Clarita there and it would take forever just to get to the freeway. I used to commute to burbank every day for work, it was 15 min to the freeway and 15 down the freeway. Anyway you'll hear a lot of Los Angelenos talk about the traffic haha! Also, not sure if you can wait a while but maybe you would have a larger community to sell your equipment to if you waited to sell when getting here. Safe travels!

Sure is! I've never been to Germany before. Looking forward to it

Haha! Who knows. I guy can wish right?!

Not sure where to post something like this, as I'm usually a lurker at this forum. But I was so excited I wanted to share the news with everyone! I feel kinda speechless, they told me I won a trip to Munich, Germany to get a tour of the headquarters, I can't wait! I built a mega sized Alexa mini as a halloween costume in October to enter the contest a few months ago. (took me two months to build it) I had no idea what I was getting myself into during the build. I had to go to 2 specialty building supply stores to find the foam and the cardboard tubing I needed, crazy but fun. Arri's instagram page: https://www.instagram.com/p/BcXZ3hpD1Qy/?taken-by=arri I also made a time lapse build video here: Thanks for all of the inspiration from the cinematography community!

Hi Guillaume, thank you for your reply. When corresponding with the associate via email I asked that very thing by saying: "...To confirm, You said that it needs to be backlit. Is that for the nighttime look? Because I would be wanting the daytime look, which I thought was front lit?..." and she replied with: "...The backdrop is a true translight and must be lit from behind. It is made on duratrans which is a backlit film material. It is a day only. You would have to have a digital vinyl material to light from the front for day and the back for the night. This is not that material..." That research led me to a couple images like this: http://murphsmedia.com/Translite3-history-translite-duratrans.html Where the lights are arranged in a grid array and not just in a line at the top. So I'm still confused about which is which.