Vince Sweeney

100% dark. Get a loading tent.

I understand those points; I'm not new at this. (Where are the pro AC's, who will have better answers?) ;) I mentioned the editor thing... Regardless if an editor didn't choose the best shot, why are so many hes working with out of focus anyway? Why have the half dozen or so indie films I've worked on barely had major focus issues, especially given that we had 1/100th the resources they have? Yes maybe those projects had a ton of other issues with quality in other areas, like many small films do, but focus wasn't usually one of them. Only once can I recall having a night-time 16mm scene with unexplained focus problems that rendered the two shots useless, but the AC on that shoot was fresh out of school and we had lenses and a camera that were about my age. The other 20+ days of dailies had barely any problems I can recall and we had no assist system of any kind, no fancy Panavision testing/check out area, no modern lenses, faded barrel marks and not even a 2nd AC to help out. After you've worked the trenches for many years, it's hard to agree there's an excuse for a multi-million dollar film to have a locked off wide or even a medium shot that is clearly off the mark, and it makes me believe I'm missing something else that doesn't get reported much. I think there's very few people here who've been involved at the level of movie's I'm talking about and dealt with problems like those so answers may not be of much value until one of these few AC's speaks up about some experiences. It can't have been a soft lens on that particular First Man example, unless it was defective, because it was way too soft compared to all the rest of the film. That answer would have me believe they had one lens they used for one shot that was really soft. But even then, wouldn't that have showed up in their lens testing? In that case there seems to be two possibilities. The AC screwed up and almost set it to infinity and walked away without checking, or there are cases of lenses having mechanical issues that aren't well known except by rental houses. Maybe someone that works in lens service at a rental house would best answer this.

Not seeing it. Lots of variables on how that might be worded. Maybe its time it get discussed by some pro AC's anyway. Something is really wrong out there and some blunt feedback on where the fault really lay is important.

For the pro AC's on the forum: When I see a well budgeted movie, the last one of which was First Man, I often see buzzed focus and wonder how often it's the fault of the AC, or is it usually a tech issue? And if so, is it that common for new lenses to get messed up internally? This hasn't been my experience with even older or converted lenses so I'm confused as to why I see screwed up shots. I loved the cinematography in that film and think it's the best of the year, but there were a more than a few shots where the focus was 100% clearly off the mark, and a couple of those were static or mostly static wides and mediums where it seems there'd be no excuses for it, and there'd certainly be no creative reason to make those particular ones out of focus. An AC couldn't screw something like that up, right? ..so are issues on those shots usually a lens that has a mechanical issue or.... what? One of them on Ryan Gosling inside a NASA hallway was very wide and from a good distance and it was way off. I'd think it would be an infinity setting on the lens and be real simple to focus, but something went wrong. And I understand the tighter shots, wide open, and with movement have much more complex focus issues but this is not what I'm talk about, although even those should be mostly spot-on given the amazing focus-assist resources they have. Interstellar is another one that comes to mind where there were a few screwed shots that were obvious on an IMAX screen. With all the money, top level gear, lenses, as much light as needed and great talents and carefully selected union crew, how do shots still get out of focus? I've done indie films in the past where this happens just a few times at most, if barely at all, and we might have had $100K for the whole movie, a very basic set of SS primes and a AC with only a few years experience. It appears our ratio of in-focus shots is better than many big films. How is that possible? Are we just more scared of getting anything wrong on our fragile, small movie, and take more care? I find that hard to believe. I'm well aware that final edits are often filled with the worst takes on a technical level, but even then, some of those shots had no excuse for buzzed focus in the first place.

That Reala in 16mm is really grainy when new. At this point it would look like a CRT screen with no signal!

Great film and worth going to an IMAX for. In fact if you don't, you are doing a disservice to yourself being in this field of work. The sequences of action and execution of it were better than anything I've seen in recent times. It's also as much a study in sound design as it is shooting action. The 2-perf really helped to nail the tone of it. Best film I've seen all year, easily, and the IMAX sound had a big effect on my perception of it. It would be a waste on even the best TV setup. Very much like Gravity in many ways, but far better (and this really happened)

Yes. Lots of interest but no payments made yet. Replied to PM.

https://www.kodak.com/corp/podcast/podcastepisode/?contentid=4295010426

Need to sell some gear and have a new Litepanels LED Astra light which is a 2nd gen model (2x brighter than the original). Amazing output with low wattage. You can buy an AB or V-mount battery plate for it as well as a bluetooth controller. Still new and wrapped with bubble-type plastic. Pick up near LA or can ship. Was about $1000 new. Sell for $550

Careful with a Penelope. As far as I know, there's only one place in Europe that can service them anymore. Aaton may as well, if you can get anyone there to answer you. A 35-3 is far easier to service and get parts for.

There's plenty of modern film camera service and rentals in LA and overall, some of it is done internally at rental houses or resellers/dealers. This post was asking about specific, non-commercial cameras which aren't in general rental use and not used on many productions, and certainly not on decently funded projects. Funded/bonded/insured productions are renting later model Arri or Aaton film cameras and it only makes business sense, in general, to actively service these cameras.

I used a Diehard brand 12v power unit for several days of a feature shoot, for an Aaton LTR. A simple addition of an XLR connector on the side of the body of it made for a really nice, rugged, long lasting and very cheap back-up source.

If it's been sitting for 5 years, you absolutely without doubt need to have it fully serviced before using it or risk much more costly problems. The switch issue will be solved by them. Abel, Bernie or AM Camera can service it.

New condition. Perfect for your 80mm front lenses. $40 Here is the BH link to what I have. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=889000&gclid=CKOFk5aj7tICFYqGfgodlEMEUA&Q=&ap=y&c3api=1876%2C%7Bcreative%7D%2C%7Bkeyword%7D&is=REG&A=details

$90

One of my favorite yet hard to find films has finally been restored (16mm) and will be showing at the Aero theater in Santa Monica, among others. It took Janus Films long enough but we finally get to see it as intended. The old DVD and pirate copies were from some old tape, I assume. The only decent looking version I ever got to see played late one night on TCM. From The FIlm Stage: "Barbara Loden’s lone feature was a vanguard work by an America independent filmmaker, a totally uncompromised writer-director-star turn in which she embodies a listless young mother in Pennsylvania coal country who drifts away from her domestic prison and shacks up with perhaps the least glamorous outlaw in cinema history, Michael Higgins’s cantankerous “Mr. Dennis.” A deeply personal work by Loden, herself a child of Appalachia, with an extraordinary clear-eyed expression of dead-end despair, a life-marred document of a scuffed, sad, left-behind working-class world. Without question, one of the greatest American films of the 1970s." http://www.janusfilms.com/films/1893

Very cool system. Have you housed it yet? Thanks for taking this on.

Looking for a 4x4 ND filter. PM me. US only.

$250

Blimp or Blimped housing.

This works on all systems: PAL/SECAM/NTSC It's also more appropiate to call it a VHF and UHF receiver. Channels UHF / VHF from 48.5 to 855.25MHz 2 to 13 and 14 to 69 Dimensions 158 (l) x 56 (w) x 38 (d) mm

This is a professional UHF receiver used in conjunction with a monitor for wireless viewing of film camera taps. Make a directors viewfinder with a real screen as opposed to some old portable TV. Works really well with a Marshall or Transvideo monitor (or any with analog inputs) Operated on 8-28v. BNC and 3-pin Fischer connectors. $550 new. Sell for $100. Pick up near LA or will ship for $15

I meant $75 for the halogen versions. (not $100)

Sold.

This is a rare Cinematography Electronics film/video sync. system. Complete kit from a major Hollywood camera house, ready to go. This was another extra item from an auction lot. These are over $5000 new from C.E.. Sell for $350. Ships in hard case for $25 From the CE spec page: Works with: Aaton 7 LTR, 54 LTR, LTR-X, XC, XTR, XTR+, XTR, Prod, XO+, X Prod, 35 mm Type (1, 2, 3) Arriflex 16SR (1,2,3), 16 SRHS (1, 2, 3), 35-3, 35-2A*, 35-2B*, 35-2C*, 35-3C*, 435, 535, 535B, 35 BL (1,2,3,4,4S) Panavision 16MM, Gold (1,2), Millennium, Panaflex, Panaflex X, Platinum, Panastar (1,2), PSR Moviecam Compact*** Mitchell Fries** Showscan Showscan ILM Vistaflex MSM Vistavision Wilcam Vistavision * With Cinematography Electronics 2C CRYSTAL MOTOR BASE ** With Cinematography Electronics FRIES/ARRI MODIFICATION *** With Cinematography Electronics COMPACT PRECISION SPEED PLUS