Jump to content

Adam Guzik

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Adam Guzik

  1. Heya, folks! Aside from being a filmmaker, DP, and colorist, I'm also a composer of music for media! Before I went to college to study film and video production, I was a music student in public school. Once I was in college, I made music on the side, and then I started composing professionally in 2015 for a YouTube web series. I mainly do orchestral works using entirely MIDI-based virtual sample instruments, but I also dabble in synth/sound design and rock-based tracks, too. Would love it if you guys would give my latest demo reel and some samples a listen! And if you'd like to listen to more, you can visit my website at https://www.adam-guzik-silver-films.com/music Thanks so much! Best, Adam Here are some Scoring Competitions and a Rescore I've done recently: And a few Miscellaneous pieces:
  2. Hello, all you fine folks! Going to be ordering a Red Komodo and accessories within the next few weeks or so, and I need some recommendations for battery plates for the camera. I did have my eye set on the Wooden Camera Battery Slide plate, as it'd allow me to have one Canon BP battery slotted directly on the camera and allow me to hot swap my main batteries, but it's currently out of stock, and I don't know if I'm patient enough to wait for it to come back in stock. Is there another battery plate for the Komodo like this that is designed and works in the same way? Or are there other battery plates I should look into? Would love to hear your recommendations. Thanks so much! Best, Adam
  3. Hey, Owen! I didn't use any filters at all for this project - I shot the 500T stock bare and measured for ISO 100 or 200, overexposing anywhere from 1 - 3 stops and correcting the white balance in post.
  4. Hey, Owen, For the Overcast/Rainy Autumn Day, I shot that on the Krasnogorsk-3 with the stock Zenit Meteor 17-69mm f/1.9 lens at I believe f/4; I was metering for ISO 200. For the Partially Cloudy Noontime and Late Afternoon Autumn Day shots, I captured those on an Aaton XTR Prod with a Canon 8-64mm f/2.4 zoom lens.
  5. I've shot on the 500T 7219 stock in daylight conditions, both with a filter and without a filter. What I've found, through experience, is that it's possible to warm it up to a Daylight-ish balance, when shooting without a filter, but be aware: you're more than likely going to have to correct a good deal of blue out of your shadows and the darkest areas of your image, as it contaminates them a lot more when shooting without the filter. It won't look the same as if you'd shot with the 85/85B filter, but it's a look all unto itself that you may or may not prefer. I've attached some examples below for you in different conditions. For the shots that I took With the 85B filter, I also used a .9 ND filter as well, which is why they're a little underexposed. Bright, Sunny Summer's Day at Noon, Without Filter Ungraded: Graded: Overcast, Rainy Day, Without Filter Ungraded: Graded: Partially Cloudy, Autumn Day in Mid-Morning, With Filter: Ungraded: Graded: Late Afternon, Autumny Day, With Filter: Ungraded: Graded:
  6. Hey, folks! Just got some 50D I shot on Boxing Day back from the lab. The colors are gorgeous - but 90% of the footage is out of focus. I'm actually going to be shooting a silent (ADR'd) short film in the next month or so, so I need to get the camera collimated and squared away so I don't have to worry about out-of-focus shots. I'm in Central Easter Pennsylvania, and I'd like to get the lens mount collimated so the camera can be ready in about 1-2 weeks. Does anybody know where I could go or who I could take it to to get it done, or if it's something I could even do myself? Thanks so much! Best, Adam
  7. Hey, folks! Looking at upgrading from my handy little Krasnogorsk-3 to a more serious, solid sync sound super 16mm camera package sometime in late Q3 to Q4 of this year. I'm looking for a sync sound body that can do up to 72 fps crystal speed, really good registration for a really steady image at any frame rate, 4 to 6 400ft magazines, freshly re-celled batteries, and a nice zoom lens. For the lens, I don't need one with the biggest zoom range or the fastest aperture, but something decently wide to decently telephoto and lighter-weight. I'm also possibly looking for a tripod to go with the package in case I can't make use of my existing tripod. My plan right now is sometime this month I'll be buying myself a Pocket 6K Pro and accessories just to have a good quality digital cinema camera, and then the super 16mm camera is what I'll be after next. Budget is going to be around $12-16K USD. I'd personally love to get my hands on an Aaton XTR Prod, as it's what I used in college, and I appreciate how easy it is to load, but I'm all ears for other suggestions! If you know of any packages or where to go looking for them, hit me up! Thanks so much, folks! Best, Adam
  8. Hello again, good folks! It's been a - long while. Covid has been pretty rough on a lot of us. I know for me, personally, it wasn't easy going 15 months not being able to see friends and family for so long. So, once I was fully vaccinated and able to start traveling again, I made a point of taking my super 16mm modified Krasnogorsk-3 with me and film 400 feet of Kodak's Vision3 500T stock of my outings. And lo and behold, I actually got a lot more shots in focus this time! Was it because my skill as a one-mand-band camera operator and focus puller had improved? Lol, nah. It was just because I was able to stop the lens down so much, even when metering at ISO 100 and 200. And also because the 500T stock is friggin' POWERFUL. I mean, seriously, I was overexposed anywhere from 1 to 3 stops for a lot of these shots, and even shooting directly into the mid-afternoon sun on a gorgeous summer day here in Pennsylvania, the stock didn't lose the information. Granted, it was overexposed, but when scanned on an HDR scanner like Colorlab's Lasergraphics Scanstation, all that highlight information is still actually there, and you can pull it to your heart's content, or just let it roll off beautifully into overexposure, as can be seen with my pretty heavy grade here. One thing I also learned is that my Krasnogorsk is not so good at slow-motion. I've read what others have had to say here on this forum about the K3's registration, and - yeah, it's really not a steady camera. Like, at all. The only way it's viable is with some heavy assistance from DaVinci Resolve's Stabilizer, and even that's not a Magic Bullet 100% of the time. So, the next time I decide I want to shoot slow-mo on my K3, just - stop me, please. I will say, though, I still love how so much of this footage turned out. I'm definitely getting more confident in loading and unloading my K3, and film remains insanely easy to color grade. All the shots here, in terms of color, were made in 4 serial nodes in DaVinci. I did cheat a little - I used DaVinci's Deflicker tool to remove the flicker inherent in the footage due to the K3's spring-wound motor variance shooting at speed, and it worked a treat for basically 99% of all shots, save for the slow-mo shots and specific spots in others, but it absolutely made much of this footage look like it was shot on a crystal sync motor, which made me really happy. All in all, this was a great test for me of the 7219 stock in bright, sunny summer daylight conditions. I do wanna test the stock out more in more dimly lit night interior and exterior settings, but that'll be for another day. In the meantime, hope you enjoy watching! Included is my graded version and the ungraded version for anyone to tinker around with in terms of grading. Music is also made by me! Professional composer here, too. Thanks so much for stopping by, folks! Have a good one! Best, Adam
  9. Hey, folks! Want to nab an MOS 35mm cam sometime later this year, maybe mid-fall to early winter or even the start of next year, and I'm looking at the Cameflex CM3 as a contender. I'm hoping to get a CM3 with a crystal sync motor, at least one M42 mount, and 2 or 3 400' mags, with all the necessary batteries and cables needed to run it and the body and mags in good working order. Mainly looking at the Cameflex for its semi-compact size, ability to do 48 fps, and multiple lens turret design. Budget is going to be $3.5K USD - $4.5K USD. If anybody knows anyone who is willing to part with theirs for that price, with all the above goodies, that would be awesome. I am also totally willing to fork over more to get it maintained and tuned up before I'd receive it. I am also happy to hear other suggestions for cams that fit the bill. Thanks so much, folks! Best, Adam
  10. Film has been SOLD. Thanks so much for looking, everyone. Best, Adam
  11. Hey, folks! Deciding to part ways with these 2 rolls of 16mm 500T stock. I bought these back in 2014 during my freshman year of college. These cans have never been opened, but they haven't been stored optimally either - they've been stored at room temperature for the last 6 years, and I don't know how long the person I bought them from had them before me, so they are almost certainly expired by this point. Selling these both for $275 USD. Shipping's included. This will be shipping from Pottsville, Pennsylvania, USA, zip code 17901. Thanks a ton, folks! Best, Adam
  12. Hey, folks! Got 2 reels to show ya: First up is my Director/DP/Colorist Reel: And then, we have my Composer Reel! The music for my filmmaker showreel is made by me, too! Thanks so much for checking these out, guys! Best, Adam
  13. Thank you so much! I definitely think I could've gone warmer on some of the shots, but the fall colors were so vibrant, even on such an overcast, rainy day, that it would very quickly become too warm. Glad you liked the ungraded version, too! Yeah, after this test shoot, this camera isn't perfect - the lens vignettes a little at the widest angle, but, it's honestly not as bad as I feared. The Krasnogorsk only takes 100ft daylight spools, though; it's not like the Bolex, which has a removable top so you can use 400ft magazines. And yeah, the winds only last about 28 seconds each, so, this was about 2 minutes 50 seconds of footage altogether. I specifically shot this unfiltered because I really wanted to see how this stock would handle overexposure and then "pulling" it digitally, just because the great thing about film is that even though it blows out when its overexposed, it can't actually clip highlights the way digital does, so I knew that digitally "pulling" would be a viable option. I definitely brought the 500T stock along because I knew this would be a very run-and-gun shoot, and I didn't know what all conditions I would be in, so I needed the most versatility in exposure latitude, and the 500T provided that. I'd originally wanted to meter at ISO 100, because originally it was supposed to be sunny on the day of the train ride, but alas, it was raining pretty good, and I had to meter at ISO 200 just so that I wasn't opened all the way up, which is where the Zenit lens's sharpness is supposed to fall apart.
  14. Hello again, folks! Been a while! I finally got the chance to shoot some film again! About 2 weeks ago, I was able to take out my (relatively recently) purchased super 16 modified Krasnogorsk-3 with the standard Zenit Meteor 17-69 f/1.9 lens out on a train ride to Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania, where their annual Fall Foliage Festival was taking place. I shot a single 100ft daylight reel of Kodak's Vision3 500T 7219 stock, but this time, I shot without any filters and metered for ISO 200, overexposing quite a bit to see how that would turn out. Being my first time shooting on this camera, and the fact that my eyesight has worsened a little since shooting on the Aaton XTR Prod, a fair amount of the shots were out of focus, but! I'm thrilled at the colors I was able to get from this footage! Processing and transfer done again by Colorlab in Rockville, Maryland, who scanned it at 4K (4096 x 2408) on their LaserGraphics ScanStation. Film is just so nice to color grade; all of these shots were only 4 serial nodes in DaVinci Resolve. Piano music was also done by me. Graded Version: Ungraded Version, for any of you who want to tinker about with the footage and make your own grades: Would love to hear what you all think, barring the terrible focusing job I did, lol! Have a good one, folks! Best, Adam
  15. Hey, folks! Just as a forewarning: This doesn't really pertain to any specific camera, but rather, what I would love to see in a future, modern super 16 camera, features wise, tech-wise, etc. Personally, I'm torn between the super 8 and super 16 formats. I love shooting on Kodak's modern Vision3 stocks - they're just a joy to color grade, and super 16 is not anywhere near as grainy as I thought it would be. That said, modern super 8 ain't no slouch either, and the ease of use - especially in regards to loading and unloading - is seriously appealing. I keep thinking how awesome it would be if, after Kodak finally started shipping their super 8 camera (whenever that is, lol), they would make a super 16 camera designed to work with pre-loaded 100 ft cartridges or 400 ft magazines. I do understand that 16mm did use to come in cartridges way back when, but they did away with that for whatever reason. But imagine if Kodak made a super 16 camera that was as easy to load as super 8. You could have two models: 1 model for the 100 ft cartridges, and one model for the pre-loaded 400 ft magazines. The 100 ft cartridge models would look and operate much the same as Kodak's Super 8 camera, but bigger, allowing for the 16mm cartridges. Meanwhile, the 400 ft recyclable magazine camera would be like this: Kodak would sell the magazines pre-loaded with 400 ft of whatever stock, and it would work only with their 400 ft compatible camera. After you shot all the film housed inside, you'd send the entire magazine to a lab; the film would get processed/scanned, and the empty magazine would be sent back to Kodak to be re-used. Obviously, something like either of these cameras would be, like, inexcusably expensive, seeing how much Kodak's going to charge for their super 8 camera, but honestly, loading and unloading film is the one part of the analog process that makes me hesitate, and if Kodak were to eliminate that, I would throw all my money at. Of course, this is assuming something like this is even possible. I'm just day-dreaming here, yanno? Still, I think it'd be sick to have super 16mm cameras like this.
  16. Hey, thanks for replying to this thread! I got my film scanned 1080p on Colorlab's LaserGraphics ScanStation at ProRes 444. It was an overscan, so the final delivered video wasn't exactly true 1080p, but the scan was so sharp that it barely made a difference. For the delivery file, I first delivered in ProRes 444, and then converted to a super high-fidelity H.264 .mov via HandBrake. As for lenses, my school had already given out their prime lens set for their other Aaton, so I was given the Canon 8-64 Super 16mm zoom lens. It's a very awesome lens, though I had to be careful using it when I had on any filters; at 8mm, you could see the edge of one side of the filters. This might've just been me not putting the matte box on properly, but I'd still not use the lens at greater than 12mm with a filter on. Hope that helps! Have a good one! Best, Adam
  17. Hey Kenny! Thanks for commenting! So, the great thing about getting film scanned log is that the files you get back, whether it's DPX or flat-pass ProRes 444, 422, etc., are literally Cineon Log images. Since they are Cineon Log files, you can then directly apply a Kodak 2383 Film Print Emulation Lut. This is what I did. Resolve comes with a 2383 lut in 3 different white points - D65, D60, and D55 - for both Rec.709 and P3 target color spaces. For the above graded version, I used the P3 Luts, but I would actually recommend you use the Rec.709 versions. Just more efficient LUTs to use for your daily color grading needs. These LUTs do a fantastic job of starting off the finished film look, and you just have to make your corrections and grades before the LUT. Fair warning, you'll realize very quickly that even though it seems flat and a little unsaturated now, the 2383 Rec.709 LUT will really make colors pop - so make sure prod design, costuming, make-up, and lighting are all under control. As stated above, this short/test shoot/whatever was basically a "Let's shoot whatever I can think of, no prep at all!" kind of deal. I shot this short under both natural light, and sometimes light from CFL bulbs. The green light they emitted really made it hard to control the green tint throughout the image, especially with the LUT applied. So definitely be mindful of that, but if the colors are working together, as they are in the shot at 0:39, the results will be literally perfect - exactly like similarly lit and designed scenes from professional movies shot on film. In terms of shooting on 7219, I used an 85 filter with an ND.09 for the broad, noon-time daylight shots - even with the film's speed cut down to ISO 320 with the 85 filter, the lens was always 2.5/3 stops too bright for what my light meter read, making the ND.09 necessary for those scenes. However, for the sunset shots, I was able to just use the 85 filter with out any extra NDs. Everything else used the full sensitivity of the stock. In every instance, I metered for how much sensitivity I had - 320 or 500. No push processing here, though there were a few underexposed shots that I pushed in post, namely the shot at 1:48. Truthfully, I didn't find the 7219 too grainy at all, even when I did push it, though I guess that's more my own personal preferences. I'm actually going to try and attempt to shoot a 2- or 3-perf 35mm short film while I'm here in Los Angeles for the semester. I've already bought a short-end 400 ft. recan of Vision3 200T 5213, and I'm thinking of getting two whole 400 ft. cans of 500T 5219, too. The people at Reel Good told me 500T was the most expensive stock in terms of price per foot, and I'm guessing it's probably because of it's versatility. My reasoning for shooting exclusively on the 500T stock was somewhere along the lines of, "It's better to have more sensitivity than less to work with," and I'm guessing that's how most other people think, too. Cheers! And if you have anything else you'd want to ask, be sure to drop me a line. Have a good one! Best, Adam
  18. Thanks so much! This is my second time shooting film. I first shot motion film 3.5 years ago for my freshman film class; back then, it was black and white Kodak Tri-X 16mm reversal film. I had a really great time then, too. This was my first time shooting color film, and the Aaton XTR Prod was a much bigger camera - really heavy when you shoulder rig it for hours at a time, which I did the day I did my shooting - but I'd love to get one after I graduate, both to have such a really rugged, rock-steady super 16mm camera and for it's ability to shoot 23.976 fps.
  19. Hello, again! A big thanks to everyone who took the time to reply to this thread, especially Michael Rodin; his post with the DPX file convinced me to have my film scanned raw. Anyways, everything's been finished; I shot back over Thanksgiving, got my film processed and scanned, edited, colored, and put up on Vimeo! I've made graded and ungraded versions for you all to see! So, basically, from shooting and getting a RAW scan of my film, I've come to the conclusion that film is kind of just as ugly as raw digital footage straight out of camera, but color grading is where film really shines. Film just responds so much nicer than digital when you start mucking about with all the colors, and I was able to get the look I was after very, very quickly. Of course, from this shoot, I've also learned the importance of lighting, production design, and costuming: My mom was a good sport for letting me film her at all, but I wish I had told her to wear a different top. That bright turquoise turtleneck just throws off the whole color palette in a couple of shots, and man is it saturated; I tried selectively desaturating just the turtleneck to tone down the color palette a little bit, and at 50% saturation, it was still really distracting, so, I just left it alone. I've had this sort of trouble with digital images before, but now, having shot on film, I can see why so many people use more muted, natural colors for costumes for most characters, unless the story calls for otherwise. Anyways, here are the two videos; first, graded, then ungraded. Thanks a ton for watching! Have a good one! -Adam GRADED: UNGRADED:
  20. Hello, all you lovely folks! This is my first post here in this forum, so, quick introduction: I'm Adam; I'm a senior Cinema & Photo student at Ithaca College, going to graduate in May. So, in the next couple of weeks, I'm going to be utilizing one of my school's Aaton XTR Prods and shooting 2 rolls of 400 ft. Kodak Vision3 500T. It's not really for a project or student film - it's just going to be me mucking about with the camera and emulsion. It's going to be a test shoot of sorts, really. It's the Processing and Scanning part of the whole process that I need some help with. So, I've done a lot of research into the various Labs around the country, and all the different types of processing and all the different types of scanning. I don't want anything too fancy - just a really good quality 1080p scan that I can muck about with in Final Cut and DaVinci, to really test how film stacks up when it comes to color grading. The two primary options I'm looking at right now for Processing and Scanning are Cinelab and Colorlab, Cinelab for it's attractive student prices and Colorlab for it's more transparent processing and scanning methods. In that regard, here are my questions: 1. Does scanning to 1080p mean I'm totally locked into Telecine? I know Telecine isn't exactly ideal when it comes to scanning film, but does choosing to have my film scanned at 1080p mean I can only use the Telecine machines and not the higher-end scanning machines? Like, could one of the 2K - 7K scanners scan 1080p? I'm mostly looking at this from a price perspective, seeing as the higher-end scanners are more expensive. I'd rather not use Telecine just for quality's sake, so I'd like to find out now whether to spend the extra money or not on the higher-quality scanners. 2. I'd like to know all of your opinions on the different scanning techniques. How big of a difference is there between Raw, Best Light, and Scene to Scene scanning? I'm mainly looking at this from a color grading perspective. I understand that Raw will provide the most flexible image, but I'm not sure that all of the scanned film videos I've already downloaded and mucked about with were scanned Raw. Attached to this post are screen grabs of ungraded scanned film (very low quality YouTube and Vimeo video downloads in every case) that I have found to be able to grade to achieve the look I want. Would you say that all of these were scanned Raw, or were different techniques used for some of them? And would any of you have visual examples of the differences between the three different scanning techniques. Thank you so much! If you need me to clarify anything I've just written here, please tell me. Have a good one! -Adam
  • Create New...