Jaan Shenberger

jules et jim mean streets office killer imaginary forces' end credits to 'lost in space' -- perfectly appropriate for a self-conscious retro remake film saul bass' 'to kill a mockingbird' -- generally credited for almost single-handedly creating the "default" title sequence technique of graceful xcus of inanimate objects as typography elegantly appears within negative space kyle cooper's 'island of dr. moreau' -- though it's very well crafted, it's a complete ripoff of stan brakhage's films. also, approximately ten times more entertaining and involving than the actual movie. kyle cooper's 'seven' -- though this unfortunately led to way too many films using the tabletop photography/scratchy typography technique imaginary forces' 'sphere' saul bass' 'cape fear' remake love the simple & stark white on black title cards cut to the music for most of woody allen's films in the 80s. they really set the tone in presenting the film to the audience as "art" and subtley implies the concept of auteurship by using the same typeface from film to film treasure island (1999) -- excellent faux-1940s titles on glass with cast shadows from a moving light source best of all time: saul bass' end credits for 'west side story' (and the opening overture animation was excellent as well)

though i generally agree with thomas's assertion about twixtor's tendency to create strange motion artifacts, i have to say that if you become familiar enough with its features that you can remedy almost any problems that arise with any particular shot when you slow it down. also, i heard that they retooled the pixel-tracking algorithms in the newest version so that it more intelligently discerns seperate layers of motion (which was its biggest flaw), though i haven't used that new version. i'm not connected to revisionfx in any way, but twixtor and fieldskit are plugins that cannot receive enough praise.

the best way to do this (without simply sending it off to a good post house), would be to use deinterlacer & twixtor from revisionfx (aftereffects plugins). i can tell you firsthand that they will give you the best 60i to 60p conversion in that price range, and twixtor can usually stretch it beyond that to an interpolated 120 or 180 frames without showing noticeable flaws, though it will largely depend on what kind of motion is in your footage. you can download a demo from their site and fully test to see if it works for you. hope this helps, jaan

i actually have the 8mm peleng (for my K3), though i've yet to use it... i had a chance to get it for really cheap and couldn't pass it up. but has anyone worked with more expensive glass in the fisheye range? to be frank, i don't even know what options there are and just was hoping to get any insight before calling rental houses. thanks for the responses, jaan

it looks like i might be shooting some projects for a company that builds custom dome motion displays (kinda like a small planetarium). if so, they'll be shot on 35mm for a 4k scan and will ultimately be projected large and in close proximity to its viewers, so image quality will be paramount. does anyone have any suggestions on specific fisheye/short lenses (irregardless of camera)? if it matters, softness would be more acceptable than color aberration. thanks, jaan

michael, i'm not really much of a pro dp, but i'd like to offer some general advice based on my (and others i've known) experiences... no matter what the project, no matter what you're getting paid, no matter what the budget, do your best to make your final work look as good as possible. that's the only consistent way for a green creative professional (regardless of your specific profession) to get to where they wanna be, faster. i know that may sound totally obvious, but i've been out of school for seven years now and there is a huge difference in the careers of people who really live by this credo, versus those who reserve "giving it their all" for projects that they feel "deserve it". this'll also obviously help you build an impressive reel quicker, too. even if you're dp on a short that is stupid and you know is gonna go nowhere... make it look as good as you can. someone's gonna see it and notice that the cinematography is particularly good and they're gonna make note of your name. if this happens in multitudes, then eventually it'll catch up with you. i guess there's a rough mathematical formula of x(quality of your work) + y(how many eyeballs end up seeing your work) = likelihood of becoming a working dp. other stuff based on my limited experience: 1) if you wanna shoot music videos, then find the biggest band on the best label that you actually can get access to. get the best, most innovative director you know to approach them with you with a great pitch. shoot the video (undoubtedly for no/little pay) and make it look as awesome as possible, and make sure the video as a whole turns out awesome. if the band's big enough, then you have an instant audience for your work. if the video turned out good enough, and if the label's healthy enough, they'll ask you guys to do another video for the artist, or for another artist on their label. or get in contact with other labels that are on the same scale and namedrop your first video and ask if they're looking for pitches for any of their artists. blah blah blah, you get the point. the theory is that you gradually bag bigger and bigger labels & artists, and in turn your invoices have more zeros in them. though this model is more clear-cut for directors, and i'm not sure how strongly it applies to dps (though there are a lot of dual director/dps in the music video world). 2) find out which director major in your school has the richest family. court him/her and start shooting his projects. 3) build a time machine and find out which director major is going to get a three picture deal. court him/her and start shooting his/her projects and hang on to him/her like a leech dipped in superglue. seriously though, because of digital, things seemed to have gotten really messy in terms of how to go about being a working dp. but i really can't reinterate the "give it your all" thing. this is especially important when you consider that when you get in your late twenties/early thirties, your energy level will be a fraction of what it is now. hope this helps, jaan

there are special 5-bladed shuttered projectors (made by eiki, i believe) that are designed for self-transferring 16mm to 60i video. we had such a projector in school and i did this a lot with miniDV. though you can't do a 3;2 inverse telecine in post, because the shared frames are kinda merged, and not seperated into fields. also, there will almost always be a hot spot. i have no idea how these projectors would work with 24p. hope this helps,

in the past, i've been completely shocked at how knowledgeable the phone reps at B&H are, so they might be able to answer your question. one note about the pro-mist filters... people tend to really love them or be really dissappointed by them, with not much in between. i'd suggest trying to find a place that rents them if you haven't tried them out before. if you're in LA, then you should be able to find a place no problem, and they'll probably be able to give you a good rundown on the pros and cons of them. hope this helps, jaan

for lighting ideas, i'd try looking for reference at a stock photo site like gettyimages.com. you'll find boatloads of well-crafted food photos. there's also a newish stock photo site that all food photos, though i forget what it is. another suggestion: don't skimp on hiring a stylist. their work will be literally half the final quality of the footage. hope this helps, jaan

though i'm not familiar with the film path in a 535B, i've seen this telltale phenomena in a cheaper camera (krasnogorsk-3) and it was caused by the K-3 losing the loops, both before and after the film gate. with the K-3, it would seem that the added tension on both ends causes a lag in time as the frame pulls in and pulls away from the gate, thus causing specular streaks both up and down. i also think i remember seeing other footage (from the same batch of faulty, err... i mean "delicate" K-3s) who had only top or bottom streaking, which i assume meant they only lost one loop. though with the K-3 loop loss footage, there was noticeable vertical jitter (yours doesn't seem to), and the streaking was not nearly as uniform. actually the K-3 vertical streaking had a very interesting organic look to it. best of luck, dude. hope this helps, jaan