Alex Haspel

there is something i often wondered about, it fits in this thread, so maybe i can get it answered here. what about dvd's of films that originated in digital, like 28days later? what does one get to see there, is the material taken from a digital master or telecined from a print? thanks in advance,

wow. you people are really mean to each other.

hehe, that made my day. almost as good as sending a pa to get the optical axis (not sure if this is the current translation into english) from the camera truck.

yep. my thoughts exactly.

well, from my understanding 1/120 is going to look more "strobey" than 1/60 since it's the shorter exposure time.

congratulations, that looked great. was that a camera shadow on the girl at the beginning, or something intentional? how did you do the slow motion? it looked flawless too... and from my personal experience, i don't really understand the moaning about the xl-h1... i shot 2 projects with it recently, one with mini35 and one without it but with lot's of artificial rain, still without any compression artefacts. haven't seen any of the material yet, but from what i saw on the preview (pal) monitor, i really liked what i saw. anyways, congratulations on your videoclip.

i've never seen a 5kw hmi ...

this is all right. it has also been partially discussed here: http://www.cinematography.com/forum2004/in...showtopic=15250

it's a dedo weigert one. i am not sure if this is common, but it also is two layered and has two zips with the first layer's "close"-position on the opposite side of the zip as the other layer's "close"-position. (which i happen to find rather clever)

well, even if the bag scratches something, it's most likely gonna be the first half meter or so. there will probably only a slate recorded on it if your'e fast (or just record 30 secs color bar, to prevent this. (sorry, extremely stupid joke)). well, my bag (which also is the only one i've yet worked is to be zipped and unzipped from the outside, so this is how i do it: .)open the bag. .)put my stuff in. .)close it per zip. .)put my arms in. .)increase the volume of the bag with my right hand, while opening the armhole for the right hand with the left hand. (to make sure there is enough air in it, a slighly vacuumish atmosphere can be very bothering, as already mentioned by daniel stigler) .)make sure everything is closed. .)do my job. of course you'll touch the emulsion, but only the first 30-40cm of the reel.. (see first answer) conserning the staitic discharge i can only speak from personal experience. i never used gloves, and never had any problems...

you might want to read this: http://www.steadicamforum.com/forums/index...?showtopic=1416 and this: http://www.steadicamforum.com/forums/index...?showtopic=3336

das war aber ein bisschen harsch... du bist ja schließlich auch erst 27, mein guter. ausserdem hattest du dir ja kommentare gewünscht, und meine kritik war auch durchwegs konstruktiv. wie auch immer... grüße, alex

and i read that the xlh1 is to be rated at around 200asa. but i'm not sure how trustworthy that information is.

das erklärt das abprallen jeglicher kritik am schnitt... ;)

well, you surely know your pictures, having seen them quite some times probably. but try to feel yourself into someone seeing this material for the first time... i really had a hard time conceiving all this, and now that i write this i must say that in retrospect i can't really remember many shots. wich might be caused by: #1: my extreme deficit of sleep #2: the horrendously fast pace of your reel

für meinen geschmack war das viel zu schnell geschnitten, ich hatte kaum die möglichkeit die (wirklich sehr schön wirkenden) bilder in diesem videoclipartigen staccato-tempo zu erfassen. aber wie gesagt: tolle bilder, hätte einige gerne länger auf mich einwirken lassen, wenn auch auf kosten wegfallender anderer. and now for our english viewers: for my taste it was cut way too fast, i hardly had a chance to conceive those (really nice looking) pictures when showed in that videoclip-like staccato-rythm. but like already mentioned: great images, i would have liked to see some of them longer, even at the expense of some others dropping out. all the best, alex "lazy eye" haspel

i never had this verified yet, but this image shows #1: my unbelievable wacom tablet skills #2: how i always explained myself the phenomen you described. i invite anyone to enlighten me, in the quite likely case that i am wrong. cheers, Alex "Mommy says i'm totally clever" Haspel

i read this over at steadicamforum.com, and me rather sad... a 72 year old crop duster? that's pretty crazy....

damn helicopters. my condolences.

well, my concern would be that at least all the super8 cameras i ever had a chance to lay my dirty hands on where consumer cameras. meaning the aperature could not be set completely manual, directly on the lens... and registration is also a lot poorer (ob das wirklich das superlativ von poor ist?). and at least from my experience, super 8 will grainwise always look like super 8 because of it's size, even when only transered to pal. i can definately imagine that mixing 16 and 35 can work, when using proffessional camera gear with both formats, which is not really possible in super8 (i'm surely getting flamed for this). especially when finished on a inferior format like pal, where the slight differences between 16 & 35 (i.e. gain) are more likely becoming invisible. best of luck anyways, alex "axel" haspel PS: konnte ich meinen letzten punkt in dieser mir fremden sprache halbwegs klarmachen? ich denke, da sowohl 16 als auch 35 dem format pal überlegen sind tendieren deren qualitative unterschiede eher dazu sich bei einer pal abtastung zu verspielen. während super8 auflösungstechnisch (zumindest subjektiv wg. korn) pal dann doch eher unterlegen ist, vermute ich, dass die optischen differenzen zwischen 16 & s8 eher feststellbar sind. aber vielleicht bin auch nur ein furchtbarer klemmer. note to non german speaking readers: i was only translating my last point into german, since i am not completely sure about my eloquence in english. dont't worry, no conspirational stuff going on here.

i'm skeptic about that format mix. even if s8 will only be used in close ups, 16 will still look superiour. but you could of course unserexpose the 16mm material by 3 stops, get that back in telecine (for the gain), and shoot everything slightly out of focus. then your material might match. hoppla, das klang jetzt vielleicht ein bisschen zu sehr nach sarkastischem arschloch (was es natürlich nicht sollte), wollte eigentlich nur meine zweifel bekunden. good luck anyways,

let us know how it went.

i am just helping with the postproduction of a student short i DoP'ed and we shot MOS because we had no sync sound compatible camera package availible (due to budget restraints of course). there is only one actress in the whole 30minute movie, and 4 lines of monologe, but still it is an unbelievable pain in the youknowwhere to do all the other sound in post! even with access to the "sound ideas" - sound libary. we totally underestimated the amount of time going into this, and so here we are now 2 days prior to the premiere and still working on the sound almost 24/7 ! paid proffessionals may be a bit faster than we are, but also a hell lot more expensive! i'm with kubrick on this one, avoiding MOS shooting for sound movies.

i remember that one. i thought that it was an extremely brave shot, since it was so long, but it worked perfectly in this movie (and it's pace). i wish i had seen elephant on the big screen. altough only seeing it on dvd, i remeber saying to myself 10 minutes into the movie that this must have been a hell of a job for the focus puller...

damn, that looked nice, congratulations. ive only seen the streaming version, but that hvx200 seems to be capable of some nice looking pictures. it also seems like you had quite some lighting budget.... ?