gordon liron

I just spent the last couple of months in a Luster Color Correction bay at $800 an hour. After picking the brain of our colorist, I would like to add that studios still like to look at Dailies as if they have been color corrected which is why some DPs get so much work because they dont freak exuctives out who don't know anything about the wonders of Color Timing. Those DPs know how to light so well that their Dailies look tip top. It is true that DPs can get in a hurry and chose to shoot a scene fairly neutral only to try to save it in post. Other times, the DP can suck major balls and the colorist can not only save his job but get him more work. It is pretty amazing though...if you haven't been in one yet.

Hey Remmy, Long time no speak! I actually own an EPSON v700 which is typically the same as the 750 except it does not include the wetscan mount and the better software. It does come with silverfast but if you want to batch scan...then you need to upgrade which is what I'm gonna do...i think its like an additional $60. I got it to scan my 120 film for my new (used) Hasselblad which I just picked up a few months ago....WOOOHOOOO. Plus there is another company out there that sells the wetmount for a pretty good price. forget their name but I can find it. In the mean time, you can always send me some neg homey. Leehyphen

MISTAW BOWERBANK, whats up dude? I kinda was expecting you to chime in. what kind off softbox do you have? I'm thinking of selling mine and getting some chimeras. My softlights are awesome but they just take up too much space. Anyways, good to hear from you too....remmy:) gordon

LOL...I know. He's heading towards Post production now so he doesnt have anything to gain from my gear....I'll remember that when he want to use my steadicam for a gig :)

I have some lights that my roommate wants me to remove from our living room :( I was looking at taking the lights to a self storage unit but I just dont think i can justify the amount it will cost vs. for them...given their value. I was looking at storing them on my patio but i was looking at getting one of those portable weather proof sheds. I'm sure it will keep the rain out but i'm concerned when winter rolls around and condensation gets in there and starts corroding everything. I live in north hollywood so it doesnt get too cold here. I was wondering if anybody else has done something like this and wouldn't mind chiming in with some advice. thanks gordon by the way....if anybody is interested in 3x mole richardson super softlights - 2k(1k switches), let me know! They were $1000 a piece at one time.

I'm putting together a HVX package for a friend who is going to sale around the world and shoot 2 movies over the course of a few years. I'm wondering what his options might be for long term storage. Advantage of tape is that you can dump the footage of your drive and re-digitze only what you need while preserving your originals. But with the HVX....it seems like hardrives are the only solution correct? I'm just wondering if I will have to budget at least 5 terebyte lacie drives for him. any info would be appreciated. I'm not totally against HDV but for the most part...everything I've seen and read about the HVX makes me believe it is the strongest format....minus the freakin p2 cards and firestore, etc, etc. thanks gordon

Not to be mean but your movie is like many films I've seen...more specifically, entry level student films. I love many styles of photography but my favorite filmmakers are those that can jump from any style whether it looks commercial or artsy. They understand their medium and can control it however they choose. If this is true than maybe you should post something else for us to see. You mentioned that you know what we want to see. If you can demonstrate that you fully know your craft as you say you do....I will post a sincere apology to you for underestimating your skill and knowledge on this subject. gordon

hmmm... not to instigate or anything but I don't see how this could have looked like anything but a bolex. You earlier post mention 3-perf 35mm and kodak stock. I don't see that at all. The grain is really obvious! Brian, Speaking for the cinematography only, I'd have to say it was a good experiment (not sure if it was your 1st). I really didn't feel like the images were driving the story which is our goal of course. I think you should really think about your shots for your next project and really try to raise the bar. Challenge yourself with a couple of shots you have never done. Bolexs are usually cheap or can be obtained for free...spend some time with your shots...I thing you'll be most pleased when you start to develop your style. good luck

Just a joke but I did make this experimental short for an art class at UC Berkeley. I always feel weird whenever the 1st thing i show is a experimental. I guess I always fear that someone will think I'm a pretentious artist with my nose in the air. I love experimental as I love all styles. Anyways, I shot this in one long day and cut it one day as well. Shot on a bolex and cut on a media 100. Its a 4 or 5 years old but would still like some input.

Well holy crap its mr. bowerbank. Whats going on man...long time. looks like you been keepin yourself pretty busy there up in the bay...nice! To reconfirm what has alreay been said...you should be alright. I shot a short a few years back with 95% interiors and the rest outdoor. The director only bought one roll of daylight and the rest was 7274. The annoying thing was that we had a couple of shots outside on day 1 and the rest was indoor for a week. The annoying thing was that we didn't have many mags but our loader still managed. anyways... hope your shoot goes well and maybe I'll see you around.

Does Anybody know of a 35mm camera that is similar to the bolex. I don't care about the spring wind up. I am looking to do a timelapse test and just wanted to see whats out there. Obiviously I would rather use a 435 with a intervalometer but this needs to be very cheap? Any help would be appreciated. thanks gordon

Also, even if your film is going through the spirit + Da Vinci, post houses also charge for the format your going to. $175 an hour sounds like beta or DVCAM. If its Digi-beta or HD, then its a great deal. If you've invested a lot of money into production, you may want to find the extra cash to go to HD. Probably lookin at $300-400 an hour.

I have a problem with this statement. There are many students who enter this field thinking they are going to change the industry and have high asparations in producing something huge....rather than learning the craft. When you play a guitar for the very first time, you don't play hendrix...you learn the fundamentals. Several students skip this part because they are impatient. I have personally budgeted a 4 minute 16mm non-synch for $600. I know that in my experience from starting with video and then moving to film...I learned so much more from the challenges of film. I remember attending a tour at UCSC and some film student who was attempting to persuade parents and students that digital was better. I remember him saying that digital was more forgiving...(maybe if your retarded)..He had said he had experience and had shot 200' of film. I couldn't keep it in and laughed at him. Anybody can learn film...there is a price no matter what format you choose. Sure it isn't cheap for a feature but neither is a feature with a genesis. I don't think its fair to say you can't learn film just because you can't afford to make a feature on film. Richard, I think this is the wrong attitude to take. These people have a sickness. Maybe an intervention where some of us chip in $20 and buy these guys a can of film and processing. We show them their dailies and then it will hit them. OH, I GET IT NOW....IT NATURALLY LOOKS LIKE CINEMA...ONLY NOW DO I SEE THE ERROR OF MY WAYS! :)

I think its important to not group some of us pro film people and the pro digital people in groups. People like film for very different reasons. sure, there are some film elitists out there but there are also plenty of artsy non-establishment prentious film students out there that make pure poop and act like they know what the hell they are taking about via commentary track. Anyways..I happen to prefer film because ultimately...it looks better in many ways. I don't feel like I am rejecting video because it's not film. I do get excited with video advancements but i still see the difference. The show I work on just did a side by side test with an arricam, Genesis, and D20. Gotta say Video has come a long way but I still chose the look of film. As soon as video looks as good as film...I'll say i'm in. Also, its one thing to be using an hvx200 with an M2 adaptor but it is a whole other beast to be using a genesis. I freakin guarentee that its possible to budget a feature with 35mm over renting a genesis. If it costs the same amount...I'm shooting film. I care about the best images...not whats new. I'm not interested in being a pioneer in the format war. I'd rather be a pioneer in my ability to make good looking images.

I know I don't frequent this site much but I have always been a big advocate for film. After I shot my first roll of 16mm 9years ago...I swore I would never shoot video again. I've always been irritated by inexperienced students who immediately buy into the digital world of cinema and without any experience...they tell me how superior DV is over film :( Unless you have used both formats...keep your oppinions to yourself please. I give two shits about what rodriguez and lucas have done. At the same time...these students who are so proud of the format they are using but they still use film terms like "we're filming" instead of taping. And if they are so confident over the quality of their format...why do they spend endless hours in post effecting it to look like a format that they don't consider superioir anymore. just my 2cents

my only comment would be to add some contrast. The images look a bit flat. other than that...good work!

Sure the shots are repetitive....but the shots are good. I think the shots are nicely done regaurdless of five hours or not.

The one comment I would make is you have a scene where you talent seems to be walking down a dirt path. You later cut back to this scene a couple of times and the camera is locked. In this frame I see the talent in the foreground and a big pile of dirt in the back. Not very appealing. Try cheating around a bad frame in the future.

Thats an excellent note. I guess if I were in his shoes...I might argue that I have access to a HDV system but maybe later on...I might be able to get on an AVID NITRUS system. You never know. But I do agree that you mught as well use DVCAM as an offline format. I just feel that if you can find a good deal on getting the best transfer.....why string up your negatives again for the D5 because you found additional budget resources down the road. That would be my argument if I were in his shoes.

please excuse the typo. it should say D5.....I'll just say i was drunk...sounds believable.

I would seriously call several post houses and see which one can give you the best rate to transfer to hdcam or d4 and then do a simo transfer to HDV. If you feel pretty good about the project you are working on, you may want to consider conserving it on a reliable format. Not to knock HDV, but in comparison.....big difference to a d4 24p master which will have so much more latitude when you get color correction.