Jump to content

Joseph White

Basic Member
  • Posts

    144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Joseph White

  1. for me, having just completed my 7th feature under $1m, i've learned that the most important thing you can strive to protect is the hours your crew is going to be asked to work and how they are going to be treated. i know that for the most part, with the exception of short meetings, i'm gone on a good gate, but everyone else, especially g&e side on a location shoot, still has quite a bit of work to do and their treatment is usually the first thing to go. on budgets at this level you, as a dp, probably have more control over scheduling and turnaround/treatment than you'll ever have, and since they want you, use this as a means to making sure the people who will be working their tails off to give you the images you want are being properly taken care of. things like second meal and overtime sound like small things, especially on shows at this level seeing as how it probably means pizza and an extra $20, but your loyalty to your crew will pay off tenfold, and this is something i always address in my conversations and contracts. look at it this way, in any other job, if people are asked to work overtime, they are compensated for it. the independent film industry seems to think that everyone is just lucky to be there, and this leads to unfair practices. don't mean to rant, but just something i wanted to put out there. in all of my converstaions with production early on i make them make specific note of what the work days will be like, and i make them hold that up with my crew too.
  2. i have shot a bunch of it on 35mm, and a little on 16mm. its grainy, contrasty - looks somewhat similar to 5279 pushed a stop. i don't really miss it - you can pretty much rate 5218 at 1000 asa and push a stop and get much better results than either of the vision emulsions, i think. i used it for a Fishbone video on 35mm a year or two ago and the client was pleased, although i spent a good deal of time in the transfer trying to bring the blacks down to get rid of grain and noise rumbling around in there...
  3. i have pushed 7217 on a couple occasions and actually really liked the results. the grain is still relatively fine, your contrast definitely increases but that can be a very good thing depending on the particular project and the look you're going for. if you're trying to get some deeper blacks i'd say perhaps overexpose slightly and pull it down in post. when i pushed it i rated it at 320 asa as opposed to 400 and liked the results. you could even go further, but in the end it depends on how badly you need the stop. the 05 is a huge improvement over the 46 in my opinion, probably the most improved of all the vision2 stocks (i'm looking at you 5218...), but the 46 was by no means a bad stock. have you considered using the 7217 for everything? it's finer grained normally rated than 46 or 05 and performs excellently in daylight situations. i've used it with an 85 filter and an LLD and was surprised at how well it performed, definitely better than 5274 85'd in my opinion. best of luck though!
  4. My roommate does a lot of pr/writing assignments to pay the bills inbetween freelance editing, and he was hired to re-work the Flyboys press and recently saw the film at Panavision Woodland Hills. He really didn't have much good to say about it, he said it looked fine (better than the Click trailer and Scary Movie 4) but not stunning, and that it's a great story not met with great filmmaking. Can't speak for myself since I haven't seen it, but he has pretty damn good taste. He said it's theatrical release is slated for sometime in October.
  5. really nice stuff man, love the running through the fields stuff and everything with the kid in the fields, hills. i think it's a good length, my only comment/criticism would be that its SUPER moody which is great considering the material , and im not saying you should put some sort of pop song over it, but it definitely shows one side of your work very heavily and i think perhaps when you have the song shift, instead of going to the second bit of score with the child singing maybe go to something slightly less heavy, but the images are strong as is the editing - nicely done.
  6. yeah i totally agree with the previous comments regarding the music - if you're going to have dialogue come in and out during the reel, use an instrumental song and fade the music up and down gently when you're introducing dialogue. if you're doing an MOS reel, lyrics can be OK as long as they're not distracting (a friend of mine had Jay-Z's "99 Problems" on his reel and while it was awesome and fun, people just balked at it). i'd remove the absolut shot and try to just condense it more or less, but nice stuff indeed. keep us updated with newer versions as they develop.
  7. cross-processing can be very beautiful, and it sounds appropriate for what you're describing. My favorite cross-processing recently would have to be "Clockers" and "Man on Fire", both used it pretty effectively. 5285 is very contrasty and fine-grained, I would reccomend rating it at 125asa as opposed to 100asa, which is only a slight difference i know, but that's just my experience. in terms of hand-cranking, Arri has a new hand-crank device that's compatible with 435a's and extremes and i think the 235 - looks pretty awesome - hard to believe there's new hand-crank technology emerging, I guess we can all thank Dan Mindel for that...
  8. if anything i'd suggest rating 5279 at 1000 asa and pushing a stop, especially if you're ok with more grain. you'll get more contrast, but nowhere near as much as if you did skip bleach. i'd reccomend shooting 5218 if you can, especially if you're planning on pushing, as it has better lattitude than 5279 and less grain, so that when you push you're starting off from a better place. 5218 pushed one stop looks gorgeous (i usually rate it at 800 asa, overexposing slightly to have a fatter negative) but again it's all about what's appropriate for the look of the film. i'd also reccomend not shooting super speeds all the way open as they tend to not perform well as such; use the speed of the lenses to shoot with a little buffer and maybe try to get a t2.0 (which will still give you very shallow depth of field) - you'll sacrifice a little bit of stop, but you'll certainly be shooting with better performance. anyhow, just my two cents - good luck with the shoot - let us know how it comes out!
  9. although not a remarkable movie by any stretch of the imagination, "Signs" from Shyamalan has some fantastic eyelighting in some key night interior scenes between Mel Gibson and Joaquin Phoenix. It's a beautifully photographed film by Tak Fujimoto. there's a scene with the two actors sitting on a couch at night with thin cool light everywhere, and Gibson's eyelights are easily the brightest things in the frame - definitely a styllistic choice and not remotely realistic, but it has an interesting effect. also if you like that circular light reflection in the actor's eyes like in the photograph but don't want the broken up pattern within the circle, check out the Kamio Ringlite made by Kino Flo, again Mr. Mullen is correct this is often used as a keylight more than anything, but if you position your actor in the right spot you can get the desired effect.
  10. i cross-processed some 64t last year and have a dvd i can show you if you like, i'll try and do some frame-grabs as well. it was in the desert so it's not a fair example necessarily of what it could look like under different conditions, but yeah the contrast is insane, and the colors are pretty out there. really gorgeous though - more reminiscent of, say, fuji velvia cross processed as opposed to kodak '85.
  11. yeah its really a matter of taste more than anything, the aaton is noisy in 4-perf and the moviecam sl is nice (slightly noisy but i never had a real problem with it), and yeah if you've got the cash and it's sync the arricam lt is fine, but at the end of the day its whatever's most comfortable. i personally prefer a heavier camera for handheld stuff - sometimes with a 1000' magazine as it's more balanced and throws less of the weight on your arms. and yeah a gII or BL is heavier, but as long as you aren't doing 10-minute takes you'll be fine. otherwise, if you're doing mos, any camera with the exception of say a panastar is just fine - arri 2c's are great for grabbing shots and running around, as is the new arri 235.
  12. another good place in los angeles is the dr. group (formerly dr. rawstock) they just moved (to culver city i think) and have always been super supportive - if you're looking for stuff on the cheap they often get in lots of discontinnued stocks and short-short ends which if you're on a shoestring can save you literally hundreds of dollars. have gotten cans of 5284, 5293, and 5289 in the past for as little as ten cents a foot. www.thedrgroup.com but yeah if you have the cash, it's always best to get stock directly from kodak or fuji, as you can make sure everything is from the same batch and has never been opened/loaded.
  13. my faves were definitely The New World, Last Days, Memoirs of a Geisha, and 2046 , but it seems like these were pretty universal favorites so nothing too controversial. although I did love Hostage, and am fine with taking tons of flack for it haha
  14. Joseph White

    1st 35mm shoot

    i would reccomend Birns and Sawyer for low-budget student type stuff. they have some great deals you can find on their website - like an Arri BL-4s with color video tap, mags, batteries, head, sticks, and an angenieux zoom lens (which they'll probably swap out for an older set of zeiss standard speeds or something) for $500/day - which is just insanely cheap, and the camera is fine. Alan Gordon will also cut you some good deals, although don't expect the newest 35mm gear by a long shot. What school do you go to? Does your school have a relationship with any rental house? I know most in the greater LA area do...
  15. as i have shot on both the Elaine and super 16mm framed at 2.35:1 i might have some stuff to add here: 1. Panavision Elaine - avoid this camera like the plague. Yes panavision optics are gorgeous and amazing for 35mm, but the glass you'll be using is modified zeiss lenses anyways. This camera is bulky, fairly quiet, way too heavy for super 16mm, and does this awesome thing called "blowing fuses all the f**king time" that'll make you run home to arriflex. I used it on a short film back in my USC days and it was just horrendous to deal with in the field. I'd strongly suggest getting an Sr-II or Sr-III over this camera as more houses rent them (makes it cheaper and more easily serviceable) and they're more production-friendly cameras on the whole. The Elaine was designed mostly for studio-style television work and it was used for this for quite some time, but never really got popular hence why panavision mostly rents our aaton xtr's or arri sr's with their glass now. This camera is mostly reserved for their New Filmmakers Program where it goes out to students or low-budet independents. 2. S16mm 2.35:1 - I shot a short last November and we did s16mm 2.35:1 and used an SR-II from Hollywood Camera in Burbank. They were awesome and set us up with basically a 1.66:1 full frame GG with top and bottom tape marks that were set to 2.35:1. We shot a framing chart and then matched it up in telecine. Bottom line - there are NO 2.35:1 GG's for 16mm anywhere in California and as far as I know none in NYC either. Believe me, I called EVERYONE. This method worked out ok and when it was too tough to see the tape marks in the eyepiece (especially in low-light situations) I just operated off the sidetap which was taped off to the 2.35:1 markings on the GG and it worked just fine. We shot the whole film on a Canon 8-64mm zoom lens and I was really pleased with the results. Hope this helps!
  16. no, the widest is 18mm - but you can use the zeiss standard speed 16mm which is still pretty fast.
  17. i'm actually a really big fan of the zeiss superspeeds - really really sharp and contrasty. you CAN shoot them all the way open, but i've found that they perform best at a t2.0 or a t2.0/t2.8 split. but you can certainly shoot them open. i shoot a lot of music videos with these lenses - they're inexpensive and i think they're lovely. if you want, check out www.clearwaterst.com and find the manic mind video for "here i am" - i shot that on 5229 with superspeeds - all the night exterior stuff was shot at a t1.4/t2.0 split and i'm really happy with it.
  18. yeah i agree with David - they are all perfectly viable options, it just depends on what overall look you're going for. and contrasty versus non-contrasty stock is only a start in terms of the look - you can give a scene a softer look with lighting alone, you don't necessarily need a different stock to achieve it. if you want less contrast, put more light in your shadow areas and your facial-fill. i've had great experiences with the vision2 5229 stock with night work - very nice skin tones, a generally softer look - a huge improvement over it's predecessor 5284. pushing it a stop will definitely add grain, but if you overexpose slightly - maybe rate at 800 asa - and are really really careful with your exposures and use nice sharp lenses like primos or ultra primes you probably won't even notice it that much (again grain is a very relative thing). and yes - if you can test - do it by all means. i'd be happy to show you some night stuff i've done with 5229 pushed a stop if you like, just drop me a note.
  19. Joseph White

    S16 Project

    a zoom i like quite a bit for super 16mm work is the Canon 8-64mm - it's compact, wide, and really really sharp. but yeah your rental house will let you know what lenses are compatible. century optics have been developing some interesting looking 16mm glass, and the zeiss 16mm ultra primes are absolutely stunningly sharp from what i've seen. in general i like to stay on the side of the longer lenses when shooting 16mm to achieve shallower depth of field to combat 16mm's increased depth compared to 35mm, but the Canon 8-64 is a nice versatile lens.
  20. yeah i think gus van sant's recent foray into the 1.33:1 real has been really refreshing, with both "elephant" and "last days" and can provide one with many interesting shots. i think aspect ratios are as muchb of a choice in filmmaking as anything - there are films i;'ve seen shot in scope that really didn't make any real use of the widescreen frame, and there have been countless tv shows shot in 4x3 that i can tell would have benefited from some sort of widescreen presentation. personally i like 4x3 because its somewhat similar to medium format photography (commonly 6x6) which i started with (and still shoot all the time). i liked starting off working with a square frame then later on finding my way through 1.85:1 and 2.35:1. of course i love shooting anamorphic (i mean come on, who doesn't?) but at the end of the day, all that matters is what's appropriate for the material. if you start off concerned with what type of frame will help tell the story best, no matter what you're on the right track.
  21. i think overall there's a lot of nice stuff here, i'd just advise perhaps condensing it a bit as it seems like most of it comes from the same source material and if you aren't including dialogue there's no real reason to keep using so many similar shots (which are nicely done, mind you) from the same picture. i'd also reccomend using a song without lyrics as no matter how much it's a montage of photography, you can't help but somewhat pay attention to the song and anything that takes peoples' focus away from your lighting can't be a good thing. definitely a good bunch of stuff though - be sure to post your next pass at it.
  22. there are several variations on the bleach retention variety of processing, different labs have their own proprietary ways of going with this look so i guess you could say these are alternate ones. if you have something in mind, i'd just call the labs around where you are and speak with them - the processes you've described are definitely the most common, but some labs offer special services that are unique to their orginazation.
  23. he recently shot "Brokeback Mountain" now in theaters, and the upcoming "Babel" from 21 Grams Director Innaritu. both look great from what i've seen/heard.
  24. it depends on the look you're going for. 35mm zooms should definitely be avoided, unless maybe you used the zeiss variable primes but they're still pretty beefy. if you want a sharper look, i'd say go with the zeiss super speeds as they are compact, fast (t1.3), and really really sharp - i still use them all the time even when shooting with 35mm. if you want a softer, creamier look, i'd get yourself a set of cooke S4's (t2.0) - not necessarily my favorite glass out there, but they're insanely popular. but yeah fast lenses and shooting close to all the way open will give you a sharp look with shallow DOF, like david says, the only real reason to use 35mm lenses on video cameras. it won't look like film, but you'll get nice fuzzy backgrounds.
  25. yeah my sekonic 558cine is wonderful - would highly reccomend it.
×
×
  • Create New...