Oli Soravia

Hy Bill, thank you for your comments. In the past I used to edit different versions of showreels from my work, longer, shorter, combined. And there always have been different ways of positive critiques from people, some liked them more, others less. I understand your argument regarding “my own short” - thankfully I know the director doesn`t see it the same way as you :-) - but it was never meant to be that way. As far as that film is a 100 min long feature, my goal focused on showing the consistency of my visual language to other directors and filmmakers. Sometimes I find it hard to figure out a DP`s skills while watching short clips of work. Maybe I`m wrong. But I really like to thank you for the time you`ve taken to watch my work. I really appreciate it! Best! OLI

I`d like to show you my showreel version of an indiefilm I did some time ago. We had a whole budget of about 300.000 EURO (330000 USD) and five weeks of shooting. Camera: RedOne / Lenses: Zeiss HS. Shot in Germany. I had total freedom to visualize the film the way I saw the story. In the end the producers have found a ww distributor. All in all a very nice experience. Will appreciate your comments. https://vimeo.com/57957165 Thank you. OLI

suggestion: Is there a window in the bathroom? if so, you could place the actors as silhouettes in front of it and shoot straight into the window, exposing to the outside and keeping the characters black. you can do this easily if it`s a day scene without any light. it`s a short, so you probably won`t have too much time to spend in that stall and the changing lighting conditions outside could be handled with some flags and reflectors. If it`s night, do the same but place some single source hmi (+1/4cto) outside high above, straight in the middle of the cam-axis as a moon light. put a small tungsten practical over the mirror and wrapp some nd`s over it in order to get that light exposed by the cam. place some small unit (350-500 fresnel) to the side of the practical to accent the actors bodies and faces. If there is no window: you could place some source from the top only to the backgrounds, not to the actors. practical the same way as described before. for close ups: take some small and diffused source and balance it to about 2,5 stops under key, only to accent the eyes and to give some details in the faces. so the whole idea is about what has to be lit and what not. it`s not always neccesary to light the people in order to make them visible on every inch of their faces. but: in the end all depends certainly from the story, from the whole mood of the film, from the conditions of the set or the location and so on....good luck.

In the end it never depends on the camera system you work with, it only depends on your personal skills. The RED, like all other videocameras, has it`s own limitations which you should test before shooting. Be aware of its limitations and then work the way you`re used to. Good luck.

I think there are (and have been) some really extremly high skilled cinematographers out there who give/gave us the possibility to learn from their work. For me, in the real end, there remains only one name. Regarding his unique way of thinking and feeling his artistry: Storaro.

I totally agree....but there is one name I `ve never read around here or in the AC either: Peter Hyams. Like Sodderbergh he does both jobs himself, but his work doesn`t seem to get respected the way it should be...it`s my impression anyway.

Is this a known issue with high-speeds? has anyone seen this before? Im sure its collimation of the lenses, but it happened on three different sets, and the main camera in 1st unit, I hear doesn't have the issue (havent seen myself)... This is very puzzling and mysterious, if anyone can shed some light on the matter I'd be very grateful. This sounds really strange. I`ve shot an entire picture only with the HS in all weather conditions, but never had any problems with them. Although the ultra primes are better lenses, I prefere the look of the HS because they are not as crisp as the newer lenses, but still give you enough speed for the low sensitivity of the RED. And, the look doesn`t become too "HD-sharp". Let us know what comes out of it, could be good to be aware of those problems. Best. OLI.

The RED doens`t really have problems in reproducing black. As long as you`re not going for a flat lighting style, you should provide some highlights in the frame and let the rest go dark, be sure to not overexpose the white to much (+2,5), it`s there where you can get some ugly looking clipping. You can then grade a bit more steeply (depending on your general look) with some hard gamma and some enhanced blacklevel. In my beginning working with the RED I also had these concerns, but it`s really in the blacks where the cam works ok, generally, underexposing 1/2 stop can be helpful for the whole material.

I've just been approached about shooting a documentary on the Red. My information regarding the production is limited as of now (meeting is tomorrow), but I was hoping someone here might be able to share some experiences with doc work and the Red. I do know that my choice in cameras is non-negotioable, and given the rate I was offered along with some other cues, I will probably not have an assistant. The Red is not exactly the first camera that springs to mind when I think about documentary / verite-style shooting - in fact it's toward the bottom of the list, but that's not to say it can't be done. I imagine a backpack full of batteries and drives will be in my near future. Am I correct in thinking that I can use super 16 lenses in 2k window mode? I would like to push for either that or switching to a b4 mount. Carrying a selection of short zooms or a prime set in the field for 4k would be murder, let alone the other issues that go along with that... I've got to figure out a decent configuration for balanced handheld shooting-- something that I can put on shoulder all day if need be. No doubt that the smaller s16 or b4 zooms will help... Regarding the circumstanzes you have to deal with, I would probably think about the possibility, whether the final result has the chance to become as good as it normally would but under better conditions? The RED is really heavy in handheld mode, and as far as I see the cam, not made at all for a documentary working style, even with the new shoulder rig and equipped with prime lenses only. Without any assistant (instead of at least 2) it can become a nightmare to do this job. Good luck anyway. OLI

It is wise to avoid too much humidity, coldness (below O-Celsius) and also heat. The cam is also very sensitive to dust, there`s a problem to protect the whole body because of its blower. On my last feature I had some problems with the cam because of its temperature steadiness. Initially I also had some concerns about the limitations of the cameras exposure curve, and I was really surprised (after checking the material with scratch on a 2K digi-projection screen) that the noise in the blacks is not a problem, even if there is some, you can grade it easily to look good. With the highlights you have to be a bit more careful, if you do a DI and go for a masterneg, they work well washed out or overexposed, if you go for a tv or DVD version, they can look like a bad videoshot. So it could be advisible to do two different DI`s. Regarding the metadata, I can only say, I never worked with them. I keep my lighting color temperature around 5000K and avoid going below. It can also be helpful to do your own exposure tests (generally the material looks better a bit underexposed -1/2) to find the look you are going for, and because all REDS I `ve tested reacted differently. And 320 ASA is - as far as I concern - not realistic. It`s more around 120-200ASA, but this should only be important regarding your lighting list. I would forget the metadata and try to learn how raw reacts. I did two entire features with RED, timed them to 4K DIs and printed them to masternegs. And they look great. Good luck. OLI

Hi, expose your whites not higher than 2 stops, don`t let the blacks go deeper than 2,5 stops, than you have enough detail on both sides of the curve to correct the look you look for in the final color correction. >Best, OLI

He`s the best.

Jaron is absolutly right! I`m just doing a picture for the big screen with RED, which means that a 4K DI will be done and lasered on masternegativ. I`ve tested a build 16 which I use for the entiry shot - and: my camera has definitly an ISO of 100 and an exposure range of 4 stops! Means: my white won`t be exposed higher than + 2 stops, my blacks not more than - 2, still having enough detail in order to prevent any noise on both sides of the curve. Digital doesn`t react like film emulsion. It falls off directly after having clipped the limits. So I have to go for a very sad flat RAW which looks terrible and my lighting is not really exciting. But I have to, to get best results in the end. At least for the big screen where every error is visible, if you do a tv-job, you have a bit more freedom and can correct the RAW errors in post and they won`t be really seen on the small screen unless they are really heavy. I`ve read a lot in the redforum and other users tell from better experiences, maybe, these are my experiences. To avoid any problems, test. GOOD LUCK. Oli

For me it`s when the cinematography merges with the directing, acting, music and all the skills given for a film and its story. When I get touched by the arts. The shots don`t even have to be exhausting from a technical view, they can be very simple, but appropriate.