freddie bonfanti

hi, sorry for the delay but i have been really busy lately! the video is done and dusted, however i am not allowed to put it anywhere in the internet for many reasons. hopefully i will be able to do it very soon. i am fairly satisfied with it, i think it looks good but you can really tell the limitation of the adapter once you project the image on a very big screen...it basically falls apart, and its very soft. not that this is too important when you shoot music videos destined to the small screen, though i really hope ill be able to post at least screen grabs VERY soon all the best

David, i am aware of the 4:3 issue, however me and the director both agree that 1.33 would suit the story better as its all set in small environment and there wont be a widescreen feel to it. as i said i believe that any adapter on a Z1 looks really bad, and the main problem is that when you project the footage on a big screen it falls apart all the time. ill test the both of them on our location tomorrow so ill be able to make a choice soon thanks a lot p.s- is there a way to transform any interlaced footage into progressive in post?

if the production had enough money to afford one, i would get one. when you work with HD you also have to think about a proper post production workflow which as you know is quite complicated and expensive for us...i believe that the camera would perform better than the Z1, the overall image quality is more muted, less contrasty. it serves the story better

hi all, i am in preproduction for a short film based here in Scotland. the look of the story for the first half of the film is supposed to be extremely low key and clean. i can get hold of a very good old DSR300 with a superb Fujinon zoom. the camera makes very clean and sharp images but i am worried this choice is a bit weird, considering the fact that we got a Z1 and a 35mm adapter available. i dont like the look of the Z1 and i feel that using the adapter would be too much, as the story doesnt require a slick look. however, for drama reasons it would help to have a "progressive" or film look, which the DSR doesnt have. i was thinking of shooting with the shutter at 25 but i am not sure if it would look good is it a silly choice?

i was well impressed with the grain structure of ETERNA 500 on my super16 film "Truth"...it cuts quite well with 250, i was very worried about grain but its not an issue. id love to see a blowup but its just not gonna happen ;-)

i agree... its nice of you to tell us about it but id be great if you could attach a link or something so that we can actually have a look! i am really curious about the development of the Genesis and its potential and id love to see this

Phil, cut the crap now, mate...you're the redicolous one, by far

i own the M2...its the cheapest but the hardest to use, as you have to deal with the spinning disc and upside down image. i am happy with the results i have got, but i wouldnt consider using it with still photography primes...these adapters work decently only with proper 35 mm cinema primes ill post some footage soon the movietube is like a tank and realtively easy to use...but the price is outrageous

Irreversible

Phil, i find it very funny, you sound like a strict father who tries so hard to encourage his son to get a 9 to 5 job in order to have a stable future... man, id rather keep being broke and eating beans and toast for the next decade than sitting my arse in a Scottish bank for my entire life! TO ME, that would be worse than being a poor wannabe cinematographer!!! if no one tried you wouldnt have all these amazing people who made it against the odds (i dont wanna sound too cheesy here). you may call me a dreamer, but im not the only one!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;-)

well, thanks everyone for your input and nice words. i just got them from the director, i am quite sure she took them straight from Final Cut pro as Tiff images and then somehow turned them into Jpegs in photoshop. Matt, theres no problem, actually thanks for resizing them correctly, i really appreciate it. about the colors: its quite simple. if you are using tungsten stock like i did ( 500t 8673) you know that any 3200k lamp will record white light, therefore you start from there adding color onto white...so for that green close up i had a 2k going trough a 4x4 frame of frost, and i knew it would be white light; so i just added a green gel and i got that green cast on her face

jesus, Matthew... you should watch it, mate! i aint no Roger Deakins

Phil, your theory seems to be right when its applied to you, but what about people like Seamus McGarvey BSC, Roger Deakins BSC and many other BSC members that started off low and eventually made it, thanks to their perseverance and commitment? their situation at the very beginning wasnt much different from Morgan's, mine's or Andy's. i have the luck to know Seamus in person: he often told me how much he struggled over the years and almost quit his passion to get a job that would guarantee a secure income. but in the end he kept going, and look at him now. you should stop discouraging people this way. maybe it didnt work out for you, but some of us youngsters will make it, i guarantee you.

hey all i thought id share some frame grabs of a short i shot very recently. the film tells the story of a girl who finds herself stuck in a world of nightmares and lies which reflects her own life and struggles to accept it and escape from it. because of the very deep subject matter, the photography had to be quite striking and reflect this nightmarish and troubled world. the director wanted to use three colours as a strong visual mark: yellow (instability) , green (sickness) and pink (beauty), therefore i constantly used different gels on my lights, trying not to emulate the italian psycotronic B movies too much. we had an old and rusty ARRI SRII with some even older Zeiss lenses ( 25, 16, 12 and 9.5 all at T1.3). our stocks were FUJI ETERNA 250d and 500t. i found the FUJI stock to be quite soft and less contrasty than the Kodak counterpart and i rated everything 2/3 of a stop slower. after that we went for a 2k spirit grade which unfortunately i could not attend but was definitely worth it the director wanted very straight on compositions and framings: i found it quite hard at the beginning as i always tend to have a bit of dinamism in the picture, but i agreed that in this case the story had to be told in a very "straight way", very harsh, so we didnt use a lot of camera movement. our main reference was the photography of Jan Saudek. here some very awfully compressed screen grabs: everything fas framed to 1.66 and these stills are in the wrong ratio for some obscure reasons

Hey Freddie, Have you seen the trailer? If not please get on the site and take a peek at it. This is the stuff that cinematographers talk about. im not quite sure what you mean here...if its about me complaining before about how sometimes some individuals of this forum frustrate me dont worry, it was just one of those moments, i shouldve kept it with me... i have indeed seen the trailer and i always follow David's work, which is higly inspirational for me. all the best

jon, thats exatcly what i wanted to know. thanks man. i know this subject has been covered a lot before but i really needed to know how to do it with this old arri SRII, without framerate change and a fixed shutter

hey all whats the easiest way to shoot a tv screen without getting the intermittance "bands"? im using an old SRII so i thought that my only choice is to shoot a tv with green on its screen and add the composite in post thanks Freddie

i dont know yet. i will certainly post some frame grabs soon, the final cut with the many GCI composites will be finished in march so you would have to wait until then im afraid. all the best

would 150w bulbs record white light on tungsten filmstock or would they be rather orangey?

well, it will take me a long long time to get to mr. Brereton´s level...i still have tons to learn having said that, im 23 and im definitely not in a hurry. thanks though

thanks Tim, i had no idea...

hey all i just wanna double check something...can i use the mag of a standar 16 SRII on a super16 one? im thinking yes, i mean the only things that differ from the two cameras are the shape of the gate, the lens mount and the viewfinder... am i right?

being a still photographer is a great way to learn things on a film set and i think its a good idea, Daniel, especially if you want to learn cinematography. you just watch things from your own prospective, take your shots and never be yelled at. youre basically a shadow on the film set. however your age might be a problem, most productions may go for older and more experienced folks. what i would do is try on smaller productions, shorts and mostly student films shot in your area. its definitely not a bad idea Freddie

film lab north in Leeds does a cheap student discount of 8p per foot plus 100 quid per hour for a one light transfer

Chayse, thanks for sharing the tests. i like the way things look and im sure youre gonna get great pictures with the varicam and the adapter, shame you couldnt get hold of the digiprimes. i like the fact that you are trying to achieve an in camera look, usually what happens over here is to shoot things clean to get a very muddy image and a "negative look" and then create the proper look in post. i do like the BPM more than the other filters too good luck yeah, i did use the word "look" several times...my dictionary is quite limited tonight...