Corey Bringas

i've found several places in LA that will do it for 325$/hr

the 18 stock is amazing. In fact, sometimes too amazing. It looks into the dark when you don't want it to. You'll be more then fine. I agree with David about pulling the filter. Shoot without them and fix it in post. I've done it before with no problems. Why not shoot 250D? You should be fine, even in the hallway with windows. Can you bounce any light in there via reflectors?

Daniel- Thanks for the well wishes! You are completely correct about the gas station. In the initial location scout I took some photos with my DSLR as well as some meter readings and realized there was plenty of available light. The photos also indicated that nice cool hue comming off of the lights, which I ended up liking and keeping. I think it helped with the cold feeling of the film and the events that were occuring. For the stuff in the car on the woman at the gas station we simply added a little pampa light for some fill. Not much was needed. Mise well be a minamillest(sp???) when one can! -Corey

Hey Everyone, My latest short is just nearly done. "Trails of Dust" was shot on Super 35mm using the Arri BL4. I was the DOP. I used Kodak 5205 and 5218. I am currently a film student at San Diego State. All that's left to be done is some audio levels and off to the festivals it goes. Please let me know what you think! http://www.robinbuday.com/Trails%20of%20Dust.html -Corey

if you're like me and dont have the money to test do what I do. Use a DSLR and just set everything up to match your stock, i.e. 500iso(asa) 1/50th shutter (dont have 1/48 on mine) tungston balanced, etc. and take some shots. Should pretty accurately represent what it will look like. Quick and easy tests. I often bring my DSLR on set and take some shots before rolling to make sure I like whats going on. Enjoy. -Corey

Quite honestly if it was me, I'd try to get them to shoot S35mm. Perhaps its because I'm a film student and used to working on small budgets, but for 10,000 and some favors pulled I could pump out a 10min film on 35. My last project was actually a 15 minute film shot on super 35 with a total budget of 8200. This is including over 1000$ worth of unforseen costs. I figure it this way: You can (if you know who to talk to) get a S35 camera package (complete) for 800-1000 for a Sat/Sunday. Pick up Friday, tell the camera house its a 1 day rental for Sat. and return on Monday. Shoot on short ends- hopefully get a good price anywhere from .12-.15$ a foot. for a 10 min project I'd agree and get about 45min of film so 4500ft (roughly). On student projects I usually go for a 4:1 shooting ratio. Rehearse the heck out of the scene and shoot 2 takes, there you go. so we're up to 675$ for film. Processing is .12/ft + 20$ per 1000ft) 620$ for processing. Telecine is 325$ per hr for HD transfer. To 1 light or not to one light...lets give you 3 hrs. So all in all 3270$$(roughly) to shoot on 35mm. you have about 7 grand left over for lights, costumes, locations (as students i usually get those free..) food, actors, etc. Bottom line, I think you could do it. And I KNOW you could do it for 16. I'd shop around though and see what the cost difference is when shooting 16mm vs 35mm. Let us know how it goes. -Corey

Hi, I know there is a way to do this. I am trying to figure out what film stock I want and if I will be able to get enough light out of my lamps with my desired stock. I'm trying to figure out if I am using (for example) a 500w par can @ 10 ft distance from subject shooting @ 24fps what T(F) stop will I get? I know I can figure this out through tests, which I plan on doing, but I would like to calculate it beforehand for a rough estimate. Thank you, Corey

Hey, Here in SD I can rent a kino flo car kit for about 35$ for the weekend. They are quite affordable. If you cannot find something like that in Chicago, the other options sound fantastic as well. One suggestion I have from personal experience is to have a follow car of some sort, perhaps even several. These cars following behind will add a white reference and add depth to the image and possibly even back light the actors. I personally do not prefer it for the WHOLE scene, as I also enjoy street lights and moments of black in the background, but having that reference and depth really does enhance the image. Also, do not be afraid of the dark! Often it's easy to overlight your actors in the car, but do what seems realistic. Little light from the dash and some from the cd player area. Whatever you can fake, but dont over do it. Have fun!

Hey, I currently go to SDSU and am a TFM major- just 2 semesters left :-D. Its a great school, with its ups and downs. I have one buddy who goes to CSU San Marcos. I think he was origionally in it for film but i'm not sure any more. I'll ask him about it. PM me and we'll talk more about state's program...

oh i totally agree. there are times where i just wanna go home. But there are others where I realize that I much rather be putting in a 19 hr day on a set then sitting behind a desk. Plus, at least on union shoots, you are very well compensated. Can you say double time?

I may be young and inexperienced but I must say that I do not really mind the long hours. As long as I am compensated appropriately and there is a good turn around I am happy.

There are many places in LA that will do an HD transfer for less then 470/hr, many of them are pretty good also. A place called CCI will do it for 325/hr. I've done a dv transfer through them for 225/hr and they were very good. LaserPacific is also a great place to go, not sure on their rates though. in regards to the 175/hr. there is a place called "Magic" something that gives student rates of 150/hr. I have seen crap work come from there, whites are a pinkish hue, colors are all off. terrible. BUT i have also seen good work come from there. There is one colorist in particular that one person I know swears by. Good rates and a good colorist. Then again, i, personally, wouldnt risk it. I'd pay the 75/hr more and go to CCI with someone i trust. Its up to you.

David, I typically rate my film stock slower as well. Do you usually rate it 2/3 of a stop slower or a full stop? From doing some tests at school I found that the blacks look blackest and whites whitest at one full stop. What is your opinion? Thank you, Corey

Ahh great point Allen! I will be bringing my DSLR with me and taking some test shots! Thanks to both of you for the help!

So how do you do it? I have a shoot comming up where I'm shooting some day interior stuff. I haven't yet seen the location in person, though i know there are big windows throughout the house. Most likely I'll be getting enough light from outside (shooting on 7205) but I may want to add a little fill here and there. I only have tungston balanced lights. Do I throw 1/2 CTB, Full, quarter? Thanks for answering what probably is a rather amature question. -Corey

so you're shooting a feature lenght film, with little to no understanding of lighting/film itself? I recommend you start by shooting some shorts.. I think there is a misunderstanding and that is probably what you are doing. In that case reversal is great to start with. It is great as a way to first get your hands dirty without having to fork out the money in post processing. BTW- negative does not have more grain. Negative is the standard when it comes to shooting anything of professional quality (unless you're going for the revearsal look of course.) Are you shooting super 16 or just 16? What camera? I typically like to over expose about a stop as I find this more accurately depicts the true rating of the stock. Give us more info about the project! Exteriors, Interiors, day/night?

Hey, I'm looking to purchase my first light meter. I really like the models that have the spot/incident all in one. I find that the Sekonic L-508 fits these needs and is somewhat in my price range. I'd love to afford the L-558 but I don't think that's in my range. Anyone have any meters, sekonic or other that they're wanting to get rid of? Thank you, Corey

I use 1" Camera tape. (Gaff tape). And don't use black. Only use black on exposed cans. Use the color appropriate to the speed of the film.

Hey, Though I am not SUPER experienced I do believe I have a decent eye for lighting. The more I watch films the more I feel a certain distain for specific types of lighting. I find that may sources are unmotivated and tend to "follow" a lead actor/actress without any real reason. The actor just happily "falls" into a perfect backlight, this doesn't always cut it for me. There are other films that incorporate lighting with mood and location perfectly, this is more believeable for me. Onto night scenes. Lately I've had a real problem with extreme blues shinning through windows. I like (if you can't tell already) "real" lighting, i.e. lighting that would occur in real life and is motivated. In a perfect world the moon would just happen to always be full on the day the event in question is occuring, but not in my world ;-). I also feel even on a full moon the light created is just not that blue. I have been having a real problem with this and find myself more and more observant both during the day and particularly at night as to how people and objects are lit. I guess I'm some what of a realist. To make a long story short, I agree with the person above. Don't over light. Don't be afraid of shadow and darkness. Do what seems right and real. -Corey

yeah you said it better. I think what I was trying to say is if you had a subject standing infront of a window during the day shooting super 16. If you expose correctly for the subject and the light outside is 4 stops or less to what the subject is exposed at it will not completly blow out. On Super 35 the light outside would have to be 7 or 8 stops brighter to completely blow out. I think that made more sense... -Corey

I have heard people have different definitions of "latitude". If by latitude you mean how many stops of latitude you have (ik now using the word in the definition) i.e. if you are shooting at a F/16 everything from a f/8 to a f/32 will expose then that is your latitude. And yes, Super 35 or 35mm will have more "latitude" then 16 or super 16. I believe super 16 has about 4 stops of latitude and super 35 has 7 or 8? these numbers may be wrong, i'm going off of memory not experience. (Though I believe super 16 does have 4 stops from experience..) Just my 2 cents. -Corey

I actually already have that one :-D

Thank you for everyone's reply thus far. I'm not necessarily looking for a specific "type" of book. Rather I'm looking for "good reads" that you have read and have found useful towards your career. I'm a strong believer in knowing a little of every part of filmmaking, particularly if wanting to be a DP as lighting and grip knowledge can help a lot. Any book which you've found is great at teaching, aiding or just plain telling you how it is in a particular field/part of filmmaking is a great suggestion to me. Thank you very much, Corey

Ian- I do not yet need a front box as I am just beginning my career, but having talked to several AC's and then checking the links you listed I have heard/found that front boxes are becomming relatively extinct! I know once I'm a 1st (some day..) and can live on the dolly for a while I'd love to take off the old belt and just throw on a front box, but it seems they're becoming rather ancient? The AC's I spoke with either got them passed down to them or knew "someone" who still made them. Seems the main manufacturers of them have just up and quit. Have you heard this? Thank you, Corey

Hey guys, Just wondering what your top choices are for books to read for a developing DP. I'm currently in film school but want some good reading material that professionals recommend. An AC told me to get "The Camera Assistant" by by Douglas Hart. What else do you recommend for both an AC and DP? Thank you, Corey