Michael Collier

One thing to keep in mind about not seeing what is on film, is that a digital camera can see less contrast than film. Film can see less contrast than your eye. If you are comfortable lighting for video without using a monitor and judging by eye, then you should be equally adept at doing it for film. Usually I meter the key and a few other spots and then light by eye. If there is a dark shadow or a really hot highlight I might meter it or spot it just to see if its too far out of range, but in general I trust my eye. If your still nervous, take a digital camera, set it to 1/50 sec exposure and snap stills with your aperture roughly set to what your lens will be (stills are F-stops, not T-stops, so even if the settings are all the same, the still camera will be slightly darker, so use your meter to determine the actual lens stop) And keep in mind you have a lot of room to screw up. There are countless examples of big name DPs screwing something up that gets solved in the print, just because film has so much latitude.

Interesting fact. Do you know the chemical reason behind that? I assumed the decay would be equal across all speeds, since I assumed film all grains were chemically similar, the difference being size of grains. Does slower stock prevent vinegar syndrome?

Looking at your shots (mostly wide-focal length, 10-30' distance), infinity would work, at the stop you were at. The best practice would be to measure the distance or zooming in and get your focus, then pull out to your desired focal length. Either of those methods gets you to critical focus, the limiting factor being the accuracy of the critical tolerance of the flange focal depth and lens collimation (and the accuracy of your ground glass, in the case of zooming to acquire focus.) The install (when I do it) is approximately 2 hours, but then there are functionality tests to ensure the crystal is within spec, note the amps required to run at various speeds/voltages, trim pots that bias the feedback circuits, ensure the chip sees all feedbacks, etc. The tests are important to make sure the install was successful and the camera will function properly. Film is expensive. Production costs more so, so I definitely feel the pressure to make sure every install is absolutely perfect before certifying it. If I were to certify overseas installers (which it seems like I will need to at some point) they will need to have experience in the electronics of the camera (or similar cameras). They will need tools common to a camera tech, but not common to the average home installer. Frequency testers, multi-meters, controlled soldering stations, etc. Any installer I certify I will have to stand behind with my warranty, so I have to make sure its done right. Not to mention I have a few patents I am working on for future products at the moment. I have a lot of other ideas, and I want to make a name for reliability and simplicity more than anything. Like most people, I will take a rock if it works better than the latest and greatest electronic hammer. It seems today that the more powerful the electronic processing, the less thought goes into making sure the human to machine interface is a seamless and efficient experience; that the human can trust it to work, to never crash, never slow down or act 'spongy'. If you are planning a trip to Alaska, the install can be finished while you wait in a half day (or check out Girdwood or Matsu area while I work) then take the next few days (and a few rolls of film) to explore Alaska's beautiful Southcentral area. I would highly recomend driving down the Turnagain, getting shots of mountains against the inlet, and dahl sheep on the mountain cliffs. then hit up Alyeska Ski resort and go up the tram, so you can get shots from the unbelievable mountain/inlet vista (with a resort day lodge built in, or chair-5 restaurant down the mountain), just a few miles down the road is a wild life rescue reserve that has bears, caribou, moose, sitka deer, yaks, Buffalo etc in picturesque mountain/tundra landscape (looks nothing like a wildlife preserve. Done right it can be photographed in a manner that looks like its in the wild). Drive past that and through the tunnel and your in Whittier, one of the most gorgeous hidden treasures AK has to offer. Mountains steeply encircle the small town, with a deep blue-ocean port in front. Take a ferry to valdez and get shots of that beautiful town. Get a small aircraft flight up to nome or barrow and get shots of the culture the ancient Alaskan Natives that lives up there (there is a blanket toss/potlatch in Barrow to celebrate the whale hunt, conveniently around the time Barrow sees 24 hours of magic hour sun a day) Travel during the right time of year and every second your able to stay awake, you will have enough light to expose an image anywhere in the state. Then there is Denali, literally thousands of Glaciers, Deserts, Rain Forests,black sand beaches and some of the worlds best disc golf. As you can see I am a bit partial to the land (GBP to USD is favorable ya know...) If it makes more sense to make a trip of it, its a beautiful state. And you would get some amazing footage with your new camera to make it worth it. Get some slow motion shots of salmon jumping up-river, only to be nabbed by the grizzly bear wading in the waterfalls. The options are limitless. Anyway, if it seems like an workable option I can help set you up with some insider info on good photo-ops and itineraries for the state. As far as camera service, everything I have done has been in the states, so I have no good recommendation for a European shop. Whitehouse and Visual Products in America is Excellent. I do recommend a CLA done just prior the Archimedes upgrade, though this isn't terribly necessary if your camera is still operating within spec. I just don't want anyone to assume the electronics install includes a CLA. Even though I have done a CLA to my camera with success, I don't claim to be a camera tech (other than the electronics of course) and can't offer a CLA service in good faith. Though I would co-ordinate with the shop of your choice to streamline the shipments so you send it out once and get it back upgraded by me and CLA'd by a qualified shop. If you want my opinion however, the Alaska trip with 2000-5000' of vision 3 would be the best option. (Long answer I know. I am taking a break from the final software builds. It really is in the home stretch.)

Hi Allan, Film is film and digital is digital. If you want the look of high quality film, choose a film camera. If you want the economies of scale, digital is the way to go. My recommendation would be to go with a film camera simply because at the level I assume your at, you should have plenty of professional friends that you can trade favors to get a digital camera if a production budget requires digital. High quality digital cameras are easy to come by these days, especially if you have the right friends. Film camera are less easy to come by, and imparts an unique quality to what you shoot. Digital is good these days, but it still occupies its own space. If you have a film camera it will hold its value, and will produce world class images not possible in digital. It does come with the stock and processing hit of course. To your telecine question: any lab should be able to burn letter box into your image, but what I typically do is shoot a framing chart at the head of roll 1 and transfer at 30fps full gate. That gives you the ability to re-frame up or down without quality compromises, using the framing chart as a guide for "normal" framing. Your goal is to not need it, but it's free and it does come in handy. 30fps insures that no mater your capture rate, you get 1 frame into each frame of video. You can tell your NLE to treat it as 24fps or 23.976 (depending on how you shot it) and avoid all pull down/interlaced nonsense (this only works if you are syncing production audio in house, if you want the lab to sync audio to your reels, you need to transfer at the shoot rate.) If you are considering an investment in a film camera, let me humbly ask you to consider the CP-16. My conflict of interest is obvious, so keep that in mind when considering my advice. A CP can be had for under $1000 with batteries, chargers, two mags and lenses. It can be converted with my electronics for the price stated below, and it will give you approximately the same functionality as an SR1 or II for less than half the price. Use the savings for more lenses, extra film and processing costs, or whatever you want (even purchasing a scarlet as well). Its as rugged as a tank, holds on-board batteries (which the Archimedes will take advantage of when not on mains power). Alternatively you could use the savings to get it upgraded at least to a hard-front PL-mount, or S16 if you want to go all out. That would allow you to take advantage of more modern glass. Your situation is why I started the Archimedes, so I ask that you at least consider it. A lot of work has gone into it to make sure its customized for the shooters needs. (I shoot some kind of camera professionally 5-6 days a week after all) High functionality on a minimum budget. But do consider all cameras and options, there are lots of good options out for you. I just wanted to have you at least consider the CP. I personally love the camera. (Note to Cinematography.com community: I am trying to balance my helpfulness vs. self promotion when discussing my upgrade. Please accept my advance apologies if you feel I have ever crossed the line. I don't want to cross any boundaries, I do enjoy this community after all.)

I love it. I'm rooting for ya. I hear you on the tungsten source, but my question is have you thought of using a gel pack? You probably can't hit the nail on the head with it, but if you get your light source closer to the inverse of the orange mask you'll be doing yourself a favor, I would imagine. Then the fine tuning of the invert would be in white balance, but you would be starting closer to the mark and your light would still be continuous spectrum. I assume some level of CTB and a touch of plus green would get you close. the only give/take in that route would be how much you would have to boost the lights wattage, or change the exposure time; that of course would either affect heat management or scan times, respectively. Hit me up with a bit of scratch (read not much. I have medical bills to, I can sympathize) and I can build you a custom footage:frame LCD counter to slap on the front of it. I have all the routines in library for my Archimedes, it would probably only take me 2 or 3 hours. Actually it would probably just require that I dig up the old working file for that routine. Don't know if it helps or not, but I'd like to help if I can.

Its just a subjective reaction to the footage. Honestly there are probably a million things that could account for it. 50D is probably sharper than my normal 200t, even when 16 years old. Your probably running a higher aperture that would increase sharpness. You definitely had a higher quality transfer than the productions I work on normally pop for. But in general there does appear to be more edge to edge sharpness than mine, which is definitely a lens characteristic. Perhaps less vignetting, but that is hard to tell, it seems most shots are focused well past 5 feet. All of this incredibly subjective. If I can find a good CP tech in the UK, I'd consider training them under the right circumstances. I don't want distance to impede the Archimedes success. I looked briefly at shipping, looks like around 130 GBP to ship one way. That would add $400 to the cost, that's not good. I will have to sort that out. Do you know of many other CP users in the UK? Who do you typically have service your camera? If there is enough of a market it might be worth it to fly the tech to Alaska for training, or make a training DVD. Its not a terribly difficult install, but it has to be done properly, and I need to know every installer I certify is actually qualified and performing the required tests properly. Well you just added to my stack of work! All the feeling of accomplishment from putting a real numerical 5.0-36.0 volt meter in the battery monitoring section is gone!

ah. I have the 12-120mm Angie, and it doesn't look as sharp as that (though my 6mm angie prime is a beautiful lens). I might have to look into picking a 15-150 up. Although I am on the fence, a certain part of me wants to get my CP a new PL mount and lens kit, a new paint, super16, video tap, rails system, etc. etc. who knows how much of that I will actually do. Super-16 and the Archimedes electronics are the only firm plan I have to mod it right now.

Looks good. I wouldn't have guessed it was 16 year old stock. What lens do you have on the CP? I like the sharpness. Is it a CP mount or has the camera been converted?

'IRT' I believe was sent up last year, in response to the incentive. Boddington, always pushing Canada :P . I'm gonna get you up here to shoot a film, you'll love it. I am not sure the regional bonus will ever be used, unless tangentially by a doc whose focus is on Nome, or McGrath or something like that. To be honest though, I am not sure what counts as rural. In my estimation I would say that Houston and Willow (just minutes north of Wasilla) should count as rural, but I don't know what the actual regs say about it. It might apply to only communities off the road system, or off the rail belt, or any other classification they could think up. There are no lab in Alaska, yet. I assume if we start doing a lot of work we will eventually get one. Right now its easy to ship down to AlphaCine. Even ground shipment to Seattle gets there in a day on a plane. Our largest film studio in Anchorage has publicly indicated they are looking at building a sound stage up here. Until then producers from what I hear have been looking at the Dena'ina convention building, since it has a huge truck accessible lower floor space and 40' ceilings, 3 phase power, 15 minutes from the airport, 3 minutes from the port, well sound insulated and away from heavy traffic. We also have a lot of warehouse space available for excellent rates (especially compared to LA warehouse space cost) The union situation (as it applies to the film industry) is pretty weak. I think we have 2 IATSE members in town (there is more representation for theatrical workers in IATSE of course), NABET as far as I know has no representation up here. Teamsters I am sure you will find, though they don't work on films typically so their union probably won't turn the screws on low budgets, since they aren't expecting work like that anyway. We do have SAG representation. A few actors are SAG and we have a SAG rep who is local, and a pretty good guy to work with. I am not sure if he has an office up here, but he is easily findable. Don't know if there is any AFTRA up here. So bottom line, if your not a huge studio you can probably get away without having any union workers at all. This obviously won't stay that way, but for a good 5 years at least it should be fairly accessible for those who don't want union work. However the good workers in town will probably be the first to go union, so as time passes the quality of worker you can get non-union will go down. We are a red state, but we trend pro-union very heavily. And while we are on the topic of worker quality, in my opinion we have some of the toughest, hardest working people in the world. Alaskans, for whatever reason, have a pretty robust work ethic, and are usually very knowledgeable about whatever they do. Its really not asking much to ask an Alaskan to work outside with heavy gear and complex tasks in -20 degree temps for 12-16 hours on end. If you look at slope oil field workers, they do that sort of work in -45 to -65 degree temps. I am sure in 10 years time our crews will be world renown. From what I have seen of select people in town, they already should be. (just to alleviate some concerns- our average temperature in Anchorage is 10-20 degrees above. Rarely does it get to -20 in town. summers are in the 80 degree range; 90s and 100s in Fairbanks. Around the solstices we get probably 6-7 hours of usable light in the winter, and 21-22 hours of usable light in the summer. light during those times generally stays low to the ground, so you don't have the 11am-3pm ugly light, its more like golden hour all day long.

How dare you question the great and all powerful SMPTE engineers of 1953! Blasphamy. Look, if you can't recognize the brilliance of drop-frame time code, then your a lost soul. You can always stick it to them by creating your own drop-base standard, and make it even more goofy and complicated than the original. What is this for by the way?

I just got some wonderful news from our newly re-opened film office. It seems Alaska film market has grown by a factor of 82 times in just a year. Granted we had a very low production level last year and for the past 2 decades, but with the incentive just now affecting producers decision making, we are seeing the snowball effect in terms of dollars spent in state. Quick look at the numbers the state office announced today: In 2008 a mere $149,500 was pre-approved in rebates (most shooting was done in 09). In 2009 that surged to over 12.4 million dollars, representing 36 million dollars that should be spent this year. That figure includes 14 feature films, and 8 non-fiction productions, including one IMAX 3D picture. Not too shabby, this year should be a good one. Quick overview of our incentive: 30% general tax rebate (all rebates are exchangeable for cash from oil companies to offset their taxes and royalties, film companies pay no tax as far as I know) 10% rebate for local hires 2% for shooting off season (fall, winter and spring) 2% for shooting in rural areas No income tax (not part of the incentive, that's how it always has been, but still a benifit) No sales tax (in most towns, Wasilla, Juneau, Fairbanks and a few others have sales tax. again, this is not specific to film makers) Now that's what I know (well I know more, but that's all the public info I am willing to throw out on a public website). If you should hear of anything coming up this way, feel free to drop me a PM, I always like to keep my ear to the ground so to speak. Or if your coming up here for a location scout or shoot give me a shout, first round of Alaskan Amber is on me. read the film office report to the legislature here: 2009 Film Incentive Report

I don't know that permafrost is a big concern up here. Sure for the pipeline it is, but you gotta remember that the oil is heated to something like 120 degrees before being pumped down the line. The concern was heat transferring through the deeply embedded supports (earthquake zone, ring of fire and all that) and melting the permafrost deep down that would start a degenerative cycle that would destroy the tundra (keep in mind relatively very little of the state is covered in tundra, and films likely wouldn't shoot in those areas). If your working in snow in Alaska, permafrost and tundra are of no concern, because they are typically buried under feet of snow. I don't think heated tracks would be a problem, most setups I have done involved no part of the track directly touching snow. Because snow shifts easily there is always lots of cribbing to be done, and wood would provide good enough insulation to keep the heat from melting the snow and shifting the tracks off level. Of course, why muck around with running power to the tracks, making sure they are operational and not leaking electricity or any other complication electricity adds when all you need is a rag and some antifreeze? It was seriously blizzard style downfall this weekend, with big sticky flakes, around 15 degrees and the trick worked flawlessly. If it worked in those conditions, it will work in just about any situation an LA, NY or Canadian crew would likely encounter.

Yeah, it was just enough antifreeze to put a thin coat on the tracks. Like doping a rag with chloroform (bad image, but its all I could think of) No pooling of antifreeze on the ground beneath or beads of it on the track, actually once applied it was invisible, so I am sure animals would be safe around it. That said, if you have a trained animal on set and ASPCA around, you might want to pass it by them first. Sometimes actual danger is trumped by perceived danger.

I was working this weekend as a Key Grip on a low budget feature, and came up with a nifty trick to keep the dolly tracks from icing over. We had a pretty consistent heavy snowfall all day while working outside, and I found if you put antifreeze on a rag, and wipe down the tracks, it keeps snow from sticking and eventually freezing. In the course of 8 hours I only wiped the rails down twice, and never was there standing water or ice on the tracks. It even helped the wheels remain ice free. Just thought I would pass that along to anyone who finds themselves under really heavy snowfall. Last snowfall shoot I did without this trick was a real hassle trying to keep the tracks from icing over. I am not sure what long term effects of using this would be on the tracks and wheels. I assume because antifreeze is generally not caustic that it would be fine on the wheels, and obviously stainless steel track wouldn't be adversely affected.

Never used it for that purpose, but if your talking about sending the same clip through redcine 3 times at different ISO values, my question would be why bother? Changing ISO does absolutely nothing to the raw data. Your just mixing the same image with varying levels of gain. I don't think you would get any more detail out of the image than you would doing a simple curves adjustment. You would need to shoot the same image with 3 different exposures, which is different than just changing the metadata ISO value.

Setware for normal shooting, but for cold weather I keep a pair of deerskin leather gloves with thinsulate insulation. Very thin gloves capable of manipulating cable, but warm enough for about -10 (and good to about -45 for short durations, I keep thicker gloves around during those days.)

1: look into a mako head, it might be just the thing you need. Mako Head 2: American Cinematographer articles usually state the camera, lens and stocks for the film in question, and sometimes provides lighting diagrams. Rodger Deakin's site at one time had a few lighting diagrams, but I am not sure if he still has those after his site went down, something to check on. 3: I know I have seen camera tests online that would give some idea, but I think your looking for side by side comparison. Other than ASC's shootout, I don't know of any side by side, apples to apples comparison available. I am not even sure if you can get ASC's test on DVD yet. Last I heard it was only played in large screenings at ASC functions.

Iso and fps are selected on the digital ones, yes. For older analog ones (having never used them) I would assume you would build the overcrank/undercrank into the rating. If you have 500t that you nominally rate at 320 for 24fps, then if you were to overcrank to 48fps, you would rate your film 160 (digital this is not necessary, it automatically calculates for the frame rate you have selected.

As you can tell I am a bit of a fan of the CP myself. Its not best practice, but you can take the mag off the camera without cutting the film, but you have to be careful. I try not to send any single roll under 100' to the lab, so on occasion I have done it if I am planning 50' one day and 50' the next. If its going to be a week, I will just short end it. But to take the mag off without cutting, all you have to do is follow these steps: 1. Take the pull up belt off, and tape the pully to the mag (preventing the roll from unrolling inside the mag) 2. reverse the loading, starting with the feed side first. When you get to the sprocket pully, hold one side of the film and gently push on the other until the perfs clear the sprockets. 3. Take mag off, rotate feed pully counter clockwise until there is only a 6" loop. Generally as a precaution I gently lay that over and put a 2" wide gaffe tape strip over the mags throat. This doesn't seem to crease the film or leave any residue. 4. tape the takeup side pulley. Then when loading, be sure to attach the take up belt without rotating the pully at all. If you do that, when you re-thread, you should be re-threading a length of film that has already been flashed. As for the magazine, just have it rebuilt. Flashing is only one problem the mags can have. As I found out a few days ago, the mag can get burdened by gunk. On mine it was on the feed side, and the resistance was unbelievable. Not quite sure how it got like that from one shoot to the next, but bottom line, a mag with that sort of issue takes A LOT more amps to pull the film out, which puts more pressure on your control amplifier and your motor. and you are correct, the CP does have custom parts that have no replacement (its the reason I started my project, when mine fried) Though a point of interest (of no real value to your understanding) the parts are not really IC. An Integrated Circuit is a circuit that has been photochemically etched into a semiconductor substrate and packaged in plastic or epoxy. The chips in question (there are two of them, and act as basic logic gates) are known as hybrid chips. An archaic idea proposed in the 70s when ICs were costly and not well featured. The hybrid is made of discreet components (something like miniaturized surface mount parts inside a single package) I have no real evidence to prove it, but my gut tells me the parts in the CP are more fragile than an IC would be, in terms of its ability to handle static discharge, and over current situations. When I was first discussing my idea with Ken at whitehouse, he told me there was a time when he contacted an electrical engineering firm to see about getting OEM replacements made for them. I think he said they wanted $25,000 just to look at the problem, so obviously the idea was dropped. That is why I am designing my board on a chip from a manufacturer that has been around for decades. Though the actual chip part number might change, they have always provided a backwards compatible replacement (and their instruction set hasn't changed in decades) so my board will never have the "no replacement parts" problem the original has.

Telecine for the first film test came back, with encouraging results. Next up is a full fledged test in a production environment (including sub-zero testing) 7274 200t (rated 160t). Still in line with my schedule.

Possibly a light leak through the viewfinder? Was this a reflex camera? I am guessing VF due to the gradient in color. Magenta transitioning to an orange. Was that gradation similar from frame to frame? That would indicate light leak hitting the film while the shutter is open (if its hitting anywhere else, it would be a more consistent streak) Either you didn't hold your eye firmly enough to the VF or the VF has a light leak. If this is a prism or dogleg, then I am stumped. A video clip of the footage would help diagnose a bit better.

Speaking of ergonomics, yes the EX1 is terrible. Made worse if the call to use a ground glass adapter is made. This rig only became comfortable if a cardolini was attached to the back of the shoulder adapter and a 20lbs shot bag hung off. It made the whole rig upwards of 40lbs, and still terribly painful to deal with, but it sort of works? When you jump into consumer cameras, ergonomics are not something you should be expecting to get, even with should adapter rigs etc.

+1 The only time I ever bought a camera was in 2000, the GL1 (months later the GL2 came out) had it paid off in less than a summer. That was the last time because after that the range of clients and projects I work on has gone crazy. From simple commercial shoots, shorts, even feature related work, and everyone of them had a different camera requirement. (ok, I should in fairness say I have also bought a CP-16. It hasn't made money back....yet. Give it another couple of months and I think it will. I suppose if nothing else I have wrangled 2000' of free film, free models, thousands in production support and services, thousands in investment deals to cover manufacturing. Can we call trade stuff a profit?)

I wish I could, but for once I feel like I actually have too much film on hand. If you haven't gotten rid of them in a couple of months PM me and I might feel differently. The 100T is pretty tempting...

Hey, I'll recognize it. I saw the pic and thought who is Alfredo Garcia. I scrolled down and I almost chuckled. It was pretty bad, but at least it was creatively so.