Seth Mondragon

Hi, thanks for your help. I was just curious, what kind of hard drive space are we looknig at for an hour of HDV footage, say from the Sony HDR-FX1? For me, typical DV footage takes up about 12/13GB per hour of footage. So how large do the HDV files get? What about higher-end HD cams? Thanks in advance.

Robert Hughes wrote: really? wow, I didn't know that. I'm looking into cameras for my first 16mm camera (probably going with a Bolex for sure), but that makes me happy to know this. Is the "bulb" feature only on certain models? Correct me if I'm wrong, but the "bulb" feature is different than single frame, right? Using the "bulb" feature in conjunction with the single frame feature would allow my night time lapses (for example a freeway) have the fast streaks of light, correct? Thanks for the info!

Thanks Tim! I appreciate your response. I'll look into the companies you mentioned and definitely pick up a copy of the 16mm Handbook. Thanks again. -Seth I just did a quick search for The 16mm Handbook, and although I didn't find that result exactly, I did find this: The 16mm Camera Book is this what you were talking about, or equivalent?

Ian Marks wrote: Spinal Tap was a mock-umentary....but it was neither sports nor nature. *buzzzer* try again. :)

Just wondering about some of your favorite docs, either sports or nature, that were shot on 16, or Super16. Another recent thread was talking about NFL Films and I remembered how much I liked them. Also, March of the Penguins was shot on Super16 and I was wondering if anybody knew of anymore like this.

I've been shooting Super8 for a while now and would like to start shooting some stuff on 16mm. Is there anyplace in the U.S. that sells used gear like this, besides eBay, that is trustworthy and reasonably priced? I asked about the Arri cameras, but that's only because that's the first name that comes to mind. Can anybody give me some feedback on what a good starter model would be and what kind of features I can expect to find on these cams? I'm really into timelapse and slowmo as well. Sorry it's such a beginner question! Thanks in advance.

Good words, Adam. I'm kind of in a similar situation as Yaron. I love to shoot and I would love to be the cinematographer for some real movies. Right now, however, my video business is keeping me too busy (weddings, blah) to focus on achieving that goal. I was just on the set of a feature this past weekend (first time on a movie set) and I've got to say I learned more in those 12 hours by observing the process than I learned while taking a few film courses. It was awesome. Then the 2nd AC told me "if you can spend a month on a set, that's just as good as going to film school". Maybe I've give that a try. :D

sneeze proof wrote: well excuuuuse me. Maybe the ARRIFLEX 16 SR3 will produces some satisfactory results. Or, obviously budget is an issue, so maybe get started with the K3 16mm cam. There......ya' happy?

if you want it to look like film, then....hmmm.....shoot it on film. I'm glad you're getting started in the field, but I'm really tired of hearing so many people saying they're trying to get the look of film. Sorry, that's just how I feel. Don't have the budget for film? Then raise the budget. Afraid it'll take a little more time to get a bigger buget? Then be patient. It'll be worth it once you see your real FILM footage. Trust me. Don't get me wrong, there's video cameras that will look great....but it's video. I have nothing against video (i shoot it for a living) but trying to make your video look like film is played out in my opinion.

Scotness, with all the time I've spent over at the filmshooting.com forum, I've never seen these stills before! They look incredible! I had no idea you shot In My Image on K40....I always had the idea (who knows why) that you had shot it on Vision2 stock.....wait, now I'm confused. Wasn't it you that started to shoot something on 16mm or Super16mm then had camera problems and switched over to HD? In any event, those stills look great, I'm glad I finally got to see them because I'm just getting started with a project that will all be shot on my remaining K40 as well. Scotness, do you remember how many cartridges of K40 you used? And what's the final running time of In My Image? Let us know when the home page is fixed, thanks! David Silverstein, how familiar are you with shooting film? If you're just getting started shooting film, I'd say you should absolutely get a Super8. It really lets you familiarize yourself with the qualities and characteristics of film as opposed to video. I've found that getting good results on film is far more satisfying than video. If you're already familiar with film, I'd say to just go with 16mm unless you're going for a certain vintage Super8 feel (or can afford a good 35mm camera). Just my opinion.

What all should I know about shooting 200T and 500T with my Nikon R10? Any tricks or techniques that anybody has learned? Thanks in advance.

lav wrote: HAHAHA...nice! lav wrote: and friend, I don't think I've EVER been more on the same page with anybody. I feel your pain. That's why I'm currently stuck trying to think of what to do.....quit weddings and move away, get a regular job so I can enjoy film/video again....or, keep trying to sell myself and services to southern california residents who don't appreciate all the work that goes into it, and continue being unhappy every frickin' weekend. *sigh*

David Mullen wrote: I've seen the flourescent flicker in some people's footage....if you properly gel the fourescents, will you still get the flicker? Otherwise, is there anyway to avoid the flourescent flicker?

lav wrote: Man, you could never do that here in southern california (in my experience anyway). I used to take my Glidecam along and try to do some stuff with it.....it came out great but it's a hassle, and the stills photographers always think it's their "show". Still photographers at weddings are butts and they've ruined so many of my shots. :angry: lav wrote: Tell me about it. Try doing 250 over the past few years. :( lav wrote: Are you telling me YOU set all that crap up just for a wedding video? That's not the DJ's stuff? Seems like overkill to me. I hope you're charging an arm and a leg! :)

heel_e, you have great looking footage! Personally, it's a little bit heavy on the moving around and not holding one shot for very long...a bit heavy on the white flashes also....but hey, when I make a better one, then I'll slam your work...until that day, keep up the awesome work! It lloks great overall! Thanks for posting! Rolfe Klement, it says your clips are unavailable...did I do something wrong? The images look great, but I was really hoping to see some motion! :D

Alessandro Machi wrote: and what else, Alex? haha :P

Michael Collier wrote: Yeah, I was thinking about something like a way to mark the position....somehow using tape didn't even come to mind. Thanks for knocking some sense into me! Michael Collier also wrote: Actually, when I get around to doing this timelapse, I plan on doing it on Super8, so I will actually be firing off one frame at a time. Also, I may try it with my Sony VX2100 camcorder as that has a single frame capability. I have a remote zoom/record device for it and I used the single frame mode for a time lapse of this big lake with clouds flying overhead. Came out great! I shot one frame every 12 seconds for about an hour.

I agree with John_P_Pytlak.....learnusing both. When I started shooting, it was on video because I got a job at a video production company. Within the past couple years I have been much more passionate about actual film. The "making video look like film" topic has been run into the frickin' ground. I said this in another forum as well, If you want the look of film then shoot film. If you can't afford film, save more money, it's worth it. If you don't know enough about film to use it...learn how. Although I can produce some really great looking images with video, I get more satisfaction when I see the results on film. But all my initial experience with lenses, viewfinders, f-stops, etc. was on video. Now I apply as much of that knowledge as is technically possible to the times that I shoot film. Video does have the attraction of instant gratification though.

someone brought this up just a moment ago in another thread, but I thought this topic title would be a little more specific. Here is my question once again: I love a good timelapse, but what's even better is a timelapse that pans, tilts or tracks. The only thing I can think of to achieve this is moving the camera ever-so-slightly between each frame....my inspiration for these shots is Ron Fricke and his many, many beautiful shots in films such as Baraka and Chronos. I know he rigged an electronic device with a bike chain of sorts to do his stuff, but it there any other way for us regular people? Any and all help is appreciated...thanks!

HOLY CRAP......I was just logging on to ask the EXACT SAME question.....I asked on the filmshooting.com forum as well, and here is what I was asking: I love a good timelapse, but what's even better is a timelapse that pans, tilts or tracks. The only thing I can think of to achieve this is moving the camera ever-so-slightly between each frame....my inspiration for these shots is Ron Fricke and his many, many beautiful shots in films such as Baraka and Chronos. I know he rigged an electronic device with a bike chain of sorts to do his stuff, but it there any other way for us regular people? Wow, great minds must think alike, eh Isobel? :) I'm going to start another thread titled "Tracking/Dolly/Pan/Tilt Timelapse" okay? See you in there.

That is correct. Most Wal-Farts will take the Super8 and send it to Dwayne's in Parsons, Kansas. You might want to check with the department however, because I've heard that there are some Wal-Farts that don't do it. I think it'll run you about $4.88. That's just what I've heard. but I wouldn't know for absolute sure because I don't support Wal-Fart in any way. I'd rather give Dwayne's more money than give one red cent to Wal-Fart. but this is a discussion about Super8 film, so my Wal-Mart bashing is done.

WOW! That IS immaculate!! :rolleyes:

Alex, am I gonna have to start bugging you on this forum as well to let me see The Alphabet Song? :)

Hi Brian, my understanding is that you can get about 3 minutes is you run it at 18fps and about 2 1/2 minutes at 24fps. If you haven't found it yet, check out the forum on www.filmshooting.com. It's dedicated to Super8, 8mm, and 16mm. They also have a TON of feedback on the new 64T stock....many of them have used it already. Check it out.

I cannot stress how happy I have been with Premiere Pro. I started with 6.0 a few years ago and from there upgraded to Pro 1.0. There were a few wierd glitches here and there, nothing too bad, but when I upgraded to 1.5 it seemed as though all those bugs went away. Mine is fast, accurate and has served me well. I got it bundled with Canopus DVStorm2Pro+ and it's solid. Sorry to hear you're having a hard time with it.