Chris Fernando

11. If it's good enough to get you noticed (in front of or behind the camera), then it's good enough.

You pay a little more but a Western Digital is worth it.

That's debatable. The one I bought crapped out less than a year after purchase and now it costs $14.95 just to talk to someone to see if they might be able to help (warranty and live-help were good for 90 days.).

I've read about other issues with WD drives, just on this site.

I'll never go near another one.

Hey man, I'm sure you know now that there are many steps that you missed before starting the shoot.

 

I would suggest not to do another until you are ready, because no excuse is good enough for a soft shot, over and over again.

 

That and the amount of pressure put on a 1st just normally is a lot to deal with. Match that with a camera that should still be in R&D, with a first timer, and it won't be an easy shoot.

 

Make sure you prep before the shoot day, and always have a FF.

Sounds like the operator is in on this thread, as well. Maybe we can get some constructive criticism from the horse's mouth.

I help moderate a forum on, of all things, automated cat litter boxes.

Is the turnout for that pretty...sh__ty? :huh:

Advice on drive brand will vary wildly. LaCie has had some issues with their larger drives in the past; I know people that won't touch Western Digital drives with a sanctified touchin' pole.

I think Western Digital coined the phrase, 'It's not a matter of if it will crash, but when.'

Save yourself much stress, hearthache and frustration; stay away from WD drives.

...with the exterior/highlight blooming out in the BG, is what I meant to type.

What was done that was new, different exciting. What shots in the film are seared into your mind, and will stay with you forever.

The up-angle from the ground (or just above :rolleyes: ) on the woman sitting against the wall as the kids run by with the background blooming out in the BG. ;)

So what was the artistic merit behind shooting a bank robbery in 70mm?

IMHO, I thought it meshed formats together well and the slum/chase sequence worked perfectly.

To each his own, I guess.

I'll just add that you should always try to get as much as you can off/clean before you start using lens cleaner - you may not even have to resort to using the Pancro.

Minimizing what you're using and how you are using it (while still getting the job done, of course) is always best when it comes to lens coatings.

I was unaware the military even HAD a bondage unit, the 101st S&M

 

This must be Lieutenant Yes Mistress

 

 

And Sargent Spank Me

 

 

Am I excited about seeing this movie?

 

 

OH Yeah :D

So, I guess, once again, T & A is supposed to cloud my judgement?

I'll say it anyway...What the hell is that?

Well, you know what Mao Tse-Tung said, "it's always darkest before it's totally black" :

My grandmother used to say, "Darkest is the night when moring is near."

I think I'll take that one, instead.

Not trying to nitpick (honest), but I think you mispelled 'Laurence Fishburne'. Don't know how much that would matter (don't even know how I noticed it, to be honest).

It looks good. Stills/frame grabs look awesome - especially the 'Northfork' stuff. Nice job.

I was at Capitol Reef NP in Utah shooting some 4x5 recently. One morning I got the camera set up, got my composition lined up, got my focus and I reched for my spot meter that wasn't there - left it back at the motel. So, I figured, 'What the hell?' I grabbed my Nikon D70S and plugged in all the relevant info (shutter speed, ASA) and used that as my spot meter. Exposure was dead-on.

FWIW, I've been completely satisfied with the D70S. I wish fast lenses were a bit cheaper, but that's not the camera's fault. The backwards compatibility of Nikon gear has always been nice and you can find some decent older lenses to mess around with.

I noticed some harsh grain in "Sam's" home as well. It was just very noticeable because the majority of the film was so crisp.

Yeah, that one stood out for me, as well. Looked like it might have been either pushed or brought up in the DI, after the fact.

I noticed a few focus issues (on static CU's no less) in a couple of shots. All in an extremely good summer popcorn flick that did the cartoon justice. Lots of fun.

BTW, what was the deal with the multiple rectangular 'sun flares' that popped in a couple of shots - i.e. a wide shot towards the end where Sam is running through the abandoned 'warehouse' while being chased by Megatron? Are those naturally occuring or is that a post thing?

Richard.

 

I paid an average of 10 cents a foot for my short-ends. I usually go through the DR Group but I happen to find a better deal. I have gotten 5 cents a foot for short-ends at the DR Group before...those are prices that are hard to turn down when you are on a shoe string budget - and...all the shorts and specs I have shot on 35mm were on short-ends... Hopefully someday when the production has a greater budget I won't have to worry about the short-ends...until then, I can manage.

 

Oh, and yes, there is the girl in this film as well. I just won't bother posting pictures.

 

-Cole

Congratulations Cole, Great job. Best of luck on the shoot.

I have to ask, though, and I hope you don't mind me doing so; but one might infer from the above post that you are paying for the stock on this shoot; please, say it ain't so!

Oh, and thanks for not posting the picture of the girl.

I do see what you're saying- and I agree with you that well crafted projects will, with few exceptions, require experienced crews crafting them. But, before anyone works on paying jobs in the industry, they need to get a foothold in the basics, and that's usually on freebies. I would argue that cutting your teeth on pro-bono jobs are a natural part of one's career. In rereading, I'm wondering if we're not saying the same thing, but just slanting our focus to opposite sides of the spectrum?

Hey you get what you pay for, in the end.

Oh and one other piece of advice our original poster and anyone else in his position can take with a grain of salt: if your Second (or anyone else like him/her in any department) has half a brain, shows up to the prep to learn the job and puts in 14 hours of helping to lug a 100 pound camera around on something he may never see, throw the poor bastard a bone and kick him/her down 50 bucks a day, would ya?

You completely misunderstood what I was saying. If it's a 35 shoot, obviously they could bite the bullet and choose to pay crew. On microbudget video jobs, which state up front that there's no pay, I see no issue. If it was a 35mm job or even many super 16 jobs, an entire crew working for free would be very questionable and could potentially weaken the stance of the workers, but a one camera, lowell kit, mini dv feature is a different story. There I see no issue with people asking for free help from those who are interested in experience or building their reels.

Mike,

I wasn't trying to contradict what you were saying. Just trying to point out for whatever reason there seems to be something of a difference between a mini DV/Lowel kit shoot, a pro-bono 35 shoot and 35 shoot where everyone is getting paid and there is money to get all the tools necessary to tell the story in the most compelling and convincing way.

Sure it can be done for free or even very little money (even if all your able to pull off is maybe one or two shots that will only be seen by others via the DP's reel) but I've seen it done many times right with the right amount of money. Hey, maybe inititiative and ingenuity cost money after all.

As someone else mentioned earlier in the thread about having the tools to allow us to do our jobs correctly. Last I checked that cost money - money for the follow focus unit and the first to keep it in focus.

I understand what you're saying, but I think a lot of it has to depend on the nature of the job. If it had some budget behind it, and could pay people, but chose not to for whatever reason, I think that would be a much different issue. Then it does absolutely weaken the stance of workers. But on other jobs, where they are have 2000 dollars in the budget, and they state upfront the terms of the job, I feel that is very different. There, the movie wouldn't be made if they paid people, and obviously they would be going with people who want to learn, or who had very little experience and wanted to get a experiment and further their craft. Who didn't take the latter type of job when they were starting out? So, I definitely hear what you're saying Kevin, and I agree with you when the budget is there and they hoard it, but on other types of jobs, I think if they state plainly up front the terms of the job, then there is no inherent reason why a freebie job should be wrong. How many established ACs and electrics decide to shoot a student film for meals and credit so they can build their reel?

Hey I'll do it for free, just go ahead and put every last penny of my salary up on the screen in 35. BTW my salary is $25,000,000.

Oh yeah I'll need a color corrected HD master of that at some point as well.

4x5 here, can't afford 8x10 yet.

So no plans to go out with one of these anytime soon?

[

I'm a 4x5 and 8x10 shooter myself.

Chris,

Aren't those formats required (for landscapes, at least) if you live in Utah?

BTW, just came back from Capitol Reef with a few nice transparencies. It's the only thing that does the place justice (and even then...).

Any of the 'Apu Trilogy' by Satyajit Ray & Subrata Mitra.

Sounds like a mis-timed release print, Chris - i.e. a bad set of printer lights being used (on a section of that particular reel) at the I.N. to release print stage; that somehow got past QC at the lab. Assuming of course it was a print.

Thanks for the input. Yeah testing and a monitor would be ideal, but this isn't the ideal situation. Pretty much confined to judging off the LCD monitor and using the zebras and the first days stuff didn't look bad exposure-wise. The thing to remember when using the zebras is they are only telling you what is over, not what's under.

I have to say; I'm a bit surprised at the dynamic range of the CCD's on this thing. We had one shot with a subject sitting in front of a window with venitian blinds, and although the blinds were closed there was still quite a bit of light leaking through. I tried to balance out the lighting indoors with what was coming through the window as best I could and it held up pretty well. I'll try and post some screen grabs (some day), pending approval.

As an aside to all the monitor advice, I was wandering if there is a relatively cheap on-board monitor that can pull double duty as a monitor to judge exposure and color (as well as a sort of low-budget director's monitor) on something like the HVX and also be used as an on-board on more conventional 16/35/HD AC/Focus Pulling gigs. Any recommendations?

Getting ready to shoot a no-budget feature (i.e. no calibrated field monitor for exposure) and I'm wondering what the best way to judge exposure is. I've heard you can dial a 320 into your meter and this is supposed to work. How safe is this? I'm used to judging zebras set at 80 on my DVX, but that's just because it's my DVX. Any suggestions? Thanks, as always, folks.

Get well soon, John. Your expertise will be sorely missed. But all will be forgiven upon a speedy recovery. I'll remember you in my thoughts and prayers as well.