Chris Fernando

Very useful and much appreciated. Thank you, Hal.

I'm curious as to where you guys have familiarized yourselves and become acquainted with waveform monitors and vectorscopes. Obviously on-set would be one place but I only ask because I never had the opportunity to get my hands on one in school and I still don't see many classes out there offering training on them or integrating them into the curriculum (yet). Thanks, as always, for the input.

Knowing that posts are required, people will post when it isn't really necessary, like when their viewpoint has already been expressed by someone else. Compelling people to say something when they don't feel it's necessary is subtle, yet insidious.

Hey guys (and girls) is this the "Post something so as to not get bumped thread"?

You should have made this topic about meters, not HD contrast ratios.

 

Understanding contrast ratios is good, but you also need to develop and learn how to trust your eye...and instincts. I know that's not what yo uwant to hear, but it's true. Though I won't tell you to use a monitor. I will tell you to use a waveform though. Far better than any lightmeter.

 

Get the best meter you can afford. Or try renting a couple different ones before you buy.

Speaking of which: I'm curious as to where you guys have familiarized yourselves and become acquainted with waveform monitors and vectorscopes. Obviously on-set would be one place but I only ask because I never had the opportunity to get my hands on one in school and I still don't see many classes out there offering training on them (yet). Thanks, as always, for the input.

It's amazing what a quarter of a billion will get you these days, isn't it?

We could have had two "Waterworld's" for that price!

i hear some of the vfx are being georgelucas-ized.

Hayden Christiansen will be playing the ghost of Roy Batty :blink:

Art does not require mechanism, it requires inspiration. If you are truly an artist then a technical or financial "inability" can be the spark of very personal and original work. The Dogme gang is an example of what can happen if one deliberately self-inflicts an "inability".

It all depends on usage of the word inability, I suppose. I think at some point that inability must become ability, in every sense of the word, if you are going to ask people to give up two hours of their time to hear what you have to say. It shouldn't look like you were "unable" to do something.

Traslate that to "Necessity is the Mother of Invention" When ya ain't got whacha needs, ya gots ta get Creative, you dig?! B)

So necessity breeds creativity.

Remember inability breed?s creativity.

I'm sorry, I'm going to need some help with this one.

If I'm not mistaken I think Nikon is a bit more backwards compatible with their lenses (i.e. older versions) - I know for a fact Nikon is, not sure about Canon. That being said however the functionality of the newer AF Nikkors vs manual focus lenses, on the D70 at least, is like night and day. But perhaps you might like the looks a certain older lens/series gives you.

This summer, Kodak VISION Color Print film is being improved to have even better durability in theatres.

You can already tow a small car with Estar base print films! Good to hear though.

Film is dead:

http://www.imaging.org/conferences/icis06/...ils.cfm?pass=38

http://www.photo.net/bboard/big-image?bboa...oad_id=29939084

Perhaps Mr. Pytlak can shed some light on newer developments

I second what Craig says about good glass. First and foremost, however, remember that the equipment is not what defines the photographer, the photograph does (among other things in life).

From what I have heard you can't go wrong either way-Canon v. Nikon-most people continue along the line of what they've been using instead of having to invest in new glass/equipment.

You're decision might also partly depend on what your intended usage of the camera is. Just remember that the Canon 350 nor the D70s do a true uncompressed RAW, for that you need to fork over $1700 for the D200 or $2900 for the 5D. From what I've read this is something of a moot point since the info that they are throwing away is not needed (i.e. highlight info). This has never really made sense to me (other than the storage issue), but whatever. Once you know what you are doing with the camera this is all water under the bridge anyway.

BTW: I have no complaints with my D70s, other than the fact that I don't have all the glass I want.

Try these sites out there's probably a dozen Rebel v. D70 threads on each one:

http://www.photo.net/

http://www.nikonians.org/

Good luck.

Saturday, June 3rd at LACMA.

http://www.lacma.org/programs/FilmListing.aspx#written

It says it's a 70 mil print as well. Saw it at the Arclight in said format about 3 years ago and it put everything else in perspective.

My Favorite Shot:

 

When the heroes are saved by a pigeon.

Thanks. You guys just saved me $10!

Eric,

Just curious as to how you will be setting up your Canon DSLR to emulate what's on film. Best of luck and keep posting.

I have been mighty impressed with "GIRL WITH A PEARL EARRING" after finaly getting round to seeing it. Of Serra's other films I rate "UNBREAKABLE" up in my top ten

thanks

A bit off topic, forgive me (didn't warrant a whole new thread), but I can't wait to see what Doyle and Shyamalan have up their sleeve for The Lady in the Water.

Hi,

 

I thought it more interesting to ask somebody who had ordered the camera what he was expecting to spend! In my experience the extras usually cost more than the camera body.

 

Stephen

Stephen,

My aplogies if I came across as singling you and your post out. That was not my intention. I was only using it to get to the "horse's mouth".

The RED ONE camera body will be $17,500, including LCD (with a new focus assist system), and battery. There will be a 2.5" SATA slot that has several recording options. Cheapest will be a RED-Drive solution for under $1000. PL mount lenses can be found anywhere between $1000 and $300k for a complete Cooke set with a RED 300mm. You choose what you can afford. Our system will be "matt box and rods ready". We will not offer these as there are many companies in the industry to offer them. We have spoken with and will support a company that makes underwater housings. Our cages systems will not be expensive and will provide many shooting alternatives, from Steadicam to ENG style, to studio work. Add mics, monitors and other recording options as you wish. We will offer interchgangeable lens mounts if you wish to shoot something other than PL Mount and use lenses you already own.

 

Short answer, for just over $20K you can shoot and record 2k. Or you can build any kind of system you want... just like with every other camera, as your budget dictates.

 

Jim

Jim,

Excuse my uninformed nature, but what are the specs on the RED-Drive? I assume you didn't mention 4k under 20k due to storage issues, again maybe I'm missing something here.

What type of accesories will it support; I'm assuming the standard Arri products/specs? Any other manufacturers as far as MB's go, or will one have to shell out another 4k for a matte box?

Perhaps there's a FAQ link to all this somewhere. Thanks.

How much do you estimate your Red camera system will cost? Camera, Lens, recording, matt box, tripod, lights etc.

 

Stephen

Instead of all the speculation why not ask Jim (Jannard, that is) since he's here. Of course sticks and lights are "extras". If Jim Jannard were going to take this thing out on a show what does he figure it would cost him. I'm thinking this probably includes a full set of decent primes (PL mount?) and a nice zoom (?).

In all the posts on all these forums, all I'm reading is hyperbole, market speak and what is becoming diatribe with no solid concrete numbers. Just asking here.

Hi.

 

With respect a 1st who has not worked with film is not qualified to do the job IMHO. A 1st does more than pull focus!

 

Stephen

Stephen,

Agreed. He is not qualified, yet. My point being (a question even) is that it was not his job to confirm that he did not have the relevant film experience (he already knew that). He is free to apply to whatever job he chooses. Should it not be the responsibility of his employer to confirm that he had the relevant experience? As far as what it takes to first, I agree wholeheartedly, that it involves more than just pulling focus, thus why I called it "pulling/1st(ing)", and I put pulling first intentionally; because IMHO that is the most important aspect, perhaps that will change with time/more experience.

David,

Agreed as well. There are far-reaching aspects to the job that one can only become most familiar with through repitition and actually doing it, herein lies the catch-22, I suppose. I guess if you don't know how to scratch test a mag, check focus marks on a lens, etc., etc, you might not find yourself at the prep in the first place. But this is not to say that every first that goes into a prep knows everything about every camera on that facilities shelves. I may know how to chage a fuse on a Moviecam Compact but that doesn't mean that I know how to change one on a 535. Isn't this part of what a prep is supposed to entail, and partly why a prep tech is present for the duration of your check-out/prep?

A guy was hired at very short notice based on his 1st AC resume, he didnt mention 'til the first settup that he had never touched film, only video. . .

Not his fault though, right? He applied for a job and he got it. Everybody shows up not knowing something, it's just matter of how much you don't know. He (or she) has got to get his first film gig at some point. Did he have all the tools to pull/1st properly on film?

Don't know the exact specs on the db levels. But the last two show I worked on were BL4S shows and on both occasions in the tight quarters we were shooting in, sound requested that we throw a furnee (sp.) over the camera. I know they tend to get louder with longer lenses on (i.e. bigger zooms) and possibly as they get older (?). The second to the last one we rented actually had a rubber lined PL mount to combat this along with a filter tray with rubber strips attached around the frame on both sides to also help with noise. It definitely seems to be quieter with primes on and in the words of the tech prep, "It becomes a horn with a big zoom on"(we had the Angie 25-250). Hope this helps.

Hmmmmm. It did make me think. He played me some jazz albums that were recorded in the early '60s and I have to tell you that the sound was AMAZING. As good or better than many of the recordings I listen to now. I was SHOCKED when he told me that these albums from the '60s were recorded with only TWO MICROPHONES!!!! Some of these jazz bands had over a dozen players.

I'm assuming (since he actually took the time to let you have a listen) that you were listening to that vinyl on some high quality audio equipment. Sonically speaking, listening through well placed audiophile-quality equipment is night and day from listening to something coming out of the latest Sony POS-1234 Home-Theatre-In-A-Box randomly thrown into the corner of someones living room, because that was the only space left.

Can you see it? A world where the camera makes the films on it's own. A beautiful, homogenized utopia..... can I dare to dream?

Don't forget about the upgrade version that will go to the theatre and have the whole cinematic experience for you.