Chris Fernando

Good AM all (or PM for the Euros), Two part question: just finished a 1st gig on a 35 shoot using the Angenieux 25-250 HR T3.5 and there seemed to be an awful lot of breathing when pulling focus on this thing, even on the smallest pulls at any focal length. <_< . Is this typical of this lens or is this par for the course with big zooms such as this? Part 2: what can be done, if anything to reduce breathing when pulling, or is that something production/DP should know about when ordering their lenses (Do they have to live with all the breathing if a scene requires pulling?)? Thanks.

Hey Ed, Congrats. Try this: http://cgi.ebay.com/CP-16R-Service-Manual-...1QQcmdZViewItem Hope that works. If the link doesn't work just try a search with CP 16 + instructions and look around the related searches links. There's a guy/company selling "service manuals" on there constantly. Best of luck.

Stay inside and keep lights out of your framing! Seriusly though, IMHO, its partly reliant on lighting and story; both of which are under a more powerful magnifying glass when you're shooting video. If memory serves me correctly the Pumpkins shot most of their videos on film (I could be wrong). There is one video from their last album that mixes video and film footage and is kind of interesting to watch. The song's name escapes me but it's from Corgan's 'Martix/I think I'll start wearing a dress' days. Best of luck

If a southpaw is walking east, isn't he a 'northpaw'? :blink:

Yeah, nothing to do with the creativity well being sapped dry!

I have been told 800 at every airport I've been through. And even that is probably incorrect. Remember these people aren't photographers, so don't assume anything; watch over all hand inspections and have a changing bag/tent handy just in case.

The end result of marketing just another documentary as the next 'Citizen Kane'. :lol:

Something that "fills" in the details and hard shadows is a ______________ (drum roll)

What does the shot look like? Is the window just bg, or is it an insert of some type of the window. If just bg, how much DoF are you playing with?

I might be nitpicking here, but it looks like the beam in the POV doesn't match the previous shot. It looks like he sort of moves his head up and back behind the flashlight, but it still doesn't match coming out of lower screen left, like it does. (my $0.02-what's the pot up to these days?) The move around the guy on the shore is nice, almost don't notice it- if David didn't mention it.

Santo, Nice stuff. Love the texture and grain on the last one and the first two are nice too. How does the 10 bit stuff compare to the projected footage?

" In a collective art like the cinema there is only one director and the word 'photography' means expression in a single image. We express ourselves through 'cinematography', which means 'Writing with Light in Motion' and requires more than one image to become an art form; in fact, it needs a beginning, development, and an end." by Vittorio Storaro, quoted from the following article: http://www.cinematographers.nl/THEDoPH1.htm

Not just the Hawks! :) They call me 'Tripod'. B)

You guys watch too many movies. :D

Just make sure your second choice doesn't hear you!

Justin, I really dug the location. Using S8 and the backwoods location give it an interesting 'eyewitness account/cinema verite' feel. Where'd you shoot this?

Igancio, Just curious if he offered any insight as to the motivation for his decision to use S16 for dialogue shots. Cheers.

David, Just curious if you do this across the board or do you let story/lighting set-up/time of day etc., etc., influence your decision and how much do you overexpose, when you do?

:blink: You're scaring me now!

Hey Brandon, It's awesome that you know exactly what to do at 15! I wish I had that kind of focus at 15, instead of telling everyone "I want to be a director". I'll offer a short analogy, if I may: While in high school I had a friend who didn't want to do anything but play basketball, and, as a result, you never saw him anywhere without that damn basketball. He went on to a fairly successful college playing career at the Naval Academy and played in the tournament his senior year (I believe they made it to the Sweet 16 and faced Antawn Jamison and North Carolina, if you're familiar with basketball) My point being try to take that camera with you as many places as you can, shoot as much as you can and tell as many stories as you possibly can. I can't tell you what I'd give to be 15 again with a camera in my hand, make it count and have fun. Don't worry about what format it is, or what it looks like. I think it was Francois Truffaut who said "The smaller the camera, the better the story." Best of luck.

Wouldn't it stand to reason, though, that if RGB was marketing themselves as a place where you could "test" motion picture film stocks, that they would need Kodak much more so than Fuji, based on industry tendencies/practices? Which brings me to my next question, as was stated by someone earlier in this thread; how many DP's were actually using RGB stocks and still cameras to test motion picture stocks?

I'm beginning to think there will never be another Kubrick.

RGB needed Kodak; Kodak, apparently, never needed RGB. Smile, it's just business :) .

Anybody out there have any idea where I can find a matte box, rails and a follow focus set-up for a CP-16R? I've seen them around (eBay auctions for the whole camera package, photos at Whitehouse, etc.) but nobody has been able to give me a definite answer as to who builds them and where I might find one. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks.

FYI: Sent: 10/21/2005 8:25:00 AM Subject: Re: Film is NOT Dead!! Kodak ROCHESTER, N.Y. - For the first time, Eastman Kodak Co. is generating more sales from digital imaging than from film-based photography, yet its massive makeover brought more pain in the third quarter - a $1.03 billion loss largely attributable to one-time tax charges. Even excluding restructuring and other charges, analysts said Kodak's results missed Wall Street forecasts. Kodak lost the equivalent of $3.58 a share in the July-September quarter, compared with a profit of $458 million, or $1.60 a share, a year earlier. Its loss from continuing operations, excluding one-time charges, was $103 million. Sales rose 5 percent, to $3.55 billion, up from $3.37 billion in last year's third quarter. Although stung once more by the rapid slide in film sales, Kodak found solace in its steady drive into the digital era. Its overall digital sales in the quarter surged 47 percent, to $1.89 billion, while revenue from film, paper and other traditional, chemical-based businesses slumped 20 percent, to $1.66 billion.