Bryan Darling

Hey David, I noticed you hadn't been around. I figured you were out there shooting something...and sure enough. Sounds like a pretty crazy and intense working situation. Some of your comments particularly about running and gunning before the light is gone and the "messier" work than normal reminds me so much of one particular project. I was directing and my DP was Floyd Diebel. It was all on location. All but one of the locations was within several minutes of each other. However we had to cover typically 3 locations a day if I remember right. The most complex a large gallery party sequence. Anyhow due to time and budget constraints we basically had about 4 or so takes per scene. So we made a rule that Floyd would shoot two full takes at particular angles we wanted to cover. From there we let the actors go for another two takes and Floyd would shoot cutaways and other various angles. It actually worked out quite well as we had enough coverage for every scene and in the end I used a lot of the "space" in the shots were he was framing or focusing into his shot. It gave the whole piece a real nice mood and feel, an almost doc. quality I suppose you could say. Luckily we were shooting 7222 so it helped in the tight lighting situations where we couldn't set up a lot of lights. One in particular was this basement of an old 30's or 40's office building. It had tons of pipes, old A/C and heating gear, freight elevator, and electrical systems, it was doubling for a water plant. The sound people had a real field day as they went around grabbing all kinds of wild sound in-between setups. I think for that setup we really only used 2 or 3 lights, Arri 650s and 2k. Those along with just the existing practicals really gave it this moody dank feeling. At the end of it all, it had put Floyd outside his comfort zone so to speak. He's a guy that really likes to set things up and craft the lighting. I know for him it was a messier and sloppier way of working, but what I love is that his messier and sloppier beats some people's measured and crafted work. That's the thing about talented and skillful craftsman they can shine in most instances even if to themselves it wasn't how they would of preferred. The work I've seen that you've done has been a pleasure to watch. It's rare to find people who know their medium and understand it, or even attempt to truly understand it. By the way I must say that the book you collaborated on with Kris Malkiewicz is a great resource that I use when I teach or mentor others. One question I have is about your stock choices. What brought you to the decision of using the Fuji Stocks? I actually have been curious about the F-64D and notice they have more in the way of Daylight stocks.

I would buy your film directly from Kodak. You can go to their website and look around at the films they have. You'll find the film cheaper there than buying it from a store or dealer. You can also mail in a check or money order along with your film order and they will send you the film. What state are you in? Processing is usually $12.50 to $13.50 depending on if you use black and white or color. I wouldn't pay more than that. Forde Labs in Seattle, WA is a good place to send your film. Sending your film to Moviestuff to transfer to Mini-DV is a great idea. The quality is great and so is the price, especially when you're beginning. No doubt film is more expensive. However it's more about what medium you enjoy working with. I know a guy who loves video, especially old analog video, because it looks crappy. So it's more about what you enjoy and what feels right to you. If anything try it out and see. I really recommend the book Cinematography : Third Edition by Kris Malkiewicz, M. David Mullen. You can get it at Amazon.com. It's great for people just getting into film. I use it a lot when teaching and helping others. Good Luck!

Does anyone know any houses that rent the ring light for the Varicam? So far I've found one for $600/day but that is really steep to me. We'd buy one if we could find it used or cheap. Bryan

I'm a location producer for a project coming in out of NYC. The shoot is in Sacramento, CA. I'm looking to rent a Varicam package somewhere more local, say San Francisco. Does anyone have any information or leads for a rental house in the bay area? I'd prefer going with one that someone has had experience with. Thanks, Bryan

I have 1- 400' can, 15- 100' rolls

I have a circa 1923 Cine-Kodak Model A. I was lucky enough to get a guy at the George Eastman House to scan me a copy of the old manual. There's no reason why you can't use these cameras. The difficult part is if they require double-perf film. The choices in double-perf have dwindles significantly over the last couple years. There's a couple Vision2 stocks and Plus-X reversal. However the Plus-X is special order with a min of (18) 100' rolls. The Kodak catalog was last updated in 2004, although the online version has an early 2005 date on it. The catalog will show quite a few filmstocks available in double-perf as well as discontinued stocks so you can't use it for accuracy. I called Kodak and essentially went through the catalog to update it myself. Really the only way to go is just to experiment, through a roll of film in and go. I recommend starting with reversal because it's easy to see the results without having to do a telecine or a print and it's fun the just through it up with the projector. B-

Are you looking for color? If so I have some 16mm Vision 500T in 100' and 400' I'm looking to clear out of the freezer.

We have a Superior Bulk printer that needs rehabilitation. I'd rather work on that than do a modified projector. I was hoping for something a little more professional and versatile. I've been offered a processor however I don't want to deal with a huge one. I'd rather use a small Cramer. B-

Thanks Clive, I found a scanned manual that came with the J Printers. It didn't seem to complex. It did show however where to lubricate along with info on maintenance. I have a background in many years of lab work in the still photo industry and although it's not the same, there are similarities in process both chem. and equipment wise. Plus I got to run the AV cart in junior high!! Thanks for the post, any info in regards to this stuff is most appreciated. Thanks, Bryan

Thanks John, do you have any other names of dealers in used surplus mp equipment? Bryan

Hi, I organize a non-profit film co-op/collective in Sacramento, CA. We are in the midst of creating a DIY darkroom lab for our group and for outside programs with schools and the community. Does anyone have any contacts or ideas on how we could obtain a contract printer such as the Bell & Howell Model J? We'd like the ability to print a soundtrack onto the print. In addition we are looking for a small processor for 16mm black & white negative for small runs that use a minimum of chemistry and maintenance. We are also looking for an optical printer for 16mm with the option to blow-up Super 8 to 16mm. We'd prefer to find a lab or person who would be willing to donate the equipment for a tax-deduction. It would be convenient if they were in California or a surrounding state. Thanks, Bryan

I've used the Rex, but I would say that to post footage for reference or idea of quality- if that's what your looking for- is pointless. The camera is great, but its more about what lense, what film, and how it was shot (i.e. exposure & processing). For instance I've used both neg and reversal but tend to really go for really pushing out the grain and distorting the image through reflection and shooting throught glass. By the way, once it's been compressed for the internet it'd be very difficult to tell the difference if it was Super 8, 16mm, or 35mm. I've owned several Bolex models and had nothing but great results, steady picture, and reliable performance.

I happen to own the film, bought it along time ago when it came to DVD. I had missed it in the theater when it passed through Sacramento. I'd say that CQ is an eye-candy movie. Empty and void of anything but pretty shots, pretty people, and pretty music. So I take it for what it is and enjoy it just for that. However, I think to compare it to Lost In Translation is like comparing apples & oranges; to use a cliche.

I was informed by an archivist that Agfa makes a black & white print stock in 35mm that has a higher than normal silver content.

I've shot several films using short-ends & recans without a problem. I've purchased from Dr. Rawstock. I've also shot with film purchased from ebay without ever a problem. A DP friend of mine uses a lot of ebay & out-dated stock for his films & commercials. We both use the same lab in San Francisco and same telecine. I recently had a print struck from some EXR50 & V250D that was outdated. It turned out great.

The Arriflex 16BL is great but very heavy and not the most friendly for handheld work. You'll also be hard pressed to find a Arri 16BL package for $2k. If you're doing a music video then you won't be recording "live" audio so I'd recommend either an Arri S package with a crystal sync motor or a Bolex Rex with a crystal sync motor. If you don't really need to match the songs lyrics to the guy or gal singing in the video then you can go with virtually any 16mm camera. Just get what you can for your budget. Bolex cameras are extremely reliable and well built. Arri cameras are great machines but will be more pricey and a not quite as simple to operate. The K-3 is a great little camera for the price. I'd focus more on what you're going to shoot & experimenting around with filmstocks. It sounds like you're starting out in film so I woulnd't recommend getting the "best" camera. That itself is very subjective. Rather get a good well-built camera that you can play and experiment with and learn from. You'll find a great many filmmaker using Bolex cameras of all kind, including the wind-ups. Check out My Architect & any of Guy Maddin's films. It'd be a waste, I think, at this point to invest a lot of money into a 16mm camera system that may not be necessary for where you are- in that you're beginning to learn and experiment. I've used a Bolex, K-3, & Arri and unless you sat watching film projected side-by-side from each camera of the same subject, you'd never really see a difference. As a matter of fact I just had a film print struck from some footage shot with a K-3 and it looked great. Just grab a decent inexpensive camera and start shooting!

Hey Jaime, having your camera stolen really sucks! I would say not to get to caught up on cameras and looks. Your subject matter- your family & breast cancer- is what will make your documentary, not the technology you're using. Whether you get the lastest & greatest- of which will always be debatable until the end of time- or you get something that you can "use" is up to you. I highly doubt anyone will give you demerits just because the "look" seemed a little different here or there. In my work I constantly mix up formats & film types in the same piece- Super 8, 16mm, color & b/w- to me it's all interchangable. It's about your content, that's where you should concentrate. Viewers will never know the difference and even if they did "see" a difference they'd have no clue as to what was different- they aren't that keen. Only tech-heads will notice and say something, but that's not your audience so you don't have to worry. Your audience are the people out there coming to see a piece on breast cancer & your family. As far as equipment goes all I would recommend to you is beware of used gear unless you know it's history of use. I've used an XL1 for many years & love it. I recently bought a GL2 and it's amazing. You can adjust the look if you so desire. It's basically an XL1s in the body of a GL1. I've also used a Sony PD-150 and that too is a great camera. Don't worry if some think 24p is the "it" and better than interlaced 30fps, it's not so much what is "better." One can always make an argument that there is something better, but better is subjective. What matters is what works for what your doing, for what the project calls for. Go with your instincts. Everyone will have an opinion on how they would do it or want to do it. However I bet inside you have the answer to your question already, perhaps you're looking for affirmation & am unsure of your thoughts. But you did get a camera at some point in time in the past and that camera has worked for you. Go with what you think, it won't be "wrong." Someone else may consider it so, but all that matters is getting your documentary onto something & out into the world. Good luck & I wish you well.

Because it to is an aesthetic.

I have a Bolex Reflex Body w/ finder & case on ebay. There are a lot of photos of the camera as well as sample frames from a BTS Quadra telecine. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...item=7564032600 Thanks, Bryan

If you're looking for free a/v programs I would check out http://www.sourceforge.net It has a great selection of open source software and there are people out there doing some cool video stuff. You'd need to install the Linux OS on your computer. There is information out there on doing that so you can run you still use Windows or Mac.

Thanks for all the replies guys. I like the idea of a song more than a metronome purely from an aesthetic point of view, however I think I will look into both. It'll be a little while but after I'm done I'll put somthing up online. I'm shooting a roll of Double-X and a roll of color as well. B-

I like how you think Dan, an experimental brethren at heart. I too love using all sorts of unconventional and weird approaches to things. None of my cameras, still or otherwise, are newer than the late 70's I believe, haha. One in particular is an old Exa with a screwed up Zeiss lens. It gets some great pictures. I through a roll of Fuji 800 NPZ and push 2 stops, guessing on the f-stops & shutter. I'm an available/natural light fanatic. I print the results on Kodak Metallic Paper by hand. I love seeing what comes out from all that. My approach to cinematography is much the same way. In my opinion once you know the basics you can go just about anywhere.

We're not open yet, but our aim is to make the SacTown Hippodrome something we think is greatly needed in downtown Sacramento: a non-profit venue that supports and promotes the process of creating art. The SacTown Hippodrome will be a place where local artists can hang out, meet with each other, learn from one another, bounce ideas around, collaborate, and show the results. It will be a place where experimentation, exploration, and risk-taking are encouraged. A place there failure and success are equally welcome. A place where the prevailing perspective--societally, persoanlly and artistically--is endlessly questioned. A place to play the ukulele. In the beginning, we'll function primarily as a screening room for avant garde cinema--historic and current, international and regional. Over time, we'll become a visual arts gallery; a small performance space for music, poetry, and fiction readings, lectures, discussions and presentations; a library of books, videos, and films; and a resource center with production and post-production equipment. Eventually, we'll conduct workshops and classes. We're in this for the long haul. Maybe we'll succeed, and maybe we'll fail. But, like all experiments, it'll be interesting to see how it turns out. Hi, I just wanted to put this out there for the hell of it. My name is Bryan & I've been working with another guy up here in creating a center for experimental cinema. We through the ukelele's in the keep the filmmakers honest :) The name of the place is the Sactown Hippodrome. We have a building in downtown Sacramento and are in the midst of trying to get a contractor to do some work. We're looking at soundproofing, building a stage, installing a lighting & sound system, and more. Eventually we are looking to open a cafe, perhaps in the summer of 2006. I'm writing because I know some of you out there are very involved in film. I'm hoping to get feedback, suggestions, contacts in various realms--such as building, equipment, education, etc-- and really just to stir some interest and see what comes back. There are very few here in Sacramento that can think outside of the box when it comes to cinema, i.e. the mainstream focus of stars & narrative rehashes of bad stories. We really want to set aside a place where people can look beyond that and into another realm that recieves little to no attention. Thanks.

I aquired an original 16mm Kodak camera from circa 1923. It was the first (and only, I believe) 16mm camera Kodak manufatured. I took it apart and greased & lubed it up. Here's the deal it says 2 turns per second for the crank. Which I assume is for 16 fps. The problem I have is in keeping time properly. I remember hearing from a much older friend that "back in the day" there used to be a song method for keeping time that the old cameramen used in the silent days. I'm curious as to if anyone knows what it is. However any simple method I can learn to help me develop a rythym for cranking the camera would be great. I don't know if anyone here has seen one let alone used one, but the camera is a beautiful box with the old EKC logo with a very Edwardian look and feel. The frame counter looks like an old industrial pressure meter. Thansk, Bryan

Thanks for all the info. I had been toying around with getting a Rex-2. My first camera was a non-reflex I got at a swap when I was 17. I love the cameras. It's funny because I have a k-3 sitting around on a tripod in my shop. So I looked through it for the hell of it and noticed how much easier it is to focus that thing. Anyhow the original Reflex I have now works great. I figured there would be a big parts issue in replacing the finder. My thing is you can play the which camera is better game forever. In that people tend to focus on the gear rather than what they are using it for- creating content. I prefer limitations myself as it forces you to contend with a set framework in which to create in. Since I have lenses, extension tubes, etc I'm thinking perhaps just getting a Rex-2 body and selling my camera. Then I just think hell maybe I should get an Arri S. But like I said you can play that game all day. My biggest issue is that with the aging of equipment and not knowing how cared for the cameras are it's hard getting one of ebay in which the seller knows anything more than the name plate on the camera. I don't want to spend a great deal of money as I'd rather spend it on filmstock & lab. If anyone has a line on a decently priced Rex-2 body please let me know. I'd like to get that and a switar 10mm RX as I find myself always using wide angle lenses and the zooms don't quite cut it for me. Thanks again. B-