Thomas Tamura

Those reflections on the wall are specular highlights. A post solution may be to generate a luma-matte then slip the wall behind it to eliminate the problem area. Painting it out wasn't a bad idea, but i can see why you're not happy with it. If you use Apple's Shake, or similar node based compositor, there ought to be a 'clamp' or 'compress' operator that you can use to isolate only the pixels above a certain value. A good old Luma-key ought to do the same thing. Ounce you have your holes cut it is just a matter of putting something behind that will match the wall -- or you may be able to use the wall its self. Basically the this is caused when you reach a complementary angle to light source. In your clip it's worse in the middle, and as you mover more perpendicular to the building the effect is decreased. To avoid on location, careful where you put your lights, use flags, maybe dulling spray. Those are just suggestions, I'm sure someone on here will have better solutions than I.

Thanks, all the data I've been able to collect basically says the same thing -- 5 seconds to cross. The tables in the ACS manual are very specific and I was hoping someone could point me to the formula used to calculate the data. Not to mention it's a home work assignment for one of my classes, and I've had a heck of a time finding any information that actually alludes to how those numbers were reached -- let alone an actual equation. Don't suppose you have a link to those elaborate tables?

Is there a mathematical formula to calculate maximum panning speed? My ASC manual has some charts that outline the max. degrees per second recommended for panning a 35mm, but I was wondering if there is a formula to determine the max pan speed for other formats, focal lengths, shutter angles, and frame rates? Thanks,

I'm in the market for a new, and more comprehensive, deal memo. Can any one point me in the direction of a download. I'm sure I'll make revisions to it, but I'm being lazy and I don't really want to start typing it from scratch. I'm not really in a position to hire a lawyer to draft one. I'm working with this company that has burned through some camera ops and editors, and I want better contract language. I'll happily except an e-mail with attachment or in-line text. I guess you could say I'm shopping around. Thanks for the help, Thomas

Thanks for the replies. Tim, as you said it can be stressful. It certainly is a relief to know that you guys agree with my position. And, Chris, in hind sigh, I should have sent them packing right away (well they wouldn't have to pack cause it was all my gear). Lesson learned. Thanks for the support and candid answers. Cheers

Dear Cinematography Community, I was wondering if some freelancers can give me their perspective on a situation? I did a shoot for a party as a favor. It was shot with my equipment at one of my relatives' homes. There were no agreements signed, including a location agreement. In fact I shot it on short ends of tapes from other clients' projects. I told them I would dump the footage to an external drive as soon as they provided one. I was not contacted by them for a 6 weeks. I told them to drop off a drive and there would be a weeks turn around time. They told me that was too long, and they would capture the tapes themselves. As I mentioned they were short ends and I refused to release the tapes. At this point talks broke down. Then I get this message from them saying they're filing a law-suit or some legal action. My position here is that I was an "at will" employee and when I felt I wasn't being treated appropriately I "quit". Am I wrong?

the recorder part of the camera doesn't care what the camera part is feeding to it. it's just a sequence of frames either way. no frames added, none dropped, no change in the gop. this is so obvious i'm sorry i didn't realize it was a question. /matt Thanks for the help.

Yes -- assuming 180 degree shutter -- that's great that you know so much about film cameras, but you haven't answered my question. I didn't start this thread for a intro to FILM lesson. Clearly the camera is duplicating frames to approximate what a longer exposure time would be -- so what is it doing when the shutter speed is increased -- compression wise; how does it affect the long-GOP. It's obviously not throwing out frames? It's not writing more data either now is it? so what is it doing to the structure of the MPEG-2 files? Thanks for trying, but I don't think you know

Matt, thanks for the reply, and I see what you're saying. In film cameras frame rate and shutter speed are one and the same. As you know 24 FPS is 1/48 of a sec shutter speed. When you lower the shutter speed (and create longer exposure time) you get a similar result to a film camera shooting at a slower shuttter speed, but not when you go faster speed. I was hoping some one could provide some insight into the more technical aspect of the compression. I guess I should have been more clear on that. Sorry.

I've done several test shots at different shutter speeds with the Z1 and I am seeing some increased resolution, but is it all in my mind? What exactly does this function do, because it's not changing the frame rate (which shutter speed should be linked to), and it's still giving me footage at 30 FPS. With the GOP MPEG compression I don't see how it could be writing more key frames either. Any one care to discuss this with me. I've used it a couple of times more for controlling exposure then doing in camera FX.

Nice work. I enjoyed the images and the editing. Was this shot using digital or photochemical? I would love to see it uncompressed.

There you go -- try this one. I haven't read it, but I've been meaning to -- let me know if it's any good. http://www.amazon.com/Purple-Someones-Gonn...g/dp/0240806883

Standard Def. has some advantages over HDV. for one it handles motion better due to HDV's GOP structured compression. But all things considered I much prefer HDV. For one thing it handles color better then DV, and when it's down converting in camera you get better color in SD then an SD camera produces based on the fact that there's more color information in the intake. Also, it is HD. The world is going HD - this is a fact - and it's coming soon, won't it be nice to send you shorts off with the best resolution possible. The added lines of resolution would help if you wanted to print to film. The cannon does offer the ability to change lens, but they offer an HD model too. You should go HDV if you can. It looks better.

my friend is a wedding photographer and she has a lens attachment that produdces the effect you're describing. I don't recall the name of it, and I havn't been able to get a hold of her. It's out there -- and it has a name. Keep looking.

It was done in Citizen Kane in the scene with the glass in the foreground -- I'd be more specific but it's been a while since i've seen it. Any way it's done with a mask over the back ground, then a mask over the exposed section to get the whole frame in sharp focus. the edge of the matte will be soft depending on the iris setting and due to the close proximity to the film plane. How's that for creative.