Joe Anderson

Homeboy is shooting the next Star Wars movie.

http://www.fortmilltimes.com/124/story/583629.html

I have worked with slightly older models of the phantom on 2 shoots and I while I would not say they are appropriate for narrative shoots, they were quite successful on 2 music videos I've done as an AC/DIT. The biggest hurdle these cameras have is the upload time of recorded data. When shooting at high resolutions with high color bit rate, it can take over 10 minutes to upload. Imagine doing 2 or 3 takes, then having to wait. This is very damaging to the production's momentum. Also the cables supplied, both Ethernet and AC adapter, are cripplingly short. HOWEVER, one aspect of the camera that is bafflingly overlooked is that the sensor at 30 fps has an ISO of 600! Sensitivity to light, is the one issue that is often overlooked in the digital vs. film debate. Most HD cameras (unless increasing gain) have an ISO of 250 or 320. Until recently, film has had the distinction of being much faster. Now that resolutions are more similar, digital cameras with more light sensitivity are the real threat to film. Below is a link of a video shot on the Phantom. You'll have to excuse the Times' compression quality. http://video.on.nytimes.com/?fr_story=ac3f...3be85c002a4218e JANDY

The standard (35) tent is a bit cramped when working with 1000' mags with hinged doors that are not completely removable (435, Arricam). However the Jumbo (65) tent is often too large when loading in strange places (back seat of cars etc.) Go with the standard.

1- This month (Feb. 07) there is a segment on HBO's Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel about NFL Films and its creator Ed Sabol. 2- "NFL Films has made the National Football League the second-most documented subject on film behind World War II." http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/26/...ain595946.shtml

I just finished AC'ing a feature shooting with the D20. In some of the rental papers I saw the replacement value listed at $150,000 for body, SRW deck and Astro waveform/monitor. The camera has several EI options: 50,100,200 and 320 in advanced user mode. At 320 there was some noticable noise that unfortunatley had a horizontal quality that was not very pleasing. This noise was not present in the blacks, but only in the areas that were 3 stops underexposed. However, when projected at 2k, this noise was not noticable. JANDY

There is another photograph in the Taschen book of Kubrick holding a light meter.

This is an aberration phenomenon known as curvature of field. Image fields are naturally round shaped with respect to the optical center of the lens. This field (called the Petzval surface) can be flattened by a 'corrected' lens that has a negative converging, or convex, lens element in it's design. It is my understanding that this curvature is more an issue with lenses of higher magnification. The term 'telephoto' was originally reserved for longer lenses that contained this convex element. So wide angle lenses are not as much at risk. JANDY.

Christopher, Regarding your question: I do think Mini-35 adapters have a CofC of 1/2000 in. because of all the additional glass elements added behind the lens. Remember that there is a depth-of-field (in front of the lens) and a depth-of-focus (behind the lens). Once the image is projected onto a spinning ground glass, then bounced of three mirrors and then magnified by a diopter which is crudely attached to the front of a video lens, that focus tolerance is going to be greatly reduced, regardless of the definition of the CCD. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depth_of_focus JANDY

These are all great tips, but no amount of muscle memory or barrel markings are going to help you in the situation described above. The depth of field on a wide open 80mm lens on a 35 adapter with its 1/2000th inch CofC is just not a reasonable amount to work with when shooting a moving human being. Even after taping out, there is no way to judge when an actor has leaned forward as little as 1". In this case it is best to inform the DP of this logistical nightmare rather than sit quietly and hope to get lucky. A professional DP will often plan ahead for these types of situations by lighting to a better stop. Unfortunately with the 35 lens adapters DP's feel they have free reign to stay wide open all the time. The best advice in this situation, is to make sure you have a really good view of the monitor and a 2nd AC who will listen to your complaints afterwords. JANDY

http://laptops.engadget.com/2006/04/24/big...-debuts-at-nab/

FYI: Aaton is releasing the Penelope (a 2 and 3 perf 35mm camera) this July. Also... since Panavision is developing anamorphic lenses with a 1.34x stretch (as opposed to 2x) they too may be leaning in a 3 perf direction.

Having gone to film school in NY, I inevitable had to light these types of scenes several times. My preference is to simply bounce an open-face off the ceiling. In addition to being a very simple set up, I find that bounced light is more pleasing on faces than lanterns or even heavily defused Kinos. Most often these scenes are meant to have a somewhat intimate feeling and therefore don't really need additional sources like a kicker (which are also hard to position if there is a mirror in frame).