Mikael Lemercier Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 Hi, does someone get some example of shoot with out of phase during the take? or any tips about where i can see some example (movies, commercial, website...) regards. Mikael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted August 16, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 16, 2006 Hi,does someone get some example of shoot with out of phase during the take? or any tips about where i can see some example (movies, commercial, website...) regards. Mikael What's out of phase? The shutter? A TV set? An HMI light? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikael Lemercier Posted August 16, 2006 Author Share Posted August 16, 2006 hi David, out of phase, i mean miss timing between shutter and mouvment, using on arri 435 or Panavision XL. i'm curious to see the effects during the shoot. do you have already use it? regards Mikael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmett John Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 I think shooting with the cameras shutter out of phase creates a vertical streaking effect, caused by highlights burning a line up the negative as the film is pulled down whilst still being exposed. Cant be dont with all cameras but im pretty sure any 435 is capable of it. Correct me if I'm wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted August 16, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 16, 2006 I "used it" by accident on my first feature back in 1992, thanks to the crappy UltraCam camera I was using... The most famous examples are: the opening battle of "Saving Private Ryan", the appearance of the sniper near the end of "Full Metal Jacket", and there's a fist fight in the auto factory in "Minority Report" that used it briefly as I recall. How bad the streaking is depends on how much out of sync you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 16, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 16, 2006 I "used it" by accident on my first feature back in 1992, thanks to the crappy UltraCam camera I was using.... David, It's just 2 allen screws that holds the shutter timing, I am suprised the AC did not notice at the check out. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member David Mullen ASC Posted August 16, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 16, 2006 David, It's just 2 allen screws that holds the shutter timing, I am suprised the AC did not notice at the check out. Stephen It was the third UltraCam dropped onto us in the San Bernardino desert where we were shooting. The first one worked fine, and then Leonetti said that wanted it back because it needed to go out on a TV series and it was the only one convertable to 3-perf. So they gave us another UltraCam on location and it blew fuses every take. So they brought us another UltraCam on location and that one shaved film off in the gate on every take. So they brought us another UltraCam on a Friday and it seemed to work fine until dailies on Monday showed us the shutter timing error. At which point Leonetti blamed the film stock and the lab for the problem. None of us, the lab person, me, the film stock rep, or the Leonetti rep recognized what the error was -- I had never seen the effect before. It was the camera assistant who guessed at the problem and found the error after-the-fact. So I can tell you that the first UltraCam worked fine and was prepped thoroughly by the AC's, but after that, it was Leonetti driving out to the desert in the middle of our shoot and swapping the cameras between takes - all the while assuring us it was prepped back at the shop. After that fiasco, Panavision generously donated a Panaflex for free for us to finish the last two weeks of the show. We were making a 35mm movie on a budget of $40,000 cash basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 16, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 16, 2006 It was the third UltraCam dropped onto us in the San Bernardino desert where we were shooting. The first one worked fine, and then Leonetti said that wanted it back because it needed to go out on a TV series and it was the only one convertable to 3-perf. So they gave us another UltraCam on location and it blew fuses every take. So they brought us another UltraCam on location and that one shaved film off in the gate on every take. So they brought us another UltraCam on a Friday and it seemed to work fine until dailies on Monday showed us the shutter timing error. At which point Leonetti blamed the film stock and the lab for the problem. None of us, the lab person, me, the film stock rep, or the Leonetti rep recognized what the error was -- I had never seen the effect before. It was the camera assistant who guessed at the problem and found the error after-the-fact. So I can tell you that the first UltraCam worked fine and was prepped thoroughly by the AC's, but after that, it was Leonetti driving out to the desert in the middle of our shoot and swapping the cameras between takes - all the while assuring us it was prepped back at the shop. After that fiasco, Panavision generously donated a Panaflex for free for us to finish the last two weeks of the show. We were making a 35mm movie on a budget of $40,000 cash basically. David, I can see why they sold their fleet off! Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted August 16, 2006 Share Posted August 16, 2006 The later 435 cameras can be set to mistime the shutter electronically. The 435extreme can do just about everything but make expresso. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikael Lemercier Posted August 18, 2006 Author Share Posted August 18, 2006 (edited) I think shooting with the cameras shutter out of phase creates a vertical streaking effect, caused by highlights burning a line up the negative as the film is pulled down whilst still being exposed. Cant be dont with all cameras but im pretty sure any 435 is capable of it. Correct me if I'm wrong? hi Emmett that's it! have you got some others examples of pictures? The most famous examples are: the opening battle of "Saving Private Ryan", the appearance of the sniper near the end of "Full Metal Jacket", and there's a fist fight in the auto factory in "Minority Report" that used it briefly as I recall. Hi David, thank you for the examples. The later 435 cameras can be set to mistime the shutter electronically. The 435extreme can do just about everything but make expresso. hi Mitch, you 're right about 435, and with the 435es (without mistiming eprom) you can just running one motor of your choice( shutter or mouvment). regards Mikael. Edited August 18, 2006 by mikael lemercier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Adam Frisch FSF Posted August 18, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 18, 2006 I've done tests recently for a commercial I did, and I will upload the test footage on my website soon. There you can see the effects of streaking at all angles of mistiming, from 0 degrees to 180 degrees. You can see the commercial here: http://www.adamfrisch.com/commercials/gree...indexmovie.html The streaking effect is at the end of it and it was varied between 120/130 degrees to about 170 degrees at the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Shani Posted August 18, 2006 Share Posted August 18, 2006 just want to say great work adam love the commercial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted August 18, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 18, 2006 It was the third UltraCam Sounds like Ultra"Crap" to me. I bet the boys at Panavision are patting themselves on the back for helping you out way back when. I know you're pretty loyal to them, and I can see why. You can see the commercial here: http://www.adamfrisch.com/commercials/gree...indexmovie.html Nice work Adam! I really dig it. Did you shoot upside down or did they just do it in post? I assume when the camera turns right side up that it was a post move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Stigler Posted August 19, 2006 Share Posted August 19, 2006 you 're right about 435, and with the 435es (without mistiming eprom) you can just running one motor of your choice( shutter or mouvment). For the Arricams and the 435Xtreme there's a little box called Timing Shift Box that plugs to the camera and lets you turn the timing out of phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikael Lemercier Posted August 23, 2006 Author Share Posted August 23, 2006 I've done tests recently for a commercial I did, and I will upload the test footage on my website soon. There you can see the effects of streaking at all angles of mistiming, from 0 degrees to 180 degrees. Hi Adam, I like your commercial. I'm curious about your tests, wich camera did you used for it? regards. Mikael. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Dzyak Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 It was the third UltraCam dropped onto us in the San Bernardino desert where we were shooting. The first one worked fine, and then Leonetti said that wanted it back because it needed to go out on a TV series and it was the only one convertable to 3-perf. So they gave us another UltraCam on location and it blew fuses every take. So they brought us another UltraCam on location and that one shaved film off in the gate on every take. So they brought us another UltraCam on a Friday and it seemed to work fine until dailies on Monday showed us the shutter timing error. At which point Leonetti blamed the film stock and the lab for the problem. None of us, the lab person, me, the film stock rep, or the Leonetti rep recognized what the error was -- I had never seen the effect before. It was the camera assistant who guessed at the problem and found the error after-the-fact. So I can tell you that the first UltraCam worked fine and was prepped thoroughly by the AC's, but after that, it was Leonetti driving out to the desert in the middle of our shoot and swapping the cameras between takes - all the while assuring us it was prepped back at the shop. After that fiasco, Panavision generously donated a Panaflex for free for us to finish the last two weeks of the show. We were making a 35mm movie on a budget of $40,000 cash basically. You've got a great memory! :) All I recall is the blue paint chipping off the mags. Ultracrap is what we were calling it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 23, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 23, 2006 You've got a great memory! :) All I recall is the blue paint chipping off the mags. Ultracrap is what we were calling it. Hi, I think the paint almost falls off the magnesium body + mags! Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timHealy Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 A friend worked on a series of spots for the summer Olympics a few years ago shot by Tony Wahlberg (sp?) also using mistiming intentionally. Sorry, that I don't have any links or examples of them but I thought they looked great at the time. I only saw them when they aired. Best Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Gross Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 You've got a great memory! :) All I recall is the blue paint chipping off the mags. Ultracrap is what we were calling it. I was always partial to the term "UltraJam" since that's what they always did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Stephen Williams Posted August 25, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 25, 2006 I was always partial to the term "UltraJam" since that's what they always did. Hi Mitch, Never had a jam myself! There is a danger of missing the last roller, then if the power is low leading to low take up tension, the film might just get caught on the main sprocket. I think that could be the issue. Stephen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted August 25, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 25, 2006 Mistiming between the shutter and film pulldown can also occur in a projector, where it is called "travel ghost": http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/students...4.9.6&lc=en http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/manuals/TAPGUIDELINES.pdf http://www.cinematography.net/Pages%20GB/%...ter%20phase.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Kukla Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Mistiming between the shutter and film pulldown can also occur in a projector, where it is called "travel ghost": http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/students...4.9.6&lc=en http://www.film-tech.com/warehouse/manuals/TAPGUIDELINES.pdf http://www.cinematography.net/Pages%20GB/%...ter%20phase.htm Generally speaking, that tends to be more tolerable to a certain degree - I used to work a lot in projection booths and we'd run RP40 loops and walk up to the screen to take a look. Oftentimes in certain cases it was very noticeable up close, but quickly fell out of visibility after 10-15 feet. Part of that may have to do with the intermittent movement, however - projectors generally use intermittent sprockets instead of claws. Since most projectors aren't necessarily tested against POMs, I'd guess that many are out of phase by minor percentages, but can get away with it usually. But this is all dredging up old knowledge, so I might be wrong... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Hal Smith Posted August 25, 2006 Premium Member Share Posted August 25, 2006 Generally speaking, that tends to be more tolerable to a certain degree - I used to work a lot in projection booths and we'd run RP40 loops and walk up to the screen to take a look. Oftentimes in certain cases it was very noticeable up close, but quickly fell out of visibility after 10-15 feet. Part of that may have to do with the intermittent movement, however - projectors generally use intermittent sprockets instead of claws. Since most projectors aren't necessarily tested against POMs, I'd guess that many are out of phase by minor percentages, but can get away with it usually. But this is all dredging up old knowledge, so I might be wrong... It's definitely noticeable on my Simplex SP 35mm projector if the shutter is misadjusted. When I got the projector I noticed a little pulldown ghosting and got rid of it by inching the projector by hand and adjusting the shutter so that it was closed when the geneva mechanism was pulling the film down. In truth the Simplex mechanism is designed such that the shutter hasn't blocked the light 100% when the film starts moving and again when the film has almost stopped. Obviously the Simplex engineers who designed the SP knew where the trade off was between shutter dwell angle and delivering the maximum duration of light to the screen. After adjustment I looked for ghosting up close to the screen on mine and really couldn't see any - a test film might show it but not a pretty much normal print. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Kukla Posted August 25, 2006 Share Posted August 25, 2006 Yeah, I remember that it was only really obvious if you have something stable and high-contrast, like a test pattern or subtitles. (Or, of course, if it was REALLY out of phase.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now