Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Yes, the scene was shot on stage with a dollies tracking various lights that were snooted down and on dimmers.
I don’t think I would do things very differently on ‘Sicario’ or that any films I have shot would have looked substantially different if they had been shot on film. I know I would have used a little more light for the night scenes but that would have been just using slightly brighter bulbs or units in the same places. I would always allow myself a thick negative for dusk work so I would have underexposed some and printed down some which is not necessary shooting with the Alexa. There is a similar extended ‘magic hour’ sequence in ‘No Country for Old Men’, which was shot on film. Certainly that was difficult but it was also more complex than the sequence in “Sicario’.
It was true that film used to handle highlights better than digital but that certainly isn’t the case with the higher end cameras today.
The process is run faster to allow for the warmer developer so the ‘exposure’, or more precisely the density, of the negative isn’t affected. What this faster processing does lead to is an slight increase in grain and, perhaps, contrast.
A hard question. I doubt I would do things very differently if I were to shoot on film again. Yes, a little more light for night shoots but I wouldn’t think much else would change. I don’t agree that film requires more hard light. I might even suggest the reverse is true but projects are always different so it is hard to judge that.
Perhaps some lab work is a little less consistent than it might have been but there should be no issues with scanning.
One last comment from me. I would always shoot a grey card for film and in the early days of digital capture. But as David says, we now use a specific LUT and what I see on set will translates exactly the same on the colorists screen. For that reason I see no need for a colorist to ‘correct’ footage to match a spec..
That is simply when a lab warms up the developer to a temperature that is above the optimum. This makes the process faster and labs would favor this if they had a large quantity of footage that needed development in a fixed time frame. When you ‘hot develop’ a negative, which I have often done with B&W stills film, there will be an increase in grain. There was a lab that would often change the temperature of their developer from day to day, which was quite noticeable on the dailies they produced.
I had asked Arri if it were possible to create a digital camera with an optical viewfinder as the electronic finders were then so tiring on the eye and really not that good. The XT Studio was the result. There is no alternative to an electronic finder for any small digital camera so the optical option simply no longer exists.
It looks like you should be able to hide your reflections pretty easily in a space like that. A simple black square with a hole in it for the lens can get you out of trouble. You might find the light being in shot is more of a problem. Perhaps bouncing a lamp off the ceiling would be more forgiving and you could use a silver reflector to ‘focus’ the bounce if necessary.
The Coen Brothers wanted the ‘old film’ to introduce “A Serious Man’ so 1:33 gave that feeling. Otherwise, the film felt quite intimate and naturalistic. I suspect that is why we chose 1:85.
Some directors just like to shoot 2:35 and that is just a given. Personal choice. Nothing profound.
Why? I cant really explain that. The choice of aspect ratio comes after discussions with the director.
Yes, 2:1 seems quite popular but it is probably only a coincidence that the ‘right’ projects came along.
If you have another idea please can you let me know. Given the camera had to move across two tables and between characters we could think of no alternative to a Technocrane. Well, we could have rigged the camera on a wire, which was my first thought, but this might have been even more complicated.
I was using a series of bare 250 watt bulbs mounted on some circular aluminum strips that I had made up for this purpose. I would surely think that there is a simple LED alternative in this situation. For instance, I wrapped some ribbon strip around a circular tube to construct a small soft multi-directional source which would work quite well to augment a firelight source. The advantage of the quartz bulbs was that they could be dimmed down to a matching color temperature and, being more resistant to heat, they can be placed quite close in to a real fire.
Yes, the Spacelights were gelled with a 1/2 blue and some of the Blondes carried a 1/4 blue. Given the diffusion warmed the light the resulting color was just a little cool, which made sense to me as the camera was set at 3,200K. The lower 2K lamps were a mixture of 1/4 blue and clean. I’m not sure why you are confused about the shot you post as this would have been lit by the pattern of Blondes projected through the diffusion.
