Cinematography Mailing List |
|---|
| |
|---|
Recent CML Tests Canon C300 initial latitude tests Epic exposed +/- 7 stops With & Without HDR Alexa +/- 7 stops Infra Red exposure & Filter tests Skintone tests Alexa-Canon 7D-Panasonic 3700 Red-MX-SI2K
|
Extreme CU CinematographyHi, I'm on a small videoclip project that gona be shoot in S-16mm in two week.
I don't know what I should do to get the best result as possible with the low budget I got to work with...use a macro lens or diopter filter...and what's gona be the difference in the result. I'm not used with this kind of technique. about the film stock, filtration (can I still use some diffusion), the light, the DOF, etc. My main lens for this project gona be a Zoom 8-64mm Canon. Thanks Bernard Clermont Typically, If I'm doing something extreme close, I reach for diopters... personal preference. For extreme close work, I usually also grab for Kino Flo -- micro flows are fantastic for placing right next to the lens (or in the mattebox if your far enough away to have one). Water can be tricky, especially coming out of a faucet dripping through air... Seems to me this might also call for a strobe situation, which would complicate things a little more unless you were able to backlight the water (mirror at the back of the sink?) For the tear shot, I'd reach for a longer lens with diopter to keep the camera from talent's face as much as possible... Canon has an 11/165mm with a close focus to 3.5' that may work without a diopter (doing head math here, forgive me)... Best of luck, Jay Holben I don't mean to slam Bernard but this seems like the kind of question that only arises due to the internet and its 'easy' access to information. How can any advice Bernard gets here possibly substitute for *going down to the rental house and looking* at the various ways of approaching this shot? Or (despite the low budget) shooting a test? 100' of 16mm is pretty cheap--if a student can pay for it, a DP should be able to. A +3 diopter on the 8-64? Or a longer zoom lens with a diopter? A macro lens? All these techniques could work, as probably every CML subscriber knows. It's just a matter of what works best for *Bernard* and his particular situation. Not to mention that this is about as basic a shooting question as there is. Light level, depth of field, can you use diffusion? Those are all really good questions, exactly the ones to be asking. But the answers are not 'yes' or 'no,' but judgement calls. And that's why we (some of us anyway) get the big buck. (For that matter there are probably plenty of ACs and gaffers on this list who would be happy to answer the questions, and happy to take over shooting the job, too.) There's a lot of responsibility that goes with the job of DP. Not as much as being a pilot or MD of course. But I don't see how anyone can get out of doing a certain amount of homework in order to earn that title. When a producer comes up to you and says 'Is this going to work?' would you rather say 'Yeah I know it will, in fact I shot a test, or 'Yeah, some guy I've never met before says it will.' CML is great but it's no substitute for experience. Best wishes (really), Alan
It sounds like a job for a probe or borescope lens. This will allow you to ue a very small taking lens (typically less than an inch in diameter) close to the subject and about 15-18" away from the camera.
Ideal from the technical point of view yes, but they may not be compatible with your requirement for low budget. For example the OpTex Borescope rents out at £150.00 (Sterling) in the UK. Expect to pay about the equivalent in Canadian $. Brian Rose
Perspective is the same whether you're shooting with a 55mm or a 200mm at 1:1 magnification. The only thing that changes is how far away your camera is from the subject (200mm gives you more room to light). To give you an idea of how much room you'll have, consider that at 1:1 magnification the distances between film plane and nodal, and between nodal and subject, are I would not use any diffusion unless you really wanted it very soft, since your depth-of-field is already tiny even at t-8+. This is very subjective. I concur with others on the list that stacking diopters would not be ideal for such 1:1 sizes unless you must zoom. Diopters can look nasty on a zoom. And the 11-110mm Zeiss is only "macro" on the wide end, meaning you can focus to the front element, but not achieve 1:1 magnification ratios and you cannot zoom while in macro (zoom becomes your focus). Mark Doering-Powell
Of course, a simple ARRI Macro lens would also do the trick. They are very popular because they automatically compensate exposure when you change focus, allowing you to concentrate on more artistic issues than having to calculate magnification ratios and exposure compensations. Once you set a T-stop, the lens will always keep that T-stop constant.
Cheers, Marc Shipman-Mueller, Camera & Digital Systems Technical Representative
BrIan RoSe
Another technique is Nikkors and the Nikkor adapter for my Aaton. I use the nikor lens extentions and then away I go wether it is the 180 Nikkor or my 24mm I even do it with my 5.9 Angenuex for that "In You Face" shot Scott(and I often guess the stop too!) Mumford But arri stop compensating macros do not work with arri Sr cameras. Nick Paton Not even on a PL-Mount SR ? Mark Doering-Powell I am sure I have used an arri macro with an SRIII. They will never fit in an SRII with a T-bar. The view finder has to be in almost the vertical position for viewing. John Duclos would give you a Definate answer but I would get the rental house you get the gear from to check it Justin Actually, it does. You need, of course, a PL mount 16SR, either a converted SR2 or an SR 3 (PL mount is standrad on the SR3), and then you have to swing the viewfinder up a bit, and voila - you can use not only the Macros, but also the Shift/Tilt System on a 16 mm camera. Now, neither ARRI Macros nor Shift/Tilt System was designed for 16 mm use, but I have talked to many rental houses that were happy that it worked none the less. Cheers, Marc Shipman-Mueller, Camera & Digital Systems Technical Representative I believe the barrels are to big to be accomodated Pl or non PL. Nick Paton Nick, Marc is correct re. the regular eyepiece, but be aware that the SR 1& 2 video T-bar will not allow use of the longer focal length macros. The T-bar can be machined howeve to gain the neccessary clearance. Best regards,
Nick Paton I enjoy the luxury of the primitive route, with Arri Standard mount lenses you just pull the lens out of the cavity a few mm ! Sam Wells To be truly primitive... I once made an extension bellows out of a toilet paper tube! Joe "I'll use anything handy" Di Gennaro
That is correct. On the SR 3 all you have to do is angle the eyepiece up, so the larger lens barrell will fit. Video assist, since the port is part of the handle on the SR 3, is not a problem Cheers, Marc Shipman-Mueller, Camera & Digital Systems Technical Representative
|
Recent Discussions Advances in Volumetric Imaging Rec 709 for theatrical release Grading monitor calibration tool?
|
|---|
Images & Text Copyright © CML do not use without permission |
|---|