I just referred to a feature I shot in 4 perf 1:85 that printed traditionally and is going out to HDCAM for DVD.
The filmmaker and I had considered 3 perf to DI and identical end products with the obvious neg and dailies savings helping to ( if not completely ) offset the DI cost. The producer ( who didn't last the show ) was an under-experienced dinosaur and terrified of anything "new", so we shot 4 perf, and it just seems silly.
I feel that particularly on faster schedule lower budget features, a DI might be a damn fine way to post, so I'm leaning towards this for the next one.
Am I wrong ? What pitfalls am I overlooking ?
If I were to choose this route, what are my non-Panavision rental options on a Indie-friendly 3 perf ( I favour the Moviecam Compact for the budgets I work), and what would be my workflow expectations to end up with a release print and a master for DVD & BluRay ?
Royce Allen Dudley
Studio City, CA, USA
Royce Allen Dudley wrote:
>Am I wrong ? What pitfalls am I overlooking ?
I just shot a short film for cinema release using three perf framed for 2.35. We did a regular rushes telecine using a three perf telecine (in this case the ITK Millennium). They will do the scan next year using the Northlight and we'll grade in Baselight.
I did a feature last year that had a combination of 3 perf and 4 perf for a theatrical release. Scanned on the Arri Scanner and graded using scratch.
The only major dramas I've found are just getting hold of 3 perf cameras and a 3 perf telecine for the rushes. All the scanner's seem to be able to deal with 3 perf no worries. The short i just did was done using a 435 and they are apparently a bit rare.
There are MovieCam compact's around that are 3 perf. I think they even have the moniker MK2 to let you know. There's also the Aaton 35. All the newer Arri’s can do it pretty easily as well (Arricam's, 235 and 435)
The hardest thing was finding a 3 perf projector to screen our camera tests ! They don't seem to exist ! We ended up doing a HD telecine just to make sure the registration and lenses were good for insurance.
As long as you get a facility that can do 3 perf telecine for rushes, there's no issue. There's still a fair bit of oops room for hair, and the mags suddenly last forever !
Royce Allen Dudley wrote:
>>Am I wrong ? What pitfalls am I overlooking- what are my non->>Panavision rental options on a Indie-friendly 3 perf ( I favour the >>Moviecam Compact for the budgets I work), and what would be my >>workflow expectations to end up with a release print and a master for >>DVD & BluRay ?
Hey again Royce
the latest Post mag has an article that talks about this, and has a few line from myself in there as well... chk it out.....
For Partition Vic Sarin used 535's (and Lt) all set up for 3 perf from PS in Toronto...I shot the VFX plates on a 435 set up with 4 perf so i had a bit more room to place trackers outside 2:35, or do tilts on locked off plates in the computer later.... these we did 2K scans on
We Xfer'd Dmin/Dmax @ Tecnicolor to SR/RGB/4.4.4
The downconverted Dvcam dailies had a LUT applied before editorial and DVD screeners were pulled did the assy from the Sr tapes and the grade in HD/RGB with a 3D LUT, as this went back to film in 2:35 pulled the video deliverables from the DI timeline used DS for the majority of the work went well, made distb's, funder's and the bond happy
Post, DI & Vfx guy
Yes as Dominic has said the low-con is struck from the IP, so it's just what it would seem to be....
that said the last time we finished a film this way ( at least 5 years ago) we ran the cut neg as a flat pass to Hdcam and did the video grade off the tape, and created the pan-N-scan at the same time... this was cost efficient, but with some (small but significant) risk to damaging the neg.. we did this only after the IP/IN's were clean and vaulted (so we did have fall-back if needed, but it was not needed)
and five years ago a Spirit was much rarer and pricier than today - I would not go near proposing this if this is a bonded show, this would be most likely way outside their comfort zone (understatement)
it's a way back in memory that we did what you guys are doing, low-con etc etc... four days is about right if you are also doing the pan-N-scan 4.3 & dust busting deliverables...
With only eight hours of tc time i would at least look at a flat scan and finishing as a HD show would, the issue that Dominic raises is the one i would flag as well... an editor is not normally a colourist... and does not normally have the suit set up in a calibrated environment either
If you are working with someone with allot of experience in timing, and has a room that is ready to go to war.. that's one thing, if you have someone (however well intentioned) with FCP in their basement pushing a LCD screen and no experience grading.. well that's another thing entirely
I do know editors who have graded academy award winning films, so it's not that is can't be done, but it's all about the nut behind the wheel......
>>yes as Dominic has said the low-con is struck from the IP, so it's just >>what it would seem to be....
Dominic didn't say that, because an I.P. is struck from the o-neg, just as the low-con print is. You can strike a dupe neg off of an I.P. though.
David Mullen, ASC
David Mullen wrote:
>>Dominic didn't say that, because an I.P. is struck from the o-neg, just >>as the low-con print is. You can strike a dupe neg off of an I.P. though.
Duhhhh... and thanks David.......
Fortunately i did say it has been at least five years since this
workflow last crossed by door step.... i think it was the fall of
2001 (more or less)
Have done everything since then with a digital finish, and pulling the video deliverables from the graded DI timeline or files
Don't really miss the lab finish (other than hang'n out with cool old school the timers)
post, DI & Vfx guy
© copyright CML all rights reserved