[John Sharaf]

Matt,

We’ve had this discussion a hundred times here on the lighting forum, so please feel free to check the archive, but the best, easiest and most elegant solution is to use 4′ Kino’s as flour lights and “poison” them with the same tubes as are in the ceiling. This way all the light is the same color. White balancing the camera will correct everything. The hospital engineering staff can provide you the same tubes from their stock or you can simply steal some from the ceilings that are not in play and return them later.

To finesse each particular shot you might consider turning off or flagging the ceiling lights just above your subject (in static shots) to eliminate the bright “top lit” nose effect.

You’ll regret gelling tubes or tungsten lights to “match” because it cannot be done, and also it’s a lot of timeconsuming work both to put up and take down. The fluorescents are “discontinuous” light sources, meaning they have “spikes” of green which can not be optically filtered out.

I understand that you probably do not have the 4′ Kinos (Fourbanks and Twobanks are the best for this purpose) in the kit that you own, but they are inexpensive to rent (especially without tubes) and priceless for this scenario.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Typically white limbo is exposed at 80ire so as not to clip. If you shoot wide open, even the best lenses will vinyette and slightly darken the corners; if you want it even light to a level that you can stop down a stop or two.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Also meant to add that used 3000 really has little downside, because with solid state recording there is no deck wear and tear to be concerned about. If camera works and cosmetics are satisfactory, other than warranty would be similar to new. I can’t imagine there being very many used 3000’s available however.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Joe,

3000 series cameras are native 1920×1080 vs. 1280×720 imager for 2000 series. I think for high end it’s a no-brainer to pick the 1920 at the same price. The features and “look” should otherwise be very similar.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Take a large tray, like that used in a photo darkroom, break a mirror on the bottom and fill with water. Aim a spotlight into the tray and point the bounce to the set and disturb the water with your finger or stick. This is a low tech method of creating a rain effect.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Steve,

Depending on how you import the media to your NLE you can choose which tracks you want. For example, I bring in as HD-SDI through a Kona card and have choice to bring in each set of two tracks ( 1&2, 3&4, etc). Does your editing platform not offer the4se choices?

JS

[John Sharaf]

Sorry, didn’t really answer your question.

Both cameras (Varicam and F900R)are very good, especially with Digi Prime lenses. The decision should be made on the basis of:

1920×1080 vs. 1280×720

and

DVCPRO100 vs. HDCAM

If you’re convinced that you’ll be filming out then 1080 trumps 720. If you have access to one or the other deck, then economics might dictate one recording format over another. For that matter, if price is an issue, Varicam rentals are much cheaper than F900Rs, although PDW800 is probably the same as Varicam. Although if you’re renting Digi Primes then you probably have plenty of money.

If that’s the case, then you should have a shoot out and determine which system is best for you. You will certainlyb learn something from that process.

JS

[John Sharaf]

Joe,

Just as it was unclear what you meant by “Varicam”, it’s also unclear what you mean by Cine Alta. In the strict sense, “Cine Alta” is a line of cameras from Sony that is now advertised to be the SWR9000, PDW800 and the EX3. Of course in addition to these are the F23, F35 and variants of the F900, namely the 900/3 and the 900R.

All of these “Cine Altas” are different beasts with different recording formats, imagers, processors, bit depth and ergonomics.

Your most likely meaning is the F900 so the distinctions between the 900/3 and the 900R become pertinent. The F900R is a significant improvement over the /3, especially because of its smaller size and power use, improved digital signal processing and especially because of the “Hyper Gamma” settings which imitate to a large extent the 500% “Dynamic Range Control” on the Varicam. This feature (on both the Panny and Sony) is very useful in creating an extended dynamic range and therefore a more “filmic”look. In addition there are third party “User Gammas” that are also useful and even more agressive for the Cine Altas. BTW, the PDW800 has all these features too and offers a full 1920 horizontal resolution in recording vs. the horizontal down rez to 1440 in HDCAM.

Of course the higher end cameras in this line, specifically the F23 and as yet unreleased SRW9000 offer 10 bit recording in HDCAM-SR format.

Your question kind of reminded me of the confusion (that sometimes still exists) when I’d get a call from a news magazine asking for a 24p shoot. Do they want DVX100, SDX900, Varicam, F900, etc? I think you get my point. These vagueries can get everyone in trouble!

JS

[John Sharaf]

1. Two ladders and a plank between them. Mount camera on tilt plate and hihat. can only zoom out so far until you see the ladders. The “real” way to do this is with a jib camera.

2. Low-tech solution is to us a mirror to reflect sunlight into the tunnel.

JS

[John Sharaf]

You want a “Combi” stand. If you just use it in your studio a heavier steel version is best, if you go on location a lot, pay extra and get a lighter aluminum version. All the usual players make these; Mathews, Avenger/Manfroto, American Studio, Arri, etc. Don’t forget to use sandbags and extend arm out over the lead leg.

JS