Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Wcttd

Mark,

one more question (the topic digression sorry again!):

How is possible that a photographer (fashion, portrait, ...) can "work" with models, actors/accretes, ordinary people, politicians, executives, etc and "achieve" what he/she want to get?

He/she doesn't need "director" to do that job!!!?

Photographers like a Vincent Laforet (he is already moving in that direction), Annie Leibovitz would easy become movie directors.

Also guy like a Steven Soderbergh are easy becoming "cinematographers"...

Some examples from the past: Leni Riefenstahl, photographer/film director, Stanley Kubrik, photographer/film director, ...

... a both were users of Leica, easy to operate photo camera...
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
Mark,

one more question (the topic digression sorry again!):

How is possible that a photographer (fashion, portrait, ...) can "work" with models, actors/accretes, ordinary people, politicians, executives, etc and "achieve" what he/she want to get?

He/she doesn't need "director" to do that job!!!?

Photographers like a Vincent Laforet (he is already moving in that direction), Annie Leibovitz would easy become movie directors.

Also guy like a Steven Soderbergh are easy becoming "cinematographers"...

Some examples from the past: Leni Riefenstahl, photographer/film director, Stanley Kubrik, photographer/film director, ...

... a both were users of Leica, easy to operate photo camera...
Click to expand...

OFF TOPIC - you can start a new thread - people like to work in different ways. I know LOTS of talented directors that don't know shit about lighting. I'm not saying we won't see many more director/shooters -we will. Working with one right now. Many directors see the new technology as a way to get their hands on the camera again - but people who eat, sleep, and breathe the craft of cinematography will be with us forever. And not all of those folks, contrary to popular belief, want to be directors.

I would add however, that most NYC taxi drivers want to direct, and some even own Red cameras.
 
"The Big RED Button".

As Mark says, simple device, one button, but here's a little upgrade for it - make the button PROGRAMMABLE in camera so it can be used for many applications, such as START/STOP, CIRCLE TAKE, GPIO etc. Camera sees it as button X with assignable function Y. Wireless and simple.

Love it!

Paul
 
USlatin said:
Say you like something, you drop a mark with your key-chain remote, what have you. But then after I call cut I may want to say a few things to my script supervisor and have them drop it in there. Not onto a piece of paper, but with a little keyboard. It really should happen through the Red Mote, a second one perhaps, one for the camera department to use whatever the thing will do and control, and one for us at the monitor. Red Mote Pro if it has to be.

I also like the idea of tagging takes with scene and page numbers!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who said that? Give him an award!

The little keyboard could have a few function buttons for example, or make the buttons on the directorial red mote be assigned to what we need them to be. You hit A for the scene number, then type the number in. Then after we cut they could hit B for the page number, and in a few short seconds type in the page number, two page numbers, and for those long shots you could still have three or more page numbers in there in just a few seconds! By separating the numbers with spaces or commas that could make them individually identifiable. The only thing left to do is to make sure that NLEs can take advantage of all this info and bring a Google type experience to post.
Click to expand...

Uhhhhhhh......

Am I missing something here? Why do we suddenly need computer assistance and wireless remotes when all we've had to do for years is say "Print," and have the script supervisor and sound mixer circle the take? How is pressing a button on an electronic device that can and likely will eventually fail (especially if you go so far as to use wireless connections) any more effective than simply marking it on paperwork that gets distributed to all relevant departments? I'm all for efficiency, but I really think this kind of thing is a solution in search of a problem. Of course, if there is some actual problem here that I'm not seeing, please enlighten me. But right now, I just don't understand why something as simple as saying one word needs to be automated. And as for file conversions, what's so hard about checking off only the circled takes and converting only those shots? Have we become so lazy and lame that the only thing we can now do is tell a computer to take in an entire directory? Deleting the B-neg takes from the list in any of the current conversion programs takes no more than a few minutes. Why is that suddenly a problem?
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
I would add however, that most NYC taxi drivers want to direct, and some even own Red cameras.
Click to expand...

Nothing against "artistically talented" NYC taxi drivers.

Some of them became a great music composers like Philip Glass,

just to name one,...
 
Sanjin, I would be happy to discuss this with you on another thread at length.

Past that.

A circle take tag would allow the digital lab to get the key footage processing imediatly with out waiting or reliance on notes. Simple sort, select batch. This is a VERY good idea.

Past that.

Why is the camera suddenly the nexus to replace scripty programs and notes. I do not want crazy amounts of sources trying to feed data to the mag and I certainly don't want scripty or the director to have a redmote. If anything they would need to have a streamlined device that does exactly and only what is needed for them. Like Mark said, just a button.

Now a time code or meta data feed to scriptys programs would be nice.
 
J. Eric Camp said:
Sanjin, I would be happy to discuss this with you on another thread at length.

Past that.

A circle take tag would allow the digital lab to get the key footage processing imediatly with out waiting or reliance on notes. Simple sort, select batch. This is a VERY good idea.

Past that.

Why is the camera suddenly the nexus to replace scripty programs and notes. I do not want crazy amounts of sources trying to feed data to the mag and I certainly don't want scripty or the director to have a redmote. If anything they would need to have a streamlined device that does exactly and only what is needed for them. Like Mark said, just a button.

Now a time code or meta data feed to scriptys programs would be nice.
Click to expand...

Guys, terribly sorry for the interruption.

I'll stop it now.
 
I love this idea. I'm sure it would be great for feature directors like Mark, but I think it would be even better for use in documentary work, where you don't usually have a script supervisor present and have a small crew, often one shooter, etc. And also often do multiple takes of the same event. This could be a real time-saver, to be able to press a button and mark the best take. I'd be happy with a simple color coding. Make it RED!

I don't have tons of feature experience, but I do have a little, and I do a ton of post work. I always thought it would be a good idea to slate the print take once it is completed with a print designation, to give the editor a visual guide. In addition to having it on paper.

I think that if all you do is batch process the best takes, then you leave shot selection completely in the hands of the director, and sometimes the editor needs more choices and can see the how the juxtaposition of shots works, much more clearly than the director.
 
i agree that a "big dumb button" works for directors who just want to push. but the iphone/more information concept i think would still appeal to many directors and/or script supervisors. especially if as you say you could tag lines ala TC/meta tags. touchscreens would make that very easy to do and we have those touchscreens now in touchs/ipods. not the most elegant but very close to possible.
 
mmost said:
Uhhhhhhh......

Am I missing something here? Why do we suddenly need computer assistance and wireless remotes when all we've had to do for years is say "Print," and have the script supervisor and sound mixer circle the take? How is pressing a button on an electronic device that can and likely will eventually fail (especially if you go so far as to use wireless connections) any more effective than simply marking it on paperwork that gets distributed to all relevant departments? I'm all for efficiency, but I really think this kind of thing is a solution in search of a problem. Of course, if there is some actual problem here that I'm not seeing, please enlighten me. But right now, I just don't understand why something as simple as saying one word needs to be automated. And as for file conversions, what's so hard about checking off only the circled takes and converting only those shots? Have we become so lazy and lame that the only thing we can now do is tell a computer to take in an entire directory? Deleting the B-neg takes from the list in any of the current conversion programs takes no more than a few minutes. Why is that suddenly a problem?
Click to expand...

Did I say it was a problem? :-)

I just like the idea... And if the system fails then the footage failed too cause it is all in the same place. It only fails if the user fails. Whether NLEs would implement this stuff right away, well I can't speak to that. But the info would be there even if the NLEs don't read all of it, and it could print in a snap. Heck, add a little fov plug so you can keep a copy with you , or have the footage being offloaded automatically write a copy of the info to a common directory... the possibilities are endless. We just need someone to sit on it for a long time and develop it right.

I just think it would be nice to be able to do more for post on set, especially for those of us that edit. And there is no need to use the tools if you don't want. Paper is just fine, it has worked so far, but I would prefer searchable printable and embedded. It just sounds like a really neat idea, like that is where it belongs.

One use for the moment button, what about when you have long takes, and your actors are not giving you much of what you want. I really like the idea of having my own directorial markers in there, which could easily be unselected from the print of the document that goes to you if you find the as nonsense scribbles :-) I just think that there are a lot of possibilities. I would really like to see if I have a use for dropping my personal marks, and would love to check out the take leading up to them as soon as I start editing that scene.

Dropping different type of marks would be as easy as making the key chain thing different from the script supervisor's marks.

I guess I am really thinking of something that is user definable though. Then if someone find they might help then they can use them.
 
Mark L. Pederson said:
but the director wants to just click a button - he/she wants to stay focused on the actors and stay in the moment of the scene.
Click to expand...

I'm glad I reread this thread and picked up on your saying this, because a lot of other posters here seem to be ignoring it.

While I think a number of things embedded into metadata make sense and have obvious value - scene and take, and print/no print, for instance - somebody on a working set has to enter this stuff. It doesn't just appear automatically (as lens information can and hopefully will when that is enabled and integrated) - not to mention the inherent reliability issues involved in having multiple devices communicating wirelessly (a film set isn't an office, it's a lot more temporary and chaotic). If you have the script supervisor do it, they're not likely to have time to finish the notes for the previous take in time to be observing the next take when the AD says "going again, right away," let alone be hand entering the information for it. The camera department doesn't really have anyone available for this other than the 2nd AC, and they're busy making sure the camera report is right, the slate is right, and taking measurements. My point is, in the heat of battle, there just isn't time for things that are "nice," because there's barely time for things that are necessary. So you're down to having additional personnel to take care of data entry - hardly something a producer is interested in providing.

The "right" answer to me is to have the ability to either edit the R3d file metadata - preferably during a copy operation (and while we're at it, have a slate frame created as the first frame of the file in the process) - or provide a mechanism to tag a separate file to the R3d file, as Mark suggested, that contains additional metadata in a Red-blessed form, which is probably a simpler way to do it, as the additional file could be placed in the RDC folder directly during the copy operation without disturbing the original R3d file in any way, and it could be extensible as well, particularly if you use something like XML. A set of base tags could simply be defined by Red that would be common, and available to any post software. Additional tags could be created by users or database developers. That way you could create the metadata during production, so that it flows through the entire process, but not require additional personnel and/or holding up production to accomplish it. And since most Red productions of any size already carry a data wrangler, the personnel issue is moot. This kind of thing would be much simpler to create and maintain, very quick to implement, and just as useful. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, I'm kind of surprised nobody's done it yet.

Mark? Ian? Deanan?
 
mmost said:
Uhhhhhhh......

Am I missing something here? Why do we suddenly need computer assistance and wireless remotes when all we've had to do for years is say "Print," and have the script supervisor and sound mixer circle the take? ... but I really think this kind of thing is a solution in search of a problem.... Have we become so lazy and lame that the only thing we can now do is tell a computer to take in an entire directory? ...
Click to expand...

Yes but wouldn't it be nice if something could automatically "line" the scripts with the "prints" and a right click on such a lined script would show us all the takes available to editorial just in case we need a shot from that "bad" take #4.

https://www.editorsguild.com/Magazine.cfm?ArticleID=304

That's one more techie job on the set too, we need more techies in film!

Rosco
 
Roxco said:
Yes but wouldn't it be nice if something could automatically "line" the scripts with the "prints" and a right click on such a lined script would show us all the takes available to editorial just in case we need a shot from that "bad" take #4.

https://www.editorsguild.com/Magazine.cfm?ArticleID=304
Click to expand...

Well, by taking the "print" tag from the metadata file I've suggested above and including it as a new column in an ALE, Avid could automatically color the print takes during the ScriptSync operation.

Michael P?
 
Sanjin Jukic said:
Today director should be also behind camera by my point of view (Soderbergh's too)

and then he/she could click at a sort of Origo button... and say ACTION!

Nothing against cinematographers or DPs but their's days are slowly numbered.

Excuse me for a slight digression from the tread topic.
Click to expand...



I love your sense of humor! Very funny.
 
I like the idea alot. As long as it's simple meta data. But I don't like the idea of this breaking. I can just see the button being hit and the camera crew goes crazy because the camera just stopped or corrupted the file during the best take of the day. Granted it's not supposed to do that, but I think it could... computer are computers.
If there was a slightly separate device (like and "independent" module) that could get feeds on timecode from the camera, then mark the time code, that would be good. Unless they could prove over the course of 4 million tries that writing that metadata into the file during the take wouldn't cause a problem.

-Josh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top