Steve Freebairn
Well-known member
In the interest of science, i have gone back to the r3d files, and they are blown out for this sequence, unfortunately i do not have the exact shots used in the aforementioned spot with the white dog. but i do have a few takes from the other camera (there were two on set), that was on a steadicam. the actual shot hank is referring to was shot with singapore a prototype camera.
first, check the e! website under the fatherhood show. there is a still image of the family around a table and the dog is clipped in that photo which was not shot on red, but with a very high end still camera, so there is inherent problems with a white dog in the context of a very dark skinned family.
second, the day that we shot was a very bright mid october day. it was 16:54 when that shot was recorded, the 10th consecutive hour of shooting (no lunch, no breaks for camera crew), and 10 minutes before the principle had to leave the set. i doubt the dp took out his meter, even though in that high altitude location the sun had gone very low on the horizon and obviously the f stop may have not been set properly, but then again sleep deprivation (see number 3) does funny things to judgement. (watch the documentary by a good friend of mine, "hands on a hard body" if you every doubt this.)
third, there was a 4 hour turnaround after a 16 hour day and an hour drive each way to and from the previous location to the next, me personally got 1.33 hours sleep, for the second night in a row. at that time after not really eating since 6am, i was spent, and a bit unset that we had never taken a break, as was the whole crew.
fourth, this was shot in 2k 80 fps, two days after the alpha firmware was released, build 7 (a). (subsequently this build was quickly replaced, therefore inherently unreliable) but director wanted to shoot 80 fps.
fifth, the camera was out for 33 days, moreover #0031, was just returned to me the day before, so "The World" was not as experienced then, as they are today or will be tomorrow with this camera. moreover, at the time i told the dp and director that i am an owner, not a DP or DIT, so they are on their own for setting color and exposure.
sixth, few if any people knew then like they know now, that over exposing is bad, unlike film.
other than that, i do not know what to say, i do not recall if there was an ND on the camera, and i was not by the camera when this was shot for a variety of reasons.
this all brings up an important point. what is the owners responsibility with regards to setting up each and every shot, do we override DP's that have 20 years experience because we put down $1,000 18 months ago?
of course knowing what i know now about the camera and the DR, i may have been more forceful, but then again, i was tired and a bit mad, so there is that too.
let your crew eat, let them get at least an 8 hour turnaround, including drive time...
I know that the DOP is not, as hank says, an "incapable... wannabe", check his site for yourself. http://ketildietrichson.com
lastly, with all due respect, posts i make after midnight are possibly completely ridiculous and may contain a bit of an attitude, i usually lighten up in the morning, but when someone attacks me or something that was shot on my camera, i tend to fight back right away and maybe even in a mean way, 40 years as a ice hockey player and coach makes me a bit of a tough guy, if only in my own head...
Your friend made hands on a hard body! No way. That is very interesting. I studied it back in College in a Doc class.