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 :)

Social Network Shot on Red or MX?

P

Peter Dmitriyev

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
506
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hello, I was pretty certain reading everywhere that The Social Network was shot on Red MX. However on IMDB it says just Red One and I'm pretty sure I've seen pictures of Cronenweth (the DP) in the behind the scenes of the film in front of a camera and it seemed like it was a normal Red NOT a Red MX.

Can anyone clarify for certain out of curiosity which it was the Mysterium or Mysterium X?
 
"The Social Network" was, in fact, the first feature film photographed on the RED One MX. To my knowledge it was also the first MX feature released theatrically and on BluRay.
 
It says "McCartney".

- Oliver
 
Shot on Red One MX. They were a couple months before production of the upgrades started.
 
I just finished watching all the extras on the BluRay today. (By the way, they are outstanding!) They did a whole section about the RED cameras. Yes they were MX upgrades. The use of the REDs made the film what it was in many ways. From visuals to content. How else could David Fincher have had the actors do 100 takes of scenes? It's a testament to digital film making.
 
thanks for clearing it up ya'll. I didn't understand what the Mccartney thing was on the side now it makes sense.
And yes that massive amount of takes was insane.

Another question about the movie (I'm asking all of these because I just saw Social Network for the first time).

Does anyone happen to know any inside details as regards at roughly what ISO settings and T stops the movie was shot on during the darker indoor night time / dorm room scenes etc? Just curious
 
All shot wide open on Master Primes at T1.3. That goes for interior as well as exterior.
If I remember correctly, ISO was set to 640 throughout the film. Interiors and exteriors alike.
Because this was the first (pre-production) MX camera, some of the current understandings and normalities of shooting MX were all brand new and thus shooting 640 was a big change as compared to RED One (TSN started shooting 4th quarter of 2009).
 
Michael Cioni said:
All shot wide open on Master Primes at T1.3. That goes for interior as well as exterior.
If I remember correctly, ISO was set to 640 throughout the film. Interiors and exteriors alike.
Because this was the first (pre-production) MX camera, some of the current understandings and normalities of shooting MX were all brand new and thus shooting 640 was a big change as compared to RED One (TSN started shooting 4th quarter of 2009).
Click to expand...

Thank you for the info. Wouldn't t1.3 produce incredibly shallow DoF? I don't recall the DoF in Social Network standing out as overly shallow
 
Really? Wicked shallow.

Jim

Peter Dmitriyev said:
Thank you for the info. Wouldn't t1.3 produce incredibly shallow DoF? I don't recall the DoF in Social Network standing out as overly shallow
Click to expand...
 
Again I'd urge you to watch the extras on the DVD. They discuss in detail the decision for the ultra shallow depth of field. They used "massive amounts of ND" when shooting outdoors. They also had to use guerrilla techniques when shooting at Harvard. (Like using a fake mime to set lights for a three RED camera panorama night shot.) The school didn't cooperate at all with locations. It really shows that no matter the budget. We all have some of the same challenges.
 
wow thanks for all the answers I definitely gotta check out those extras, didn't know they speak about this. I'm assuming Zeiss master primes remain very sharp at t1.3 I thought it was generally advised never to shoot lenses wide open
 
by the way can someone correct my math. Using the sunny 16 rule at 800 iso f22 to get it down to proper exposure the ND's need to correct for about 3 stops worth of light from the 800 ISO. (800 to 400 to 200 to 100 roughly 3 stops) Then to correct for f22 down to f2 or so that's an additional 7 or so stops. From f22 to 16, 11, 8, 5.6, 4, 2.8, 2.4 etc. so roughly an additional 7 which on top of the original 3 is 10 stops of light that needs to be ND'd down. So you'd need roughly two full ND 1.2's in front of the lens is this vaguely accurate and somewhat corresponds to what Cronenweht must of been using since the 640iso as opposed to 800 in my example is made up for by the fact that he was at t1.3 instead of f2.0 or 2.8 etc?
 
Thanks for this guys, I have the BluRay special but never got around to watching the extra. Will definitely be doing that tonight. I too noticed the super thin DOF but didn't know it was all MP's @ t1.3 ... WOW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top