Issuu

John Alonzo,ASC on High Definition INTERVIEW

$5.00

Cameramen have counted on Deluxe since 1915.

The Rank Film Laboratories Group LONDON路 TORONTO路 HOLLYWOOD

Stage Cra nes Chapma n has its impressive line of stage cranes. Used fo r both location and indoor applications, the stage crnnc

electric

powered

for

silence during producti o n shots. The arm sw ings a full 360 degrees to fo ll ow pann ing act ion tis well as a lift (w hi ch util izes the coun ter ba lance syste m) fro m g ro und level to a maxim um of 16'. All srage cranes have your cho ice of pneu- l"--'11•11iil mati c o r solid tires and fi lm o rTV turret. Ask about trac k and other convenient accessory pac kages to complement the stn gc crane of your cho ice. Our swge cranes ha ve saved hours of production time 10 obtain some of the most award winning scenes.

Pedestal s Pedolly, the latest to come off Chapman's producti o n line. This versati le unit has the ca pabili ti es of hot h the traditio nal pedes tal as we ll as the camera do ll y. TI1e Pedolly o bta ins a lo w camera mount height of 15 5/8" o r 40 c m which makes it one of the lowes t of all Lhc current

pedestals on the market today.The Pet/oily sh:.trcs the crab and conventi onal s1ccrin g and variable chassis leg features of the Super Pee\Vce while maintainingthcability 10 work

on both strai ght and curved track.The Pedolly also has various tires for the d iffe rent terrains encounte red du ring the fi lmi ng of producti ons. The maximum standard he ight of the Pedo/1.1• is 55" or 1.42 meters. T he f' ec/olly's abi li1 y to shift steerin g applica ti ons cilhcr manually or electroni call y coupled with its s ile nt. smoo th performance arc cert ainl y appea ling fea tures. There l.lrc many ::iccessori cs for 1hc Perini/_,. to adapt it to rnos1 applicatio ns.

Arms The Lenny Arm is equipped with the ahi li ty to ac t as a crnnc ann (for manned use) as we ll as a remote camera arm. The Le1111y Arm is advnnrngeous for shots that req uire the benefits of dua l panning ac tion (achieved when used in combinat ion with an y o f the Chap man cranes.) Versa tilit y is the best way to desc ri be this arm whic h .!!Ill.,.=~ can adj ust fro m 4 feet 10 34 feet of reach and 6 feet to 32 feet of height. '---==-';:::._--"

• Leonard Studio Equipment Time Saving Camera Cranes, Dollies & Pedestals Leasing or Rental programs available

Mobile Cra nes Fo r shots with Action. the Chapman Titan II. S111>er Nora or S1111er Apollo is for you! T hese units provide versat ility allowi ng savi ngs in producti on setup time as well as capturing some of the most difficult shots with ease and perfection. Driven to the production s ite by o ne of our specially trained drivers these uni ts were designed with niggedness in mind. TheSuperNm •o wiJh its 6 wheel drive and S11per Apollo with 4 wheel drive has conquered 111os1 terrain s. The electri c drive allows silence during production shots. Crab and conven1i onal steering capabilities as wel l as a variety of accessory atrnch mcnt s enab le numerous camera angles 10 enhance a productions dramatic and tec hnica l as pects.

Super Nova & Apollo Mobile Cranes • Zeus, Nike & Electra Stage Cranes Olympian, Sidewinder, Hybrid, Hustler & Super Pee Wee HydrauUc Lift Dollies Lenny Arm, Pedolly Pedestal & More!

Los Angeles (213) 877-5309

•

Orlando, Fl. (407) 851-3456

MOVIECAM COMPACT

LISTENED OUR REQUEST. THE CHOICE IS YOURS.

ono

NEMENZ INTERNATIONAL WHERE SIMPLY THE BEST IS SIMPLY OUR WAY OF DOING BUSINESS.

HOLLYWOOD: 870 NORTH VINE STR EET, HOLLYWOOD, CA 90038 !0213-469-2774 FAX: 213-469-1217 HONOLULU : 1824 HART STREET, HONOLULU , HAWAII 96819 ill808-847-6886 FAX : 808-842-1314 HOUSTON : 39 16 FLO YD , HOUSTON , TEXAS 77007 速 713-862 -848 7 FA X: 713-862-1487

Eradicating Childhood Blindness page 40 by Dr. A. Linn Murphree, M.D.

(' J '

t-~ _, p

magazine

The Widescreen Revolution

" ~( )\

Part III - The Spherical Campaign

by Rick Mitchell

.._

OPERATING CAMERAMAN

THE s

John Alonzo, ASC

The Pathe Camera

Continuing Series on the Development of the Motion Picture Camera

by Wes Lambert

page 20

The Master of Film takes on a new technology & reflects on his experiences sliooting "World War 11, When Lions Roared" The first NBC mini-series on High Definition. by John Galt

HDTV Electronic Cinematography

A Film Cinematographers Nightmare or the Videographers Dream ?

by Larry Thorpe

A Common Frame for Film and Video by David Richards

The Shape of TV by John Galt

The American Society of Cinematographers Statement on HDTV Aspect Ratio

Set Etiquette

Recognizing Virtual v路 tues

page 43

Oscar evaluates foture and inevitable film formats for award considerations. by John Horn

First of a Series on a Misunderstood Topic

Filming Screen Titles for Hollywood's Coming Attractions by Wynn Hammer

The Lost City A follow up report on the DeMille Ten Commandments set excavation by Peter Brosnan

Just for the Fun of it! by Joseph Epperson, soc

Standards Committe: The Akela Crane

Heritage Film Series American Film Institute National Center for Film and Video Preservation by Gregory Lukow

Advertisers Index

An in-depth look at a leading lady behind the camera and a view from her German homeland

SOC News & Letters

by Randall Robinson, soc

SOC Roster

by Ron Dexter

Interview: Anette Haellmigk, soc

page 10

Behind eve1y talented director of

pbotograpby . Tbere is a superb operator. Wbo has mastered an int1'icate and

demanding craft. And is totally

committed to the pursuit of excellence. No one makes a great film without an

outstanding camera operato1'.

Motion Picture & Television Imaging 0 Enun1n Koci.tic Companp, lt'M

Editor Randall Robinson

Managing Editor Douglas Knapp Design & Production Lynda Modaff Psychic Dog Illustration Advertising/Sales Bill Hines Printing Gemini Graphics, Inc. Venice, CA

C 0

Illustration by Lynda Modaff, reference from a Gene Stein photograph of a Sculpture by Aldo Favilli and Andrea Favilli. Sculpture engraving reads: "He envisioned dreams that others might share."

Photography by Gene Stein Wynn Hammer

vVE SEE IT FIRS-r

Vision of Children

Photography by Ken Chernus POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Society of Operating Cameramen, P.O. Box 2006, Toluca Lake, CA 9 16 10 The Operatin g Ca mera man Magazine, ISSN I 069-0646, is published semi -a nnu ally by the Society of Operatin g Ca meramen. Fo r advertising information and articl e submissions co ntact the SOC at P.O. Box 2006, Tolu ca Lake, CA. 9 16 10 Telephone (8 18) 382-7070; Fax (3 10) 306-9245

Subscrip tion Rates: USA $10/yr; Canada $15/yr; Fo reign $20/yr; Copyri ght ÂŠ 1994 by th e Society of Operating Ca meramen

page 6

Contributors Peter Brosnan Ron Dexter Ed DiGiulio Joseph Epperson John Galt Wynn Hammer John Horn Bill Hines Wes Lambert Gregory Lukow Rick Mitchell Edward Molina Dr.Linn Murphree M.D. David Richards Randall Robinson Larry Thorpe

his Society 11as been established to advance the Art and Creative Contribution of the Operating Cameraman (Second Cameraman, Camera Operator) in the Motion Picture and Video Industries. To foster and strive for Excellence, Artistic perfection and Scientific Knowledge in all matters pertaining to Film and Video Photography. ision,the essential ingredient that we, as Camera Operators use in our work, intrinsically bonds us to children with vision problems. Our organization contributes it's full support to the Eye Care Clinic of the Childrens Hospital of Los Angeles.

ÂŽ

is a registered trademark, All Rights Rese rved.

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

THE

WIDESCREEN RE-V•

•LUTI·,......~

EXPANDING HORIZONS - THE SPHERICAL CAMPAIGN by Rick Mitchell Part three of a continuing series on the developing standards of motion picture photography and theater presentation.

OLLYWOOD was not too alarmed by Cinerama. Its unique three-lens filming process was poorly suited for exhibition in regular movie houses because it required the installation of three separate projectors which could run in interlock with the soundtrack. Instead, it was CinemaScope, the widescreen process introduced by Twentieth Century Fox in 1953, that sent shock-waves throughout the industry. In CinemaScope, a cylindrical, or anamorphic, lens was used to "squeeze" picture information onto the negative. Almost any theater could show a CinemaScope picture by simply swapping its projection lenses for ones that could unsqueeze the release print. This easy widescreen process was cause for general panic. Fox's rivals had amassed large unreleased inventories of 1.37:1 aspect ratio films. They feared the nightmare of twenty-five years earlier - when the overnight success of The Jazz Singer and Lights of New York made silent films obsolete - would be repeated. Paramount Pictures was particularly disturbed. Paramount had over a year 's worth of unreleased features in its vaults. While other companies could exhaust their inventories as they produced their first CinemaScope films, Paramount was faced with the unattractive prospect of writing off a significant number of pictures. As early as January 1953, Paramount assigned the head of its Research Department, Loren Ryder, to investigate the feasibility of obtaining a "widescreen effect" by masking off the top and bottom of the projected image and using a shorter focal length spherical lens to throw the image onto a wider than normal screen. Warner Brothers had already rejected this technique, after privately screening a widescreen version Night and Day (1946), because they fe lt it compromised the visual integrity of the film . But Paramount's Ryder felt that by using an aspect ratio of 1.66: 1, favoring the upper two-thirds of the image, most films could be shown without too disturbing a loss in composition. Of course, Ryder's conclusions may have been based in part on the fact that image composition in the fifties was considerably looser that it is today. First, since feature films were customarily shown on large screens, cinematographers and directors preferred wider shots. Second, non-

reflex cameras that used side finders were less precise so a margin of safety was added to the original composition . And third, many movie theaters habitually masked the projected images much tighter than industry recommendations. As a result, tight "choker" close-ups were rarely used. The most common camera set-ups were the medium shot, the two shot, and the over-the-shoulder. Rarely was important information placed at the extreme top or bottom of the frame.

The Search for a Spherical Widescreen Standard Spherical widescreen responses to CinemaScope came swiftly. The day after Fox presented its first public demonstration of CinemaScope, Paramount screened Shane in a 1.66: 1 aspect ratio on a huge, slightly curved screen specially setup on Stage 15. The viewers were impressed. As a result, Paramount boldly announced that Shane would premiere on the wide screen. Not to be outdone, Universal answered Paramount the following week by holding a press screening of Thunder Bay in a wider-screen 1.85: 1 version, using a separate interlocked three-channel stereo sound track. A week later, Columbia also came out in favor of the wider 1.85:1 image. MGM opted for a third wide-screen size, 1.75:1, and premjered Julius Caesar that way in New York with a separate stereo sound track. By the summer of 1953, most "!\' features first-run engagements in major cities were shown in one of the three widescreen ratios, even though all had all been originally composed for 1.37:1 in the camera. Many films, especially those shot in 3-D, were shown with stereophonic sound by using a separate "dummy" soundtrack reel running in interlock with the standard monaural optical track on the release print. In most instances, the dialog track was monaural and obvious sound effects and music were in stereo. The search for the perfect aspect ratio was only just beginning. At its Thunder Bay screening, Universal also had presented test footage composed for projection at a 2: 1 aspect ratio. Near the end of April 1953, Universal announced that all its feature pictures would be composed for projection at the wider ratio, claiming that 2: 1 would preserve the height of the original 1.37: 1 image. In contrast, Paramount announced all of its feature pictures would be composed for 1.66: 1 image. continued on page 46

Societlj of Opera.ting Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 7

he Pathe camera was introduced in 1905. This camera was destined to be a success for two basic reasons. First, it was manufactured by the pioneer French cine camera company, Pathe. They had made some worthwhile very early movie cameras. The Pathe studio camera design was a state-of-the-art concept based on what they had learned from their earlier cameras. Second, the basic reason for its success was the utilization of the superb film transport design developed by the Lumiere brothers. The Lumiere camera/projector was credited with the showing of the first projected movie to a paying audience.

by Wes Lambert page 8

The Lumieres got out of the movie business after a disastrous fire killed many distinguished attendees at a charity ball. The fire was started in the projector by the very dangerous nitrate film. Pathe su bsequently acquired the right to use the great Lumiere film transport mechanism in their new Pathe studio camera. Now, what was unique about this camera design? First, it utilized two externally mounted film magazines. The film supply and take up magazines were easily accessible and securely mounted. Second, the critical optical/mechanical parts of the camera system were all precisely mounted internally on a common metal frame. Society of Operating Cameramm

Summer 1994

The magazines and camera body were made of wood and covered with prime leather. The camera lens was mounted on a precision dovetail/keyway and focus change was actuated by an external lever against a calibrated scale. The lens iris was controlled by an external lever and scale. The opening of the rotary shutter was controlled externally. The camera hand crank input could be used for the standard 16 frames per second or variations thereof. A separate hand crank input access was provided for a single frame per turn for special effects or animati on. Critical focus was accomplished by removing a hatch from an optical magnifier mounted on the back of the camera. The operator would then get an enlarged view of the film at the aperture. In those early days the film did not have an antihalation backing and the emulsion surface made a fine substitute for ground glass. Originally the rotating shutter had a fixed opening but later refinements provided an adjustable opening shutter. Further refinements provided an adjustable shutter that could produce lap dissolves from an external control. The film entrance and exit had simple velvet at the aperture in early modes. This was subsequently replaced by metal rollers. Refined versions have spring loaded side guides at the film aperture. An externally controlled film punch was added so that the operator could mark the start or finish of a scene. The technician in the dark motion picture processing lab could then ascertain the portion of the film requiring special processing or handling. An external control could be added so that the lens iris could be driven open or closed for fade in or fade out. The original Pathe studio camera was quite versatile to begin with but with the add on features it became extremely versatile. In the early days of the film industry the cameramen often owned their own cameras. He would configure and add accessories as he saw fit. He could buy the camera with the accessories or add them as he wished. It is not surprising that the Pathe studio camera became a very popular camera. Just before World War One Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

it was the most used movie camera in the world. In America the Pathe camera was copied by the Sigmon Lubin studio and by the Willart company. They both added metal bodies. The Pathe saw extensive service in World War I. With the introduction of the great Bell and Howell 2709B cine camera in 1912 the popularity of the Pathe began to wane. Many of the cameramen would still use their Pathes in spite of the advantages of the Bell and Howell camera. A leading cameraman, Billy Bitzer, used his Pathe well into the 1920's because he said, "It will do anything I want." During the post war period there was still difficulty in producing a good copy negative from the original negative. Two negatives were required so that the second one could be expeditiously sent to Europe for that concurrent movie market. Often two cameras were operated at the same site so as to generate two original negatives. The Pathe was increasingly delegated to the second camera designation. The Pathe studio camera gradually fell out of general use. Today it is considered a prime cine camera collectors item and it commands a premiun1 price. You can nowadays see them proudly displayed 111 movie executives' offices and in movie memorabilia museums. On a personal note, I have three Pathe studio cameras in my large collection of early movie cameras. Normally, I think that redundancy does not belong in a camera collection. However, my three cameras are significantly different. One camera is conventional and has a number of add-ons. The second camera has a color filter wheel added to allow the camera to generate film for an early two-color camera concept. The third camera is devoid of refinements and quite basic. The removable front board of the camera is not full length and has the lens simply mounted on it. There is no serial number and the camera is probably a prototype.

page9

nette Haellmigk, soc is a delight to talk with. Her credentials have brought this talented operator to the forefront of today's cinema. Cinematographer on Kisses, The Milkman, Undine, Fairplay, The Making of In The Line of Fire, and second unit director of photography on House of Spirits and Tony Bill's Untamed Heart. Ms Haellmigk found herself operating the "/\' camera on such pictures as House of Spirits, Tales from the Crypt, Hudson Hawk, Total Recall,, Rocket Gibraltar & The Never Ending Story. SOC: We first became aware of you when you were Assistant Cameraman on Das Boot, The Boat. Jost Yacano was the Director of Photography. A very interesting picture. It seemed like a very difficult shoot because everything was very tight, almost claustrophobic. ANETTE: It was a really difficult shoot because everything was shot in an actual boat or submarine. No sets. Jost had invented a new handheld camera which at the time was really very progressive. He was using an Arri 2C with two gyros attached that would balance the horizontal and vertical. This changed the hand-held look to a smooth floating look. It amazed everyone. Actually, Das Boot was my very first job in the camera departrnen t. I started as a loader, then quickly moved up to being the first assistant. In Europe or in Germany you get thrown into much bigger responsibilities right away. SOC: So it was all hand held. Steadycam?

It wasn't

ANETTE: No, not at all. The Boat is already I think 13 years ago. Steadycam was not really available in Germany at the time. People there had only heard about it. SOC: I noticed the big chases down through the narrow corridors and then you come to a doorway, the actor would go running through but there would be something that would cause the camera to have to stop, maybe somebody would cross. ANETTE: Right, right. That was to give Jost enough time to step through. The hatches were no larger in diameter than maybe 2-1 \2 feet. He

page 10

actually had to step through, then continue on. He needed to slow the action down a bit so he could get his long legs through. It's fantastic how he created these movements! In the beginning when we started shooting, they didn't dream these kinds of shots could ever be done. As the shooting went on, Jost got more of a feeling for the submarine or for the area. With his new camera invention, he gave them shots they thought impossible. Steadycam wouldn't have worked because it's too long and wouldn't fit through the small doorways. Also, Jost was not only progressive in terms of creating new cameras and techniques. He also was a progressive enough thinker to see a woman could work in camera as well as a man. He has helped this effort and I am very, very thankful to him. He believed in my abilities. I have much respect for him.

SOC: So when did you first start operating? ANETTE: I started operating on Robocop, the first film, Robocop 1. Then I operated on Paul Verhoven's Total Recall starring Arnold Schwartzenegger. SOC: Here in the United States? ANETTE: Robocop was shot in the U.S. And Total Recall was shot in Mexico with post production done in the U.S. I did with Jost also 52 Pickup before these two films. That was still as an assistant. And then on Robocop, I switched to operating the camera, which worked out really nice. Ever since then I have been operating and I enjoy it very much. SOC: Oh, really? ANETTE: Yes, I do! SOC: Well, you seem to have a budding career. You've actually been working lately as director of photography as well. ANETTE: So far, I've done most of my cinematography work in Germany. The transition here in the U.S. is taking a bit longer than I had anticipated. I just moved to this country. It takes a while to get established. So I will travel and take work as a DP in other places until I settle in here. I had just returned here from a DP job in Germany and was offered a job operating camera on House of the Spirits starring Meryl Streep, Glenn Close and Jeremy Irons. Even though my goal is to be a DP, I couldn't pass up this opportunity to operate again.

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

by RANDALL ROBINSON, soc

The Director was Bille August, who is Danish and the DP was Joergen Persson, he is Sweedish. He has done, My Life as a Dog and together with Billie August, Pele the Conquerer, which got an Oscar for Best Foreign Film. In Europe, Joergen is considered the master of natural lighting. And since one of my passions is lighting, working for him was an offer I didn't want to pass on . I shot screen-tests for them here in the U.S. when they where still testing actresses because Meryl Streep hadn't made her commitment. I showed the director my reel which he liked very much and they invited me to operate their film and be the 2nd Unit DP Now I'm going to go back to Germany to work on another film.

SOC: Well, it must have been very interesting working with Glenn Close and Meryl Streep as a woman camera operator. Did you have a lot of camaraderie? Did you find it easier working in that situation? ANETTE: All these ladies are very nice but also they don't let you come close in a way. In the film they go through extreme age changes that carry them from 25 years old through age 70. There was a lot of heavy make-up effects in terms of aging process and they all wore wigs. Glenn Close had wore a wig that had a very sharp hairline. I really had to watch very carefully to make sure these effects were invisible and convincing to camera. Both actresses said they felt very happy about how I took care of these elements. The makeup artists were very happy as well. There were crucial moments where these effects were closely scrutinized. I was actually very grateful the director of photography was happy to hear from me, if I thought there was a problem. I have also experienced sometimes otherwise where they say it's none of your business. SOC: But it must have been interesting when they looked around the camera and see a woman back there, it's not a normal situation. You're one of the few operators in the business that's a woman. They must of felt comfortable. Proud that a woman was behind the camera. ANETTE: Yes, I hope so, yes. And of course also for the men I think they enjoyed it. Although it's always important to create an understanding with your comrades that being a woman doesn't matter in terms of doing a professional job. But on the other hand, I think it's very good to bring that more female influence in there because guys smooth out a little bit also, having a woman on the camera. SOC: I think this is a very important element to discuss actually, because there are a lot of women in the industry now as well as in a capacities of life where they haven't been before. It's an adjustment for men as it is for women. Do you have any comment? ANETTE: Well, I think I have been very fortunate in terms of my past experiences working with men and how I was accepted as a woman entering into this industry. When I started as an AC in Germany, I was really the very first one. I must say I was treated with a lot of respect. During the page 12

first two weeks, in the beginning, they really watch closely what you do. And it seems to me once you have passed this point, they accept you.

SOC: I would like to hear about being a camera operator in Germany. How is that different from here in the United States? ANETTE: Well, the first primary thing is that there really aren't any operators per say. In Germany you step up from the AC position immediately to cinematographer. In Germany we use the term cinematographer since you do the operating yourself. More like a photographer. This seems for me a very, very hard step to do all at once and not gradually, going from AC directly to DP. In the U.S. the DP does not operate. He really functions much more like a director. He directs the photography by delegating responsibilities. I had my training as an operator in the United States and got firmiliar with the working system here. After completing my first work in the U.S. I returned home to Germany, and advertised myself as a camera operator, which was a new concept there. However, there are rare situations when a German cinematographer might choose to use a person like an operator, because maybe the project becomes too complex. Once, I was asked to operate camera on a film which initially started without an operator. The cinematographer didn't get along with the actress too well. So they hired me as a link to work between the two of them. In Germany you don't get fired or let go because of creative differences. When the producer or director has made the commitment to work with certain people, you work with them throughout the whole show. I mean, it must be very severe that they would say now we must exchange someone. If you would get fired from a job, it would be so devastating because you can only get fired if you totally mess up your work. When I was hired to operate as a link between the cinematographer and the actress there was a little bit of friction in terms of competence and what I was allowed to say or what input I have, sometimes it was a little bit tricky. It was very interesting. I really couldn't blame the cinematographer, because he was used to working without an operator. So I have to find out the personality of the director of photography to guess what he wants. I also think that's an advantage of being a woman. I think it's easier for women to tune into other people. I think men in general have a little bit more ego about it. Out of there nature. I think women try to integrate more. Where as men are more on guard. SOC: The job of operating does tend to make you bend in that position, try to accommodate everybody. The cameraman, director, while you dance with the actors, and still have to answer to your own values. Very challenging. All the while there is that cry from out of video village, "frame up! " You're leaving soon for Europe to shoot another picture? ANETTE: It's a comedy with a quite well known director in Germany, Doris Doerrie. She normally works with her Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

Anette on the set of "Total Recall".

husband Helge Weindler, who is the Director of Photography. The job is interesting in that I will be working as the Director of Photography on the occasions when Helge options not to. So this is a great opportunity for me. I feel comfortable with this because they are happy to have me. I am very excited to work with this woman director. I went to see her speak once a few years back. She was fascinating, and I thought I would very much like to work with her someday. And a chance to be exposed to another style of working photographically with this DP. This job is extremely chaliengmg ill that I will have to imitate his style completely when he turns over the shooting to me. It's not second unit style. It's having the DP turning the shoot over to another DP, switching back and forth. SOC: Being a woman, how is it when you are the director of photography with the entire crew. Do you have any different reaction? Is it more difficult?

ANETTE: I don't think so. In Germany I have done a few films and have found a group of people that really get along fine. The feedback that I get from them is they really like to work for me. I really try to involve them into the decision making, I approach it more like this is what I want, what can you offer me to achieve that. They really seem to like that because they get involved more. SOC: Rather than dictate to them.

ANETTE: Yes, having worked on so many sets I've learned Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

that the more you involve people the more yo u get out of them. I've seen this when I was working as an assistant. DP's have said, " you have to do this like this, and do this like that," I started to resist a little bit. When I first started in film, my opinion was invited even though I was so young. And what did I know really about filming? But I was asked, "what do you think about this?" That involvement would really inspire me to do more in order to make something better. Sometimes there are ego problems. You are forced to work with a person yo u actually wouldn't get along with, and that creates friction . Sometimes there's a generation problem. SOC: But that was more prevalent a few years back. Now we're more used to the role of the woman today.

ANETTE: I must say my experiences aren't bad. I think everyone has things in their own personality on the set and how they deal with things. How I experience it doesn't mean that another woman experiences it the same way, or another operator experiences it that way. I think we bring in a lot of or own personality wherever we go in life, and on the set as well. But it's still up to the mdividual man or woman as how they choose to perform. Everyone is different. We're all so individual. SOC: Are you comfortable lighting? Is that a difficult transition going from a working operator to DP? Does a woman have a different eye for light than a man would? page 13

Do you find yourself playing with color more? ANETTE: Yes, definitely. As I said, the transition from operator to DP is really hard and for a women even harder since we're still pioneers. Maybe women are more playful with colors and light. Speaking for myself, I'm certainly into creating atmosphere. But there isn't too much work out there to make comparisons between women and men. But it is interesting that the films I have seen created by women do seem concerned with light and atmosphere. Women like atmosphere. As a little girl I was trained to make the house beautiful. I now apply that sensibility to my home and craft.

SOC: Just playing house. ANETTE: It was interesting in House of the Spirits because the director and the DP really had a distinct style of filming . Since it is a film about story and acting, the camera doesn't move as much as if they were shooting action. They create a sensation of portraiture. They tell their story with more locked-off camera positions. The art direction and the look was very important to them. Beautiful and romantic shots. It became very important to compose the actors and the background objects in the shots to create atmosphere. So besides working with the makeup artists, it was part of my job to work with the art department to watch that the sets and decor's really work. In this film, operating was less about moving camera, and more about arranging and coordinating the arts, details and actors in front of camera.

SOC: Did you come on early in the project and have a lot of input? ANETTE: I had the usual prep time, but I really had a lot of input on the set. In Europe, except Great Britain and France, the departments aren't divide up the way it is here. It's a different kind of teamwork, due to the fact that crews are much smaller. One department helps out the other if necessary. And there aren't any unions there, so crossing over is more a necessity. page 14

SOC: To step over. ANETTE: For example the propmaster, who was also the art director would say, " If you want to change something, do it. I know you'll change it for the better." That was very different from my experiences working here in the U.S. I'm not saying it's better. It's just different. And since I was extremely interested, I was happy to be involved.

SOC: Are there a lot of other women in other departments in Germany or are you one of the few?

There are many women working in every field, who are actually quite successful.

ANETTE:

SOC: How about cameramen? ANETTE: In camera, maybe we have four now. And we all have had different degrees of success so far on the projects we have worked on. I think I have been lucky to step so far and get to work on these big films.

SOC: Have you met other women in the United States that are in the business and what kind of response do you get from them. ANETTE: Some. And I do get very good response from them. My first AC and my Gaffer here are women, which wasn't a decision for gender, it happened more by accident. We work well together. The funny thing about all three of us is we come from a dancing background.

SOC: Does that help bring symmetric qualities to your camera movement? ANETTE: It has an effect on your discipline. When you study dance it's like you have to be very disciplined, as well as also free style movement in terms of choreographing shots. In my work with the camera I really like to have

movement. I have been working with Jost Vacano and he is, I think, the master of the moving camera. His mother was a dancer. He learned about movement from her. It's like, you know, with dance you are more prone to move I think. SOC: You're more fluid . You have an artistic background. What is your training? ANETTE: Well, I have to give initial credit to my parents. My father and mother owned their own business. My father, Ernesto, put me to work there at an early age. He told me that he wanted me to know that I could really do anything a man could do, if my heart was in it. My mother Doris, also ran the business with my father. She comes from a long line of successful working women, at a time when this was quite uncommon. They both made it seem quite natural for man and women to work equally side by side. They are amazing people. My training, in terms of camera work, I really learned it on the set. Before that I studied dancing and art history at the University. I studied photography working with fashion photographers. And at one point, I was a working professional carpenter. My father bought me the tools and found me the job. He was always a creative thinker. I got into camera work more by accident. I had a boyfriend at the time who was working as an assistant director in Berlin. He worked with a director who did these underground films in 16 mm. We were all living in a commune kind of thing. One day the director asked me ifl wanted to be the assistant camera person on his film and I said sure, not knowing at all what kind of responsibility it actually is. That director actually had a woman from Boston Film School to shoot this film. She showed me a lot, loading magazines and what you have to do in order to function as an AC. I actually did pretty good for taking care of three cameras at once for a period of two months. On this job, doing it for the first time, it hit me: This is what I want to do. It combines all the things I like to do. I like the artistic part, the technical part. I like dealing

Societlj of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

"I thought that it would be an addition to my equipment that I would use only occasionally, but I find that I'm using it almost exclusively."

Joe Pytkafl/111.ing Navajo Indian s fo r the American Indian College Fund

Mobility, light weig ht , instant magazine, time recording , color vid eo -assist.

Abel Cine Tech 66 Willow Av. Staten Island, NY 10305 tel (7 18) 273 8108 fax (7 18) 273 8137

AATON DesAutres 4 11 0 W. Magnoli a Blvd Burbank, CA 91505 tel (8 18) 972 9078 fax (8 18) 972 2673

AAJION 35

talleomes ether... Film Laboratory 65/70mm Film Processing Digital 3D Animated Titles and Graphics for Film Special Visual Effects Computerized Images to Film for the Cine-Solitaire System Videotape Services in all formats Production & Editorial Offices Sound Stage

with other people as well as I like traveling. This was ideal and from then on I really focused on doing camera work. And I really think I have been very fortunate with how my career went so far.

SOC: Well, knock on wood. You can use my head. ANETTE: I first worked here in th e U.S. with Jost Yacano. He had just shot Das Boot and had received an Oscar nomination for that. John Frankenheimer really liked Jost's work in this film so he offered Jost 52 Pickup. Jost asked me to come along and assist. Working here made me realize that in Germany films and schedules are much smaller.

Anette shooting "House of the Spirits" with Meryl Streep, Jeremy Irons.

are a lot of films like The Piano that could never get produced here in the United States.

ANETTE: I'm not familiar yet how that works here.

SOC: What I think happens too, there

~- ~ cea-

SOC: In other countries they have subsidies and smaller films get made that may not other wise fly, but they may turn out to be bea utiful art films. The subject matter is something that nobody here wo uld want to co ntend with because it does not have Arno ld

LIGHTING FROM HOLLYWOOD"

Rental Deportment 6K HMI Molepar•

TYPE 6401

Manufacturing Soles • Rentals Studio Expendables Moletown

Stud io Expendable s

93 7 N. Sycamore Ave. Hollywood, CA 90038 -2384 • Tel. (213) 851 -0111 • Fax . (213) 851 -55 93

Schwartzennegger in it, you know. And yet they turn out to be beautiful art films. Because of the subsides you can build a name as a cameraman in other countries where you could have done five or six of these films. Where here you can't even get started. In the U.S. all we have are the big dollar films. And it makes it difficult for young people to start. Do you think that maybe in Europe there's more of an artistic drive to film?

peers. We all have similar and different experiences to share. And common goals.

SOC: Do you carry the SOC after your name? ANETTE: I do, yes. Actually, I don't know what the credit on House of the Spirits will read, because I saw the credits in Germany and it wasn't on there.

SOC: You have to fight for it. ANETTE: Maybe Europeans like to make more sincere films. I remember ANETTE: They had promised me. I when I first started, I thought I would don't know what the credits will be in do art films. Then I came to the U.S. the United States because they defiand did Robocop and Total Recall. nitely had to be on there. When I read the script of Robocop I thought I'm working on this film now, SOC: You almost have to put it on isn't that weird, a comic film in a way. your deal memo. When actually I thought I would work only on art films. That has ANETTE: Right. Now I have done that. changed for me now. I really enjoy the variety. If there were only films out like The SOC: Like it's your birth name. But Piano I would get bored or if there your proud to have that? were only films like Total Recall or Robocop I would get bored too. I really ANETTE: Yes, very much. Very, very like the variety. When it's a good film much. I really enjoy it no matter what the SOC: Now, I'm always getting from subject is. Also, if I had only done art women in this country immediately films, I would have missed out gaining when I ask them to join or whatever, experience in the Special Visual Effects "as soon as you change your name." and the Special Makeup FX fields. By They seem to be offended by the fact working on Robocop and Total Recall, I that we're the Society of Operating learned quite a great deal about film- Cameramen as opposed to some other ing complicated effects by working name. It was chosen. We were the very closely with the FX teams. I was Association of Camera Operators always curious about these special FX originally and the organization and makeup tricks. I always used to changed its name so that we could see it as a person looks at a magic have the SOC be very clearly our identrick. How do they do that? Now, I tity. I don't consider it a gender situahave experienced working with how tion, that the person that operates the these tricks are done and realize they camera is a cameraman. It doesn't are much more complicated and matter if they are a woman or a man. eccentric than I had ever imagined. A ANETTE: I agree with you. I have lot of work, but a lot of fun! been thinking about that for a long SOC: You really seem to enjoy the cin- time now. There was also a time ema and your position. We're very where I was calling myself, or considproud to have you in the SOC. How ering calling myself a camerawoman or assistant camerawoman and I do you feel being a member? thought... it sounds weird. It doesn't ANETTE: Well, I'm very proud of sound right. Then I went to make it that. I think it's good to be associated more neutral by saying camera person with a Society where you are coming but I think that doesn't sound right out sharing and discussing with your either. I just think that cameraman in page 18

a way, is a standing meaning.

SOC: Webster's Dictionary has it as "a person who operates a television or motion picture camera is a cameraman." ANETTE: That's how I would see it. I mean, I'm not offended by it now. I have accepted it but it's - I know there are other women who are much more, specific let's say, more fighting for their rights. SOC: But you don't feel that this is an infringement on your ANETTE: No, no. SOC: - position ANETTE: No, no. SOC: - as a woman? ANETTE: No. I mean, I don't feel offended by the title, I'm not upset about it. I know where the concern comes from. Women want to inform the public, bring awareness to the broader society that there are actually women who do these jobs too, because when you hear cameraman, of course, you associate a man with it. There are other ways of explaining there are women doing this work. That is why it is good to do these interviews. SOC: Bring it out. Instead of tiptoeing around it. ANETTE: This interview is very good because it does advertise that there are women in the SOC and there are women in the industry. Yes. I think that's very important because it shows how it has evolved and that it is evolving. If a person is dedicated to a craft, it doesn't matter if they are a man or woman. If they excel and give the best, that's everything. I think it is a very interesting and exciting time indeed to be involved in the film industry. We see women surfacing such as Jane Campion, a very talented women. Yes, I am extremely happy to be a part of this new frontier of Cinema. I'm looking forward to experiencing more work with talented men ... and women!

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

It's not our birthday, but there is cause to celebrate. The new Arriflex l 6SR 3 cameras are now available at Victor Duncan , Inc. , your leading rental house for film and video production equipment. The unique design features of the Arriflex 16SR 3 have already captured the attention of episodic television producers as well as those anticipating the emergence of high definition television. It delivers an image that is both easy on the eyes and on your budget. Most unique to the camera is its ability to shoot normal 16 and super 16 fom1ats. This

feature, in concert with an internal time code generator, an illuminated ground glass (a.k.a. Arri Glow) , and improved optics in the eyepiece, make the Arri flex 16SR 3 the camera for al I your modern production needs. To further enhance the filmrnaking process, Victor Duncan, Inc. has designed a new video assist system - the HyperTap. It is a custom package that minimizes flicker to deliver a sharp image without an outboard fucker processor. Come revel in the future of 16MM production today by contacting your local Victor Duncan film rental coordinator for more details.

VICTOR OUNCAN, INC.

Atlanta (404) 457-4550

member of~

Chicago (312) 267-1500

Dallas (214) 869-0200

Detroit (313) 471-1600

JOHN ALO

On High Deji'

Director of Creative Services Sony Pichires High Definition Center

he following was an impromptu interview with John Alonzo, ASC which took place on a soundstage at Sony Pictures. I had asked John to do an oncamera presentation dealing with his experiences and impressions of his first high definition drama shoot which was subsequently to be presented at a meeting of the BKSTS (B ritish Kinomapographic Sou nd & Television Society) in England. John asked me what topics I thought he should cover; and as we were discussing this, he suddenly said, "Why don't we record this, just you and I talking?" GALT: John yo ur credits include over 50 feature films such as Harold and Maude, Sounder, Lady Sings the Blues, Chinatown, Steel Magnolias and many others. Today I would like to talk to you about your first digital high definition drama shoot. ALONZO: Forget about the credits, what's important is this " new toy," as I call it. The HDC-500 High Definition Camera is possibly the most exciting camera I've ever used. I know it so unds cliche, but to me it really is exciting. A lot of people on the crew will tell you how enthusiastic I was when I was using this new medium. I love the format. It's not much different from shooting 2.35 or 1.85. I had fun applying motion picture style lighting to this system. You [John Galt] taught me a lot about the eccentricities of electronics and how it behaved with light and so on. It was like going back to school again. It certainly provides a broader canvas for the artist, and, of course, the instant gratification wherein you can see the crystal clear picture on a monitor as you line up page 20

the shot. It's like having a light meter and laboratory right there on screen. I found I had several new colleagues that I normally wouldn't have on film - namely, a systems engineer, a video technician and a tape operator. I first worked with this camera over a year and a half ago in Orlando, Florida. Sony was kind enough to invite me to play with it. Not knowing anything about it and not knowing any better for that matter, I pushed the camera to its limits. I used it very much like a movie camera. I exposed it, underexposed it, pushed it to the limits and discovered that it could do some wonderful things that film can't do. The current project is called World War II - When Lions Roared, an epic of four hours for NBC, dramatizing the actual words of Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin and Roosevelt's aide Harry Hopkins. David Rintels, the writer/producer, uses the actual words that were spoken by these m en during the war years. It's a very strong and very powerful piece. David tried to get it produced for a long time. It was probably fate that somehow David Rintels couldn't mount this piece until high def came along. Not that he was waiting for it, but things finally fell into place. It was not to be done on film , because of the extensive special effects, nor did he really want to do it on standard television . He believed that high definition might give the piece a different look. He heard that I had some experience with HD and that I was enthusiastic about the medium, so he gave me a call

GALT: You know, this camera is the third generation of High Definition cameras. I think a lot of the problems that cinematographers have had in the past and a lot of things that have dictated this sort of engineering approach topictures has had to do with the fact that the early cameras used video tube technology. This new CCD chip technology I think gives yo u much greater freedom. Now for the first time, you have a tool which you can use creatively. Societlj of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

I'd like to ask you a little bit about how you prepared for this enormous project? As we look at the camera and the certain modifications that have been made, I'd like to know how did you deal with the new members of the crew and how did you integrate them into the creative process?

ALONZO: Well it's a big question. I think among a lot of my colleagues, there has always been some apprehension with video systems, that the tail starts to wag the dog so to speak. Electronic engineering is so foreign to us and complex that we're intimidated. Here is a system that has the equivalent exposure index of 500 to 2000 - a tremendous speed. So I said to myself "with this new tool, how or what should I prepare for?" You would expect me to say that I prepared by looking at a lot of photographs and research on World War II - that I tested lenses, but I didn't do that. Instead, I picked John Galt's brain - I picked Bill Connolly's brain - Jim Lucas' and one of your very artistic engineers, C.R. Caillouet. I picked everyone's brain in Sony's world of engineering. Not just to find out why certain things work in this camera, but why the electronics do what they do - mostly to find out where your men and their minds were in respect to the aesthetics and the kind of lighting that should be done. Now to make me feel a little more comfortable, I did ask you and Sony to give us a follow focus at the lens which is more traditional with a movie camera although I do like the idea that the assistant can also go back to the truck and follow focus from the truck.

terrific. We gave the finder a position on the side as well as on top, which made a big difference to the camera operator. Another advantage over an optical viewfinder is that you don't have your head attached to an eye piece. It gives you a lot more freedom to see beyond and around as you're operating the camera. We also have a finder to which you may attach yourself if you needed to. Another modification was the use of matte boxes for filtration - although I soon discovered I didn't need much filtration. The profile of the camera is probably a little longer than we want it to be because the zoom lens is so big. However, I would request that someone design some lenses that are a little smaller, and a little more comfortable. We did have some small fixed focal length lenses which made it possible to hand hold this camera quite nicely. But back to the question of preparation for a piece like this, I did research into the history of Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin. I read the script thoroughly. But my mind was more in preparing for this new format. The format, 1.78:1or16x9, is not available on film. A new challenge came up in preparation for this project. I had to make sure that the lighting we implemented didn't suddenly show the audience something we didn't want them to see. High def is extremely sensitive. I remember particularly the close collaboration we had to have with makeup artist, Ms. Linda De Yetta.

GALT: Yes. There were a lot of prosthetics used.

GALT: You did both in this picture.

ALONZO: Yes, a lot of prosthetics. I think in a picture

ALONZO: Yes. Sometimes in confmed areas, it was

where you have a leading lady for instance, we would really have to light her very carefully because this thing sees your pores.

awkward for our assistant - Allan Gitlan - to follow focus . So following focus from the truck camera was

"The ima9es were just so 9ood tltere was no reason to diffuse tltent. I ltave a tlteory. I don't really tltink tltat tlte world of Fibn and Hi91t Definition are 9oin9 to conflict for a lon9 time, if ever. I don't tltink one replaces tlte otlter. They eaclt ltave tlteir purpose for specific types of stories:' Societ!) of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 21

John Alonzo in white cap with director Joe Sargent blocking a scene from WWII with Michael Caine.

GALT: But you elected not to use any filtration on this project. You tested some super frost filters.

replaces the other. They each have their purpose for specific kind of stories.

ALONZO: I tested ultra-cons. We had some pro-mists, I think we used a warm pro-mist once or twice. A lot of thought went into this, and I kept saying to myself, "Wait a minute. If this is the sharpest most resolved image today, then why am I degrading it? Does the story call for it?" If the story called for us to diffuse it and muddy it up and make it sort of documentary or romantic, whatever the word is, then we probably shouldn't be using this system. In conferences with David Rintels the producer and Joe Sargent the director, the more I talked to them, the more I found what they really wanted was not to distract the audience in any way but just to give them clarity. Total clarity of words and clarity of picture. The images were just so good, there was no reason to diffuse them. I have a theory. I don't really think that the world of film and high definition are going to conflict for a long time, if ever. I don't think one

GALT: One of the reasons I believe that they decided to use this technology was that there would be some fairly elaborate blue screen and motion control photography. Normally, that kind of process is handled by a specialist. The first unit sort of steps back; but in this case, you did all of the blue screen lighting and you - with the exception of the motion control specialist - and your normal crew did everything. Could you elaborate a little bit on that?

page 22

ALONZO: That's something that my colleagues should be aware of. That is the total control that the director of photography has over that aspect of a project when using high def. When we had the plate to play back to, we were able to balance the picture so perfectly that the producer had no questions about it. It was exactly what it was going to look like. On film , when you do blue screen, it's more complicated. Usually, you have a

visual effects supervisor there whose total concentration is strictly on the blue screen, and the cameraman loses a bit of control. My first introduction to high definition engineering was also in Orlando with Mark Daigle, Sony's high definition product manager. I approached this camera and this technology with a totally open mind, and I got a good response from Mark to my questions about the so-called video aesthetic. I said, "Well why can't we open the lens more?" "Why can't we shoot it with full gain?" He said the right thing to me. "We don't have a reason why you can't, John. If you want to, here it is." And he showed it to me. I found the same response from you, C.R. Caillouet, Jim Lucas and Dale Hunter. The same from the men that worked with us in Czechoslovakia. I guess because we were all sort of exploring new ground, we had to leave our minds open and allow for the discovery of new things. I think that anybody who wants to use this system has to approach it that way. Most all of the visual effects that are

Society of Operating Cameramen.

Summer 1994

being done today on film are mostly translated to digital information, manipulated and put back on film. In this instance, with this project, World War II, a tremendous amount of time and money was saved by already being in digital format.

GALT: So for the sake of our readers, all of your composites had a high definition Ultimatte as part of your camera package. You had some test background plates and sometimes yo u were actually shooting the background plates. ALONZO: That's right. GALT: So you could do the composite live. You could determine if there were any technical problems. In fact, I believe you made quite an extensive use of smoke and atmosphere which is normally very dangerous. ALONZO: Yes, remember when we did some smoke on one plate and did n't do smoke on the foreground, or was it the other way around? And you said, "Don't worry about it 'cause we

can make it work."

GALT: Yes. We often had a problem when using smoke, for creating 3-D, a sense of atmospheric perspective. You often run into a problem particularly if you have a character very foreground in the picture. It doesn't matter how much smoke you put into the picture they'll never really show the smoke. GALT: The other question that interested me was, for instance, you shot for 20 days in Prague in the Czech Republic. I remember one day we walked into a mausoleum. When I looked at it, I thought, "It'll take two days to light this room." Within four or five hours, it was beautifully lit. I'd like you to address this because I think that you certainly made tremendous use of the sensitivity of this camera. Normal sensitivity is equivalent to an exposure index of over 500. With gain and an exposure index of over 1000, it still produces a very good picture. ALONZO: When Mark and I were "diddling" around with the camera in

Florida, we pushed it up to 2000 ASA. He said, "Well, you know that's not very good," I said, "Your engineering eyes tell you it's not very good; but if I'm shooting Internal Affairs or Scarface, for instance, it might look perfect."

GALT: So the sort of gritty look that you get from the noise is like film grain? ALONZO: Yes, like the grain, the gritty look we had in a picture like Norma Rae. As a matter of fact, Norma Rae could have been shot with this system using that kind of gain. The mausoleum you're talking about in Czechoslovakia was as large as a football field . GALT: It's pretty big. And it had no windows. ALONZO: Yes and very, very high ceilings. The reason it took the three or four hours to light was because it took the electricians four or five minutes just to walk up and down the stairs. The cable runs were really long.

Products for Film and Video Production Roscolux Rosco Cinegel Cinefoil (Black, White and Black/White) Scenic Paint Chroma Key and Ultimatteâ„˘ Paints Designer Projection Patterns Pin Connectors Fog Systems (machines and fluids) Studio Floor Tiles Instructional Video Tapes

sco

36 Bush Ave., Port Chester, NY 10573 (914) 937-1300 TELEX: 131472 (800) ROSCO NY FAX: (914) 937-5984 1135 N. Highland Ave., Hollywood, CA 90038 (213) 462-2233 (800) ROSCO LA FAX: (213) 462-3338 ALSO IN: Ontario, London, Madrid, Lisbon, sao Paulo and Sydney

I came up with an idea that I'd used before in other pictures - using white, helium filled weather balloons. I had the grip (Bobby Griffith) send them up to the top, and we had the gaffer (Rod Yamanne) just aim some 2,500 HMI's at them. It gives a very beautiful sort of light. Again, this camera is amazing. The sensitivity of it, I think we were already at about T3.2 stop. We augmented certain things and brought the level up a little bit It was so simple to do that, but on film it would have been tough.

High def does one thing that film doesn't do. lt seems to dig into shadow areas and give information. I must say Eastman and Fuji all are working very hara to develop an emulsion like that.

GALT: Of course; but ironically, one

ALONZO: Compressing highlights is good, but I prefer to see into the shadows. And please don't fool with the range of color control that the HDC500 has. In some sequences with Michael Caine playing Stalin, I had this idea that I wanted to make them a little grayer. Not quite so cold - it was

of the development efforts for this technology over the past eight or ten years has been to make it more filmlike. So we now can also compress shadows and highlights just like a film emulsion.

he blue screen or visual effects are so much simpler in HDTV because you're in the digital format to begin with. It was very satisfying to be able to put an ultimate up and a blue screen and see your results immediately.

uaae 24

c;nr if'.tll nf nn~mti na

( nmPrmttPll

C:11m mP r 7qq4

SONY

Camera Tech Video Camera Consultants 11299 LaCienega Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90035 (213) 555-5678

BOTH CARDS CAN CHANGE YOUR CAMERA SETTINGS. ONLY ONE DOES IT INSTANTLY.

CJ)

0 I

...A.

THEY'LL CHANGE THE WAY You SEE THINGS. For the first time ever, a high resolution HyperHAD 1000 chip set is available in a camcorder. Producing more than 850 lines of resolution. Furthermore, full digital signal

look of rough skin and wrinkles on talents' faces. And the detail frequency is adjustable to allow you to fine tune the look of the camera. Detail clip limits the detail in already contrasty areas producing a more natural "film look", if you desire. GET

CONTROL.

No other EFP camcorders combine superior picture quality with such a high degree of creative control. You can carry the SetUp Card wherever you go and ensure the exact look you want instantly- anytime, anywhere. Nothing is left to chance. So you can focus on more imporprocessing increases signal information for improved image tant things. Like getting the quality. With 10-bit/36MHz perfect shot. signal processing, non-linear functions such as Gamma, Knee and the encoder are digitally processed for the first time. Sony DSP technology delivers unequaled control and stability because digital settings don't drift or shift. And all digital functions are easily set using an on-screen menu system. IMPROVED DETAIL CONTROL.

Another revolutionary feature of the Digital 1000 Camcorders is control over skin detail and hue- to soften the Sony Busintss and Professional Prnducts Group, 3 Paragon Orin, Montvalt, NJ 07645-1735.

<D l 994 Sony Electronics Inc. Rcproduccion in â€˘ Âˇholt or in part without wricrcn permission is prohibited. Sony, HypcrHAD, Bccacam and Becacam SP arc trademarks of Sony.

SONY.

Of course, the real test of any EFP camcorder is in the field. And that's BSC-1 where Sony took SONY them. For your Actua. size free video of the of SccUp Card Sony Digital 1000 Camcorders put to the test by three award-winning Directors of Photography call us at 1-800-635-SONY, ext. DSP.

INNOVATION AT WORK.

hard for me to explain. I remember Lucas "diddling" (my word for fooling with the controls). I said, "There, that's what I want." He was talking in minu s this and plus th at, gamma's, et cetera. He got the image that I wanted to see. On film , I'd have to wait until the film came back from the lab. We were able to manipulate it on the set, and that provided a big advantage.

GALT: So once he gave yo u that look, he could store it in the camera's computer memory and recall it any time that yo u wanted to use it again.

ALONZO:

Yes, he stored it in the computer and made it possible to come back two or three days later in the same room, shoot in the same direction, and match the look. I remember we shot a lot of Churchill in a bunker filled with smoke. C.R. and I played with black gamma. We played with white and black va lu es. It's a huge advantage, I think, to a cinematographer who really wants to explore a different way of lighting things. To me it's a more enjoyable way.

GALT: With the exception of the use of the live composite system, World War II was shot very traditionally. You and your camera assistants came up with modifications to the system to make it more compatible with single camera, film-style practice. We've talked quite a lot about how technology can change. W11at is (in video) often known as the technical director or systems engineer was very closely involved with you in the picture-makmg process.

ALONZO: Wlien you're working in film , yo u have a director of photography and a gaffer who are organizing all of yo ur lighting, establishing the way yo u want it and then rolling it on dollies, cranes, et cetera. The jobs are very defined . We shot all the sound stage work for World War II at CBS in Television City, California . We used CBS people who are used to working on soap operas and game shows with several cameras shooting different lightin g angles at the same time. I came to them as a total foreigner saying "I don't like the lights up there, l want to bring them down to the floor."

They would smile and comply. The lighting gaffer (Rod Yamanne) at CBS is called th e lighting director, and he found he wasn' t directing lighting very much but seemed to like this concept. But as I said earlier, I made a few new allies. C.R. Caillouet who was the systems engineer - i_n term s of video, a technical director. He became a new ally for me. He was my other set of eyes looking at th e monitor, constantly making sure the color was exactly the way we wanted it. Jim Lucas, in the truck, was the third set of eyes making sure that we were getting what we wanted. Dale Hunter the recordist made sure that we were getting it on tape. That's a lot of help there. And that's a benefit. Its an added dimen sio n you don't have with film. I found it very supportive and warm to have these people around me to say, "You know, that light you had on yes terday, it's off today." Or "There's a cable in the shot." Or "Look at the camera. It just bumped a little bit." Somebody says to me, "It's out of focus in the truck." Or "Here is the shot yo u did last week so you can continued on page 55

SR3/\FOR RENT. (and much more!)

• 16mm/Super 16mm. • Very, very, very quiet (20dB) • PL lens mount. • Zeiss 1H10zoom. • Angenieux 11.5-138 zoom. • CEI color TV flicker-free video tap • Fiber optics ground glass. • Time Code. • Viewfinder extension. • Zeiss Distagon speed lenses. • Mini follow focus. • Lightweight matte box. • Chrosziel sunshade. • Microlorce zoom control. • On-board batteries. • Sony AC/DC Monitor. • Sachller Studio II.

1430 CAHUENGA BLVD ., HOLLYWOOD , CALIFORNIA 90078, USA TEL : (213) 466-3561 • TWX : 910-321-4526 • FAX : (213) 871-2193

by Larry Tharpe. V. P. Camera/HDV5, 5any Corporation at' America

!iion'!i

ecent advanceยง in CCU imager technology,

allied

with

the

dramatic e!icalation in televiimaging

capability

that

i!i

inherent in HDTV, ha!i radically narrowed the technical gap between the two media farm!i of film and video. The age-old dialectic on the topic of electronic cinematography possibly challenging the domain of 35mm/Super 16mm/16mrn motion picture origination has acquired a new dimension in recent years. The advent of stunning new electronic CCD imager technologies has dramatically altered the nature of the technical debate. There still remains, however, the larger discussion which centers about allied topics of creativity, artistry, aestheticism and subjectivity. While stubbornly separate in their respective characteristics, the two media of motion picture film and electronic television have long been bedfellows in the subsequent areas of post-production and distribution. On a level unparalleled anywhere else on the globe, 35mm film has evolved in the U.S. on a huge scale as the medium of choice for producing both prime time television programming and television commercials. l6mm and more recently super 16mm, also play a relatively minor, but important role. Direct electronic television origination is, of course, a very large engine of program production in its own right, being at the very core of local broadcasting. Television has blossomed into a medium that offers strikingly new possibilities. High Definition Television (HDTV) has advanced from a laboratory exploration a little more than a decade ago into a fully-fledged technological reality that presently underscores large new broadcasting agendas in the U.S., Europe and Japan. The promise of an advanced television service that dramatically enhances the totality of the picture-sound viewing experience in the home is a reality of the foreseeable future. But, advanced television can simultaneously encompass enhanced services in the form of digital multi-channel 525 NTSC delivered to the home by satellite, cable and, in the not to distant future fiber optic systems. 525 digital component widescreen 16:9 services are also under serious consideration via these alternative media to over the air terrestrial broadcasting. page 26

Outside of the home, HDTV also holds high promise of a future of electronic cinema which many in the industry believe will spur a substantial increase in the total number of public screens. Digital Electronic distribution is the powerhouse behind all that this new world of television is making possible. And electronic distribution - by over the air broadcasting, cable, satellite, fiber, and future packaged media such as digital VCR and video disc is becoming all powerful primarily as a consequence of two enabling technologies: namely, digital television and bit rate reduction or compression. In this future world of higher complexity - but one also of enormous opportunity - it is important for another convergence to take place: namely, the cross fertilization and joining of the arts of film cinematography and electronic videography. Happily, technology has greatly narrowed the former wide gap between television and film. What is especially significant in the new digital world is that it is a global movement. Unlike color television, which was born and nurtured in the U.S. before being picked up abroad, HDTV, 525/625 widescreen 16:9, and digital component video are all flowering into disparateagendas of programming distribution within all major regions of the developed world. An important television renaissance is underway - Figure I. What is important is that the explosion in new global distribution possibilities is driving an inevitable convergence of film and television production.

Figure I U.S. Program Production for Global 16:9 and 4:3 Television The "Film Look" as it Applies to 525 Television Much has been spoken and written about the characteristics of the "Film Look" as it applies to the separation Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

between those television pictures directly originated by electronic cameras and television pictures transferred by 525Telecine from a 35mm motion picture film shoot. The debate at times can become quite impossible in the sense that it encompasses fundamental technological differences between the two media, and the substantial differences in the shooting techniques of its separate practitioners. When it also includes esoteric discussions on image capture and portrayal involving frame rate and shutter action, etc., the discussion can sometimes diverge into a sharp polarization of views. A dispassionate assessment of the "film look' can be helped by separating the discussion into three distinct areas: • Quantifiable imaging properties of the two media. • Shooting practices - Such as lighting, framing, exposure, camera movement, etc. • Creative and subjective - Using artifacts of the medium to impart a desired "look" to the imagery. Technical Comparison of Film and HD Imaging:

The first of these three topics plants us squarely into the realm of a direct comparison of the technical attributes of the media of film and television. Picture quality is multidimensional. The attributes of each are listed below using film cinematography terminology with the equivalent television parameter in parentheses: ·Exposure Index (Sensitivity) •Sharpness (Horizontal and vertical spatial resolution) ·Tonal Reproduction (Contrast) ·Exposure Latitude (Total dynamic range) ·Color Reproduction (Colorimetry) There really is nothing else that directly affects the image quality recorded on a given film frame or television frame. Film lirain and Electronic Noise:

A separate discussion centers about the artifacts, or technical limitations, of both forms of media. In particular, in the case of film capture, these pertain to the third category listed above which contribute to the "Film Look." For example, film grain is a fundamental technical limitation, a physical shortcoming in the film emulsions of complex origin. Yet, it is an inescapable fact oflife, and has over a century or more, become woven into the very core of film making. Indeed, film grain has become sacred to some, and is often not at all perceived as a limitation. Film grain is so familiar to the world at large that it is often creatively exploited to add yet another dimension to the "Film Look." Electronic noise is the equivalent of film grain in the world of television. Noise is first encountered at the very front end of the television, in the camera, and also in video tapes recorders, and television transmission and distribution systems. Noise is anathema to television engineers. It remains strictly in the realm of undesirable artifacts in the television world. Indeed, it took film cinematographers to seek a creative exploitation of television camera noise to simulate the "grainy look" of film origination. Socilty of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

The Limit:at:ion!i of a Finit:e Frame Rat:e: The popular 24 frame per second capture (fps) rate of motion picture capture is also a technical limitations which generate some very interesting visual artifacts. The choice of this frame rate is a major story in itself. 24 frames per second is technically very inadequate to fully capture real world motion as encountered in everyday life. Yet, the imperfection itself is quite distinct. The Telecine transfer of film to 525 television incorporates the well known 3:2 pulldown to reconcile the lower frame rate of film to the higher rate of television. This actually adds yet another motion related artifact. However, it too has acquired an almost mythical creative relevance over many decades. To some , it has become inseparable from the overall totality of the "Film Look." Just like film grain, the 24 fps "artifact" has become another dimension that is creatively exploited at times to impart a desired additional attribute to image portrayal of a specific scene. Associated with the 24 fps capture rate is the "blanking" time of the camera and projector shutters. This also adds a technical artifact which has become part of the magic of "story telling" by recorded imagery. Lighting for Film:

The second category is physically separated from the attributes of the media themselves but speaks to a to a constituent element of the "Film Look" that is of major proportion. The art of lighting, that ability to exercise a virtual infinite range of control over the "mood" of a scene, in combination with the craft of controlling the camera and exposing the film - all speak to a finely honed and flexible art form that is a crucial element of the total "Film Look." Yet, considerable experimentation has shown that if these same techniques are used by film cinematographers when shooting with an HD camera then a very close emulsion of the"Film Look" can be achieved - if this is sought. To better understand why this is so, it is necessary to examine some specific technical issues which lie at the core of the film-HD debate. An Examination of HDTV CCD Camera and the 35mm Film for Origination of 5i!5 Television

Recent advances in CCD imager technology, allied with the dramatic escalation in television's imaging capability that is inherent in HDTV, has radically narrowed the technical gap between the two media forms. This is particularly true when these two "high definition" media (of Film and HDTV) are subsequently "down-converted" to the quite restricted 525 television system (film being down-converted via the 525 Telecine, and HDTV by an alldigital standards conversion.) We will examine this in detail for three of the primary dimensions of the final 525 television image quality: • Sensitivity ·Sharpness •Exposure Latitude These are generally considered to be the three most crucial elements constituting the technical aspects of the film look. continued on page 49 page 27

Anamomhic lenses at Clairmont: extensive range and 路 lots of them Equipment in depth, 22mm to 2000mm Left to right: 1600mm Nikkor T9, 800mm Nikkor T4 .8, 50-500mm Angenieux HR T5.6, in PL mounts. Telephotos, zooms (and six primes) are also available in BNCR mounts.

Anamorphic telephotos: lOOOmm Canon TB 1200mm Nikkor T6.3 1200mm Canon TB 1600mm Nikkor T9 1600mm Canon T9 2000mm Clairmont TB 300-1200mm Canon varifocal Tll

400mm Nikkor T4 600mm Nikkor T4 600mm Canon T4.5 BOOmm Nikkor T4.B BOOmm Canon T4 .B lOOOmm Nikkor T6.3

Left: 600mm Nikkor T4. Right: two T2.3 Arriscopes. At back : 36-200mm T4 , based on latest Cooke 18-lOOmm spherical lens design .

Anamorphic zooms: 2B-140mm Cooke T4 .5 34-204mm Angenieux T4. 5 36-200mm Cooke T4 .5 40-200mm Cooke T4 .5

lOOmm Arriscope T3 .5, lOOmm Clairmont T3 .4. Smaller lens is for Steadicam , hand-holding.

50-500mm Cooke T5 .6 50-500 Angenieux HR T5.6 300-1200mm Clairmont/ Canon Tll

Anamorphic primes: 22mm Clairmont T2 .4 24mm Cinevision Tl.6 24mm Todd AO Tl.6 2Bmm Todd AO T3.9 32mm Clairmont T2.3 35mm Todd AO Tl.4 3Bmm Todd AO T2 .3 40mm Arriscope T2.3 40mm Clairmont T2.3 50mm Arriscope T2 .3 50mm Clairmont T2.3

50mm Todd AO T2.3 55mm Todd AO Tl.4 75mm Arriscope T2.3 75mm Clairmont T2 .B 75mm Todd AO T2.5 lOOmm Arriscope T3.5 lOOmm Clairmont T3.4 lOOmm Todd AO T3.4 135mm Arriscope T3.5 200mm Todd AO T4

CIAIRMONT CAMERA North Hollywood and Vancouver. Phone : (818) 761-4440 Fax : (818) 761-0861

By David Richards

T~is is a rwi ed version of a paper presented by the author and Edmund Dt'Giulio at t e 13 5 h I Tte>bnieal Conference in Los Angeles, in November, 19 9 3. It reexamines th~ 'liroaess oj con-

S verting motion picture film images to television. New specifications are proposed for the area of the film frame to be transferred. With a 16X9 display (either widescreen NTSC or HDTV), incorporating the proposal would allow essentially the same image to be seen on the monitor as that seen in the theater. For present 4X3 displays, more of the film area would be visible, and the picture would match the theatrical image as nearly as the aspect ratio difference allows. e are reaching a turning point. With the arrival of widescreen TV systems (Improved Definition TV, or IDTV), and with HDTV looming on the horizon, we have the opportunity to correct some of the non ideal practices that have become common with present film-to-video transfers. We can start over from scratch. But there's not much time to waste. Images are already being composed, and film transferred, in non-standard ways for eventual widescreen TV use. The primary area of concern is practices to be followed with 16x9 television systems. However, it may be possible to establish some common guidelines for all transfers. The proposals presented below are intended to achieve the ultimate goal that a video transfer of a feature film recreates the original theatrical experience as closely as possible. At the same time, as much of the available film area as possible should be used in film shot for TV. For these two things to happen, film and television must become more closely integrated than they are at present. The main problem with film and television compatibility now is the difference in aspect ratios (the ratio of picture width to height). With 16x9 television systems this difference is much less, and the problem is greatly reduced. Of course the problem would be eliminated if the aspect ratios were identical. Aside from the aspect ratio difference, there are two things that must occur in order to accomplish the goal of having the video release closely match the theatrical showing: more of the film frame must be available in the transmitted video signal, and the receiver overscan amount must be reduced from that typically seen in contemporary receivers. Both of these changes are necessary to optimize film on TV, but it should be emphasized that they are also independent. Transfers could incorporate an increased scanned area at any time, and there would be an improvement in the result available to everyone, whether their TV set was readjusted or not. pa11e 30

The Film Image and Present Transfers When 35mm motion pictures were first introduced about 100 years ago, every system used a unique format, preventing the possibility of exchanging media between systems. Within a short time, the film stock and sprocket hole dimensions became standardized, as well as the 1 in. by 3/4 in. frame. This standard was accepted internationally and lasted into the 1920s. When the soundtrack was added to the film alongside the picture, it shook things up again for a short time, but eventually a new aperture was chosen by representatives of the Motion Picture Academy, the American Society of Cinematographers (ASC), the SMPE, and the American Projection Society. This frame was accepted as the international standard for sound films, and has become known as the Academy frame. The original Academy aspect ratio was 4:3 (1.333:1), but has become 1.37:1 due to revisions of the standard over the years. Early in the development of television, engineers wisely realized that a great amount of television programming would come from film materials. This led to the selection of the 4x3 aspect ratio for the picture tube. Unfortunately, the standard aspect ratio for films changed shortly thereafter, largely as a result of television's popularity. By the early 1950s, broadcasts were going most of the day and into the evening, sales of receivers were picking up, and theater attendance was dropping. Naturally, people in the film industry became concerned路about their future. But this changed with the introduction of widescreen movies. Actually, widescreen formats had been experimented with almost since the beginning of motion pictures, but they had not been done very well until the arrival of Cinerama in 1952. Audiences loved the larger, wider screen. The threat of competition from television merely added more momentum to the theaters' push for widescreen formats. The next three years saw the introduction of three additional widescreen systems: CinemaScope in 1953, VistaVision in 1954, and the 70mrn Todd-AO format in 1955. These new widescreen processes drew audiences back into theaters and Societq of Operatinf{ Cameramen

Summer 1994

almost say that there are not separate film and television revitalized the movie business. Even though the official 'standard' for films was industries any longer. They have almost completely still the Academy format, with its approximate 4x3 aspect merged into a single industry. At the present time, it is rearatio, it became common practice for theaters to project sonable to expect that everyone in this industry should be the frame larger than usual and to mask the top and bot- willing to consider changes that would make film and teletom of the picture to obtain a wider image. Thus, the vision more compatible. This is a good place to make a plea for a global thecropped 1.85 standard was born. Other countries adopted ratios of 1.85 or 1.66: 1, although a 1. 75: 1 frame was report- atrical projection standard. For the last 40 years we have edly used by Warner Brothers and Disney for a period of used 1.85: 1 for features in the U.S., while much of the rest of the world has used 1.66: 1. Since the aspect ratio for time. For feature films, the ASC Manual suggests pro- advanced TV systems is firmly established at 1.78:1, featecting the full Academy frame for eventual video release. tures and television could be made more compatible by This practice may be followed occasionally, but this writer adopting approximately the same frame for film. Warner Brothers Technical Operations has said knows of no widescreen features photographed with such that, starting the 1993 fall season, film shot for television protection. Most cinematographers do protect some of the frame above and below the 1.85: 1 area, typically 1. 75 or by any of their production companies will use a 1.78:1 1.66:1 equivalent frames. The fact that the full Academy frame, so as to be widescreen-TV compatible. The next frame height is not typically usable makes transfers of fea- logical step would be to adopt a similar frame as the stantures to 4x3 video that much more difficult. Of course, dard aspect ratio for all non -anamorphic film, including film shot specifically for television may still be composed theatrical projection. A 1. 78: 1 frame is a fair choice for a global standard, because it favors neither 1.85 nor 1.66 for the Academy aperture. Despite the uncertainty about the specifications users. It would be a compromise for both sides. If this for the HDTV broadcast format that will be ultimately change could be brought about, for the first time since the approved by the FCC, one thing is certain. The new televi- 1950s we would once again have true global theatrical sion system (or systems) will use an aspect ratio of 16x9, or compatibility, and at the same time, eliminate any framing 1. 78: 1. Even though other countries may not agree on the differences between theatrical and television display. This frame rate, or the number of scan lines that make up the is simply too good an idea to ignore. This concept is being picture, television engineers worldwide have all agreed on promoted in Europe by Rune Ericson of Sweden. The actual difference between 1.85 and 1.78 ratios the 1. 78: 1 aspect ratio. Being closer to 1.85 simplifies the film transfer process somewhat, but there is still a differ- is slight, only 4%. On a typical 20-ft wide theater screen, the difference amounts to an increase in height of about 5 ence to be dealt with. It is well known that some cinematographers are in. This difference could probably be accommodated by a unhappy with the 1.78:1 aspect ratio. It is not within the minor adjustment of the screen masking and would not scope of this paper to argue for or against this number. require a different screen or projection lens. The impact to Suffice it to say that the number was chosen as being the production is essentially nil. As mentioned earlier, most, if most fair to formats ranging from 1.33 to 2.4: 1. In other not all cinematographers already protect a portion of the words, equal cropping or matting (in area) is required for frame above and below the 1.85:1 area. On film and in the both extremes, with very little loss associated with the two viewfinder, the difference in picture height between 1.85 main theatrical standards of 1.66 and 1.85: 1. It is the opin- and 1.78 amounts to about .018 in., hardly more than the ion of the author that despite the objections that have been thickness of the lines on the groundglass. Adopting 1. 78: 1 as a new projection standard has raised, the 1.78 aspect ratio for the TV tube is not likely to change at this late date in HDTV development. Of course, been officially proposed to the SMPTE Projection commitit is quite likely that receivers will have sufficient intelli- tee. Of course, it is not the function of the SMPTE to cregence that the geometry of the raster-scanned area can ate new standards, but rather to recognize practices which adapt to various aspect ratios. But obviously, the shape of the have become common in the industry. A change of this tube must be fixed, and it looks like 16x9 will be the shape. type might find acceptance as an EG (Engineering Those who know the history of conflict between Guideline) or RP (Recommended Practice), and eventualthe television and film industries might wonder, won't this ly become a standard in the future. It is hoped that the pronew widescreen TV hurt theater attendance again, and posal will be seriously considered by producers and exhibsimply force movies to some other new incompatible for- itors as one that represents an intelligent move toward mat? It's pretty clear that the answer to this question is no. global standardization and video compatibility, especially People will always go to the movies, for the high-quality when the impact to production and exhibition is so trivial. picture and sound, for the social interaction, or just to get out of the house. The film industry has gotten over viewPresent 'Iransfer Standards ing television as an enemy, and the video transfer is conDue to the mechanical tolerances of cameras. sidered a normal part of the post-production process. printers, and projectors, it is not possible to project the Many films lose money in the theatrical release but earn a entire photographed film frame. Doing so would result in profit from video sales. And let us not forget that a large one or more edges of the frame frequently becoming visiportion of television program material is shot on film. ble on the screen. With any projected format there is This includes essentially all dramatic shows. You could always a safety margin. According to ANSI/SMPTE Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 31

Standard 195, the overhead, or amount of image that exists on 35mm film that is not projected is about 4.5% of the height and width. The amount of the film frame that gets transferred to video is officially defined in ANSI/SMPTE Standard 96. The area to be covered by the video pickup device is to be 96% of the projectable area, or about 92% of the total height and width of the image. So in a transfer executed to the present specification, at least 8% of the height and width is lost, even when viewed on a video display showing every bit of the video picture. Of course, video displays don't show the entire picture. The typical loss at the receiver is about 10% in height and width, leaving about 86% to be seen at home. The telecine alignment pattern, including the "safe action" and "safe title" areas, is defined in SMPTE RP 27.3. The SMPTE sells alignment films made to this design. They were originally intended to help align a projector and video camera on a telecine chain, and are still used today for calibrating modern transfer equipment. It is important to realize that there is no inherent connection between the dimensions of film scanned for television and the receiver safe action and safe title areas. The safe areas are defined as a fixed percentage of the transmitted TV picture. In other words, with a video picture originating on film, if we increase the area of film being scanned, the safe areas on film increase a corresponding amount. Conversely, if the scanned area of film is decreased, the safe areas on film also decrease in size. Some people may wonder why it is desirable to change the scanned area at this time. They may reason that the system has worked for all these years, so why change it? There are two motivations for this effort. The first is the need for a standard for transfers to 16x9 television. To understand why a change is appropriate for 4x3 television as well, more historical background is necessary. When standard 96 was created, movies were transferred to video at the local TV station, by means of a tubebased camera and film projector on which regular 16 and 35mm distribution prints and kinescope films were page32

run, unsupervised. Of course this was done live, as there was no other method of storing the picture. The scanned area defined by the standard was purposefully made conservative, taking into account the tolerance buildups associated with the process, and the desire to avoid having any unused areas of the picture tube on the home receiver. The standard intentionally cut off a portion of the image on all four sides to ensure ample leeway for film weave and framing errors. It also may have been felt that, due to the small size of receivers of that era, the long and medium shots that are common in films would be too small for the home viewer to see what was going on in the scene. There have been substantial improvements in technology since the time the standards were created. Besides an increase in the size of the average receiver, there have been tremendous advances in the design of receivers and broadcast equipment, and there have been improvements to film and the film transfer process as well. Perhaps the most significant change is that the transfer is no longer done at the local TV station, from a regular print. The video transfer is now executed at one of a few post-production laboratories that specializes in that type of work. The modern transfer equipment used is much more stable than the old telecine chain, and the transfer specialist is usually working with a pristine film element such as an interpositive, internegative, or even the original camera negative in some cases. The net result of these improvements is that the laboratories are ignoring the ANSI standard. They have found that they can increase the scanned area of the film frame without causing any problem whatsoever. This pleases the customer, because less of the image is cropped off. One might be tempted to accuse these labs of violating the standard, until one realizes that the standard was never intended to apply to this modern transfer scenario. Even though transfers are of much better quality now, a rather unfortunate effect of this situation is that different labs are using a different scanning aperture. A transfer executed at one facility will include a different amount of the frame than a transfer of

the same film at another facility. So there is no standard currently in effect. The present approved standard does not reflect the current wants and needs of the industry. A principal objective of this article is 路 to provide a recommendation for transfers that will resolve, or at least improve this situation.

A New Telecine Standard Now let us examine what can be changed in the transfer process to help accomplish the goal of making the video image more closely match the theatrical image. First of all, we know there is substantial image loss in the typical receiver. The scanning raster is purposely adjusted to cover an area that is larger than the visible portion of the screen, resulting in a noticeable amount of the image being cropped around the edges. This is referred to as "overscan". In a survey of receiver overscan that was recently completed, the least amount of vertical and horizontal loss found in any set was 6% of the total image. Knowing that, by recording a reduced portion of the film image, we are adding insult to injury. With the care and supervision that takes place throughout a modern film transfer, there is no longer any reason not to transmit the entire projected film image. In fact, we can include essentially the entire camera image, and rely on the receiver overscan to hide the excess picture content at the edges. In this way, a receiver adjusted for a small amount of overscan would show the projected film image almost exactly, whereas a set having the typical excess amount would show less of the picture, but still more than what is seen now. It seems apparent that several standards for transfers of 35mm film to video are required, depending on the nature of the film original and the particular destination video format. The Super 35 format for film is being used more and more, and requires a standard for transfer to 4x3 and l 6x9 video systems. On the other hand, we have built up a 60-year history of film material that in many cases does not have any image outside the Academy area. Therefore we should still continue to continued on page 64

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

e are close to the emergence of a new television technology which promises higher resolution, wider screens, and improved colorimetry. As we debate the various standards which will finally result in what we will see in our homes at the beginning of the next century, it is imperative that we recognize the importance of this century's legacy of motion picture art to the future acceptance of any new video display technology. Our motion picture libraries not only represent important aspects of our artistic and cultural heritage but also represent an extremely valuable existing source of high definition imagery. It was these concerns which caused the U.S. to oppose the original Japanese proposal for a 15:9 aspect ratio high definition television standard and to propose the now internationally accepted 16:9 standard. Television technology, which was only a scientific curiosity until the middle of this century, never seriously debated the aspect ratio, or shape of television screens. It was simply assumed that television would have the same aspect ratio as the most prevalent theatrical film, that is 1.33:1(12:9) . This is not surprising since, for much of the history of television, film has been the dominant source of information and entertainment, which was simply broadcasted by the television system. Ironically, in the early l 950's just as television was reaching its stride the film industry recognized serious competition from television and began to look to new ways to lure the audience away from television in the home, and back to the movie theaters. It is therefore no coincidence, that the majority of today's wide screen film systems came into general use in movie theaters within a few years of the introduction of the NTSC color television system in 1954. Large screen, wide screen film systems such as Cinemascope, Vista Vision, Super Panavision, etc. were the movie industries answer to the little, almost square, boxes with rounded corners which were pervading the living rooms of America. In this highly competitive atmosphere, The producers of wide screen film certainly did not consider the havoc this would later generate when these films were to be broadcast on television. In the early 1980's when NHK, the Japanese national broadcaster, first demonstrated wide screen, high definition television, the aspect ratio they chose was 15:9 or 1.66:1. This was coincidentally the same aspect ratio as the most popular European wide screen film system and 4% taller than the American 1.85:1 system . page 34

In 1984 the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) formed a Working Group on High Definition Electronic Production (WGHDEP). Their mandate was to develop a universal production system independent of future broadcasting requirements. This both recognized the necessity of creating a production system with greater bandwidth than a final distribution system, and also hoped to reconcile into a single high definition production standard the various television standards in use throughout the world. SMPTE recognized the importance of the Hollywood production community in setting such a standard and decided that, in order to maximize the input of the film community to this process, all of WGHDEP meetings would Director of Creative Services take place in the Sony Pictures High Definition Center west coast rather than alternating east coast, west coast, which was the normal practice for SMPTE committee meetings. Early in this process a number of ASC members gave their time and input into this process and it quickly became obvious that any future high definition television system must consider how film images would be delivered to the home. Until recently the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had mandated that the complete video raster must contain picture information. This meant that regardless of the shooting aspect ratio of a motion picture film the television transmitted aspect ratio would be a 12:9 slice of that image. Most of the creative film community has decried this practice which has resulted in pan-and-scan , over-scan, or image cropping, whkh certainly did not reflect the original creative intent of the director or cinematographer. Since much dedicated technology such as camera sensors, cathode ray tubes, and flat panel displays would be dependent on, and fixed, by a chosen aspect ratio, how could an aspect ratio be chosen which, would not only reflect today's viewer choices, but also acknowledge the past, present practice, and hopefully a future as yet unknown? Kerns Powers, chairman of the parent committee of the WGHDEP, had a novel idea. He realized that the increased resolution and large screen display potential of high definition television would enable films to be broadcast in their original aspect ratios. Could an aspect ratio be chosen which would minimize the amount of non-picture Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

With our 16SR 3 viewfinder, you can see the difference in the details.

SEE SHADOW DETAIL MORE CONTROL The offset pl-mount makes it easy for you to switch from standard l 6mm to Super l 6mm in the field. SMPTE time code and flickerreduced CCD video are integral to the l 6SR 3's design, allowing you access to the latest in electronic post-production. Many of the new electronic features of the Arriflex 535, such as programmable on-board speed changes are included, giving you more creative options than ever before .

Once the exception, low light filming is now the rule. Even when shooting at T2 or less, the viewfinder on the Arriflex l 6SR 3 won't strain your eyes or your imagination . It delivers the largest, sharpest, brightest image of any l 6mm camera, regardless of stop or format. In fact, the viewfinder on the SR 3 is 25% brighter than the SR 2, and that was a/ready brighter than the competition . The SR 3 comes equipped with Arriglow, which provides precise, illuminated frameline markings, in all shooting environments, daylight or midnight.

LESS FATIGUE When you spend all day looking through a viewfinder, you deserve the best working conditions possible . Your eyes will appreciate the brighter finder image and the two-time magnifier built into the extender for critical focus adjustments . Warning indications in the finder for asynchronous speed and battery status are displayed instantly. An available heated eyecup provides extra comfort and convenience .

SEE AT DIFFERENT ANGLES Improving on the industry standard workhorse SR 2, the SR 3 viewfinder pivots to either side of the camera for comfortable filming and non-restrictive camera placement. Even when equipped with our high quality color video assist, the viewfinder still pivots 120째 from right to left, rotates 360째 parallel to the camera body, and swings out 25째. In short, the most adjustable l 6mm viewfinder currently available .

ARRl<4B1!P ,.

l 6SR 3

information which must be transmitted in order to pre- 16:9, and recognizing the effect an international consensus serve the original aspect ratio of the film? Or, if the film was on aspect ratio would have in reducing manufacturing to be cropped for transmission according to, the then in costs, the various world standards bodies agreed to the force FCC dictum, what was the aspect ratio which would proposed American 16:9 aspect ratio. This aspect ratio, and its rationale, is the only comresult in the least loss of picture information for all of the existing film formats? Surprisingly, the answer to both monly accepted international standard to date for future high definition telequestions was the same. An 1.33:1 aspect ratio of 16:9 was the ,....~-..----------------....-~ ....+t================~~t:"j 1 . 66 : 1 vision systems. aspect ratio which would satisfy 'r . -t-tt================:;t1r-t=;- 1.ss:1 The illustration both criteria. In order to arrive 2.40:1 below shows that by normalizing all of at this ratio Powers normalized the areas of all aspect ratios from the common film 1.33: 1 to 2.40: 1. That is, he made aspect ratios to the the projected area the same for same displayed area, 16:9 is the aspect all the film formats. He then described a rectangle which ratio which results would encompass all of these in the least wasted formats. This aspect ratio was screen area without 16:9. Additionally, as can be seen cropping the origifrom the accompanying drawnal film. The outer gray rectangle represents the 16:9 televiing, the common image area also has a 16:9 aspect ratio. This would be the overshoot and protection window for sion screen. The solid rectangles show how the various film full screen 16:9 broadcast. formats can be displayed with the same screen area. The The Europeans favored the 1.66:1(15:9) aspect inner gray rectangle represents the largest common area ratio since this was their wide screen film aspect ratio of (shoot and protect area) of the various formats if these were choice. The Japanese also favored this aspect ratio since displayed as cropped images occupying the full screen area. they had already spent hundreds of millions of dollars In practice today's most common film aspect ratios of developing and building equipment to support it. 1.85:1 and 1.66:1 could be magnified to fill 95% of the However, faced with the film format friendly argument for available 16:9 screen area. ~

A T E

Aspect Ratio, as many of you know, refers to the width of a displayed image compared to height. The shape of the frame surrounding one's work is obviously one of the most elemental concerns of a visual artist. Over the past several years, the technical community has been engaged is a debate over the various elements of a new televi sion standard to replace the venerable but long-outdated NTSC standard. One of these elements under debate is aspect ratio. The currently proposed standard aspect ratio of HDTV is 1.78:1or16x9. If there is logical reasoning for this particular aspect ratio, it is cloaked in mystery. Several theories exist as to how the numbers were arrived at; none are irrefutable. One thing is certain: when l.78:1/16x9 was conceived and sanctioned by the technical and manufacturing communities, the artistic community was not part of the discussion. The 16x9 ratio also flies in the face of forty years of Hollywood feature film wide screen production. This HDTV standard would from the beginning be crippled in its ability to properly display a large portion of the largest existing library of programming. This decision will affect the visual aesthetic of all new production as well as irrevocably alter how all motion picture work from the past will be seen by future audiences. The ASC, which represents the filmmakers most concerned with composition, and which carries a proud 75 yea r history of defend-

The film and television industries are at a critical crossroads. Cinema images have always been faced with compromise when adapted to video. We have the rare opportunity to end that struggle, to resolve the tension between film images and video images. We as Cinematographers have come to the conclusion that an aspect ratio can be designed to show older material as it was originally conceived. Additionally, the aspect ratio has the potential to become an exciting new medium for future production . The best of both worlds is within our reach: a filmmaker's work can be shown in the frame he or she intended for its entire life, regardless of display method . The simple and elegant aspect ratio capable of bring harmony to compositions in both film and HDTV is 2:1 While the ASC would prefer an aspect that matches our current widest screen production standard of 2.40:1, we realize that practical engineering and manufacturing requirements must also be considered. Thus the ASC advocates 2:1 as an adequate, if not ideal standard ratio. The ASC understands that in the short term, this aspect ratio (under the current proposals offered by the Grand Alliance) would result in a modest increase in the width, depth, and price of a High Definition receiver. The 2:1 aspect ratio would also most likely require a slight reduction in resolution over 1.78:1, but correct aspect ratio of display is generally speaking of much more crucial importance to storytelling

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CINEMATOGRAPHERS ing artistic integrity, is compelled to enter the debate. It may be enlightening to look back 50 years for precedent. In September, 1940, Dr. George R. Town of the National Television System Committee wrote: ".. .In motion pictures, the standard aspect ratio is 4:3 (1.33:1). If the same ratio is used in television, the fuJJ area of a motion picture frame may be used efficiently as subject matter for television transmission. If any other aspect ratio is chosen, either one edge of the picture will be cut off, or the received picture will not completely fill the ... screen . Since neither of these alternatives is desirable, an aspect ratio of 4:3 ( 1.33: 1) is seen to have a distinct advantage over any other. "Conclusion ... The ratio 4:3 permits the most efficient use of motion picture film." Helping filmmakers get their vision to the audience should be the goal of the motion picture technological community. That's what draws audiences back and contributes to our mutual success. Cinematographers, as visual storytellers, play a crucial role in creating emotions that help tell stories through images. What could be more important to these painters with light than the shape of their canvas? The best way for the audience to feel those emotions and understand the stories is by viewing them as close to the original intent of the artist as possible.

HDTV

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

than a negligible reduction in display resolution. The 2: 1 standard would allow previous material to be faithfully displayed in its original aspect ratio with insignificant letterboxing. Turning an eye towards future feature and HD production, many cinematographers are attracted to the symmetry and simplicity of the 2: 1 ratio itself. If the proposed l.78:1/16x9 ratio is adopted, the war between film and video aspect ratios wiJJ continue. Few filmmakers will look favorably on retreating to a narrow standard. At the same time, video has much to gain by adopting a wider, more "cinematic" ratio. The details of our proposal are: 0

Every original film work would be mastered and distributed over U.S. ATV (Advanced Television) in its native aspect ratio. This might be 2.4:1, 2.2:1,1.85:1,1.66:1 or 1.33:1 (or 1.78:1 if in the current HDTV format). 0 The ATV system should be deployed so that all ATV receivers have a 2: 1 aspect ratio, at any and all standards at which they might operate. 0 A universal header/descriptor would describe the aspect ratio and would specify the correct presentation, using letterbox, or side panel blackout. 째 Film will, as is current practice, continue to be mastered and distributed at 24 frames per second (this is already part of the ATV proposal).

ASPECT

AT I 0 page 37

PROD.

N.V. DAILIES HRS - M I N - S E C -

FRS

Color Negative Workprint Dailies Video & Audio Dailies Col or-Black/White 35mm-Super 16mm-16mm 1~800-35

16 LAB

GUFFANTI FILM LABORATORIES, INC. 630 Ninth Avenue I New York, NY 10036 212-265-5530 Fax: 212-245-1193

10918 BURBANK BLVD. • NORTH HOLLYWOOD CA 91601 (213) 877-9966 • (818) 769-2631 • FAX (818) 769-2341 Please Contact Us for a Complete Product Catalog

T by Dr. A. Linn Murphree, M.D. Director of Ophthalmology, Childrens Hospital of Los Angeles

Yfih ;Idhood ffi lindness Imagine learning that your newborn child has entered a pitch-black, dimensionless world. Each year more than one in every two thousand newborn children and their families confront that reality. Instead of celebrating new life with its limitless potential, these parents and their infants face the uncertain, often devastating course of childhood blindness. Of the estimated 500,000 blind people in the United States, nearly 1 in 5 has been blind since early childhood. Most of the nearly 100,000 individuals in the United States who are blind from birth, will never hold a productive job. It is estimated that each of these blind people represents a cost to society in direct subsidy and Jost productivity of an estimated $1,000,000 ($1 million) over their lifetime. Each year nearly 1,000 infants and children in the United States are either born blind or lose their sight in the first few years of life. These 1,000 children gather $1 ,000,000,000 ($1 billion) from the health care system and from the federal and state assistance over their lifetime. Our focus is on a coordinated research and global communication for medical treatment, whether surgical or pharmaceutical, with a single clear vision - eradication of childhood blindness. As a member of the National Advisory Eye Council which oversees the National Eye Institute and from the vantage point of fifteen years spent as the Director of Ophthalmology at a major national Childrens Hospital, I can categorically state that there is no program in place at the National or State level to address the problem of childhood blindness. The vast majority of the National Eye Institute's budget is earmarked for research addressing blindness in older adults and the elderly, principally because of the most powerful advocacy group of all, members of Congress. Children as a group have few advocates. We want to change this. We need your help. Society of Operating Camerame11

Summer 1994

ildren Without your help we could revisit this issue in 25 years and find the scene unchanged. Most medical school Departments of Ophthalmology have one or two faculty They are specializing in pediatric ophthalmology. swamped clinically dealing with strabismus (crossed eyes). Most have little research training and for those that do, the chance of receiving research funding from NIH is minuscule. Some children are born totally blind. Others lose vision slowly during their formative years. The remainder face lifelong visual handicaps due to accidents and diseases. These problems can be every bit as disruptive as total sightlessness. Diagnosed early some problems can be corrected . Not all pediatricians and family practitioners are aware of Little-known warning signs and treatment options. Thus, children frequently suffer unnecessary loss of sight. Nearly one-third of all blind children inherit their visual problems. The science of genetics holds the keys to prevention. Uncovering, sharing and applying today's new DNA-level knowledge is a staggering - almost unimaginable - task. But the potential benefits make it critical that we master the genetic components of childhood blindness. Other newborns suffer from prematurity-related blindness - one of technology's ironies. As we same ever smaller babies, more and more of them begin life with severe visualabnormalities. This has become the numberone cause of childhood blindness. Finally, many children are born with non-genetic birth defects. Scientists believe these are caused by substances encountered in utero. While this general principle is well established, much needs to be learned about specific causes of and remedies for non-genetic birth defects. Newborn infants and young babies sometimes undergo cataract removal. They need corrective lenses almost immediately, and could benefit greatly from autofocusing systems. Simple, commercially available electronic technology could be utilized if these children had the right advocates. page 41

New treatments and drug delivery systems need to be developed for tiny children with eye problems. We must learn to better monitor dosages, and to understand their effects on small bodies.

Wur <Yf{;ssion We are proposing a new organization -

The Vision of Children. It will have six main objectives: 1.The elimination of childhood blindness. 2.Establishment of Child Sight Network, a computer-assisted information clearinghouse for researchers in this field. 3.The application of existing technology in the Child Sight Technology Center to improve the mobility and functioning of blind children. 4.Global collection and dissemination of information about the prevention, detection and treatment of childhood blindness via our Child Sight Clinical Research & Education Center. 5.Acquisition, distribution and coordination of private and public funds to support work at established research settings worldwide via the Child Sight Funding Group. 6.Establishment of the Child Sight Gene Library for the collection and cataloging of cloned genes responsible for eye diseases. Established institutions and projects will be identi-

fied and nurtured whenever possible. We will encourage the world's handful of geneticists, neuro-ophthalrnologists, molecular biologists, scientists and clinicians to share information of potential value in the war against childhood blindness. Child Sight Network This network will make it possible for us to become worldwide communicators. We will seek the assistance of the nation's leading computer and communications companies to help establish a stateof-the-art, computerized teleconferencing system. It will be provided at little or no cost to participating researchers. Child Sight Gene Library Created in cooperation with the National Human Genome Project and others, this is one of the tools central to the project. Specialists will map, collect, clone, and store genes that hold clues to visual abnormalities like aniridia, cataracts, glaucoma, oculocutaneous albinism, and many other diseases. Further, since many of today's potentially useful genetic discoveries are made by researchers fighting different diseases (cancer or AIDS, for instance), the vision-related potential of their findings frequently goes unpublished, or at least unconsidered in the context of childhood blindness. Our Administrative Center will make certain that these new clues are widely disseminated and utilized. If you wish to make a donation (tax deductible), or would like further information, please call or write me at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles, 4650 Sunset Boulevard MS88, Los Angeles, California 90027, (213) 669-5603 . We sincerely appreciate your interest in this innovative global program.

LEADING TECHNOLOGY FOR CINEMA NEW! Focus/Iris/Zoom Digital Control System & new Super Motors. Stiff lenses giving you a headache? Our new FIZ provides lens autocalibration rugged design, SUPER TORQUE, and the highest positional accuracy. Available June '93.

Speed Aperture Computer- A new tool for the creative Cinematographer. Slows down or speeds up action on cue with automatic lens aperture compensation. User - friendly operation with automatic lens set up. The SAC can be used with: Arriflex, Aaton, Moviecam, Panavision, Wilcam cameras and Fries motors.

Light Ranger - Autofocus System.

Super accurate (1 cm.), & Long Range (> 150cm) Perfect for action, sports, car shots, crane, and low light. Stay tuned.

Micro Force Zoom - The Industry Standard.

Smooth, rugged and reliable .

Make it your standard tool!

Preston Cinema Systems 1659 Eleventh Street, Suite 100, Santa Monica, CA 90404, (310) 453-1852

n animated musical has been nominated for best picture and a melting Terminator has won for best visual effects. Now, amusement park movie rides are about to crash the Oscar party.

New technology is constantly changing the definition of motion pictures, and it's not impossible that some high-tech movie ride will soon be nominated for or win an Academy Award . JOURNE Y TO T ECHNOPIA, a 4 1/2 minute movie ride shown at South Korea's Expo '93, was submitted for Oscar consideration this year. Jt wasn't nominated, but it was the first ride movie ever entered for Academy Awards consideration. "We've stepped into a whole new landscape with a lot of areas to explore," says Donn Cambern, an academy board member who recently chaired the short film committee. Last year, the committee considered eliminating the live action and documentary short film Oscars because movie theaters rarely show these films anymore. Yet the seemingly archaic categories were retained not so much as a nostaJgic gesture, but rather as a framework for the rich future of the ride and large-format films. "We're getting into virtual reality now, aren't we?" Associated Press Cambern said . "And we're going to have to deal with _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..

RECOGNIZING

VIRTUAL VIRTUES BY JOHN HORN

it."

FUTURE ride

Unlike conventional motion pictures, these usually brief movie simulator rides feature rocking and rolling computer-controlled seats, dazzling large-format film stocks and eardrum-shattering sound systems. The combination aims to make patrons physically engaged in movies, not the passive spectators you'll find at any neighborhood multiplex. Production values are slick are staggering: JOURNEY TO T ECHNOPIA cost $1 million a minute, four times the average for a medium-budget feature film. The B ACK TO TH E F UTURE ride at Universal Studios Hollywood tour cost a whopping $60 million to mount. The simulator rides are typicaJly found in theme parks, but soon will appear in more and more shopping malls. The movie rides do not generally offer interactivity or virtual reality, where viewers can decide a movie's outcome and interact with its characters. But that may not be far away. South Korea's JO URNEY TO T ECHNOPIA was seen by 1 million exposition guests in three months, many of whom waited hours in line. In 1993, B ACK TO TH E F UTURE: TH E RIDE at Universal helped the park enjoy its second-biggest attendance year ever. Showscan Corp plans to open 43 movie simulator theaters worldwide by year's end . A var iety of other movie simulator rides are either running or in development, some adapted from the movies ROBOCOP and DAYS OF TH UNDER. But are they real movies, like THE F UGITI VE or THE PIANO? The academy seems to think so. There's a whole new area that we've become vitally aware of," says Cambern, whose short film committee visited the BACK TO THE FUTURE ride, among other movie simulator rides. "We really wanted to explore these new venues. The format and the motion is startling," he says. The B ACK TO THE Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

is a complete film itself. It's a large format, but it has a beginning, middle and end. And it uses film as the communicator of ideas." Although JOURNEY TO T ECHNOPIA, a thriller set in a futuristic utopia, was not nominated, producer Charlotte Huggins believes ride films should-and will-be nominated soon. Huggins hopes the academy will create a new category, although the academy says the films can be put in the existing short film categories. (The last new award was added in 1982 for makeup.) "There are so many special venue films being made now;' says Huggins, who works for Boss Film Studios." There will have to be a new category. "The long-term agenda is to get the academy and other filmmakers aware of the in credible technical effort launched in this arena by all their peers. They are as worthy as any film of being submitted." Stan Kinsey, the chairman of Rosoc oP: THE RJDE maker lwerks Entertainment, says the need for a separate category is weak. He says standard narrative films (as opposed to ride films) made and projected in large formats should be included in the existing short film categories. Indeed, in last year's documentary feature competition, the nominees included FIR ES OF K UWA IT - a large format film about torched oil wells made with large-format IMAX cam eras and projectors. It did not win, losing to THE PANAMA DECEPTION. But it became the first movie made in a nonstandard format to be honored since the , Cinerama days of the 1950s. Such large-format movies, with or without bucking seats, represent huge potential both artistically and commercially, Kinsey says. "People are trading off movie visits to do other things out continued on page 48 page 43

Business philosophy: Actually my Dad's. He said to give people more than you bargained for and they will be so relieved of not being robbed, that they will gladly pay the bill and not question it the next time. It works much of the time.

by Ron Dexter ost people in the entertainment business at one time or another have a problem with set etiquette. For a newcomer on a set it's like being dumped in a foreign country. The language alone is a struggle. For people moving up the ladder there are problems and even for old timers it's possible to loose ones bearings. The rules are often different and the glamour factor can distort . ones views. These are not elaborate theories, but are observation s and opinions from many years working in the business. There are definitely different ways that things are done on the different size and types of shoots. Without a carefully defined structure a large shoot would be absolute chaos. On small shoots departmental lines can become blurred, but certain rules of etiquette still apply. A newcomer should follow all the rules until he is sure which ones apply.

M )

hearing of clients, producers, visitors, cast, locals. Keep your opinions to your self. •Bad mouthing other production companies, equipment houses, crews etc. • Loud talk on the set. • Radical wardrobe on location. Make your personal statements in your own neighborhood. • Accepting conflicting jobs that you will some how "work out". • Replacing yourself on a job without warning. • Not saying anything when you see a dangerous situation evolving. Even if people are dumb enough to take unnecessary risks, if you see danger evolving, you are morally obliged to say something. Often people are relying on others as a measure of how safe something is. Your concern may make people think twice. In our business there are a lot of ways to make things look exciting that are not as dangerous.

Here are adozen universal rules for any set Out of Line for Production • Show up a bit early for the call. • Booking crews when a job is not yet firm. • Be polite. Use please and thanks. • Let people do their job. •Be humble. • Ask questions if in doubt. • Watch what's going on in YOUR department. • Make your superior look good. • Don't embarrass anyone. • Don't be a "hero". • Listen very carefully before you leap. • Learn and use peoples' names. • Work hard and willingly. (Feel free to help refine this list.)

Always Out of Line For Crews • Sexual jokes and talk around the ladies. • Political, religious or racial jokes and slurs •Having such a good time at night on location that safety and performance are compromised the next day. • Evidence of booze and drug abuse. • Negative criticism of anything or anybody within the

vane 44

•Not sharing cancellation fees with canceled crews. • Holding checks or time cards.

Always In Line for Production •Uniform deals for the whole crew. • • • •

Per Diem paid promptly. Production picking up a wrap dinner. Prompt equipment rental checks. Keeping crews informed about job scheduling.

New onIf the Set you are new on a job or production, it's best to let your knowledge be discovered slowly as you work with people. They will be more impressed if you don't try to show them everything that you know right away. Some outspoken people really do know a lot, but it's the big mouths that make the truly knowledgeable ones suspect. For every outspoken knowledgeable one there are 10 full of baloney. Societ11 of Overatina (ameramen

<;um111er 7994

Offeri~,y!~~~~! !~!!£~ce in a special skill, offerillg

advice can be tricky, especially if you are new on a set. Humbly offer your advice to your immediate superior and let him offer it to the group. It will be more likely heeded. If he gives you credit, good. If he takes the credit he will remember that you made him look good. Try "I worked construction for a few years and we ...... .. ., you know it might work here." (Very softly) .

Offering aHand When can you offer to give someone outside your department a hand? Generally if it doesn't threaten their job and your helping can't do more damage than good. Often helping carry someone's equipment cases is OK, IF PERMISSION IS GIVEN. Spilling stuff on the ground is not appreciated help. Setting a flag for a grip is usually not appreciated. If a camera assistant builds a good relationship with the grip department they may allow him to adjust a flag as the sun moves IF they know he is not trying to make them look bad, eliminate their job and KNOWS WHAT HE IS DOING. Getting a feel of what is appreciated and not is the key. Don't assume that people want help and respect their refusal. Maybe they just don't have time to explain how to do it right just then.

Don't Be aHero For every mistake "a hero" discovers, there is someone who made that mistake. Don't let them be blamed publicly. If you see something that APPEARS TO YOU to be a mistake, say something quietly and HUMBLY to your immediate superior. "This may sound stupid, but is the "stupip" on that sign spelled wrong?". Let your boss go to his boss so he can quietly say sometl1ing to the next person up tl1e ladder. The sign might be out of frame or be so small it won't make any difference or it may have already have been decided that it's really OK. If you run out and yell something "being a hero" you are taking a big risk. The person at fault will remember for a long time the public embarrassment created by the young "hero" on the set. The worst thing would be to go over your immediate boss's head to the director, AD or into a different department. You won't hear, "Who is that smart ___ kid."

To Be Continued ...

Ron Dexter: Cameraman since 1962. NABET E Board member, union negotiator, TV Commercial director since 1972.(DGA), owner TV commercial production company since 1977. Equipment designer. Mechanic. Teacher. Has shot in 20 foreign countries and 35 American states. Mr Dexter's video tapes on Film Production Techniques are available - 1-800-274-8749 or 1-800-274-TRIX

Table-top Technology.

Personality Problems

We are never the cause of unpleasant events on the job. It's always the other guy wiili "personality problems." In most disagreements, both parties are usually right to some extent. Usually the rightness or wrongness has little to do with the job and a lot to do with our egos.

Society of Operating Cameramen

Winning an argument can lead to losing a war. If two people who don't get along have to be kept separate, one or both will lose work. If one of the persons has anything to do with hiring, it can be disaster for the other. Don't risk your future over making a personal statement. Tempers cool off after a job and pressures are gone. Then it's wise to be humble and apologize even if you are sure that yo u were right. Sometimes two people will fall all over each other claiming who was more at fault. Good friends will not blindly suppor:t everything that we do. They should whisper in our ear that maybe we are· possibly out of line. Advice on the spot in the heat of anger is sure to be rejected. If you see a -eo-worker that is loosing perspective, think about it a bit and even write down what you think. Making it clear on paper may make it more understandable. Even if you don't show them the paper, look at it at a later date after the job and see if you still agree with your observations. If it still seems good you might show it to them or talk about it. Cautiously approach a discussion about behavior, LISTEN FIRST. You will be much more able to tailor your questions or comments to what they already feel. Often just their telling you about something, with a few questions from you, will help them understand a problem. Sometimes we all have personal problems that are difficult to leave.at home. Both production and fellow crew members should take this into consideration. There is a intimate relationship between work and personal life. If someone is unhappy on the job it's hard to not take it home and visa-versa.

Summer 1994

Discover the Probe Lens~ • Direct & 90° angles-of-view •For 16/35mm film &video •Interchangeable lenses: 5mm to 100mm • Interchangeable mounts

page 45

Widescreen continued fron page 7 Soon all the other studios followed suit. RKO and Republic decided to shoot their pictures in 1.66: 1. Disney, MGM, and Warner Bros chose 1.75:1. Allied Artists and Columbia went with the wider 1.85: 1. United Artists, because it was primarily a distributor for independent producers, left the choice of aspect ratio up to the individual producing company. And in the Fall of 1953, Fox - even

of a knob. Unbeknownst to Gottschalk, Irving and Joseph Tushinsky of RKO's Camera Department were working on the same principle, which they called "SuperScope". Both Panavision and RKO publicly demonstrated their line new of anamorphic lenses in March 1954. Most significantly, both companies also introduced optical printer lenses which could be used to either unsqueeze anamorphic footage or squeeze spherical material. Aside from The Robe, which was photographed in

though it had announced it would not make any more both anamorphic and spherical versions, Fox filmed all its spherical pictures - set up a subsidiary, Panoramic Pictures, headed by Leonard Goldstein, to produce a series of spherical "B" pictures in 1.66: 1. After the successful opening of Fox's CinemaScope release of The Robe ( 1954), most theaters began to install wider screens. They adopted masked projection techniques for spherical releases, thus establishing masking as the new standard for 35mm nonanamorphic projection. According to exhibitor periodicals of the time, 1.66: 1 and 1. 75: 1 appear to have been the most popular aspect ratios. Consequently, it is somewhat unclear how, in time, 1.85: 1 came to be the accepted industry standard. In fact, the earliest reference to 1.85:1 as the predominant medium appeared as late as 1956 in a paper read to the SMPTE by Merle Chamberlain, then head of projection for MGM. To this day, however, there is no consistent adherence to the 1.85: 1 standard. In truth, the projected aspect ratio in any given screening facility is based on a combination of three elements: (1) the projector-to-screen distance, (2) the size of the screen, and (3) the focal length of the projection lens. Where possible, theater designers try to come as close as possible to 1.85: 1. But there are many older theaters that still project images at 1.66: 1 or 1. 75: 1. Some of the newer, smaller multiplex auditoriums use a 2:1 ratio for spherical features. And some theaters even show all features whether spherical or anamorphic -at one ratio, by masking anamorphic features down to 2:1 or 1.85:1.

The Optical Squeeze Initially, Fox hoped to establish CinemaScope as the feature film standard and secured the rights to the anamorphic lens patents filed in the 1920s by Professors Henri Chretien and H. Sidney Newcomer. Fox also hired Newcomer to be its CinemaScope advisor. Unfortunately, Fox soon learned it had merely purchased scientific rights. The basic design patents for the anamorphic process were, in fact, legally considered to be in the public domain. Consequently, as soon Fox had demonstrated CinemaScope and articles about the principles behind the process had been published, a number of competing lens systems were announced by various sources, including the developer of the first anamorphic lens, Professor Ernst Abbe. Robert E. Gottschalk, who first became interested in the underwater use of anamorphic lenses, formed Panavision, Inc., to manufacture projection lenses. Gottschalk had come up with a new idea for developing lenses using prisms instead of cylindrical elements, thereby allowing the squeeze of the image to be varied by the turn page 46

productions in CinemaScope. Other studios, however, stiJl felt the need to protect their investments by concurrently filming two versions so the spherical version could be shown in theaters that were not yet converted to anamorphic projection. With the advent of the new optical printer lenses, it was no longer necessary to film two versions. In addition, studios could now incorporate spherical stock footage into CinemaScope pictures. The Tushinskys took their innovation a step further by proposing the use of SuperScope optical printer lenses to make CinemaScope-compatible prints from spherical photography. Under this process, a studio could use standard cameras and lenses so long as all important action was kept within a 2:1 aspect ratio. The 2:1 image was chosen because it was the widest aspect ratio that could be handled by the majority of theaters at the time. After principal photography, the 2: 1 pictureinformation would be optically extracted and then given a two-times squeeze during the making of the matrices at Technicolor, the lab that printed all the color films released in this process. Since the Tushinskys did not impose a color-only limitation on SuperScope, the optical squeezing process became attractive to low-budget companies who would make release prints from a fine-grain squeezed dupe negative to minimize grain and contrast. Allied Artists released three films in this process, including Don Siegel's original Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956). American Releasing, a precursor of American International Pictures, also released optically squeezed films. In England, a reissue of Henry V (1945) used optical squeezing. And Disney used the process in a most unusual manner in its 1956 reissue of Fantasia , in which the orchestra and "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" sequences maintained their original 1.37:1 aspect ratio and proper image shapes, while the other cartoon sequences were stretched to fill the wide screen.

Techniscope In 1963 two engineers at Technicolor Italiana, Rome, Doctors Giulio Monteleoni and Giovanni Ventimiglia, developed a variation on the SuperScope idea. They altered their cameras to pull down film stock two perforations at a time. By using half of the height of the full aperture frame, they were able to photograph a 2.35: 1 aspect ratio image that could later be given a two-times optical squeeze when preparing the Technicolor matrices. Monteleoni and Ventimiglia called the process Techniscope. Techniscope became extremely popular with European low-budget filmmakers who have continued to employ this technique until as recently as 1985. Society of OperatiTlfl Carneramw

Summer 1994

In contrast, Techniscope was not as popular in the United States, where it was used primarily by Universal. Only a few American low-budget producers used it in the sixties, but by the mid-seventies, its use has so declined that Technicolor stopped printing it.

The 70mm Release Print During the seventies, high-quality lenses were developed which finally made it possible to make acceptable 70mm release prints from both 35mm anamorphic and spherical negatives. The spherical negatives, however, presented some unique problems. Initially, spherical negatives were blown up to the full 2.2:1 projection aspect ratio of 70mm. Unfortunately, this resulted in a noticeable loss of sharpness and increase in grain. Then in 1978, 70mm release prints of Days of Heaven were made retaining the 1.85:1 aspect ratio by using black borders at the sides of the frame . This yielded a higher quality image, despite the fact that it was slightly narrower. Over the next four years, more and more producers used this approach for spherical blowups. Then after Stephen Spielberg used the process on E.T. - The Extraterrestrial (1982), it became the industry standard.

Super 35 Also in 1982, widescreen buff and equipment dealer Joe Dunton planned to make a 35mm "rockumentary", Dance Fever, on which he wanted full-width 70mm release prints. Remembering SuperScope, he shot the film to fill the fullaperture by recentering the spherical lenses and scribing new viewfinder markings. In this manner, he was able to frame the important action for a 2.2:1 aspect ratio. Dun ton's work came to the attention of Les Ostinelli of Technicolor London who was dealing with a similar problem in the production of the film Greystoke: The Legend of Tarzan of the Apes . Producer Warner Brothers wanted to release full-frame 2.2:1 70mm prints, but cinematographer John Alcott hated anamorphic lenses. Alcott additionally felt the slower anamorphic lenses would be impractical under the difficult lighting situations he would face in the dense jungles of Africa. As a result, Ostinelli and Alcott made tests with recentered lenses and chose to shoot the film with them, a technique they called "Super Techniscope". The success of Greystoke interested many other cinematographers and directors who wanted a widescreen image, but either disliked anamorphic lenses or planned to shoot in low-light situations. The new process soon became generally known as "Super 35". Producers also became interested in the format because they could use the same negative to make a 35mm anamorphic print, a fullframe 70mm print, and a video release that would not require the images to be "panned and scanned". Super 35 release prints are made on modern, finegrain film stocks by an updated version of the basic method used in SuperScope. First, a timed contact interpositive is made from the cut original negative. Second, a squeezed internegative is extracted. For a small number of 70mm prints, the prints are made optically from a 35mm Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

squeezed internegative. If a larger print run is desired, a 65mm internegative is optically made so the 70mm prints may be contact printed. One notable exception to this scheme was Silverado (1985) for which a 65mm interpositive was first made from the cut original negative, from which the 65mm and 35mm squeezed internegatives were struck. There are three major considerations to filming in Super 35. First, the width of the extracted image can only be as wide as the narrowest aperture plate on any camera used in the production. While most cameras have a frame width of .980", some, such as the Arriflex, are narrower. To accommodate the possibility of negative damage in the perforation area, some manufacturers and labs recommend using a slightly smaller extraction: Panavision recommends .945" while Technicolor prefers .930". Second, it is unsettled whether the lens mounts need to be recentered to prevent vignetting. John Bailey, ASC, for example, did not recenter the lenses used on Silverado. For Bailey, it was important to be able to press into service cameras such as Eyemos for a stampede sequence. By avoiding recentering, Bailey was able to use prime lenses as short as l 7mm and the 5: 1 Cooke zoom lenses at 20mm without encountering any vignette problems. Third, a decision must be made about vertical composition and how it affects theatrical and video releases. The image can either be composed between scribed frame lines equidistant from the center of the full aperture ("common center" or "symmetrical") or from the top frame line downward ("common top line"). Symmetrical was the preferred approach for SuperScope films and recently was used on Top Gun (1986)because it was easier to line up jet-mounted cameras for a centered frame. Director James Cameron, currently the industry's foremost exponent of Super 35, prefers the common top line approach because a medium shot in a theatrical version becomes a tight full shot on video. Common top line additionally eliminates the problem of keeping the microphone further away from the actors to protect for video. Both John Bailey and special effects cinematographer Peter Anderson agree that when shooting in Super 35 it is important to have a rich, fully exposed negative to minimize grain and increase contrast. Forced development should to be avoided. The fine-grain high speed stocks recently developed by Eastman, Agfa, and Fuji have helped to minimize many of the problems of optical extraction inherent in Super 35 photography. There are no longer valid objections to using Super 35 for pictures with a lot of optical effects. This has been adequately proven by such action and effect pictures as Deepstar Six , The Abyss , Star Trek V, and, most notably, Terminator 2 . During production, a Super 35 matte and realigned projector are all that's necessary for previewing a contact work print. If a Super 35 matte is not available, film dailies may be projected satisfactorily with a 1.85:1 matte. Squeezed dailies are not recommended because the optical printer and ink coding may risk the negative, something that became a nightmare for the producer of Greystoke. For editing, Super 35 picture modules have been page 47

developed for KEM editing machines. And if the venerable Moviola is being used, the editor may mask off the proper area with tape and simply turn the film over if she needs to view part of the image in the former sound track area.

Super 35 and HDTV Ten years ago it looked like Super 35 might be a passing fancy _ the "thrilJ of the moment" soon to be discarded for more established formats. Yet with the advent of high-definition television (HDTV) looming on the horizon, Super 35 has gained greater acceptance. Super 35 may be the best format for creating "all purpose" negatives, an idea first advanced by the Russians in the late seventies. By filming a full-aperture image on a frame three perforations high, filmmakers can easily protect height for theatrical releases and width for conventional or high-definition televis10n. Despite the fact that Super 35 is a great process to protect a wide range of distribution channels from theaters

THE NEW

to videotapes, its use for high-quality theatrical films is stiU a subject of debate. While the quality of release prints from the six major laboratories making Super 35 prints has continued to improve, no Super 35 release print can compare to one struck from a negative made with state-of-the-art anamorphic lenses. Thus, after forty years of anamorphic and spherical widescreen photography, the choice is still not easy. In the end, the most important consideration is the degree of image quality the decision maker _ whether producer, director, or cinematographer _ wants for the theatrical release.

Acknowledgments The author would like to extend special thanks to all those who provided insight and guidance: Peter Anderson; Fred Austin, Deluxe Labs; John Badham; John Bailey, ASC; John Baptista, Anthony Bruno, James George, Trent Hilton, Chester Luton, and Roger Mayer, formerly of MGM Labs; Doug Knapp; Sal Lomita, Orion Pictures; Takuo Miyagishima, Phil Radin, Panavision, Inc.; Joseph W. Schmit and Drake Woodworth, Technicolor, Inc.; Phil Scott, formerly of Universal Pictures; film editor Ho ward Sm ith; Bill Taylor, ASC; and Joseph Tushinsky. ~

VIRTUAL continued from page 43

side of the home," Kinsey says of declining movie admissions. Oscar recognition of large-format films will call attention to its appeal and attract writers, producers and directors who don't consider special venue movies legitimate. Academy Awards "will help encourage filmmakers to get into a whole new area of filmmaking," Kinsey says. He's opposed, however, to creating a new category for ride films. "I can see how the academy could go five steps down and start giving awards to arcade games," Kinsey says. Part of the problem is that ride films are hard to judge outside the venues constructed especially for them. In its Oscar-qualifying run and in a showing to academy voters, ] OURNEY TO TECHNOPIA was shown in 35mm (as opposed to 70mm) without moving seats and in a rushed dub into English. The ride films also are frequently dependent on a "pre-show," where patrons in line watch a separate short film setting up the ride film's story." Says Huggins: "It's not going to be easy." But it may be inevitable.

BadyCa111 ™

LIGHT

AND THE ANSWERS TO SOME OF THE MOST COMMONLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT IT! WHAT IS THE BODYCAM™? It is a practical and comfortable human carried camera system which allows the operator to stand, sit, crouch, stoop, walk or run while filming or taping.

WHAT IS THE BODYCAM™ LIGHT? It is an even better system for converting the body into a human dolly.

WHY CHOOSE BODYCAM™ LIGHT OVER OLD FASHIONED SYSTEMS? Operators are reporting how the Bodycam™ Light is safer and much easier to learn (a week to a month, typically) than any other system they try. They talk about how Bodycam™ doesn't beat them up and how easy it is to control. They like that it is lighter, and has a much larger balance window (you can bend over forwards or to either side without falling on your face), and minimal backache risk to boot! Plus, you don 't have to be particularly athletic to use it. · Directors love its ability to do those boom up/down shots. Finally, they can get the shot from shoe to face, ON THE MOVE! Whip pans, whip tilts, horizon roll to 180 degrees, look straight up or down and still go through a doorway, no problem . And it can do a heck of a lot more. Producers love it too. It costs a lot less to rent, sometimes cutting the human dolly costs in half.

IS BODYCAM™ STEADIER THAN STEADICAM®? Some operators think Bodycam™ is significantly more stable. A more advanced design allows better stability when running, and a tri-pod steady look is possible when standing still. or course, image quality is superior when used by an experienced operator.

IS THERE AN INFRINGEMENT ON THE STEADICAM® PATENT? There currently is no lawsuit of patent infringement. The original Bodycam™ was devised back in 1976. In 1984 there was an allegation of infringement which backfired since it resulted in the Steadicam® patent being pulled by the Patent Office for several years. Fact: the Bodycam™ is protected by patent number 4,206,983.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: CONTINENTAL CAMERA SYSTEMS, INC. 16117 C.ohasset St. • Van Nuys, CA 91406 (818) 989-5222 •Fax (818) 994-8405

HDTV continued from page 27 SENSITIVITY Television engineers specify the sensitivity of an HDTV camera as the lens aperture setting (in f-stops) for the camera to achieve full level video output (at normal dB gain setting) when imaging a white test chart (having 90% reflectance) that is illuminated by 2000 LUX of 3200° K light. Thus, the HDC-500 HD - CCD camera has a sensitivity quoted in video terms as: f 8.0 at 2000 Lux. This method of specifying sens1t1Vlty is understandably alien to a film cameraman . The equivalent Exposure Index (traditionally used to specify sensitivity motion picture film) = 585 ASA in 3200° K light and 650 ASA in daylight. When the camera is used outdoors (in 5600° Kor higher lighting, for example: ) the HDC-500 sensitivity actually increases because the camera's blue CCD sees more blue light. Directly comparing the HDC-500 with a contemporary series of 35mm motion picture film shows that this single electronic camera has a sensitivity higher than that entire range of film.

Figure 3 summarizes the elements of each system. The label MTF (Modulation Transfer Function) is a technical measurement of resolution. It is a measurement of the falloff of resolution with increasing detail. To assess the final resolution we must multiply all of the MTF's (each element) to produce the final output resolution. Starting with motion picture film the MTF of the emulsion are taken directly from the published date sheet for a given stock. Figure 4 shows the typical transfer curves of popularly used 35mm motion picture film today. Figure 4 shows the MTF for the medium speed film EXR-5248 (100 ASA.) It is important to note that the three film emulsions have different resolution capabilities (blue is always slightly higher than green - so we will ignore it in our discussion.) It should be noted that these charts depict the inherent resolution capability of the film emulsion. In practice, of course, the film is loaded into a camera and a particular lens is mounted on the camera. What is actually recorded on the film negative is now a function of both the lens and the film. The resolution of the lens in both media will be considered equal for this discussion. 120.0

....,.,.

······ · ···· · ·1······· · ·· · ·r · ··· · · · ·· · · · ~ · ···· · ··· · ···r····· · · · · · · · ·~

110.0 · ·· ···· ·· .. .. ; ........ .... ~...... . ·· ·· ·· .;. . ... ......... ~ . .... ......... : 100.0

. ..•.•.

...:

···! .......... L. . . . . .L.~~1~~

....,.,. Ch

Figure 2.

525 TELECINE

HDTV digitally down converted to 525 television compared to traditional film origination and 525 Telecine. SHARPNESS This complex topic requires an examination of the resolution characteristic of all elements of the system that are involved in capturing a recording on the film or on video tape - figure 2. After that there is the crucial issue of "down-conversion" to the final 525 television output. FILM ORIGINATION

llTF #1

~llTF#2

~ NG

~ E

HDVS ORIGINATION

@) PE

NOllTFLOSS

llTF t1

llTF #3

I ...~RI

llTF #2

llTF #4

DOWN CONVERTER

525 4:2:2

DIGITAL INTERPOTATION

525 4:2:2

Figure 3. The contributing elements to picture sharpness - for the film and HDTV origination systems.

10.0

... . . ........

(""··· ·1·

0.0 ' - - - - - , - - ' - - - - ' - - - - ' - - - - - ' - - - - - ' 0.0 IOD 1000 tlOD 800 2IOl:I

"MJloll

Figure 4. Resolution characteristic of medium speed 35mm film emulsions - shown in television terms (TV lines per picture height.) Choosing an f5.6 as a typical aperture setting the final output is derived by multiplying this curve by the film emulsion curves. The actual resultant 11TF OF EXPOSED 36mm RLM recording is depict121.1 ······· ·· ·••# ........ ........... ........... ...... .............. . ed in Figure 5. 110.0 100.0

....

Figure 5. Resolution actually recorded on the 10.0 negative film -i;:r- .... through the lens .... (at /5.6) in less .... than the emulsion :io.o capability (effect of :IG.O the lens. 10.0

EXR:s248 ·:

........... ........ .... ~

... - ~ ............~

·····I

~A'-----,-~-l-ODO.;.__llG0...;__2000_;__ZIGO___; TVUpll

Societlj of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 49

EFFECT OF RR VERTICAL RLTER

The negative is subsequently processed in the film lab. Assuming this first generation negative is then transferred down to 525 digital component 4:2 :2 on a high performance 525 Telecine, it is necessary to separately examine what actually occurs to both the horizontal spatial resolution and to the vertical. Figure 6 shows the MTF horizontal of a modern high performance 525 Telecine. 625 TELECINE TRANSFER versus HDC-600 DOWNCONVERSION HORIZONTAL llTF 100

Output Horizontal Fiiter

llO

Figure 7b. 1oeo 21eo Figure 8 shows that the three RGB video outputs from the HDTV down converter have a higher MTF than that of 35mm film transferred by 525 Telecine - and more important, the R and G and B videos has equal resolution.

Horizontal

70 80

MTF (%)

40 40

'""::::r::::: ::::::: : :::::: :路:.

30 20

5a TELECINE TRANSFER \WWW~ DOWHCONVERSION

HORIZONTAL llTF

200

400 460 600 llOO TVL/Ph 540 (5.75 MHz) Horizontal FBquency

Figure 6. The 525 Telecine Horizontal MTF is multiplied by the negative film recording to produce the 525 Video Horizontal resolution response. When this MTF is multiplied by the Red and Green negative MTF's, then the resultant R and G output horizontal MTF is as shown in Figure 6. Clearly, the output of the Telecine is producing excellent horizontal resolution: about a 60% MTF for Green (at 400 TvL/ph) and a respectable 40% MTF for Red. These are the sort of resolution levels that contribute to the superbly sharp transfers we have all seen over many years. The use of image enhancement in the Telecine can further improve this. However, in the vertical direction the performance is not so good. Here the MTF of the Telecine itself is the primary limiting factor. The HDC-500 High Definition CCD camera has the exceptional horizontal and vertical response. When this camera output is recorded on a digital HDTV video tape recorder there is no loss in MTF over the video passband. Following HDTV post-production, the VTR is played back as an input to an all-digital HDTV to 525 television down converter. There is essentially no MTF loss in this process horizontally - until the edge of the 525 video passband is encountered when the band limiting filters sharply cut off as seen in Figures 7a and 7b.

lUO

lfTF (%)

t-lllliiiii;;;;:::::-----__.;.

IO IO

7ll IO

... .., 2IJ 1Q

.ooo ..,

540

(5.75 MHz)

eoo

eoo -

TVllPh

"'-ICY

Figure 8. The HDTV downconverted to 525 produced a higher RGB horizontal than the Telecine output.

BECOME A BODYCAM OPERATOR IN 10 DAYS OR LESS

HD CCD HORIZONTAL RESOLUTION

llO

Relative

Rnponso 60

Figure 7a. page 50

路-

n. IH~

,..,._

CLASSES Every Week Include Beginning And Advanced Techniques. $550 At Van Nuys, CA Instructor, Russell Ofria 818-989-5222

In the vertical direction the real benefit of digital down conversion reveals itself. The original vertical MTF of the HDTV can be largely retained over the first half of the video passband and then lowered progressively as shown in Figure 9. Overall, the vertical response is clearly superior to that of the 525 Telecine, and again, the three RGB video vertical responses are equal. 6211 TELECINE TRANSFER versu• HOC-MIO DOWNCONVERSION VER11CAL llTF 100

llO 80

v..1lcel 70 MTF 80 (%) 50

30 20

10 200

100

300

500

TVl../Ph

llertlcal Ff9q'*1C'f

final picture sharpness. Clearly, as far as sharpness of a final 525 picture is an issue, the HDC-500 can equal or surpass the traditional Film-Telecine combination. EXPOSURE LATITUDE- Total Picture Dynamic Range: It is perhaps in this key area where CCD imaging has truly revolutionized the capabilities of television imaging. Motion picture film has always far-outstripped the capabilities of traditional television cameras in its ability to superbly capture images over a very wide contrast range. As shown in Figure 10 the total Exposure Latitude of a contemporary high -performance 35mm film stock is about 9 1/2 f-stops. The famous s-curve that describes the linear exposure range and the "knee" and "toe" of film's exposure characteristic has become an essential part of the whole art of creative cinematography. Television camera, for the first 60 years of their history, were based upon a variety of thermonic photo conductive pick-up tribes. While extraordinary in their ever-evolving capabilities in real-time imaging, all of them

Figure 9. The HDTV downconverted to 525 produces a significantly higher RGB vertical resolution from the 525 Telecine output. NORM•• pm

CCO OUTPUT VOLTAGE

10.0

What is perhaps more important is the fact that the vertical aliasing of the down converted output is lower than that of the 525 Telecine. The "super-sampled" HDC-500 camera inherently has lower aliasing in the 0-500 TvL/ph region than does the 525 line Telecine and this is carried through the down conversion process. Overall, the HDC-500 CD camera gives a higher picture sharpness than is capable by 525 Telecine transfer from the best of 35mm motion picture origination. Of course, there are times when, for creative reasons, such sharpness is not desired by the director or cinematographer. The simple expedient of appropriate lens filtering can allow control of the

SATURATION

LIWI~

DYNAIM: UHOE

0.1

80dB

0.01 TOTAL ~----- LA11TUDE,.

0.001

11 STOPS -----II~ F==================================+===== cco

N0m FLOOR

a.1

1•

tim

2.75 2.50 2.25 ~

1.50

1.25

1.00 0.75

0.50

....

I/ ,_

......... •v•,.

D.25

~"" "1!!

ll~STOPS

0.00 ~

REL EXPOSURE (STOPS)

Figure IO. Total exposure latitude for contemporary 35mm film is about 9 1/2 f-stops. Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

1111

111•

1A1

112

•

Figure 11. Total exposure latitude for the HD CCD camera is in excess of 10 1/2 f-stops.

PRINTING DENSITY 3.00

1.75

111a

NORllAUZID ~TION

COLOR NEGATIVE (GREEN RECORD)

2.00

---·_-_1_-_•.__-_•.__~-4..__-3....__-2..__-~1-+-.....L--~2~,~3~f.STOP

were bedeviled by a variety of artifacts at both extremes of their transfer characteristics curves. Noise, flare, lag, dark current, shading at the lower end - and blooming, comet tailing, image "sticking" at the upper end - all combined to drastically curtail the effective dynamic range or Exposure Latitude of television. In practice, about 6 fstops proved to be useful Exposure Latitude of traditional pickup tube cameras. The arrival of the CCD in the mid l 980's however, dramatically changed television imaging. Lag, blooming, and comet-tailing virtually disappeared overnight. Stunning advances over the past five years propelled CCD imagers from Electronic News Gathering (ENG) broadcast studio and Outside Broadcast (OB) cameras - all the way up to the 2 million pixel High Definition CCD imager design evolved over the past decade - and there is no end in sight. page Sl

Today, the transfer characteristic of the HDC-500 is more than 10 f -stops as shown in Figure 11. And, it is in the lowlight shadowed areas that the HDC-500 has a striking advantage, technically, over any 35mm motion picture film . T he very low " noise floor" allows this camera to "see" in low light like no known film. In its abi li ty to pull out co lor images in deeplyshadowed areas of a scene with essentially no "grain " or noise visible - it is a major step forward. Once agai n however, it must be recognized that a "grainy look" is often part of the desired creative "Look" to an image Jn this case, resort must be made to controLlin g the HDC500 neutral density filters, video gain , electron ic shutters, etc. , to appropriately synthesize the "gra iny look." But if a very clean reproduction at low light is desirable then, the HDC-500 extends beyond the limiting " toe" of motion picture film - and can be exp loited to image superb pictures in these dark areas .

Conclusion: The technical comparisons made in this paper are not intended to be so presumptuous as claiming that HDTV imaging has brought an accura te reproduction of th e "Film Look." This "Look" encompasses many other subtle attributes than those examined here. However, what is

for sure is that the former enormous difference in total picture quality of 35 mm film and traditional television has been greatly narrowed by the arrival of both HDTV and CCD imagers. In certain purely technical respects the HDTV camera truly does surpass motion picture film . T hat does not necessarily make it better. The intent of this paper is to reveal that in four core areas: sensitivity, sharpness, exposure latitude and noise, the HD CCD camera can rank with or exceed the "down converted" 525 NTSC picture produced by 35mm fi lm and 525 Telecine. How this might be used is now a decision of program makers, directors, directors of photography, ad agencies and cinematographers. A totally new imagery is possible with the HD Camera and digital down converter. It can, when combined with the skills of film cinematography, closely emulate and even improve upon certain aspects of the "Film Look." This new creative capability should be enth usiastically embraced by cinematographers, not as a contender with 35mm film , but as an addition or adjunct to the creative " tool kit' - to be exploited as dictated by a particular script and th e creative aspirations of the producer, director and cinematographer.

INTRODUCTORY OFFER!

Subscribe Now

Save 25%

4 ISSUES FOR $15.00 The Operating Cameraman P.O. Box 2006, Toluca Lake, CA. 91610 Phon e (818) 582-7070

.. The Standard of the Industry Worldwide

TYLER MOUNTS USED ON: The Fugitive • Hard Target• Under Siege • The Firm Beethoven II • Free Willy • Back To The Future Ill Demolition Man •Honeymoon In Vegas • Forever Young Sister Act I & II

路operators prove oconnor's 2575 has: incredible... COUNTERBALANCE

best... FLUID FEEL reatest... FLUID RANGE most... TILT RANGE VERSATILITY RELIABILITY

the BEST always use the BEST

oconnor

ENGINEERING LABORATORIES

100 Kalmus Drive - Costa Mesa, California 92626 - Tel (714) 979-3993 - Fax (714) 957-8138

Alonzo continued from page 25 match the look." All of this information is on a clear, sharp monitor.

see it. Those questions add up to a lot of time-consuming question and answer periods during film making.

GALT: I've heard of cinematographers who have been afraid of this kind of involvement with engineers. They're afraid that the engineers are going to take over their picture. But obviously from what you're saying, that was not your concern at all.

GALT: I also saw how closely you collaborated with the makeup specialist. Bob Hoskins as Churchill, and Michael Caine as Stalin had very extensive prosthetics. And you used no diffusion. There were lots of very tight close-ups, and yet I don't think I have ever seen such good prosthetic make-up on actors before. Is there any value to the makeup artist being able to see what you were doing?

AWNZO: No. On the contrary, we had a good understanding. As you well know, we were all sort of stepping onto new ground. The best way to do it was to have somebody say, "This is the way we're going to go." But remember, there are eight horses pulling that wagon; and they all have to cooperate and collaborate. It was a very pleasant working experience. There was never any question about what we were doing. You could see it on the monitor. The director, I think, loved the idea of seeing instantaneously what he wanted. His biggest problem was to compose for the high def and the NTSC format. That was very tough for him. My preference is that we show it all on the wide screen - but that's another battle. All the apprehensions that some people have about the umbilical cord which this camera carries, well it never got in the way. Whenever we shoot a film right now, we have an umbilical cord with a video assist and it goes wherever the camera goes. I never found the cable to be a problem.

ALONZO: Linda De Vetta did extraordinary makeup on those people. Her biggest fear when she saw the test was how much you did see. The camera is able to detect the netting, detect every single pore of the skin. It frightened her. I said to her with all confidence, "Don't worry. I think we'll be able to fix it with lighting. You and I will be able to sit there in front of the monitor and know that the audience will never see a defect." However, the art department for instance, found that they couldn't cheat an emblem on a uniform, they couldn't fake anything because the system sees it all so very clearly. It's a closer collaboration with the various departments with high definition. GALT: Won't a lot of producers, directors and cameramen consider that to be a great disadvantage of this technology? AWNZO: I don't think so, but it depends on their attitude. I find some directors, including Joe Sargent, love the idea because they can actually see performance on the screen. You can go over to the monitor and see the close up of it, you can get a feel for the performance and can give the actor good direction or good notes. Joe found it very satisfying.

GALT: You shot some pretty large dolly shots, tracking shots, crane shots. AWNZO: Remember the long dolly shot we did in the mausoleum . Nobody ever had a problem with the cable. When I use a Chapman crane, sometimes I'll put in an HMI or an arc on the crane. It's got to carry that long electrical feed to it. Another point to make about the facility of using high def is that no one would come to me and say, "Do you think the color of that jacket is okay?" They would see it. So it eliminated a lot of questions. "Is the depth of field enough?" Of course it is. You Soc~ty

of Operating Cameramen

GALT: Although we did have a set of prime lenses, you elected to shoot almost everything with the zoom lens. Was there any particular reason?

sharp. We didn't use it too much as a zoom lens, per se. We used it as a variable focal length prime lens. My favorite choice of focal length on this particular zoom was around a 25 millimeters (N.B. equivalent to 35mm in 1.85:1 35mm).

GAIT: You also sometimes shot with two cameras. ALONZO: We used two cameras whenever possible. It saved the actors from having to repeat themselves. The times we couldn't use two cameras were when the director couldn't see two performances simultaneously. But most of the time when we used two cameras, especially in drama, we were conserving the performance of each actor, not having to repeat it again for one side and then over again for the other side. GALT: An argument that I've heard against using multiple cameras on what's essentially single camera cinematography is that you are compromising the lighting for one angle. AWNZO: I think it's relative to the piece that you're shooting. For instance, a picture like Scarface with stunts, weapons firing and a lot of mechanical effects, using three or four cameras, didn't compromise the lighting; because we were very careful in selecting the positions for those cameras. The director, Brian De Palma, was very good about that. I never considered that two or three cameras were a problem. It would be a problem in a small room, or tight quarters; then, of course, you can't. But then again, if the Director tells you this is a one-take situation, then you had better figure out where to put two or three cameras. I don't think that compromising the lighting is so critical; it's not as bad as compromising performance and story. GALT: Thank you very much, indeed, Mr. Alonzo.

AWNZO: We did look at the lens very closely and made sure that it was

Summer 1994

page 55

creen titles, prior to the computer age, were done " by hand ''. Hollywood title houses used a variety of techniques, some of which I will attempt to describe. I'm sure you are familiar with trailers of old films, thanks to television's American Movie Classics channel. Trailers, or "Previews of Coming Attractions" were major productions m themselves . Certain exciting or poignant production scenes were provided by the major studios; then dialogue, music, narration , and titles were all melded together by the title house. Customarily, motion picture titles were made from white letters painted on black cards that were shot on high contrast film (Eastman's 5363). Artists painstakingly handlettered titles in all styles imaginable. To achieve a feeling of shape and roundness, the artists would paint the words with Plaster of Paris, building up the letters on sheets of glass so they could be cross-lit. Front light was used to produce the image, back light produced the matte. The camera was mounted on a horizontal bed with the title frame mounted vertically in front of it. The glass title sheets were then precisely registered on the frame. With the camera mounted on a vertically arranged track, what we called a "downshooter", the camera could ride up and down to animate words or parts of words. We adapted the old Bell & Howell 2709B with a Bell & Howell movement and perforation register pin . The table under the camera had a one-piece rectangle cut in the top to hold the animation frame . With twelve ordinary door bolts acting as pivot points for the frame, we could swing, spin, and pivot the artwork in all directions. The effect was a title that could swing in from any direction , spinning one title into another. The camera moving down would produce a zoom or slow ride-in. Moving up would produce a rapid or slow pull away. An animated "write-on" could be made by shooting in reverse while painting out bits of the letters one frame at a time from right to left. Camera speed, starting from single frame, was controlled by an ordinary fly wheel and solenoid . This method dates back so far that I cannot begin to guess its origin (though I suspect it was designed by Paul (Starr) Stoleroff who worked for National Screen Service in New York City. Stoleroff later came out to Hollywood in the 1930s and opened a studio on Sa11ta Monica Boulevard). Maximum camera speed was twelve frames per second. Each camera had an accurate frame counter since, to complete a sequence, it was imperative to be able return to a specific frame on a roll of film . "Roll-up" titles, commonly used for end credits, were fashioned from white letters painted on black cards. These cards were taped together end-to-end, then cranked through an old Anchor Brand rubber chamois wringer solidly mounted on a wall. End credits were generally shot at twelve frames per second, with the hand crank speed smoothly tempoed to page 56

the exact footage, to avoid jerking. As a rule of thumb, we calculated the average reading time on screen at ten frames per word. With black cards, we able to create all kinds of wipes. By backing up the film to partially exposed words, we could create "i nside-out wipes", or turn one phrase into another. "Circle wipes" were done in a similar fashion. "Exploding titles" were shot forward . The title was shot in place for a few feet then torn apart and separated a little at a time un ti! the en tire ti tie was out of frame. To reverse the process, and have the titles in1plode, it was necessary first to shoot the title forward for a few feet then close the shutter or cover the lens; the exact frame was noted, the film was advanced to a predetermined frame, and then the card was reassembledand photographed, frame by frame, back to the point when the shutter was closed. End titles and some main titles that were to run over live scenes were composed in the optical printer with high contrast title units acting as a matte. A less expensive method used mainly for end credits, was to create a complete unit for a single pass of the camera. Here, the titles were printed or hand lettered on glass or eels that were placed over a single art background or series of backgrounds, then both background and titles were sandwiched under a glass platen to hold them in place. The trick was to dissolve one title into the next without the background art pulsating or "breathing" on the screen. When a one, two, or four foot lap dissolve was desired, the shutter had to be opened and closed smoothly with the camera running at twelve frames per second. Any mistimed lap would result in a disturbing dip in the density of the background image. A four foot lap dissolve required a sixteen frame pullback. A three footer required twelve frames. A two footer, six frames. And for a one footer, no pullback at all . Imagine trying to do this while the film is flying through the camera! As a result, most end credits used only one or two foot lap dissolves. Very little screen time was allowed for titles. Many times the titles just popped from one to another. It was difficult to run the camera at twelve frames per second and then stop on a specific frame. Some camera operators took quite a while to master the technique. Some never did. In fact, many operators would burn up a lot of film practicing before they would tackle a job to make sure their work be good enough to leave the studio. There were only a few studios in Hollywood that did this type of work during the 1940s. I was fortunate to work for two of the major ones: National Screen Service and Pacific Title & Art Studio. Pacific Title is still active, but National Screen closed down it's Hollywood operation about 20 years ago when "Hollywood" went abroad. I now see some of these old trailers on AMC and think proudly to myself, "I did those wonderful titles." The good ol' days are just a memory.

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

west TECHNICOLOR, INC. HOLLYWOOD

east TECHNICOLOR NEW YORK

4050 LANKERSHIM BLVD.

321 WEST 44TH STREET

NORTH HOLLYWOOD, CA 91608

NEW YORK, NY 10036

TEL: 818-769-8500

TEL: 212-582-7310

FAX: 818-761 -4835

FAX: 212-265-9089

Technicolor速 The Greatest Name In Color

LOST CITY REVISITED by Peter Brosnan

In 1990, after nearly seven years of preparation and fundraising, efforts to save portions of Cecil B. DeMille's "City of the Pharaoh" -

the massive set built for the 1923 version of The Ten Commandments

and buried in the Guadelupe Dunes near Santa Barbara when filming was completed -

finally got

underway with a start-up grant from Bank of America. The initial archaeological survey proved that massive portions of the set the last of the ''great sets" from the Silent Age of Hollywood, and perhaps the largest set ever built - still ex ist and can easily. be salvaged.

;

Jlmon!J the discoveries • Massive portions of the four, 35-foot high statues of Pharaoh Ramses are intact and recoverable. • Several bas- relief statues that graced the walls of the set -- including a 20-foot statue of the Pharaoh -- are also intact and recoverable, but rapidly disintegrating. • Ground-penetrating radar located what is almost certainly the burial spot of over a dozen massive Sphinxes used in the film. • The 2,500 actors and extras who lived on the site for over a month left a multitude of "cultural artifacts" behind, including: props; pieces of costumes and jewelry; and at least one bottle of high-alcohol "cough medicine" (this was, after all, during Prohibition!) . In short, the 1990 survey showed that a virtual Film History Museum lies buried beneath the Guadelupe Dunes. Artifacts of a sort that have survived nowhere else await recovery -- the cinematic equivalent of King "Tut's" tomb. The project generated enormous international interest. The Nature Conservancy, which owns the site, was solidly behind us. It seemed certain "DeMille's Lost City" would finally end up in a museum where it belongs. Well, that's what we thought, anyway. Ever hear of Murphy's Law? First, Santa Barbara bureaucrats informed us that further work on the site might require: a special use permit; a conditional use permit; a grading permit; a coastal development permit; a filming permit (we're filming a docupage 58

mentary, you see); a toilet bowl permit; a parking permit; and a "pre-permit permit-application permit" (and probably a few more permits I've forgotten). Possible cost for the permits: thousands. Time needed to get all these permits: years. It didn't matter that the project was unfunded and volunteer driven. Or that the set was disintegrating and being vandalized (do vandals need permits?) even as we spoke. Rules are rules. Even more aggravating was the fact that we'd already discussed the project with Santa Barbara officials several years earlier and had been told (fortunately in writing) that no permits would be needed. The problem was that the old bureaucrats had moved on. Now the new bureaucrats wanted a look at our plans. Eventually, the new bureaucrats agreed with the old bureaucrats: no permits needed. Unfortunately, it took two years and hundreds of dollars in fees to get to that point. By which time (December, 1992) the whole project had lost its 1990 momentum and ground to a halt. But, by early 1993, things seemed on track again. The Hollywood Studio Museum opened an extensive exhibit on the project which drew thousands of visitors over the next year. The exhibit also brought renewed international media interest to the project. It seemed like the right time to begin fundraising . Enter Murphy's Law again. We approached a number of film & media companies that have a historic relationship to one or both versions of The Ten Commandments. They've made a fortune on The S ociety of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

Ten Commandments, we thought. Surely they'll help us raise the funding to rescue this piece of their own history (after all, Bank of America's 1990 start-up grant came about because they saw this as part of their history -- the Bank helped DeMille with funding in 1923. Surely, such corporate pride extends to the Film Industry, no?). Boy, were we naive. Our fund-raising letters went out. Months went by. No replies. Follow-up letters went out. Still no replies. Not even a "no thank you." I guess corporate courtesy in the Film Industry died about the same time DeMille did. Bank of America's 1990 start-up grant was made with the hope that the Film Industry would help fmish the job. Apparently, the Film Industry couldn't care less (although their PR flacks fell over each other praising the project during the media glare in 1990). Undaunted, we next donned our "scholars" hats and approached the venerable National Endowment for the Humanities for funding. NEH at least sent a response -"No." They perceived the project as "too Hollywood." One NEH reviewer, who'd read some of the 1990 press clips, sniffed: "If all these well-moneyed film industry groups are so interested in this project, why aren't they footing the bill?" Yeah. Right. Talk about a rock and a hard place ... Cut to 1994 -- The "cavalry" may finally have arrived, in the form of the University of San Diego. They don't think the project is "too Hollywood" or not worth commenting on. In fact, their archaeologists think the project is important, fascinating and needs to be done. USD's Dr. Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

Ray Brandes, a fund-raising veteran, is helping us to approach new funding sources. We're keeping our fingers crossed. Whether the project ever gets funded or not, we have at least managed to film a remarkable set of interviews with the last surviving folks who worked on both versions of The Ten Commandments. A documentary on the "making of" these films is in the rough-cut stage. Predictably, Hollywood has no interest in the documentary, although German, French and British sources (who seem to appreciate Hollywood more than Hollywood does) are quite interested. The interviews will eventually be donated to the DeMille Archives at Brigham Young University (who also think the project is quite important and worthwhile) for use by future historians. In the meantime, while the NEH thinks the project is "too Hollywood," and Hollywood won't even respond, the last of the Great Sets from Hollywood's Golden Age continues disintegrating beneath the sands of Guadelupe. The rapid cultural and technological developments of the 20th century are only now being analyzed and understood. The discipline of Film History is still in its infancy. 100 years from now people wiU be able to say very clearly why saving this set was important, in ways that we still grope after. They will not think very highly of us if we let this precious artifact from om history slip through our fingers.

And so,. our efforts will continue

e page 59

mDllFIL &TAPE'S INDEPENDENT FILMMAKER PROGRAM STUDIO FILM & TAPE'S

10% DISCOUNT

Independent Filmmaker's

With your first purchase, you will automatically be a

Program has been

member of STUDIO FILM

designed just for independent

& TAPE'S Frequent

filmmakers and independent

Buyer Program and your

documentary filmmakers as a

purchases will earn you gifts

way to help with production

ranging from Fuji still film,

costs. We know that you are our

SF&T 1 /2" and Fuji 3/4" tapes, to

creative geniuses and you need a

VCR 's and TV's.

film that supports you technically

All of this, just to get you to use the

while you express your creativity.

world 's greatest film stock?

We're offering a 1 0% discount for the Yes, because you are the backbone of

purchase of new FUJIFILM l 6mm or 35mm film stocks to the membership of the IFP and IDA Organizations. You can choose from any one of

our industry and you make us proud to service and support you . Please call for full information .

FUJIFILM'S six ASA's . When you

I a ur Service

make your next film , we will be there with the same 10% discount again to help support your achievements.

We guarantee you a quality product at an excellent price that will leave every other manufacturer far behind .

ASK ABOUT OUR FREQUENT BUYER PROGRAM

Stock Around The Clock Open 24 Hours

213.466.8101

SJUDIO FILM &TAPE

6674 Santa Monica Boulevard• Hollywood, CA 90038 •Ph 213.466 .8101 •Toll Free 800 .824 .3130 630 Ninth Avenue• New York, NY 10036 •Ph 212 .977 .9330 •Toll Free 800.444 .9330 110 W. Kin zie• Chicago, IL 60610 •Ph 312.467 .0070 •Toll Free 80.0.467.0070

~9t! r31f ~ ~' YJOe

ition, but editing. The changes in post production equipment have revolutionized the process. State-of-the-art systems allow random access to show material from a computer disk. There are several schools in the area th~t _offer short courses in the basics of editing. At the least, sit 111 on an edit session of your show and see how your material is used and how your mistakes are covered. Or take a course in directing. Not that you necessarily want to become a director, but knowing what their craft is all about can't help but make you a better operator. There's a lot more to directing than just snapping your fingers. Now some of yo u are going to say, "I know all I need to know to work in this town. I'm not going to waste my time learning any more." That was my opinion about pagers and cell phones. I don't want to be that tied to the industry. Then I noticed that other operators who had pagers and cell phones were getting work that I wasn't. He or she who returns a call first often gets the job. The same goes for learning other facets of the business. ~he challenging (and fun) jobs will go to those who can bnng more them than the ability to point and focus. On the personal side, when I find myself on a job that is, shall we say, less than stimulating, I look for a moment. Hopefully, every job has at least one-and it might be the only-redeeming spark on an otherwise lackluster cal l. It can be something as obvious as the flash dissolve from the NBC peacock to Jay Leno's entrance on The Tonight Show or watching Archie and Edith sing the theme song to All In The Family. It can also be the dramatic interplay between two actors that only my camera angle sees. And if one doesn't come naturally, I might create it by making a shot harder than it needs to be or grabbing an unscheduled ISO . Whatever moment I find , it is somethin g that works for me, that justifies why I came to work that day. Of course, not every job we get lends itself to a full display of o ur talents. But the hallmark of a true professional is doing every job, no matter how insignificant, as if it were possible Emmy material. The successful operators, the ones that get the fist call, know the drill. It's a service profession. Serve a burger as if it were sirloin. Pour Evian as if it were Cabernet Sauvignon. Above all else, we should have fun with our work, yet never be too proud to ask, "Would you Like fries WI'th th at.?" ~

hy would anyone want to operate a TV camera for a li ving? It's a job that often means staring into a little electronic window for hours on end wit some uncharitable person yellin g orders in your ear. The quick answer is that it pays the bills. But beyond that most of us do it because it offers a release for personal creativity, artistic or iginality, and mechanical inventiveness, al based on split second teamwork with little or no allowance for mistakes. However, beneath aU the luster is the reality that we are just highly paid service workers and our job is a lot like waiting tables at Denny's. Not a cook or the maitre'd but a waiter. Yet a good waiter serves every meal as if it were filet mignon and they are expecting a $50 tip. Our customers expect no less from us. It seems that over the last twenty years the above line people, as a group, don't have as much fun as they used to. This could be the result of the massive expansion of the industry that is taking place. The competition for jobs and results is formidable and it means that there are many people out there working on the edge of ob ljvion. Big bucks or a career can hinge on every show. Not that there aren't many talented new people coming into the business, because there are. But they have a much shorter time to prove themselves and that burden of proof is often passed down th e line to the operating crew. We all know the number of times we have shot a good looking show that was entirely t h e . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , consequence of a sharp editor and excel lent iso reels. Where does that leave us? Is it harder to maintain a professional attitude 3-Axis Mini-Jib Arm in the face of the more mundane jobs that • Moves horizontal, vertical & are being offered? T he cost per viewer backward/forward. factor means tighter budgets and small er • Lightweight & portable. • 8' 9' long with 52' extension over table-top. crews and as a result the business just ain't • For film & video cameras. what it used to be and will never be aga in. The burden is for us to maintain our pro-

Table-top Technology.

fessional pride in our craft and even to ilRMQ""'~_I.·•~/~... .·SaRelnetast adapt it to the changing cond itions. ••••• My first proposal is to keep up 131BSecondStreet,Suite31 ,SantaMonica,Camomia00401 with the new technology. Not hi gh defin- L.:..:Phone::::..::31:.:.11-394-55:...::.::::..:::..::10:__ _ ___.:Fax:..::..:..:·3:..:1.:..0-.:.:395-=294::....:..:....1_ _ _ _~:;;....-------~

'r'w;:.,.::!:.

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 61

!iTAl\IDARD!i REPORT

The Akl!la Crane

ndrew Millstein, executive producer at Hollywood's Image G, had a tough challenge to meet: How to shoot a series of complex motion-control scenes that would be composited later for a Pepsi commercial. The spot required an exceptionally large crane to create bird 's eye views of children walking across a cube of snow which is revealed to be an ice cube inside a cup. To capture the desired effect, Millstein turned to the Akela Crane, which, at more than 70 feet in length, offers visual perspectives never before achievable witho ut a helicopter. The Akela Crane was originally manufactured in Europe, then modified for American film production by Bob, Rob and Rick Johnson at Flu id Images in Portland, Oregon. It can go from ground level to five stories high in a single move, and can follow a subject over broken ground for more than 140 feet without track or overhead cables. Director Ricardo Mendez Matta's film , Everything Changes, includes a scene in which a woman runs away from her boyfriend's house following an argument. To convey a sense of heightened drama, Mendez Matta envisioned lensing the shot using a crane. The Akela's arm length enabled Mendez Matta to achieve the dramatic effect he was seeking. "The arm is so long, the circumference it describes is almost imperceptible," he says. "The viewer isn't predicting exactly where the camera will go. It also allowed me to stage a complicated scene with an actress, and let her do exactly what we wanted ." The scene began with a close-up, then the camera went over and around a three-story building. It followed the actress as she crossed a street, and ended with another close-up. T he Akela Crane is represented in the Los Angeles area by Andy Romanoff, soc, president of Louma LA. Even his years of crane experience didn't prepare him for the impact of shots made with a 70-foot arm. He recalls, "When I first saw the demo reel, I was convinced I was seeing a combination of dolly, zoom and arm movement. After talking to Bob Johnson and finding that the entire shot had been accomp lished with arm swing alone, I knew I had entered a world of new possibilities and I became as excited as I had been the first time I saw the Louma." The Akela can be built as a 45-, 58- or 71-foot crane. Even at full length, it carries a Hot Head II and up to 65 pounds of camera. With jobs just completed for cinem atographers such as Bob Primes, ASC and Alan Caso; upcoming sequences set for John Alonzo, ASC and Adam Greenberg, ASC and serious interest from Dean Semler, ASC and Januz Kaminski, the Akela Crane looks likely to be Hollywood 's hottest answer to the age-oldquestion, "How are we ever going to get the camera over there?"

page 62

The Akela Crane can go from ground level to five stories high in a single move, or fo llow a subject over broken ground for up to 140' without track or cables. Only the Akela Crane takes you from macro to helicopter without wind or danger. For rental information and a free demo reel contact:

â€˘

X T I OO , X TR250 , X TS400 Colo r N ega ti ve F i lms

Lighting sets the mood for

NYPD Blue. At times, the mood is somber; even lurid, so I'm working at extremely low light levels. But I always fee l comfortable using AGFA XTS 400 in these situations. It's incredible how well this film holds detail in the shadows. And I love its versatility. I've stretched it to both ends of the spectrum, and I'm always confident that skin tones will be beautiful. Technically, I know all the rules, but I like to break 'em. As a creative tool, Agfa film lets me capture what I normally wouldn't be able to. It's a perfect canvas with wh ich to start. What you build into it, where you take it, t hat's up to the individual. As for myself, I have yet to :

B i ng Sokolsky

~------- - ---------------

Director of Photograph y

reflect

For more information about Agfa film, call 800-568-1378.

the

exhaust its limits.

best

you

AGFA+

A COMMON FRAME continued from page 32

support that format for transfers, or something close to it. In the early days of the Academy format, the camera aperture was reduced in size, which left the film unexposed in the soundtrack area, and provided a thick frame line between frames. That reduced aperture is seldom (if ever) used now. Typically, cameras expose the entire (silent) frame. Today, the only difference between a camera set up for Academy versus one set up for Super 35 is that the Jens is shifted laterally 0.050 in. for optical centering of the tmage. Although film is almost never projected in Academy format today, it is the projectable Academy area that would ideally be visible on a 4x3 television display (assuming an Academyformat original). So if one were to transmit the entire film camera image area, a receiver adjusted for exactly 4.5% overscan would end up displaying the projectable area of film exactly. Efforts are currently underway to persuade receiver manufacturers to aim for a target overscan of 4%. If we assume that every set will have at least a 2% minimum overscan amount, that allows an approximate 2.5% safety margin to accommodate film weave and telecine alignment error. There is a slight aspect ratio difference between Academy-format film at 1.37:1, and 4x3 TV, at 1.33:1. People are often heard to make the comment that the two are exactly the same. This is a misconception. The old, silent aperture (which is the same as Super 35 today) was indeed 1.33:1. The Academy aperture that was originally selected restored this ratio, but the present aperture is slightly wider. This means that if one were to exactly match the width of the Academy image to the width of the TV picture, the height would not exactly match . Conversely, if one matches the height of the film image to the height of the TV picture, the width will not exactly match. So the choice must be made whether to match the height or the width (or perhaps neither, as is the case at present). Of course, in a transfer to 16x9 HDTV, one would match the width, because there would be unpage 64

used image height on the film anyway, and there is no need to retain NTSC compatibility. On the other hand, 16x9 widescreen-NTSC, or IDTV sets, share the same video signal as 4x3 NTSC sets. The IDTV set simply displays a selected number of lines out of the middle of the normal NTSC picture. While there could be separate home video versions for 4x3 NTSC and 16x9 IDTV sets, this is undesirable and should not be encouraged. For television broadcasts, there is no choice. They must share the same signal. Therefore, since a modern film transfer to NTSC video may end up being displayed on both 4x3 NTSC and widescreen IDTV sets, the most useful thing would be to establish a common scanned width that includes the entire film image width. This would make the area of the frame scanned for TV .864" x .648". Unfortunately, the height of .648" is quite a bit more than the Academy image height. And there are often undesirable objects at the upper and lower limits of the image, such as mic booms at the top, and dolly track at the bottom. Until the time comes when 4x3 receivers are obsolete, a safer practice would be to scan just to the Academy height. This gives a scanned area of .842" x .631", which results in a very slight image loss at the sides, if the video display has more than 2.5% width overscan. A compromise may be feasible, but the latter method has been proposed to the SMPTE working group on telecine practices. With such a transfer, viewed on a 16x9 display adjusted for 2% overscan, one would see essentially the same image seen in the theater (assuming that the proposal of using 1. 78: 1 for theatrical display was also adopted). We can now contemplate a telecine alignment chart that embodies the philosophy outlined. The safe action and safe title reference lines would be absent. As already discussed, those things are a fixed percentage of the television picture. If the operator enlarges or reduces the frame slightly, those references on the film become meaningless. Also, they are

likely to be revised if TV set manufacturers comply with the request for a reduced overscan. The only important references that should be present are: the actual border of the area to record, which is approximately the same as the Academy image border, and an indication of where the screen will cut off on an ideal display, which is basically the same as the projectable area. Rather than having separate lines that indicate these two perimeters, a single bold border line is used. The width of this line is significant. The line thickness is 2% of total image width at the sides, and 2% of image height at the top and bottom. The 2% thickness on all sides results in a combined 4% difference, corresponding to ideal receiver overscan. The outer edge indicates the total area of the film frame to be transmitted, and the inner edge indicates the projectable/viewable area. The single bold reference line simplifies the alignment pattern to the extent that multiple versions of it can be included on one test film. On the "Super 35" film, the full 4x3 aperture, a 16x9 shape of the same width but reduced height, and a smaller 4x3 box comprising an extraction from the center of a 16x9 composition would be represented. Thus one test film would replace three. Another version of the film would include the same three references, but slightly reduced in size and re-centered for the Academy frame. In the usual case where the full Academy height has not been protected during photography, the preferred 4x3 transfer would use the 16x9 indicator as a letterbox reference. The full image width would be preserved, and a matte would be added at the top and bottom to cover up the mic booms, lights, or other distractions that appear in the 4x3 picture. As a lessdesirable alternative, the inner rectangle could be used as a pan-and-scan size reference. The Warner Brothers plan for using a 16x9 film frame during photography for eventual HDTV use was mentioned. The planned 4x3 TV image is an extraction from the center of the 16x9 film image. The extra

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

image width that will appear on an HDTV set cannot appear on widescreen IDTV sets unless the picture 1s letterboxed m the NTSC domain, because of the need to share the signal with standard NTSC sets. Besides being used on alignment films, this same test image, or portions of it, could be helpful to cinematographers if it was applied to the groundglass in the camera viewfinder.

Conclusion This is a time of change and merging technologies in the audiovisual production community. It is no longer fashionable or desirable to enhance the differences between photo-chemical and photo-conductive capture or display methods. Both technologies have their strengths and weaknesses, and it is time to concentrate less on emphasizing the differences, and concentrate more on reconciling them. Establishing a common screen shape is one step toward maximizing compatibility, and mini-

Jugf Another

mizing the impact to compositions in transfers either to or from film. Also, both technologies have an effective "gross image" and a "net usable image", which are entirely equivalent. In film, they are defined as Camera Aperture and Projectable Aperture. In video, it is scanned/transmitted area and displayed area (due to receiver overscan). If the safety margins are adjusted to coincide, rather than adding to one another as they do currently, the loop is complete, bi-directional transfers with no image loss are possible, and the method of delivery to the viewer becomes transparent, as it should be.

Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Ed DiGiulio for his collaboration and guidance throughout this work, and the other SMPTE members and specialists who assisted: Si Becker, Bob Ringer, Rollie Zavada, Phil Mendelson, Mike Orton, Chris Cookson and Paul Klamer.

Advertiser>s Index AATON AGFA AKELA CRANE ALAN GORDON ENTERPRJSES ARRI CARTON! U.S.A. BODYCAM CHAPMAN STUDIO EQUIPMENT CINEMATOGRAPHY ELECTRONICS CLAIRMONT CAMERA CONSOLIDATED FILM INDUSTRIES DELUXE LABORATORIES EASTMAN KODAK 路 FISHER BOOMS & DOLLIES FUJI PHOTO FILM USA GREAT AMERICAN MARKET GUFFANTI FILM LABS INNOVISION OPTICS MOLE RICHARDSON NETTMANN & ASSOCIATIES O'CONNOR ENGINEERING OTTO NEMENZ INTERNATIONAL PANAVlSION PHOTO-SONICS PRESTON CAMERA SYSTEMS ROSCO SHOT MAKER SONY STUDIO FILM & TAPE TECHNICOLOR TYLER CAMERA SYSTEMS VICTOR DUNCAN

63 62 25 35 2 48,50 I 52 28, 29 16 inside front cover 6 39 inside back cover back cover 38 45, 61 17 33 54 3 67 24 42 23 36 insert 24-25 60 57 53 19

Day in

WukiW~ ------

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 65

llliiliiilHllll1111iill'i

nflTIDnflL [£nT£H fDH fILm flnD UIIlfD PH£S£HUflTIDn flT Tff £flm£Hl[fln fILm InSTITUTf By Gregory Lukow

he National Center for Film and Video Preservation was established in 1984 by The American Film Institute and the National Endowment for the Arts. Working with the public moving image archives, as well as with the film studios, television broad-casters, and independent producers and collectors, the Center plays a unique role in the effort to safeguard our nation's film and television heritage. The creation of the National Center was prompted by a sense of urgency: America and the world face the immediate danger of losing forever many of the images recorded on film and tape-images that have become the collective memory of the 20th century. Of the more than 21 ,000 feature-length films produced in the United States before 1951, only half exist today. The rest have been lost or destroyed or have deteriorated beyond repair. For newsreels, documentaries, and television programs, the survival rate is even less than half. Many of the materials that do survive are endangered. Pre-1951 theatrical films were produced on highly flammable nitrate film stock which inevitably decays, first into a sticky, gaseous gel and finally into a mass of fine brownish powder. Most color films will ultimately fade to an ugly magenta. The permanence and stability of videotape are still in doubt, and many television programs have been deliberately erased. The entire spectrum of our moving image history is vulnerable: classic silent films, major commercial releases, newsreels, documentaries, television shows, and independently made film and video art works. Over the years, American archivists and producers have worked long and hard to protect their film and television materials. Nevertheless, this enormous and complex task requires an instrument for national coordination. The National Center for Film and Video Preservation was created to fill this role, and continues The American Film Institute's long-established involvement with preservation. In the last decade, significant progress and tremendous change have characterized the preservation field. The National Center at the AFI has been a major factor in this change. The success of such acclaimed projects as the restoration of Lawrence Of Arabia and Spartacus have given an even higher profile to the public benefits of preservation. Perhaps most dramatic has been the growth of the archival community itself. Largely through the Center's page 66

coordinating efforts, a field once comprised of a handful of major archives in the 1970s has now grown to include over a hundred local, state and national institutions working together across the country. Important new groups have been established to help support this work, including the Film Foundation, founded by eight prominent film directors dedicated to preservation, and the National Film Preservation Board, established by Congress to help create a national registry of historic films. Technical challenges have continued to evolve, as has been seen with the recent discovery of the "vinegar syndrome," a form of deterioration that can attack improperly stored safety films. Meanwhile, as videotape formats proliferate, problems of tape instability and obsolescence continue to worsen, and a new universe of cable production remains to be assessed and preserved. The National Center continues in its effort to respond to these and other challenges in a rapidly changing field. Here are some of the Center's continuing programs and projects.

The ff fl ~ollection When The American Film Institute was created in 1967, one of its most important mandates was to initiate a coordinated effort to rescue original, unique, or best-surviving moving image materials and bring them into the nation's archives. No other institution was in a position to undertake this national-level effort, and the ongoing development of the AFI Collection has played a major role in transforming the preservation field. Today, the National Center continues to locate, identify and acquire a diverse range of film and video materials for inclusion in the AFI Collection, which now numbers over 21,000 titles. A broad spectrum of materials have been saved: feature films, short subjects, newsreels and documentaries, and television news, entertainment, and public affairs programming. By donating these materials to the Library of Congress and other archives across the country, where they are preserved and made available to the public, the AFI Collection has facilitated archival cooperation and fostered the concept of a "national collection." In addition, during the last several years the Center has acquired from overseas archives several hundred rare silent-era feature films and short subjects that previously had disappeared and were no longer available in this country. These international repatriation projects have been coordinated by the Center on behalf of the major U.S. archives, and involved the national archives of Australia, the Netherlands, and New Zealand.

Special Preseruation Projects The Center has also overseen exemplary preservation and restoration projects which have brought the issue of preservation to the forefront of public attention. Examples have included Birthright (1924), one of the few surviving silent films of pioneering black filmmaker Oscar Micheaux, Annie Laurie (1927), a previously lost MGM film starring Lillian Gish, Lost Horizon, Frank Capra's 1937 classic, and a joint project with the UCLA Film and Television Archive to preserve the surviving nitrate negative of Orson Welles' unfinished 1942 film, It's All True. Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

flfl/nEfl film Presel'lliltion lirants Program The National Center administers the AFI/NEA Film Preservation Program, which annually awards more than $350,000 to archival institutions for the preservation of unique or best-surviving copies of motion pictures. This is ~he nation's o~ly ongoing grants program for moving ~mage preservation. During the program's history, approximately $7 ,500,000 has been distributed to several dozen institutions and has been matched by total project expenditures of more than $15,000,000.

processes all filrnographic data compiled through the ongoing AFI Catalog project.

Teleuision ilnd Uideotilpe Preseruiltion

Although deteriorating nitrate film remains a critical problem, the Center is also working with the major television and video collections to create and implement a nationally coordinated plan for the largely uncharted area of television and videotape preservation. To address this need, the Center has initiated a number of projects. These have included the two-year "National ~?~atori~m on the Disposal of Television Programming," The flfl [atalog of feilture films m1tiated m 1986, and the preparation of comprehensive ~he AFI Catalog project is a monumental undertaking, national guidelines for "The Selection of Television nothmg less than the documentation of the national filPrograms for Retention and Preservation." In 1987, the mography. It provides invaluable information to a diverse Center organized the first national conference for local set of users, including archivists, catalogers, historians, . televi~ion ne~s archives~ th~ largest and fastest growing social scientists and the general public. It is recognized as const~tuency m the movmg image archival field today. In the definitive reference work on American film production. 1990 1t completed the negotiation of an agreement between The current multi-volume series provides the complete Capital Cities/ABC Inc., the UCLA Film and Television record of American feature-length motion pictures on a Archive, and the Museum of Television and Radio that decade-by-decade basis. Volumes for the Teens, Twenties, facilitated the donation of the history of ABC's entertainand Sixties have already been published over the past ment programming- over 20,000 programs from 1950 to de~ad.e, and most recently, the three-volume, 3,800 page 1980 - to the national collection. Currently, the Center is Th1_rt1es . volume was published by the University of overseeing a federally-funded grant project to write and Cal1forma Press, completing over five years of research the publish a basic curatorial manual covering all aspects Catalog staff of the National Center. mvolved in the administration of television newsfilm and Cataloging is now well underway on the next volume videotape collections. of the Catalog, covering the decade of the 1940s. Prior rese_arch on all titles produced during this decade, as well as lnter-ftrdriuill [oordination dunng the decade of the 1950s, was completed in 1990. To promote cooperation and communication, the In October 1993, the Film Beginnings, 1893-1910 volCenter assists in coordinating the work of the nation's ume of the Catalog was made available for distribution as archives and archival constituencies. It serves as the ~n internally-published work-in-progress. This volume Secretariat for the Association of Moving Image Archivists 1-?cludes basic production data and primary reference cita(formerly known as the Film and Television Archives t10ns on the more than 17, 700 films released in the U.S. ~dv_isory Committee), the only national professional assoduring the pre-teens era, from the beginnings of the cineciation for the hundreds of working film and video ma, through the nickelodeon era, and to the dawn of the archivists ~cross the country. Largely through the Center's feature film industry. effo:ts, this group has grown and developed dramatically dunng the past decade. The Center maintains the associaThe UiltiDnill moulng lmilge Diltilhi15t! tion's mailing list, assists in organizing its annual conferThe building of a National Moving Image Database ences, and publishes the quarterly AMIA Newsletter. (NAMID), providing comprehensive information on the . The ~enter also works to build bridges and exchange moving image holdings of American archives and producmformation between the archives, the film and television ~rs, is the Center's most complex and ambitious project. It industry, and a broad range of laboratories, manufacturers 1s a challenge that no other institution could undertake. To and equipment vendors. It develops committees and semdate, NAMID has acquired and processed over 200,000 records describing the film, televisionand video holdings of ina~s in s~c? areas of mutual concern as storage, catalogmg, tr~mmg, a?d new prese~vation technologies. A key nearly 40 participant organizations. part of this effort 1s the Centers role as Secretariat for The To assist in the process of building the database, the Film Foundation, a group of eight major film directors, Center initiated the NAMID Data Entry and Conversion headed by Martin Scorsese, dedicated to film preservation. Program in 1988. The program has made available annu_Through these and other continuing efforts, the ally~ minimum of $100,000 to acquire holdings data from National Center for Film and Video Preservation is workarchives across the country. In the process, it fosters the in_g to e~sure that our precious legacy of moving images development and use of national-level standards for will survive for future generation. For more information describing and cataloging moving image materials. NAMID's objective is to centralize archival and user on t?~ Cent~r, or the Association of Moving Image Arch1v1sts, wnte to The National Center for Film and Video information that previously was fragmented or unobtainPreservation, The American Film Institute, 2021 North able,_t~ereby providing a vital tool that is an essential preWestern Avenue., Los Angeles, California 90027 reqms1te to any coherent preservation effort. NAMID also

page 68

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

SC>C

,...,E~S

ANNOUNCEMENT OF LIFETIME AWARD WINNERS 1994 S.O.C. AWARDS BANQUET

The Seventh Lifetime Achievement Awards Banquet will be held at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Marina Del Rey on ARTISTS' RIGHTS & WRONGS Saturday evening, October 29, 1994. The first International Artists' Rights Symposium, Los Angeles Mayor Richard Riordan is scheduled to held 27-29 April 94 at the Hotel Nikko in Beverly Hills open the festivities which will feature the presentation of brought out prominent filmmakers, artists, and production the Governors Award for lifetime achievement in the cineexecutives from around the world. The debate concerns the matic media to Steven Spielberg. rights of artists to protect their works from misrepresentaThe President's Award for service to the Society will go tion, manipulation, alteration by others, such as, copyright to long-time member of the Board of Governors, owners. Membership Chairman and Awards Banquet organizer, The cinematic media is highly collaborative in nature, Howie Block, soc. with each craft in the chain, contributing in varying degree Recipients of the Lifetime Achievement Awards, as to the final result. Who is the author? France has deter- voted by the membership, will be: Bill Johnson, soc., film mined that three craft categories serve that purpose-the camera operator; George Meyers, video camera operator; writer, the director, and the cinematographer. Each of Phil Stern, still photographer; and Harry Young, assistant these artists has the right to withhold permission to alter cameraman. his or her finished work in any way. All who have attended past Awards Banquets have said Content, plot and story line are the principal concerns that it is the warmest, friendliest and most enjoyable indusof the writer. Continuity of characterization, emotional try affair of the year. Seating is limited, so plan now to content and the ebb and flow of the action are prime con- attend. Invitations will be in the mail soon. See you there! cerns of the director. Quality of the visual image is the S.O.C. LUNCHEON PROVIDES FOOD FOR THOUGHT overriding concern of the cinematographer. The Society quarterly membership luncheon, held at The writer does not want the story line manipulated or the Sportsmen's Lodge on Saturday, 30 April 94, provided tampered with. The director does not want the rhythm, more to chew on than the excellent food . pace and logic of the visual piece to be diluted or destroyed. Guest of honor, Vilmos Zsigmond, ASC, captured the The cinematographer does not want the color, quality and attention of the capacity turn-out by relating a little of his lighting balance of his or her finished work modified in any background from film school in Hungary, coming to way. America, his early film work here, and his subsequent and Some of the problem areas are: Arbitrary shortening current film production experiences in his illustrious and segmenting for TV, colorization of black & white films, career. pan & scan of ultra-wide aspect ratio formats for TV, digiFollowing the luncheon, the new 70' Ake!a crane was tized replacement of actors' heads/bodies/voices with other introduced by Andy Romanoff, soc. of Louma LA to the actors' heads/bodies/voices. membership attending, who then had a hands-on opportuIn order to protect the integrity of their work, the nity to remotely control (by electronic "gear head") the authors may provide, or authorize, a modified version of camera, which was mounted on a control head attached to their product, shortened and with specified places (such as the end of the crane arm, as the crane was manually fade-outs and sequence changes) for the insertion of commaneuvered in various configurations. mercials, for exhibition on commercial television. NATIONAL RECOGNITION FOR THE SOC MAGAZINE Under United States copyright law, the copyright Our Society magazine, THE OPERATING CAMERAowner of a work is considered the author, and retains the MAN, has received recognition from the Western right to exploit that work commercially in the marketplaces of the world. This clearly has been interpreted to mean that Publishers Association as one of the most improved nationmodification of the work is implicit in the rights of the al magazines to date. The affair took place at the Airport copyright owner to the exclusion of any rights the Hyatt Hotel on Friday, 8 April 94. Although we didn't receive the first place "Maggie" artist/creator (true author) may claim. Considerable negotiation needs to be done before artists' rights to the patri- award, we were one of the five finalists and were a strong mony and integrity of their works are fully protected from runner-up. As you are all aware, it has taken a great deal of time, the ravages of uncaring commercial exploitation. The final solution will necessarily accommodate both effort and dedication to plan and put out a magazine of the artist's rights to protect and preserve the identity and consistently high quality and character, even on its present integrity of his or her work and the rights of the owner to semi-annual basis. reasonably commercially exploit the work. All our readership has been supportive in their praise This symposium, priced at $300, was available at no of the articles and look of our magazine. In fact, there has charge to members of the SOC - we were well represented been significant request for the magazine to go quarterly. by Randy Robinson, Chris Moon, Bill Molina, Tom Congratulations to all the staff and contributors who have Munshower, Phil Schwartz, Wynn Hammer and Bill Hines. given so much to the success of this publication. By Bill Hines, soc

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

page 69

SOC LETTERS

WE ENCOURAGE YOUR LETTERS AND V/[WS ON THE ISSUES EMPACTING YOUR CRAFT

WAYNE KENNAN,

soc

Dear SOC, I wonder if the folks developing the high definition television system have taken into account the following: •Will a teal sweater look teal or blue or green as it now does? •Will the head room be set by the camera operator, an engineer at the transmission site, or the viewer? •Will skin tones be set by me, an engineer at the transmission site, the viewer, or all three of us as they now are? I could go on and on but I guess the big question is, will there be a continuity of image integrity from the point it leaves the cinematographer's control to the point of viewing? I mean, if they're going to make it "better", why not make it as good as it can be in all aspects. A wider screen with higher resolution just isn't enough for our taxpaying consumers to go to all that expense. And while we're at it, how's this for an interactive TV idea? Broadcast old (and new) black and white classics and let the viewer colorize them himself. What fun we could have with H ow GREEN W AS MY VALLEY, not to mention SCHIN DLER'S LIST.

MICHAEL FREDIANI,

soc

Dear SOC: The new format, 1.78:1, that we are now dealing with is a bit of a conundrum. The problem is that the studio heads, producers and directors are of three minds concerning this new aspect ratio. The studios are adopting it so that the shows we are filming will play on the future wide-screen televisions, thereby maximizing profits. On the other hand, episodic television producers seem divided on the issue; they would like to make it work, but don't want to sacrifice the budget to accommodate a scene that is difficult to stage in the 1. 78: 1 format as well as the traditional 1.33: 1 format. Finally, television directors don't seem to have any great interest in 1. 78: 1 because it apparently is not a strict edict to follow. In many instances, directors choose to stickblack tape around the border of 1.33: 1 on their video monipage 70

tors, since that is all that they are immediately concerned with. They don't want to be bothered with the wide-screen composition. So where does all of this leave the Director of Photography and the Camera Operator? Unfortunately, smack in the middle. Basically, what I have experienced this past season as the Camera Operator on L.A. Law is a lot of frustration in trying to serve two masters of composition. One example of this dilemma takes place when we shoot in the large conference room set with its 15 foot conference table, occupied by 9 lawyers and a wall of glass separating the room from the large outer office area. Shooting a "master" on the move is usually no problem, format-wise, though reflections in the glass are sometimes hard to work out, yet coverage around the table is another story. Every effort is made to use two cameras to expedite efficiency and herein lies the rub. With two actors seated side-by-side, the A Camera sets for a two shot and the B Camera sets for a single of one actor. The problem with the 1.78:1 AS CURRENTLY DEFINED is that the B Camera ends up with a portion of the other actor in the frame. To slightly separate both actors to accommodate B Camera ruins the A Camera shot - so the easy compromise is made - ignore the wide-screen format and get the shots! Another example I can site takes place in one of our courtroom sets, where two massive walls are removable, a section at a time. It is then possible to shoot a more interesting shot, as well as to use larger lighting units, move in the sound boom, other equipment and people. When it comes time to shoot a medium shot of an actor in the witness box with a section of wall missing off to the side behind him, we are presented with a problem: Do we take the time to have the wall section replaced, or do we shoot the coverage as is, which is fine for the usual 1.33: 1 format? You guessed it ... we continue without the wall section. In closing, having shot approximately 20 episodes of L.A.Lawwith the mixed format ground glass configura-

tion, there is probably not one full episode suitable for viewing as shot in the new wide-screen format exclusively. It's too bad not to have done an entire show for broadcast in 1.78:1, but I'm sure it will be done by some brave network someday. Let's just hope that these previous episodes never see the light of day in 1.78:1, because we can't take our names off the credits.

DOUGLAS KNAPP,

...

soc

.980

HDTV I EUROPEAN RATIO 1.78: 1 TV TRANSMISSION .945 x .531

.735

Additional Arca Included in U.S. Television Ratio 1.33. 1 TV APERTURE .945 X .711

The anticipation of HDTV broadcasting worldwide has created an awkward period of trans1t1on. Producers are conscious of the fact that the future value of their production depends upon it being High Definition ready -both in terms of resolution AND aspect ratio. At present, FILM is the only way to guarantee resolution for any future High Definition medium, in all worldwide broadcast standards. Aspect ratio is the other concern. Many producers have opted for the "dual standard" of a small 4x3 television frame within a wider 16x9 HDTV frame. The common top & bottom framelines work well, but the left & right framelines create untold difficulties to keep them "clean" and are MOST OFTEN ignored for the 16x9 frame at this time. Today's filmed production is being seen on a 4x3 screen, and directors often require that Camera Operators frame for that format alone. We are in a TRANSITIONAL FRAMING STANDARD. This won't be with us in ten years, but we must have a workable compromise until then. In the 4-perf Super 35 format, the increased width of the frame

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994

allows for increased height of the scanned television frame. Base the 4x3 frame for US television on the full Super 35 frame. Set a common topline for both 4x3 and 16x9 and use common sidelines as well. The only change required for the difference in aspect ratio is the bottom frame line. In 4x3 television, the full frame is transferred, resulting in better resolution than we now enjoy. For HDTV, the negative area is the same as we now use, but framing is much more compatible with production requirements of today. This transitional framing standard gets the best of both formats, without the production and post-production headaches of the current dual standard.

In Memory of Craig Denault

In Memory of Harry H. Wolf,

ASC

The late Harry Wolf was a veteran of 50 years in motion pictures and past president of the ASC. He left college in 1934 to become an assistant cameraman at Monogram, but soon moved to Selznick International Pictures. He was the last surviving member of the camera crew of Gone With The Wind, and worked on the visual effects of many Selznick productions. His familiarity with the three-strip Technicolor cameras led him to work as a color cinematography advisor at all major studios. He later became a director of photography in television and photographed more than 500 shows. Harry received four Emmy nominations and won the award twice for episodes of Columbo and Baretta. He died November 10, 1993. Society of Operati11.g Cameramen

On April 15, 1994, we of the Motion Picture Industry lost a fellow filmmaker and friend, Craig Denault. In terms of years, Craig was a young man, but in terms of experience, Craig was a veteran of this industry with many years behind the camera, and an equal amount of credits to show for his labors. Craig's passing was untimely and leaves us with a void filled with sorrow and sadness at our loss. The memories we have of Craig are of a dashing energetic man with a love of the camera. Craig will be truly missed by all of us. He leaves behind three children, his mother, father, and ab ther.

of the first documentaries dealing with the painful issue of racism as seen through the eyes of children. This documentary is now in the library at the New York Museum of Modern Art. As an assistant cameraman and then cameraman he worked on such movies as Don't Drink the Water, Godfather I & II, Serpico, Jaws, Up the Sandbox, All the President's Men and Who is Harry Kellerman, just to name a few. His first TV series NYPD began his career in the world of television. In 1975 he moved his family to California and worked steadily on such TV series as Airwolf, Chips and Magnum PI. In between the TV series he worked on, he also shot films such as Lost Boys and The Last Dragon. When offered the job of Director of Photography for the series Spenser for Hire, he was also able to try out his directorial talents. Directing was something he really loved. While working as Director of Photography on In The Heat Of The Night, and Murder She Wrote he continued to direct some of these shows as well. Peter was a tireless worker and always gave everything he had to any project in which he was involved. He knew his craft very well. Expecting the best from himself and from those with whom he worked was how he lived his life. The results speak for themselves. He left a legacy of work behind. His family and friends will miss him always.

In Memory of Peter Salim, soc Peter Salim 路passed away suddenly on Feb. 2nd. He was 54. Raised in Buffalo New York he began his career in the theater as an actor in the Studio Arena Theater. The summer of 1961 the troop traveled to Monaco and participated in an international festival where they took first prize for their performance of View From a Bridge. After serving two years in the army (he was stationed in Manhattan as a medic), he began his exploration of the world behind the camera. He and two friends shot the documentary I Wonder Why, winning the New York Film Critics award. This film was one

Summer 1994

page 71

~Society of Operating Cameramen 1994 CHARTER Parker Bartlett Paul Basta Michael Benson Bob Bergdah1 Howard Block Jerry Callaway David Calloway Mike Chevalier Steve Conant Sam Drummy Joe Epperson Mike Ferra Ron Francis Bill Gahret Gil Haimson Peter Hapke Bill Hines John Huneck Wayne Kennan Bob Keys Norm Langley Tom Laughridge Brice Mack III Ed Morey Tom Munshower Lee Nakahara JayNefcy Rik Nervik King Nicholson Leigh Nicholson John Nogle Dan Norris Skip Norton DavidNoweU Wayne Orr Richard Pria: Ernie Reed Chris Schwiebert Mike Scott Hal Shiffman Roger Smith Mike St. Hilaire Ray Stella John Stephens Carol Sunflower Joe Valentine ACTIVE Art Adams James Anderson Ted Ashton Jr. Bill Asman Brett Babcock Paul Babin Liz Bailey Vincent Baldino Gerald Banales Stewart Barbee Ed Barger Louis Barlia Tom Barron Richard Benda Bob Berry Al Bettcher Joe Blaisdell James Blanford Peter Bonilla David Boyd

page 72

Billy Bragg Garrett Brown Bob Bryan Robert Carmichael Joe Chess Jr. Dana Christiaansen Charles Cohen Tom Connole Freddie Cooper John Corso Ron Courtney Ivan Craig Ri~hard Cullis Eward Dadulalc Maury Da len Rocky Danielson Ray de la Motte David Diano Alexis DuPont David Elkins James Etheridge Tom Faigh Jerome Fauci Michael Ferris Kenneth Ferro Bruce Finn Howard Ford Thomas Fraser David Frederick Micllael Frediani Jag Gaynor Rusty Geller Wayne Getchell Allen Gonzales John Goode John Gutierrez Anette Haellmigk

Dean Hall

Dennis Hall Terry Harkin Ronald High Patricia Hill William Hirsh Jeffrey Hoffman Joachim Hoffmann David lrete ~e Isaacks Michael Jones David Ju4f Bur1 Kinney John Kiser Doug as KrlaRP Dan I<neece Jerry KulhaWik Robert La Bonge Jeffrey Laszlo Henry Lebo Mark Levin Moshe Levin Michael Little Patrick Longman George Loomis Allan Lumli Kenji Luster Braden Lutz Cam Macdonald Constantine Makris James Mann John Maskall

Richard Mason Stan McClain Don McCuaig Ron McManus Mike Meinardus Robert Mills William Molina Joseph Montgomery Christopher Moon Jeff Moore Denis Moran Dohald Morea Joshua Morton Rick Neff Michael Negrin Chuck Nicklin Ed Nielsen Randy Nolen Philip Oetiker Russel Ofria Lucio Olivieri Michael O'Shea David Parrish Aaron Pazanti Robert Peebles David Plenn Ronald Precious Robert Presley Laszlo Regos Bernard Reilly Herb Roberts Randall Robinson Rick Roblinson David Rohman Andy Romanoff Harvey Rubin James Rush Frank Ruttencutter Steven Schoedsack Philip Schwartz. Guy Skinner Johnathan Smith Sandy Spooner Stephen St. John Jonathan Smith Stephen St. John Craig Stewart Michael Stramisky David Stump Bill Swearingen Gene Talvin Richard Tiedemann John Toll Daniel Turrett Pernell Tyus Robert Ulland Gregory Van Der Veer Bill Waldman Victoria Walker John Ward Bill Williams Ben Wolf Elizabeth Ziegler ASSOCIATE Gary Armstrong Eugene Ashbrook Chuck Barbee MitcheU Block

Joseph Calloway Bruce Cardozo Jeff Clark Christopher Dawson James Dennett Ronald Deveaux George Dibie Kevin Downey Robert Feller Dan Fetler Gerald Finnerman John Flinn Ill Steve Gainer Richard Garbutt James Garvey Micheal Gaun Harvey Genkins Wayne Goldwyn Bud Gray Jeff Greene Kevin Haggerty Donald Halliday Wynn Hammer. John Hill Charles House John Huggins Philip Hurn Gregory Irwin Chris Ishii George La Fountaine Stevan Larner John LeBlanc Brian LeGrady Dr. Ellen Matsumoto Annie McEveety John McPherson Mark Melville Charles Minsky Karin Modlin Gary Moore Sol Negrin John Newby krman Parker c Jetson Pfoutz ed Polmanski Serge Poupis Bill Reiter Parker Roe Marvin Rush Lee Safar Richard Salvatore Boo Seaman. Jan Sluchak Kurt Soderling Owen Stephens Kenneth Wade Haskell Wexler Shaun Wheeler Tony Yarlett

Jay Roth Frank Stanley George Toscas RETIRED Bernie Abramson Rupert Benson Jr. Vee Bodrero Don Burch Phil Caplan Bruce Catlin Bill Clark Dick Colean Cliff Concialdi Jim Connell Jerry Fuller Ralph Gerling Jeff Goldenberg Jerry Good Don Cropper Lutz Hapke John Hussey Bill Johnson David Kurland Steve Lydecker O~enMarsh

Bob Marta

Michael McClary Emmanuel Metaxas Arnold Rich David Robman Rosen Jim Saper Lou Schwartz Joe Steuben David Sutton John Thoeny Sen Walnum CORPORATE AFFTUATE AGFA DIVISION, MIW INC.

Toni Robertson ARRIFLEX CoRPORATlON

Bill Russell KooAK Co. Donald Henderson John Mason

EAsrMAN

Fun FILM USA,

INC.

H.A. Hap Parker LEoNARD STUDIO EQUIP.

Leonard Chapman Charles Huenergardt MATIHEWS ELECTRONICS,

Bob Nettman

Orro NEMENZ INT. INC. Karl Kresser PANAVISION INT.

Tracy Langan PHOTO-SONI CS, INC.

Conrad Kiel HONORARY Stephanie Benson Bruce Doering Bill Fraker Ron KeUey Wesley Lambert Jerry Lewis Dr. A. Linn Murphree David Myers

SHOTMAKER

Derek Church TECHNICOLOR

Adam Chuck VICTOR DUNCAN, INC.

Frank Marasco

Society of Operating Cameramen

Summer 1994