Jump to content


Photo

Filming in Chernobyl


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#41 Micah Fernandez

Micah Fernandez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 82 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 December 2006 - 12:01 AM

As far as filming on the actual location, I have nothing further to contribute except to mention that our business is dealing with believability, not reality. I'm sure any capable outfit would be able to build a fake location that would be closer to what you as director would require than filming on ground zero. And that's minus the hassle of having a consultant for the radioactivity, wearing suits, lining sensitive equipment with lead. I highly doubt those "authentic" aspects of production would leak onto the celluloid and make a better movie.

As far as the story, if people here think that it sounds like a B-movie, it's only because you've pitched it as such. Group of crazy youths off on an adventure get more than they bargained for by stumbling onto a hidden secret that forces them to fight for their lives. Classic B plot line. :)
  • 0

#42 Robert Glenn

Robert Glenn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 247 posts
  • Other

Posted 23 December 2006 - 01:17 AM

I am no expert on all this, but I would think that #1 you get permission, #2 you get a lot of lead vests like what they use for dental work.. or foil maybe. Put it on the ground under wherever you're filming or working at in order to keep gamma rays from exposing the film.. The radiation will come from the ground up I imagine... keep all of your film shielded in lead until the very moment that you need it.
Health-wise I think that apart from hot spots you'll be ok.. Enough time will have past so that most particulates will be absorbed by the fauna such that you won't be so much at risk of breating it.. alpha and beta particles are another issue altogether and I guess you'll need to talk that over with a nuclear scientist
  • 0

#43 Pavel Mitov

Pavel Mitov

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 December 2006 - 03:58 AM

While permission will be hell to obtain (unless you have deep pocket, I guess), the radiation will most likely spare your stock. GThe radiation from the gamma rays (the only one that can penetrate through the metal magazine of your film) is long gone. You don't have to worry about the stock and you'll be relativelly safe provided that you don't sleep with days at that place... Currently, you'll get more radiation if you spend a month on a aircraft carrier, pass 100 times through an x-ray machine in the airports, or get 40 x-ray pictures taken in the hospital than to shoot for a several days there. Another question is how you'll manage to convince you crew and actors to join :D

Actually, alpha-particles can be stopped by a sheet of paper or your skin. As long as you won't ingest an alpha-emmiting source you are OK.

Edited by Pavel Mitov, 23 December 2006 - 04:00 AM.

  • 0

#44 Max Jacoby

Max Jacoby
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2955 posts
  • Other

Posted 23 December 2006 - 09:15 AM

Actually, alpha-particles can be stopped by a sheet of paper or your skin. As long as you won't ingest an alpha-emmiting source you are OK.

That line there sounds very familiar...
  • 0

#45 Hal Smith

Hal Smith
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2280 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • OKC area

Posted 23 December 2006 - 09:49 AM

The good news are that everyone will know that one or another form of mutants inhabit the town before they actually see the film ..........

Emil,

There's discussion by nuclear engineers and scientists in the following thread concerning what went wrong at Chernobyl. I thought you might find it handy for research while writing your script.

http://www.physicsfo...ead.php?t=47795

For the curious (morbid?) there's discussion as to what went wrong at Three Mile Island in the thread.
  • 0

#46 Dan Goulder

Dan Goulder
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1259 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 December 2006 - 11:11 AM

The radiation will take some 600 years to decrease to tolerable levels again.

On the positive side, since this event took place 20 years ago, you'll still be left with only 580 years to work on your script.
  • 0

#47 Rupe Whiteman

Rupe Whiteman
  • Sustaining Members
  • 336 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 23 December 2006 - 11:22 AM

... Channel 4 shot a documentary about Chernobyl recently and the area is very eeire - wild animals roaming deserted streets and towerblocks, with trees now growing out of abandoned buildings and in the middle of football stadiums. As the crew shot in the actual building they constantly monitored geiger counters and were not allowed to film for long because of the exposure...

It would truly be an amazing location to film in (and you wouldn't have a problem with crowd control!) but as a crew member I'd really have my doubts. A day or two fine, but a number of weeks?!; not for me thanks but no thanks!.. Humans aren't meant to glow in the dark...

- Sorry I can't remember the name of the doco but it was fronted by one of the Theroux brothers if that's any help.

Good luck with it,

Rupe Whiteman UK
  • 0

#48 Kenny N Suleimanagich

Kenny N Suleimanagich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 902 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 25 December 2006 - 03:35 AM

Did you mean this?

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/
Remember, that there are loads of good places to shoot in scandinavia that virtually deserted.

Check out also Estonia and maybe other baltic countries. If you do a little scouting you can find deserted places with a soviet "feel".

Hope this helps.

Actually, Belarus, Estonia, and countries in tha region have higher radiation levels because the entire redioactive cloud blew over them and rained heavy water.

Emil,

What i suggest you do is get lead lockboxes to store your film in, load your film inside of a lead bag or tent or whatever, and make a lead barney or blimp for the camera. You should keep in mind that when (i think) Faraday was in his laboratory he had uranium in a droor on top of photopaper and he discovered that the paper was exposed. Also keep in mind that light is visible radiation, and although incomparable, it may give you different film results.
  • 0

#49 Leo Anthony Vale

Leo Anthony Vale
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2010 posts
  • Other
  • Pittsburgh PA

Posted 26 December 2006 - 03:50 PM

Actually, Belarus, Estonia, and countries in tha region have higher radiation levels because the entire redioactive cloud blew over them and rained heavy water.

Heavy water is not radioactive. it is a moderator used for slowing nuclear reactions.
& occurs in one part to 5000 parts in standard water.
So don't expect it to rain heavy water.

http://www.straightd...heavywater.html

http://www.fas.org/n.../nuke/heavy.htm

Dont be unscientific.
Check your facts before you post!

---El Pedante
  • 0

#50 K Borowski

K Borowski
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3905 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • I.A.T.S.E. Local # 600 Eastern Region

Posted 26 December 2006 - 04:26 PM

Sorry to make light of the subject, but with the less-than-serious story idea here, perhaps you could figure out a scale to meter film exposure with a Geiger counter? B)

Agreed, there is a lot of misinformation about radiation. Airline attendants and, I'd assume, pilots, get the equivalent of several hundred x-rays a year because our universe is naturally radioactive, from the Big Bang, presumably. When you go out into space, or up in the atmosphere in a plane alot, you don't have the Earth to protect you and you're bombarded with that radiation at much higher levels, still without any adverse effect. Radiation exposure is cumulative, and is based on your age. It's kind of confusing to measure, as there are different types of radiation, alpha, beta, gamma, different measuring units based on intensity, and harm to human tissue. So if you have someone say 20 yrs. old, radiation is going to be worse for him than it would be for a 70-year old, because the 70-year-old man won't have to worry (probably) about what he'll be doing in 50 yrs., whereas the 20-year-old probably would.

It's best (if you're still serious about doing this film) to consult with experts, probably people with the Ukrainian or Russian governments before you even attempt it. Again, this has been done before, as in "Pripyat", but by people that know what they're doing, not by indie "let's throw caution to the wind and make a zombie movie on the site of an international tragedy" filmmakers. Personally, if you showed up at my front door and said you wanted to make a zombie movie about a tragedy that occured to me, I'd want to hit you. Someone said that legally there's nothing wrong with what you are doing, but I firmly believe that, morally, there is.

Regards,

~Karl
  • 0


Abel Cine

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

CineLab

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Paralinx LLC

Willys Widgets

Ritter Battery

The Slider

FJS International, LLC

Technodolly

CineTape

Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Technodolly

Wooden Camera

The Slider

Rig Wheels Passport

rebotnix Technologies

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Willys Widgets