Jump to content


Photo

How much qualifies as waste?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 David Calson

David Calson
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 269 posts
  • Other
  • Georgia

Posted 29 May 2008 - 01:35 PM

I've heard some people say less than 100' others 150' and still those that say 200'

Also, what about 16mm?
  • 0

#2 Stephen Price

Stephen Price
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 84 posts
  • Digital Image Technician
  • London

Posted 29 May 2008 - 03:05 PM

It really depends on the production and the situation, but i will usually waste up to 120' on 16mm and around 100' on 35mm, if i have to. The least the better though, obviously.

steve p
  • 0

#3 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7118 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 29 May 2008 - 04:12 PM

For myself I trey not to waste anything more than 50 ft on 16mm or 100ft on 35mm. Never know when those extra seconds might help.
  • 0

#4 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 May 2008 - 04:47 PM

In 35, I used to save anything over 10 ft -- you could spool it down for SLR stills. All you need is cans and time.



-- J.S.
  • 0

#5 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 29 May 2008 - 08:18 PM

In 35, I used to save anything over 10 ft -- you could spool it down for SLR stills. All you need is cans and time.


Now that's what I call resourceful!
  • 0

#6 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 29 May 2008 - 11:54 PM

I try not to save anything under 150 for 35mm. If it's under that but over what production says to keep (often 100 feet, I was asked once to keep any short end over 50 feet!), I'll sometimes write off the difference as a "camera test." Nobody wants to load, shoot, and download short ends that only get you a minute of footage. It just ends up being a waste of time and money as I see it.

Edited by Chris Keth, 29 May 2008 - 11:55 PM.

  • 0

#7 Satsuki Murashige

Satsuki Murashige
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3510 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • San Francisco, CA

Posted 30 May 2008 - 12:24 AM

... I'll sometimes write off the difference as a "camera test."

And then stash it for scratch tests and dummy loads. ;)
  • 0

#8 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 May 2008 - 12:56 AM

And then stash it for scratch tests and dummy loads. ;)


True dat! :ph34r: Or still camera.
  • 0

#9 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 30 May 2008 - 01:17 AM

It just ends up being a waste of time and money as I see it.


Or it could end up giving an aspiring filmmaker a chance to shoot on 35mm for a price they could not afford otherwise. I would have no problem using 100' short ends of 35mm if it meant I could get it for pennies on the dollar. I guess one man's junk is another man's gold.
  • 0

#10 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 30 May 2008 - 10:03 PM

Or it could end up giving an aspiring filmmaker a chance to shoot on 35mm for a price they could not afford otherwise. I would have no problem using 100' short ends of 35mm if it meant I could get it for pennies on the dollar. I guess one man's junk is another man's gold.


That's very true. Those short ends never REALLY go to waste. I just don't want to corner myself into loading teeny-tiny loads all day when I could simplify things a bit and save set time by facilitating fewer camera reloads. On a small production, the savings on short ends like that may very well outweigh the time it takes to load and download them and to reload the camera many more times per day, then again it might not.
  • 0

#11 Matt Kelly

Matt Kelly
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 85 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Pasadena, CA

Posted 02 June 2008 - 01:10 AM

Just to add...the amount of waste depends mostly on the budget of the show.  It's ultimately up to production how much you should waste, but a lot of times it's up to you because they don't really understand why you have to "waste" film anyway.  I've gotten away with wasting less than 200' on a number of low budget (1-4 million) 35mm films without question.  :P

Right now tho, I'm on a film that's forcing us to shoot ONLY 400 loads and short ends, because they happen to have about 60 thousand feet of it leftover from a previous movie.  They don't seem to realize that once we hit a scene with one take mags, it'll slow down production a LOOOOT.  We'll see how it goes...
  • 0

#12 Bruce Taylor

Bruce Taylor
  • Sustaining Members
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Los Angeles

Posted 02 June 2008 - 07:43 PM

Just to add...the amount of waste depends mostly on the budget of the show. They don't seem to realize that once we hit a scene with one take mags, it'll slow down production a LOOOOT.  


Very true. Interestingly, there is a great combination of short ands and cheap camera. If one is shooting MOS, the Russian Konvas with quick change mags and $0.06 a foot short ends (thank you ReelGoodFilm.com !) is hard to beat. Also, as a shameless plug for Indi35.com, a 200' short end in a 2 perf camera (like a Kinor 35H Techniscope mod http://www.indi35.com/2_perf_techniscope ) is the equivalent of a 400' load in standard 4 perf.

Lots of ways to skin a cat.


Bruce Taylor
www.Indi35.com
  • 0

#13 Vanessa Ward

Vanessa Ward

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • 2nd Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles, CA

Posted 03 June 2008 - 12:13 AM

True dat! :ph34r: Or still camera.


I heard no place will develop ENG anymore for stills. Is this true?
A friend of mine recently got a bulk loader, and was excited to use some 5218 100' short ends, however the second told him it wouldn't work anymore.
  • 0

#14 Paul Bruening

Paul Bruening

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2858 posts
  • Producer
  • Oxford, Mississippi

Posted 03 June 2008 - 12:21 AM

You beat me to it, Bruce. By the way, guys, never shoot the last 220 feet, then sell it to me for $0.025 a foot. That's, obviously, the best approach you could possibly take.
  • 0

#15 Matthew W. Phillips

Matthew W. Phillips
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1792 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 June 2008 - 12:26 AM

You beat me to it, Bruce. By the way, guys, never shoot the last 220 feet, then sell it to me for $0.025 a foot. That's, obviously, the best approach you could possibly take.


Sounds like you're a bit self-serving...I admire that! :lol:
  • 0

#16 Hans Engstrom

Hans Engstrom
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 195 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Sweden

Posted 03 June 2008 - 09:45 AM

When I was working as a 2nd and had time to unload and no shortage of empty cans I´d keep as little as 60ft in 16mm or 150ft in 35mm, those cans usually ended up in my fridge after the production was finished because they where considered to short, but I remember one 16mm production where those 60ft-80ft shortends saved us. Now when I work as 1st there have been time when the production decided not to hire a loader or 2nd. Then I consider everything under 100ft (16mm) waste because it would cost to much time keeping them.
  • 0

#17 John Sprung

John Sprung
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4635 posts
  • Other

Posted 03 June 2008 - 01:18 PM

If all you need is an establishing shot of a house, or an insert of dialing a phone or stuff like that, those 50 - 100 ft short ends are plenty. But if you save them all, you end up with a lot more of them than pickups/inserts that they'd be good for. So, keep 'em when you can, waste 'em when you're in a hurry.



-- J.S.
  • 0


Metropolis Post

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Abel Cine

Glidecam

Willys Widgets

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Ritter Battery

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

rebotnix Technologies

Opal

Tai Audio

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

The Slider

Aerial Filmworks

CineLab

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Abel Cine

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Metropolis Post

CineTape

Wooden Camera

Aerial Filmworks

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Willys Widgets

Visual Products

Technodolly

Tai Audio

Opal

Glidecam

CineLab