|
April, 2001 The
Taylors speak edited by Jay Garbose and Charles Roberts
I have been interested in photography ever since I was at school in the late 1940s. My father was an amateur photographer and 8mm cameraman. When I took up the sport of spearfishing in 1951, I naturally wished to take underwater pictures, so I built an underwater housing for a still camera and started to get good results. When television came to Australia in 1956, I saw the potential for making underwater news stories. My lucky break came when a friend loaned me his Bell Howell 16mm movie camera. It used a 50 foot magazine that had a running time of just over a minute at 25 frames per second. I built a housing for it. My friend also bought the 16mm film for me to experiment with. I could not afford to buy movie film in those days because I was only an apprentice in the printing industry. When I learned to get the right exposure and color filters to produce a professional result, I purchased my own 16mm Bolex, made a housing and started selling news items to TV and Movietone News. My first TV documentary, SHARK HUNTERS, was sold to NBC in the US in the early 60s and I was on my way. I purchased my first 35mm movie camera in 1967, built a housing and started shooting underwater scenes for other peoples' productions. My first major 35mm shoot was for BLUE WATER WHITE DEATH, in 69. Peter Gimbel was producer, director and underwater cameraman. Jim Lipscome was the topside cameraman/director, while Stan Waterman and I were underwater cameramen. Stan and I worked as a pair as did Peter and Valerie.
My most famous shoot was the underwater live Great White Shark sequences for JAWS. That came about when Universal Studios producers asked Peter Gimbel to shoot the underwater shark sequences. Peter said he would not shoot underwater, and instead offered to direct the movie. Steven Spielberg had already been engaged to direct, so Peter suggested they contact us here in Australia for the underwater sequences. They did and we jumped at the opportunity.
Most of my film shooting has been with 16mm, although I also have a 35mm library. I purchased a 16MM-35MM six plate flat bed editing machine in 1975, and edited some of my own productions in 16mm. I also found it very useful for selecting 16 and 35mm footage for sale as stock footage. Then, in 1985, I built a housing for my first 8mm camcorder, which delivered the wonderful flexibility of low cost and long running time. The down side was low video quality. The arrival of Hi-8 Video finally produced quality acceptable for broadcast TV. And today, Digital Video is changing my professional life. The digital revolution has arrived. My film cameras never get used now, and what's more, their value has dropped dramatically. I now use 3 chip DVCAM units in housings I made myself.
I also have a Betacam SP edit suite and have had all my film stock transferred to tape. Editing and finishing on tape certainly beats the high costs of an all-film production. After the shoot, my first job is to go through my original camera tapes and select out all the best shots that I know can be used in the final edit. I transfer all these selected shots to a 3 hour DVCAM master tape. I have a Sony DSR30 PAL deck as the record deck and use the camcorder to transfer the original. My original tapes never get touched again. I also have the option of selecting those shots and capturing directly to the hard drive. At the moment, Final Cut Pro is very new to me. I am only in the beginning stages of using it but can already see the advantages of a non-linear editor. I hope to be able to do the complete postproduction in FCP. I will probably work the much same way I do with Betacam linear editing; that is, construct short sequences. What I really like about FCP is the Edit Decision List and Batch Capture features. I plan to use the EDL to select good takes while on location and then make batch captures back in the edit room. I can see the tremendous advantage of making several versions of an edit and to be able to easily make changes. In a couple of respects, video offers big advantages for underwater cinematography. First, it responds very well to low contrast lighting and makes the water look clearer than it actually is. Second, much less artificial light is needed to get a good colorful exposure. Where I would have to use a 650 watt light to get good color on film, a 100 watt light will achieve the same with video. Shooting underwater with video is easy; you can get near perfect exposures all the time. For best results, I use a video light to make the colors show up. The mini-arcs are best because they are daylight color temperature. I use a 3-chip camera, although single chips cameras are also good.
copyright © Jay Garbose and Charles Roberts 2001
Charles Roberts AKA Chawla teaches Digital Video, Audio and Post Production at Fitchburg State College in Fitchburg, MA. He is a busy freelance shooter, editor, compositor and A/V and DV solutions consultant and installer. He is also a whacko video artist with an eye peeled for the incredible expressive possibilities of interactive DVD for the masses. He spends what little time is left serving as a Guide on the 2 Pop Final Cut Pro Discussion Boards.
This article
first appeared on www.kenstone.net as is reprinted here
with permission
|
||||||||||
| | Home | Next Meeting | Forum | Join | Past Meetings | Talent Directory | Reviews | Features | Tutorials | About Us | Discounts | Store |Training Classes |Contact Us | SEARCH | |