Phil Rhodes

Hi, > People have the right to speak their minds Yeah, yeah, that's really the vibe I'm getting. Cough. Phil

Hi, > That is a very nice upgrade from flying video on flyer to full 35mm.. For certain value of "nice", I guess. Because let's face it, over here, first 35 job, it's gonna be a BL4, you can see it coming over the horizon... Phil

Hi, Oh, I'm bored. > that the mandatory operator position is crass and stupid That can't reasonably be implied from what I said. The definite "that" in the second sentence refers to the situation described in the first, which is most certainly crass and stupid. I think you're inferring what you want to be true because you have a psychological need to attack something. I understand the feeling, but really, don't shoot the messenger. Perhaps I don't pull any punches, but this is not local 600's private forum and you can expect to see posts representing a wide variety of real-life opinion. Phil

Hi, > If you don't see the value of an operator on the set... Which I do. > stop making our legitimate issue about yourself. I'm not (although I can't stop Fletcher going ad hominem). My point - my only point, the only issue I'm arguing here - is that forcing productions to pay an operator to sit on the truck only gives the producers ammunition in this sort of situation. In case anyone hadn't noticed, that means I'm not disagreeing with you. Oh-fricken-kay? Phil

Hi, > as for your state of affairs, i don't think all the folks in the u.k. working away making movies big and small > agree with you at all Oh well, if it's only the "big" UK film crews who disagree with me, at least I'm not that seriously outnumbered... Phil

Hi, > I have been reading your posts for a number of years and would have to say that unless you work in the > union system this would be a good time to keep your opinions to yourself. Why? Fair practice is fair practice, unless you're taking the position that unionisation is an excuse for institutionalising unfair practice. Which, as I think I've shown, has recently been the case. - Phil

You are making people pay for services they don't need. At the very least it makes you look like workshy agitators. I don't need to be a member of your union local - in fact, I don't need to be working in the film industry - to understand this situation. In fact, it seems like I explicitly need to not be a member of your union local to understand that. Phil

Hi, I'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make there, I found it rather confused, but to restate, I completely agree that the US/UK situations are not comparable. That was my entire point, in objection to someone earlier on trying to do exactly that. Yes it is unfortunate that the union here is rubbish, but then two things occur: - If it was any good, I wouldn't be in it, and; - There's no point in having a union to support an industry that doesn't exist. However, I stand by the assertion that making people pay for things they don't need does nothing but give the producers ammunition. Doing things that are that stupid doesn't make the IA look like anything other than moneygrubbing idiots. That's the only point I'm trying to make. It should be practically axiomatic anyway. Phil

It's not about letting anyone "break" a union. If the money isn't there, the money isn't there. If we had a union like IATSE in the UK, then what you'd have would be an awful lot of union crews not getting employed because there's no films being made (incidentally exactly the situation that now exists anyway). You are being slapped because you forced people to do something completely indefensible. The situations are not even nearly comparable. Phil

I was once proudly told how the union had mandatory camera operators sitting in the truck reading the newspaper because of this rule. I don't see how that kind of crass stupidity is in any way defensible. You brought this on yourselves. - Phil

Hi, Nice to see you guys are still arguing about this - I thought it was just me! I've never been paid anything extra to do Steadicam, normally I end up doing it alongside doing something else (lighting camera most often) and it ends up sitting on the stand most of the day anyway. Phil

Hi, Does anyone have the wiring schematic for a J7 zoom controller? I have one here that was bust, and has since been rewired in a rather, um, cough, manner, and I need to fix it. Thanks, Phil

Hi, >Go build one and sell it. What would the point be? Bartell's already done it. P

Hi, > This is why on my invoices I always state "Payment due 30 days Net." Yeah, so do I, but it never works. If they don't want to pay you, they can usually get away with it. Phil

Hi, I still wear that fleece when operating. Shows how much operating I do, that it's still in one piece... Phil

Hi, > when the dust settles and the Alien finally debuts Is this ever going to happen? Ever? This thing has been talked about in hushed tones, behind-the-hand whispers and terms of "I've seen it, but I'm not allowed to talk about it" for almost as long as I have been aware of Steadicam equipment period. If this was the computer software industry, people would have been screaming vapourware a year ago. Phil

Hi, Three and a half months wouldn't be that unusual for me. I'd moan like hell and not work for them again, but it's not uncommon. I don't know what the laws are in the US, but in the UK if you're a big company you can pretty much get away with this on a whim, there's very little to stop you as you can threaten the little guy with the costs of the legal proceedings. The thought of losing such a case on some technicality and ending up out of pocket for perhaps a quarter of your yearly earnings is just too terrifying, so you don't bother. Phil

Hi, Well, you're all better looking than me... Phil

Hi, Bear in mind that a certain amount of wonkiness in this respect is unavoidable and normal. There's an enormous amount of length and leverage around the gimbal and even minuscule, tenths-of-a-thou errors will produce this effect. I guess it depends on how much more your particular outfit does it now than when it was new. Phil

Hi, First off a full wave antenna at 2GHz is only 5.904 inches long so it is possible to have one without it getting horribly in the way. Unfortunately as frequency rises reflections become more of a problem. Also in the UK at least fitting an out of spec, multiple-wavelength antenna can make a legal transmitter illegal; I would be very surprised if the FCC didn't have similar rules for exactly these reasons. It would presumably at least nullfy any certification, making it illegal to operate. Phil

Hi, >Well that might be your point but what does it have to do with the topic of runaway production? I don't think you have a problem because Americans will always watch American film and make a point of doing so, at least that's what I've seen. Now it's possible that a film like "Cold Mountain" is sufficiently American-looking to fool everyone. Phil

Hi, > Better not tell the French with their thriving film industry. Well that's exactly the point; French films sell in France simply because the locals like to watch local film. US film sells in the US for the same reason. For some reason, we don't care here. God knows why. Also, we don't share a language with the countries you mentioned; I wonder how much that has to do with it. Phil

Hi, > Could it be that much of the work there started to shoot in cheaper locations, > thereby causing the industry to shrink? I'm not sure, but I don't think so. Any rather old English people here care to comment? I'd hazard a guess that it's something to do with the politics of patriotism. At some point it begins to tell that American film is budgeted for an audience pool of 250million plus, whereas we've only about a fifth of the numbers; perhaps attitudes have changed enough that people don't sufficiently care anymore here, whereas they certainly do there. In the 60s the UK was beginning to climb out of the hideous post-world-war-2 financial and resource problems and there was much to be proud of. By 1980 most people had realised that it had all actually been a complete waste of time and there were much more glamorous and interesting things happening over the pond. A guess. Phil

Hi, >So by this logic, a company like Levi Strauss, which closed it's last one or two U.S. based factories within the last month or two Miramax has not yet completely stopped producing films in the US. Sure, fine, outsourced production is far from ideal if you don't live where they're making films, but it's a damn sight better than no production at all if they ARE making stuff locally as well. Phil

Hi, > production designer Ann Champion....hasn't had health insurance for years and > doesn't know how she'll pay her February mortgage My heart bleeds. I have these problems without the advantage of a twenty-year career behind me, and if I have the unmitigated temerity to complain about them, I get jeered at. Double standards, anyone? Phil