mission to mars

[Filip Plesha]

I just wached the film.

It has some serious focus problems,and being an anamorphic film

this is a bit more unpleasant.

What lenses did they use?Panavision,or something else like Hawk or Arriscope?

 

And by the way,that was 5279 and SFX200t on that film right?

[David Mullen ASC]

I didn't notice any particular focus problems. Stephen Burum shoots a LOT of anamorphic and tends to work at a deeper stop, so the film felt rather "un-anamorphic" (lack of scope artifacts) for the most part, except for some tight close-ups. Of course, he told me at the ASC Open House once that he really wanted to shoot it in 65mm, but when Disney nixed that idea, he shot as much as he could in 8-perf 35mm (VistaVision) for anything to be augmented by efx, which probably explains that lack of scope lens artifacts, especially for the day exteriors.

 

Burum is a fan of C-Series Panavision anamorphics so he probably used those. He said in the article on "Mission Impossible" that the slightly softer look of the older C-Series gave the appearance of having more depth-of-field compared to the harder focus fall-off of the Primos.

 

I mean, there are a FEW focus problems but no more than any other film, spherical or anamorphic (in fact, it seemed to have fewer problems than a lot of anamorphic pictures I see.) I did notice some barrel distortion and fall-off on the sides of the wide-angle scope shots.

[F Bulgarelli]

Talk about focus problems. There is a few shots in "Lost in translation" that are reallly bad.. You can tell they were probably shooting wide open. I know Lance Accord likes to use available light or minimal lighting set-ups. It's too bad that happened because I think is one of the best movies I've seen all year.

 

It makes you wonder if one should push it that far.

 

Francisco

[Filip Plesha]

Most of the film has a good focus,i didn't say that the whole film has problems

but if you look at the last part of the film...specially the scene when the guy (forgot the name) decides to stay and leave with the alien ship and they say goodbie to each other...that scene is the best example..

i have noticed a lot of anamorphic artefacts in that place in cinema and on TV too.

 

I do agree that most of the film looks great,i am just pointing out that

in some places there are focus problems.

 

It is allso interesting how the whole film has a very plesant slightly retro-look

in term of the color emulsion look whic i really like...if i didn't know better i'd say that it was shot on EXR stock (it has that look) but it was vision stock in deed.

most of the films shot on vision appear more smooth,a bit colder and more "real"

in look.