Milo Sekulovich Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Greetings all, I was perusing the widescreen museum and saw this and couldn't believe my eyes. Now some a-hole decides that Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur suffer from poor compositions and need re-framing. http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/flikfx/default.htm This supposed technology "fixes" the poor compositions And it's all explained in an arrogant know it all manner. Who the hell is behind this??? It's a growing trend-armchair hack film reviewers, curators and 'scholars' who have never shot a frame and now they know better than David Lean and Freddie Young. Unbelievable!! Milo Sekulovich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Neary Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 "Besides that, there's just too much distracting scenery. " !!!! (I think it's just a joke.) ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick A Murray Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Greetings all, I was perusing the widescreen museum and saw this and couldn't believe my eyes. Now some a-hole decides that Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur suffer from poor compositions and need re-framing. http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/flikfx/default.htm This supposed technology "fixes" the poor compositions And it's all explained in an arrogant know it all manner. Who the hell is behind this??? It's a growing trend-armchair hack film reviewers, curators and 'scholars' who have never shot a frame and now they know better than David Lean and Freddie Young. Unbelievable!! Milo Sekulovich The site must be a joke. Gene Siskel provides a review of the "new technology" and I can't find anything on the proper museum site or any other information on this technology using a google search of flik fx. That and the "fix" is always a cluttered mess. I was laughing rather than feeling outraged. If I'm wrong and this turns out to be serious, then I'll be outraged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick A Murray Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 From the bottom of page 4: "Roger and I just don't have enough thumbs to properly rate this new DVD release." - Gene Siskel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Washlesky Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 From the bottom of page 4: "Roger and I just don't have enough thumbs to properly rate this new DVD release." - Gene Siskel Wow. I guess Gene really hates the composition if he is commenting from the grave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Milanov Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Come on Milo, did you really fall for this? :lol: By the way, the DVD was due on April 1st... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted July 25, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted July 25, 2009 and look at the final "fixed" composition on page 4. Lawrence could lick the match out he's so close to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Neary Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 and look at the final "fixed" composition on page 4. Lawrence could lick the match out he's so close to it. and his nose is on fire! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 That website is friggin' hilarious! Milo, you were taken . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Pincus Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Martin Hart, the website's "curator," has been a frequent participant on the rec.movies.tech newsgroup since the early 90s. He also cracks a sharp wit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Sekulovich Posted July 25, 2009 Author Share Posted July 25, 2009 Well, of course I had my doubts as I've never even heard of this ludicrous technology and the fact that Gene Siskel passed away some time ago. But ridiculous things are being announced all the time, like shooting major features with still cameras..... Quite an elaborate "joke" to write and post on one's website. Some people just have too much time on their hands... But seriously, I've heard similar criticisms of major motion pictures regarding framing, acting and so forth by layman film reviewers, 'scholars' and so forth. Like Coppola said 'Everyone on a movie set thinks they can make the movie better than the director'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A. Whitehouse Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 http://www.engadgethd.com/2009/07/24/micha...ces-for-transf/ It may be a joke but your average layman is still in the dark about formats. Read the newspost above and then read some of the comments below if you want to get really depressed about the attitude of your general consumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A. Whitehouse Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Sorry I tried to edit but was to slow. I didnt mean to say you were the layman. Im as disgusted by the idea of reframing classic films as anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas James Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 Lately I have been butchering my widescreen films by zooming in which effectively converts them to 16 x 9 so that my entire screen is filled up and I do not lose resolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Chris Keth Posted July 25, 2009 Premium Member Share Posted July 25, 2009 Lately I have been butchering my widescreen films by zooming in which effectively converts them to 16 x 9 so that my entire screen is filled up and I do not lose resolution. As an operator, doesn't it kind of nag at you to be ignoring all the hard work that the DPs and operators of those films put into the composition? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saul Rodgar Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 (edited) Welcome to the era of armchair DP'ing . . . Quite literally. Edited July 25, 2009 by Saul Rodgar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dominic Case Posted July 26, 2009 Share Posted July 26, 2009 Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur suffer from poor compositions and need re-framing. This page has been around for about ten years! Yes, it's a joke. When I first saw it, I forwarded the link to a cinematographer's forum (it was before this one existed I think) and also to a telecine forum. In general, cinematographers either got the joke, or reacted in horror. Most of the telecine folk rushed to ask where they could get the technology. OMG! :o The worrying news is that exactly this process is now genuinely available - at least for still images. Look at this. http://www.seamcarving.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boy yniguez Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 This page has been around for about ten years! Yes, it's a joke. When I first saw it, I forwarded the link to a cinematographer's forum (it was before this one existed I think) and also to a telecine forum. In general, cinematographers either got the joke, or reacted in horror. Most of the telecine folk rushed to ask where they could get the technology. OMG! :o The worrying news is that exactly this process is now genuinely available - at least for still images. Look at this. http://www.seamcarving.com/ even time magazine was guilty of this when they had to feature the pyramids of egypt on their cover some years ago. they couldn't fit the two pyramids in a vertical compostion so they they just moved them closer to each other digitally. is it any wonder photographs are no longer usable as evidence in court? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now