The Island

[Robert Hughes]

Just caught this flick at the cineplex, perfect fare for a July evening in the 90's.

 

The nightmare sequences caught my attention with their extreme color intensities. Was this effect created in digital post, or by clever photo stock and chemistry manipulation?

[Preston Herrick]

According to AC magazine, the film (at press time) was scheduled to go through a DI. The dream sequences were directly attributed to the DI process.

[Jayson Crothers]

Did anyone else catch the vignetting in the corners on the aerial work at the very beginning (and very end) - it was the fly-by stuff of the island. Especially with a DI, I'm not sure why they'd be kept in the film.

 

It was interesting to see Mauro Fiore doing some work that directly echoed Kaminski - the heavy backlight / massive lens flare stuff especially (towards the end in the clone center - I'm assuming that with the trailer out I'm not spoiling anything for anyone).

 

What I found myself looking at was how well I thought close ups of Ewan McGregor looked, but some of the close ups on Scarlett Johansson seemed a bit more raw and less careful.

 

I had a good time though - haven't got my AC issue yet though.............

[Max Jacoby]

...but some of the close ups on Scarlett Johansson seemed a bit more raw and less careful.

I have only seen the trailer and some publicity stills, but that was my thought exactly. He really didn't light her in a flattering way. A poly from below is the way to get her to look good.

[Preston Herrick]

Yes, I noticed the vignetting too and thought it a bit odd. (Also noticed dust in the gate that varied from shot to shot. Theater didn't mask the edges very well.)

[Boone Hudgins]

A lot of cinematographers are adding vignetting in the DI nowadays. Harkening back to the silent picture days, possibly.

[David Mullen ASC]

A lot of cinematographers are adding vignetting in the DI nowadays.  Harkening back to the silent picture days, possibly.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But this wasn't a soft vignette.

[Boone Hudgins]

Hm. I wonder if it was intentional or not. I'll probably watch it on Thursday, mostly because it's Mauro Fiore and anamorphic.

 

I like vignetting, subtle or no. I probably couldn't explain why.

[Dominik Muench]

what was it shot on?

 

i thought in some scenes they did something to johanssons face, cause the side thats closer to the cam is always smother than the other and almost "airbrushed".

[David Mullen ASC]

35mm anamorphic (Panavision).

 

They used digital diffusion in the digital intermediate stage to selectively defocus and diffuse portions of Scarlett Johanson's face. Perhaps she had a horrible pimple or the director became overly obsessed with removing some natural feature on her face like a mole or crease... it was rather distracting, I thought, because the diffused spot was also degrained.

[Tim Tyler]

...it was rather distracting, I thought, because the diffused spot was also degrained.

I agree. It looked like if they just backed the softening effect off a bit, it wouldn't have been so noticable. I wonder if, while making all these decision looking at a 40" CRT, they just couldn't see how it would look on a 40' screen?

[Saul Pincus]

But this wasn't a soft vignette.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

According to the AC article, Bay had Panavision make anamorphic versions of a few close-focus sphericals and an Angenieux zoom. I haven't seen the film, but I wonder if the shots in question used these conversions?

 

Incidentally, didn't Panavision also make a lens for him on "Pearl Harbor," a 20mm anamorphic?

 

Saul

Edited July 28, 2005 by Saul Pincus

[Saul Pincus]

According to the AC article, Bay had Panavision make anamorphic versions of a few close-focus sphericals and an Angenieux zoom.  I haven't seen the film, but I wonder if the shots in question used these conversions?

Saul

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I just found another fascinating article on these conversions at Millimeter.com:

 

http://millimeter.com/mag/video_bay_method/

 

Much more detail here. Very cool.

 

Saul

[Dominik Muench]

im pretty positive they did that with the girls in "Sin City" as well.

i also think it is very distracting and gives the whole thing a very unnatural fake look.

[Max Jacoby]

Incidentally, didn't Panavision also make a lens for him on "Pearl Harbor," a 20mm anamorphic?

 

They did. A 20mm C-Series lens.

[Max Jacoby]

Great article, especially on the lenses. Shame they don't use all this technology to make a better movie though.

[Boone Hudgins]

I see what you guys mean by vignette now. It looked almost like the rounded corners of the film frame. I'm not sure what caused it, and it seemed to only be in, like, two helicopter shots. 2nd unit?

 

The film looked pretty nice. I didn't notice overabundant face softening, but none of the shots lasted very long. It probably would have been even more of an issue if Michael Bay could pick a shot and stick with it. The movie itself was kind of dumb, though. Thankfully it didn't try to pretend to be anything else but dumb.

[Jonathan Bryant]

They used a Arri 235 which looks like a fun camera due to its size. What is the going rate on one of those? Any limitations compared to other Arri cameras? Also I am just curious as to how much a 235 would cost? And no I don't plan on buying one so nobody has to inform me of the cost savings of renting. Though a 235 would make a great bday present or xmas stocking stuffer.

[Adam Frisch FSF]

I think the 235 is about $60.000.

[Danish Puthan Valiyandi]

I think the 235 is about $60.000.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

wrong, it´s in the area of 30000 euro , but even without vf I think

[Max Jacoby]

The body alone is 30K, but to have a workeable camera (viewfinder, mags, etc...) you'll end up spending at least 50-60K

[Greg Gross]

I really liked the Helinet action in the the chase scenes. I thought at times

Scarlett Johannson was photographed harshly,actually I wanted her to look

softer throughout the production. I think they had an excellent story to tell

here. Page 35 of AC says that they used handles on the 235 similar to mo-

tor cycle bars. So they they could whip the camera around while shooting.

 

 

Greg Gross

[Boone Hudgins]

How much would a 235 rent for, would you think? Would it be closer to a IIC or a 435?

[Stephen Williams]

How much would a 235 rent for, would you think?  Would it be closer to a IIC or a 435?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Hi,

 

In Germany I have seen the following prices:-

 

Arri 2c 100 euro

Arri 235 300 euro

Arri 435 ES 450 euro

Arri 435 Advance 750 euro

 

Thats body only!

 

Stephen

[Adam Frisch FSF]

A good rule of thumb is that the rental price shoud be about 1% of the value of the item rented. This is why a simple cable is so much more profitable (percentage-wise) than the big stuff.....