Dream 'job', massive budget - would you shoot digital or film?

[Satsuki Murashige]

4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

 You correct everyone, about everything.

That’s not true, Dom makes corrections on posts that are in his areas of expertise, namely camera and lens servicing and maintenance. And he admits errors when they happen. We should all strive to follow his example in this regard, me included. 

[Dom Jaeger]

5 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

How can you not be sure of something if you think your sure of something? 

Doesn't it give you pause for thought that a lot of times when you thought you knew something you actually didn't? Most people have a sense of what they don't know for sure. I might be 80% sure of something, but I'll still do a double check to make sure. If the question is about anamorphic on the LF for instance, ask yourself if you've ever shot anamorphic on an LF, or dealt with the files in post. If you haven't, and you don't bother doing any further research into it, then you're just making assumptions. 

5 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

I wasn't even responding to the OP. I was responding to Dominik Bauch who was talking about Netflix deliverables. He was the person who mentioned the low resolution issue, not me. I was confused to all poop on why someone would shoot 2.8k on an LF. I was offering ideas on what I'd do instead. You can call my ideas wrong, but they all would have worked fine and given an acceptable resolution. 

Tyler, Dominik was the OP! You're making up stuff that's so easy to check!

If you were confused about his mention of 2880 x 2880 as Netflix compliant, why not look into it? Why assume he's wrong and offer him faulty advice when you've never dealt with anamorphic on the LF for Netfix and don't even know basic things about the LF like the sensor shape or shooting modes? Why would you think you're sure of that stuff when you later admitted to not having looked at the specs and that you simply assumed it all? That's when you tell yourself you're not sure!

5 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

In terms of your other babble against me, bro. You wouldn't even let me explain myself, it was always "you're wrong" and that's one more check on the principals list for detention. This isn't school, you aren't my teacher and I make movies for a living, so I have a bit of experience using the equipment you service, on set, in actual applications and then taking those images and manipulating them in post, using the industry standard software. If you always shut down user feedback to the equipment that is used, then how will anyone know of the issues? How can anyone share their experiences if all they get is you coming on here telling them they're wrong. 

Nobody on the forum explains himself more than you do! An endless stream of excuses mixed with bragging about your vast experience, but the simple fact is you keep giving out bum advice and saying things that just aren't true.

As for me shutting down user feedback, I challenge you to find one instance where I've shut down someone for sharing their own personal experience.

If you talked about an Alexa Mini going down on a job you were on, I wouldn't bat an eyelid. But if you state with certainty that Alexa Minis are unreliable and have chronic failure rates because you've talked to a few people who told you so, and that doesn't correlate with my experience as someone who actually deals with equipment service, I'll question you. It's not "shutting down user feedback", it's called fact-checking and it prevents hogwash and false rumours from being circulated and believed. 

[Robin R Probyn]

2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Robin, what you may not know is that you're destroying your credibility outside of this forum. That's the joy of using real names. You just told one of the most liked "film" people in Hollywood that they're incompetent. 

 

Ok Im out of here.. Im very worried about the future of my career ,having crossed one of the top, and most liked people "in Hollywood '.. my name will be mud through out  the studios .. a thinly veiled threat .. guys its too late for me.. I have crossed someone at the top of the  Hollywood totem pole.. and I will pay dearly for that.. and I can also share a new fact.and this is a truthful fact that not many people know, but I know it..and an old guy I met on the bus told me..  In fact Tyler was the first man on the moon.. ! but choose to hide his light under a bushel.. and masquerade as an unsung legend of the indie film world.. I feel such a fool now.. frankly I just don't know what to do.. Im moving back to Idaho and take up my old job at the store.. if its still available .. so long guys.. take care .. damn these real name forums.. 

[Robin R Probyn]

BTW there is alot more to Dunning Kruger ..incompetence is not the thrust of it at all..." where people mistakenly assess their cognitive ability as greater than it is.. It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from the inability of people to recognize their lack of ability "..  does have a bit of a familiar ring to it.. no..?

[Aapo Lettinen]

Tyler, you said you scuba dive as well.

Remember what you need to do when being 140ft underwater and you start to feel anxious. Your breathing rate starts to go up, you know you will start to panick soon and feel you won't get enough air from the regulator despite it is working fine?

Focus on the breathing man. Stop, breathe, think, then act. You may not drown on internet forums if hastily panicking around but you sure will get into lot of problems. Consider it being a serious entanglement hazard...you surely would rather swim around watching pretty corals and colourful fish than roll up on someones fishing nets all the time (without even having a proper cutting tool with you?)

[Aapo Lettinen]

Robin is out of the thread... but he will be back...

like Arnold.... he'll be back...

[Stephen Perera]

OK as the original thread creator can we stop with the personal and get back to the theme....I say this respectfully to all.....I am a 'learner in here and look to this place for knowledge and inspiration....(for any Brits in here I have the big red L stuck to my back)

P.S. the only advice I can offer is related to my limited experience with 16mm film on an Aaton I own and my 34 years doing film photography mainly on Hasselblad......I can talk about using handheld metres and the beauty of Kodak Portra etc etc haha......

[Aapo Lettinen]

4 minutes ago, Stephen Perera said:

OK as the original thread creator can we stop with the personal and get back to the theme....I say this respectfully to all.....I am a 'learner in here and look to this place for knowledge and inspiration....(for any Brits in here I have the big red L stuck to my back)

It's not your thread anymore, we changed it to one of the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory  :D

[Stephen Perera]

Just now, aapo lettinen said:

It's not your thread anymore, we changed it to one of the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory ?

hahaha good one

[Jon O'Brien]

Yes, can the thread go back to what it's supposed to be about? If a disputed post is written, don't appeal to the creator of the post. Clearly that approach isn't working - as this goes back several years apparently (though I truly admire some of the very polite and respectful efforts to try and appeal to reason). There's a definition of madness that goes something like this: doing the same thing again and again but expecting a different result. If the moderator hasn't banned someone, there seems little point endlessly (and I really do mean endlessly) harping on about a contributor to the forum. If a post is written that you feel or know is erroneous, refrain from addressing the poster and simply point out the error and give your correction as you see it. Let the gentle reader choose his or her advice and/or information as he or she sees fit. People are pretty smart usually. Otherwise the very attempt to improve the forum sort of, well, shoots itself in the foot. You can't win. So just calmly post your correction to what you see as incorrect information. Because nothing's going to change. That's clear.

[Tyler Purcell]

13 hours ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

when someone who was actually privy to the situation corrects you, you tend to persist, argue the point, or ignore the correction.

The conversation you and greg had basically went right along with what I said all along. It actually proved without any doubt what I said. 

The problem here is that, a few people don't even bother to understand WHY I say what I say. They take everything too literal. 

For instance the discussion on the LF. My suggestions were 100% accurate. Netflix does require 4k for in house production. Yes they have a provision for anamorphic shows only, but my information isn't wrong. When discussing the LF,  it's just another Alexa, anyone should be able to give advice if they've shot with an Alexa before. My advice was to shoot 16x9 mode with and 1.3x anamorphic lenses and you will get more resolution than shooting 2.8k mode with 2x lenses. The only piece of information I got wrong was that the Panavision vistavision lenses were 1.6x and I said 1.5x because that's what the "film" vistavision format is and I honestly hadn't noticed the LF was 1.44:1 not 1.55:1. Instead of Dom simply saying "Ohh you're right, standard fill-frame is 1.55:1, but the LF actually is 1.44:1 so that's why your math was off". He literally slammed the door in my face and told me everything I said was wrong and threw me under the bus without even contemplating why I responded the way I did. 

I was trying to be helpful and my advice wasn't wrong it was just misinterpreted. 

That's why I don't want to give in to people complaining. When my advice flat-out won't work, then sure I'll be like, whoops and say sorry. But generally that's not the case. 

I do agree with you on the point of sticking to topics I know best and I try to do that. What happens is that the subject matter switches gears and I dive into territories I may not know a lot about, but I never dive into subjects I know nothing about. I just ignore those posts and move on. 

[Tyler Purcell]

11 hours ago, aapo lettinen said:

Remember what you need to do when being 140ft underwater and you start to feel anxious. Your breathing rate starts to go up, you know you will start to panick soon and feel you won't get enough air from the regulator despite it is working fine?

Teehee, the worst for me was feeling lightheaded. But yea I get the analogy. 

11 hours ago, aapo lettinen said:

Consider it being a serious entanglement hazard...you surely would rather swim around watching pretty corals and colourful fish than roll up on someones fishing nets all the time (without even having a proper cutting tool with you?)

Shit man, like going into a wreck without a helmet, reel, flashlight, cutting tool or buddy. There is no better feeling than being prepared. Doubles, decent pony bottle, spare reg around my neck, decent line back to the boat and all the toys aforementioned. 

Sadly, I feel I am always prepared when I respond to something. It's not until someone throws a door in my face that I realize, maybe I missed something? The good news is that most civil people actually pay attention to what's said and give commentary, rather than pull the carpet from underneath me.  

[Tyler Purcell]

14 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

Doesn't it give you pause for thought that a lot of times when you thought you knew something you actually didn't?

Sure and when I’m straight up wrong, usually it’s because someone told me something that wasn’t right. I’m simply relaying info, which by the way is how the world works. If Arri misprinted the service manual and you damaged a camera because of it, how is that your fault? I don’t make shit up, everything is based on experiences or what I’ve been told. 

 

How do I know people here who correct me are right compared to the people I talk to in real life? 

Yes I’m wrong about shit, everyone is wrong about shit. In the same posts you come down on me like a ton of bricks, there are generally others who think the same things I do, based on experience. 

So whose right? The technician or the person on set using the gear? In my mind, it’s hard to quantify, which is why I’m generally open to others opinions and am very calm and collective when corrected. 

Quote

 If the question is about anamorphic on the LF for instance, ask yourself if you've ever shot anamorphic on an LF, or dealt with the files in post. If you haven't, and you don't bother doing any further research into it, then you're just making assumptions. 

Dom, have you delivered for Netflix? Have you shot with the LF? 

I deliver for Netflix all the time, in fact my last roommate use to work for the intermediary distribution company Netflix uses to get media onto their platform. He and I know the specs like the back of our hand because we have to quote them to post all the time. 

Nobody sent us any documentation about the LF and guess what? Any file set would be rejected for not being 4k. They would need to process it specially with the new provision that again, nobody told either one of us about. 

So whose fault is it for not knowing about the provision? My fault for not digging up special provisions? Again how do I know there is a special provision when there never has been in the past? See how illogical it is to assume everyone knows about it? 

Quote

If you were confused about his mention of 2880 x 2880 as Netflix compliant, why not look into it?

I just assumed the OP didn’t know what he was talking about as his questions seemed remedial to me. Why would anyone shoot on an LF in 2.8k mode? So I assumed he may have not known that Netflix has different requirements for different projects, in house and out of house. There was nothing wrong about what I said, I just didn’t know about the provision. But with the remedial questions, did the OP know about it either? 

Quote

Why assume he's wrong and offer him faulty advice when you've never dealt with anamorphic on the LF for Netfix and don't even know basic things about the LF like the sensor shape or shooting modes?

I’ve delivered anamorphic shows, 4k is required for in house producions. Why the LF has a provision makes zero logical sense. 

The LF can shoot 16x9 at 3.8k, which gives you more resolution using a 1.3x lens than 2.8k does with super 35mm 2x anamorphic lenses. I already responded about my confusion on the imager size. I thought it was a true full frame imager and it’s not. That’s the only piece of information I mucked up on and it didn’t hurt my comments at all. My advice would have worked fine. 

Quote

As for me shutting down user feedback, I challenge you to find one instance where I've shut down someone for sharing their own personal experience.

You always tell people that they’re wrong. All you do is come on here and correct everyone, but you don’t even use the equipment! How do you know that my lenses haven’t been messed with and deliver specs differently than they do stock? How do you know if our cameras have a lot of wear on them and that’s why they constantly need lubing? How do you know if the alexa minis that went bad, weren’t shooting at the ocean so statistically are more prone to failure. It’s one thing to comment that you have never seen a problem or issue. But the way you defend equipment you have no stake in, you don’t own it, you don’t shoot with it, is beyond me. Why adamantly defend something to the death when things are different everywhere? Us normal users don’t know why something does what it does, we just know it doesn’t.

I’m sorry we don’t see eye to eye and I whole heartedly agree with you and Satsukis comments about me commenting only on things I know about. But where does that start? How much knowledge does one need to make a suggestion?

Edited November 15, 2019 by Tyler Purcell

[Satsuki Murashige]

3 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Sure and when I’m straight up wrong, usually it’s because someone told me something that wasn’t right. I’m simply relaying info, which by the way is how the world works.

That’s not how ‘the world works’ - that’s how the game of telephone works. Big difference. 

If you’re just repeating info that someone told you without knowing whether it’s correct, then that’s pretty irresponsible. You’re literally taking no responsibility for the accuracy of the things you are writing (since you can just shrug and say you’re ‘simply relaying’ what you heard), and unfortunately this colors everything that you put your name on here.

How about if you just clarify whether ‘you heard’, ‘you experienced’, or ‘you think’ something before posting it as ‘a fact?’ I will try to do the same. 

[Gregg MacPherson]

14 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

... If a disputed post is written, don't appeal to the creator of the post. Clearly that approach isn't working - as this goes back several years apparently (though I truly admire some of the very polite and respectful efforts to try and appeal to reason). There's a definition of madness that goes something like this: doing the same thing again and again but expecting a different result. If the moderator hasn't banned someone, there seems little point endlessly (and I really do mean endlessly) harping on about a contributor to the forum. If a post is written that you feel or know is erroneous, refrain from addressing the poster and simply point out the error and give your correction as you see it. Let the gentle reader choose his or her advice and/or information as he or she sees fit. People are pretty smart usually. .... just calmly post your correction to what you see as incorrect information. Because nothing's going to change.....

 

So, over and over, people just like you allow this to happen, doing nothing. Madness? Well it satisfies your given definition. But my feeling is that it's something else. Most people are just gutless, lacking the strength or moral purpose to push back at someone like Tyler.  And it is a complete fancy that this can be depersonalized.

I believe Tyler should be banned. Tim, if you are reading this, I beg of you, please do it....

[Satsuki Murashige]

4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

The conversation you and greg had basically went right along with what I said all along. It actually proved without any doubt what I said. 

This was not my impression at all, though if Greg wants to correct me on this, I’d be happy to accept that. 

You got the basic facts right, but I think you got the nuances wrong - essentially mis-reading what Greg characterized as a friendly, respectful, working collaboration between director and cinematographer where the format choice was mutually agreed upon after discussion, into something more nefarious. 

From your posts from Page 8 in this thread:

Tyler: Let me tell you what bothers me. I'm tired of hearing stories about directors who always work on film, being manipulated by cinematographers into shooting digital.

——————————————

 

Tyler: It's not the cinematographers project, it's the directors project. 

Imagine this... you're the director. You hire a cinematographer for your job, assuming you'd be using X equipment because you're familiar with it and you like what it does. The CInematographer comes in and guilt trips you into changing your mind because they don't like X equipment, they like Y equipment.

—————————————

Sounds to me like you are ascribing an unflattering motive to Mr. Sher and essentially calling him out. And Greg, who was there for the whole shoot, is telling you that’s not true. Am I wrong about that? 

[Justin Hayward]

6 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

I agree about me commenting only on things I know about. But where does that start? How much knowledge does one need to make a suggestion?

If it were me, I would start with not posting about anything I heard from other people, even if I heard it from five hundred other people.  If it were me, I would start by only posting things I've physically dealt with myself and can speak to directly, without any hearsay.  I think that might absolve about 90% of certain people's issues.  In my opinion.

[dio zafi]

For budgets even starting at 5,000€ it’s film all the way (more than just an image)

[Gregory Irwin]

On 11/15/2019 at 8:21 PM, Satsuki Murashige said:

This was not my impression at all, though if Greg wants to correct me on this, I’d be happy to accept that. 

You got the basic facts right, but I think you got the nuances wrong - essentially mis-reading what Greg characterized as a friendly, respectful, working collaboration between director and cinematographer where the format choice was mutually agreed upon after discussion, into something more nefarious. 

From your posts from Page 8 in this thread:

Tyler: Let me tell you what bothers me. I'm tired of hearing stories about directors who always work on film, being manipulated by cinematographers into shooting digital.

——————————————

 

Tyler: It's not the cinematographers project, it's the directors project. 

Imagine this... you're the director. You hire a cinematographer for your job, assuming you'd be using X equipment because you're familiar with it and you like what it does. The CInematographer comes in and guilt trips you into changing your mind because they don't like X equipment, they like Y equipment.

—————————————

Sounds to me like you are ascribing an unflattering motive to Mr. Sher and essentially calling him out. And Greg, who was there for the whole shoot, is telling you that’s not true. Am I wrong about that? 

Sorry... just read this.  Sat is right on the spot with his interpretation of my post.  Todd and Larry are very close friends as well as collaborators.  It was a mutually agreed upon decision to shoot digi in the end.

G

[Dylan Gill]

I won't lie, 35mm with Panavision anamorphic lenses and a 4K DI

[Tyler Purcell]

On 11/15/2019 at 5:21 PM, Satsuki Murashige said:

Sounds to me like you are ascribing an unflattering motive to Mr. Sher and essentially calling him out. And Greg, who was there for the whole shoot, is telling you that’s not true. Am I wrong about that? 

Sorry for my disappearing act, been busy shooting! ?

My problem is the director wanting X and only being able to get Y because someone on their team, friend or not, basically talked them out of it. It happens at all level of production, generally early on in pre-production when a vision is tailored to fit the budget. I've been in those meetings, I've sat right next to the director as someone else has said they can't do XYZ. Generally because there is a working rapport between certain key members of the crew, there isn't much fuss. 

I mean lets face it, Greg was there so he knows best. I've just read what Larry had to say about it and it seems he was pretty dead set on digital from day one. 

So if you put the pieces together. 

Director wants film and is a film guy
DP wants digital and is a digital guy
Film was shot digitally 

You can interpret what happened in many ways. I see it pretty black and white. 

 

[Tyler Purcell]

On 11/15/2019 at 7:43 PM, Justin Hayward said:

If it were me, I would start by only posting things I've physically dealt with myself and can speak to directly, without any hearsay.  I think that might absolve about 90% of certain people's issues.  In my opinion.

I mean, that would be the goal wouldn't it.

For instance... Just because I have spent days experimenting how the pitch adjustment system works on my cameras, doesn't mean I know the proper terminology to discuss it. I can tell you how to get it right, but there are people here who always pick on me for sharing WHAT I know. So the choice is to take my experience since it's not complete and basically not share it, OR to share the pieces I know. 

I agree with you, recently it appears that I'm posting hearsay, but if there is corroboration between a few sources (more than 2), then I feel it's fine to discuss it, especially if I've seen it first hand. There are so few people in the world doing what we're doing, using the equipment we use, I think it's more important to give feedback than to stay quiet. 

I mean in the long run, we're all humans and yes, I sometimes type as I'm researching and sometimes people catch me before I can edit my post. It happens, we all make mistakes, it's just that I have a red dot on my forehead. Everyone ignores the other people who say completely off-base stuff. 

Edited November 27, 2019 by Tyler Purcell

[Satsuki Murashige]

55 minutes ago, Tyler Purcell said:

You can interpret what happened in many ways.

But in this particular case, there is no need to ‘interpret’ because Greg has just told you exactly what happened.

If you know differently based on having specific information, then feel free to say so. But if you are just speculating, then you’re living in fantasy land.

Also, feel free to name names on anyone saying ‘completely off-base stuff’ particularly if it wasn’t corrected...

[Stephen Perera]

....the way I see it in my completely amateur, idealistic, utopian frame of mind is the big productions should shoot film to keep the medium alive for everyone....like Nolan, Tarantino and the others prevented Kodak from shutting down its film production by signing some deal.......its like a respect to the history and tradition of moving images.....it is understandable the smaller films go with what they can afford although that is obviously a big debate I understand.....Joker would have been another level on 35mm....thats just an opinion as a cinephile....thats all.....

[Tyler Purcell]

17 hours ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

But in this particular case, there is no need to ‘interpret’ because Greg has just told you exactly what happened.

Greg said straight up, Larry wanted to shoot digital, period. So one can draw a direct line from "Larry wanted to shoot digital" to "Larry convinced Todd to shoot digital".