Tony Brown

You think?? It seems to me everybody is desperate to do EVERYTHING in camera..... Speaking as an 'in camera' fan..... I'm getting bored with it......

There must be several for the US as there are in the UK. www.davidreviews.com for one.....

I've an order thats taking a long time to arrive, the number I have has been disconnected, no reply to email for over 10 days and I cant find their website on google Can anyone supply a contact please? I need these filters for a shoot next week and I'm going to look a bit of a mug if they dont show. Thanks

Well that'll be me then Any concept will out if it can fill any two of three criteria, Quality, Cheap, Fast Digital to my eyes fails on all counts...... so far.

I'm genuinely shocked.... last thing I shot there (must be 4/5 years ago now was for Pontiac something or other (hideous car)... that was all 16:9 ........ I assume then that you take the 16:9 from the 4:3, and not the 4:3 from the 16:9..... might as well be on 16mm :(

I rarely work in the US these days so am out of touch. What percentage of US viewers are still on 4:3 sets? I haven't seen a 4:3 set anywhere in the world for about 5 years ....

....and the nomination for understatement of the year goes to..... :) PV 'C' series anyone?

Is the US the last bastion of 4:3? Irony eh.....

Dont have an iPhone and never will - Cant stand Apple Any other suggestion

SunPath is still not working on Vista, anyone know of an alternative that would run PC or N96....or even a good website Thanks

In 30+ years I've NEVER seen a units stills photographer do Continuity shots.. Why would he? Continuity girl just jumps in and shoots them... she's on set 100%... Stills drift in and out.....mostly out :rolleyes:

Most UK DoP's operate themselves now..... its been that way for 20+ years Stills on set get 'a credit'....not 'the credit'

And in those pictures I'm supposed to be looking at .....what?

Agreed. If only choosing locations where that easy.

Not necessarily. A direct light high enough over the line of sight axis to give a chin shadow on the neckline will compliment most women. I'd also move it a fraction to the blind side of the eyeline to bring out the cheekbone. The problem with lighting direct is restricting the movement. If they want to look 100% then it needs to be a collaboration with the director and actress. Sometimes softlight is a just an easy way out IMO No golden rules when it comes to beauty I'm afraid, which as they say is in the eye of...........

I second that - you're trying too hard.... Light the scene, let the rest happen. There are exceptions but its a good rule

What happened in the end? Not IN the book....TO the book? Missed the thread :o(

Lucas did it.... ...or was that your point?

I suspect what Tom means is that you cant replace the craft with technical competence of the equipment (though I'd also dispute the competence of the equipment based on the film). And by the way - I see nothing there that probably couldn't be shot on Vision 3 (500asa). Unless you post A/B its impossible to judge levels I like the narrow DoF, but the rest is awful

You should know better Stephen.... aim lower The thread has left me (almost) speechless

".....Its a 35mm film equivalent cinema system that allows you to film 35mm style cine imagery without the need for any crew......" You think?

Any old crap off ebay then.....

Oceans 13 is one of the most poorly photographed films I've seen. Appalling

UK went 16:9 long before the US. I had to shoot some Pontiac & McDonalds spots in 4:3 about 4 years ago, felt archaic, I've never liked the format. Black and white is still popular in commercials here too, done lots for one particular client - I think IBM still shoot B&W ? I'm struggling to think of anywhere thats still 4:3, I shot in India recently and shot 1:1.85 for broadcast on their 4:3 system, though all new equipment I saw on sale there was 16:9 so they wont be long permanently switching I'm sure