Sam Wells

Shooting film isn't just a matter of aesthetic, it's a matter of principle too. I'm not saying that digital doesn't have it's place, I'm saying that film *does have* its place, and it is important that future filmmakers have a CHOICE of several different media to work with.

Meaning "You should have a choice but mine is the principled choice" ?

-Sam

Nikon D3; Canon 1DMkIII, (in JPEG fine: buffer limits in RAW are 17 for D3, I think 30 for the Canon)

-Sam

Coutard used an Eclair Cameflex - which - as he points out on the Criterion "Breathless" DVD has a claw which does not go very deep. (but would, it seems, position at an angle to register the film well enough).

-Sam

You know, I wish that the Foveon technologies took off that are in the Sigma SLR. That would make 3-chip less necessary.

Fuji seems to be working on a similar idea:

http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/article/HONSHI/20061115/123642/

note: I thought Foveon as in the Sigmas is CCD not CMOS as stated in the article

-Sam

Last I saw, the prototype they had working was somewhat smaller than a Mini-Cooper.

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

Then parking on a city street should be no problem, what's not to like ?

"Huh ? Is that the dolly or the camera ?" "Yes"

-Sam "It's a floor wax AND a desert topping" Wells

The assertions by some RedUser.net folks that any problems must be due to incompetency on the part of the user is not helpful. For one thing, human error has to be taken into account when designing a system because people are flawed.

Good design = shortest / most optimal path to good results.

-Sam

I'd actually be quite happy if my D3 or something like it could do 24 fps sustained for even short Bolex-like bursts, 4K (3.2 whatever) Bolex or Digital Eyemo.

Yes I know the shutter would not survive long at that rate and would certainly mean "mirror up" (I've thought for a long time even film SLR's could benefit from spinning mirror vibration and sound wise - drive em like a CD walkman)

And even 24 as a limit would work for me (36 would be nice) I do weird things with Shake....

Obviously this is not a "production camera" but the as thread says dream specs I'm being conservative !

The form factor is beneficial to me and I frankly love shooting motion imaging sequences on a 24 x 36 area; I'll save medium format motion digital for the upgrade dream B)

Yes I want more DR, highlight control (sensitivity I'm happy now: EI 800 without a second thought, 1600-3200 as a "push")

Now do I get dream software & computer to go along ?

-Sam

Hi Satsuki, I pulled focus off a videotap monitor on dozens of Kenworthy snorkel jobs back in the past, yes you can get into the "zone"

B&W monitor no shadow mask.

Easier with "hard light" DP's than "soft light" DP's B)

-Sam

Here are a couple of Remington night scenes. This look can not be achieved by shooting at night.

This makes me think of some of my favorite day for night scenes which are in Jean-Pierre Melville's "Army Of Shadows"

-Sam

Neither of the above. Nikon and Canon both are behind the curve, and are unable to get out of the old 35mm film format mindset, as shown by their inistance of having multiple sensor sizes, which means that they cannot optimize their lenses for digital,

Hi, I'm shooting with circa 1980's Nikkor primes on my D3 and they work very nicely.

Show me a Samsung which I can shoot clean ISO 3200 on at 14 bit RAW

-Sam

I really like Agnes Godard's work.

-Sam

not really desat but take a look at Hou Hsiao-hsien's "The Puppetmaster"

-Sam

Well John, Spielburg has up 'til now resisted doing a DI to an entire movie (the non-FX shots), but obviously all of the special effects shots these days have to go through some sort of DI since all of the model makers are dead :ph34r:

And the insurance costs with using real dinosaurs have become prohibitive :blink:

-Sam

If the discussion is focused on RAW capture the "off the bat" and "needs correction" are not really the right terms as "off the bat" in terms of saturation, gamma, color balance presumes a processed image...

A good CMOS DSLR can produce very good saturation in jpeg, jpeg-tagged RAW or RAW straight out of a good RAW converter.

-Sam

"I think the problem with contemporary-instrument orchestras is that they sound too abrassive to be considered of symphonic hall quality. I listened to Bach's St Matthew Passion recorded by Nikolaus Harnoncourt with baroque instruments on SACD and it sounded so great because it had volume and loudness.

Hey Michael I'm almost inclined to agree ! Altho I'll note that Harnoncourt went over to modern instruments for Mozart with the Amsterdam Concertgebouw; OK, he kept the natural trumpets didn't he ;)

PS Does the Kurzweil K250 qualify as a "period instrument" yet in digital years ? B)

Sorry, now back to Back to the Future

-Sam (has Herreweghe's Matthew Passion, so there ya go)

New video shot by Jon Fordham on the F23 in 4:2:2 I believe. Don't know the rest of the details and Jon isn't on this forum I don't think.

I like it *shamelessly* blows out the highlights !! (not a good ad for the F-23's highlight control B) ) Sharper than sharp isn't it.

Random thought: an F-35 shooting @ same aperture (were it available) would not have worked as well for this dof wise, I liked the deep focus......

-Sam

I believe the Arriscan is probably the first full area CCD scanner it uses a full frame B+W CCD array with a set of R,G,B Led's that are flashed in sequence.

-Rob-

It's a CMOS and apparently same chip as the D-20 (D-21 now ?). Reads to the sprockets per Mark from Arri on CML recently.

But no Bayer striping in this case are you saying ?

I see one drawback to my (not necessarily practical) VialtaRed notion, vs Arriscan, how would you do the dual-scan mode like Arriscan can do..

-Sam

how fast you get data off the chip depends on variety of factors, dark current, integration time, serial or/and parallel shift and add time, etc the buffer has little to do with it. in addition you have to account for the A/D conversion delays etc, etc

Yes, I should have written "as opposed to...."

-Sam

Any help would be a god send. I've been googling all morning for a manual and checked through here with massive searches, but I can't find anything on the BL3 aside from whats in the ASC Manual

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id...NjuzOr0#PPP1,M1

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/024...0X/filmtoolscom

-Sam

Of course, you don't get anything for free. The big catch with bayer is that extracting a useful image from the sensor data requires far more processing. And this is probably the primary reason why you've seen bayer adopted almost universally for photo cameras, but many vendors seem to avoid it for motion picture acquisition. A professional still photographer might shoot a couple of thousand images in a day. A motion picture camera rolling at 24 frames/second shoots that many in a minute and a half. Running every one of those images through a sophisticated debayer algorithm requires vast computational resources. Processing gets faster every year, though, and file-based acquisition means you don't have to process sensor data at full quality in real-time on-camera anymore. I expect that as a result of these trends, bayer-pattern sensors will become more common in large-format motion picture cameras over time.

Hi Chris, do you really think DSP is the problem now ? I can't get sustained high frame rates from my DSLR but it can process a RAW image very fast, give me jpegs (in fact does a more efficient job if it doesn't keep the RAW and record it) - mechanical issues aside the bottleneck would seem to be how fast thy can get data off the chip itself, the buffer size and read/write to & from the buffer.

Indeed it can make a viewable jpeg from the RAW capture much faster than my computer..

I note Canon would seem to be using more or less the same - or cousins "Digic" DSP in still cameras and the Bayer HV-20; Sony as well (Alpha DSLRs & EX-1)

-Sam

I can already hear the "is it really a 4K scan or is it a 3.2 / 3 / 2.8 k scan arguments...."

i suggested last year you think about swapping out what is essentially a camera section of a Sony Vialta with a Red.

Put a reworked Red Epic in there...

(I'm at least semi-serious !)

-Sam

I wish I still had an article about this quite a few years ago about how Kodak had done a lot of experimenting with T-Max to see if they could release it as a movie film. As I recall the results were very disappointing. Plus-X looked better and there was no advantage to using T-Max emulsions according to Kodak.

I remember this also, I sort of got the feeling Kodak had pre-determined the results to some extent. Plus X OK, but T-Max 400 vs Double X is a different equation. I was always thinking T-Max 3200 would be interesting as a MP stock (I recall a thread on CML where it was suggested TMax 3200 might be too susceptible to pressure fogging.

I read Kodak claims the new T-Max 400 is pushable to 3200, anyone tried it ?

I'm getting a very nice "T-Max like" look by digital means currently, and at EI 1600 - 3200 I know this is heresy :rolleyes: but I'm quite happy and then some......

-Sam

And just gaffing the bulbs to the ceiling would be a no-no? I know the ballast's got to go somewhere, but that's not nearly 70kgs of at all.

I did that with Optima 32's (in sleeves !) before there even were Kinos.....

-Sam

I personally thought Agfa 5.61 (Gordon Willis' films for Woody Allen, Soderbergh's Kafka, the Bruce Weber doc "Let's Get Lost" - that last one a blow-up from Tri-X reversal) looked better than Kodak positive..

No longer made. I've heard (but have not seen) ORWO has / had a similar print stock.

Kodak 7361 reversal print stock (16mm only) was great (and also no more).

-Sam

It's a licensed system & the processor is not playing a CD, it's a CD-ROM that DTS burns containing ATRAC compressed audio and having a much faster seek time than a CD.

-Sam