Joseph Arch

The third is usually the worst because they have used up all the ideas for the first two.

I saw it twice. It was a great film. Screenplay was great. I can't think of anything to make it better. Cinematography was fantastic. Some shots were a bit off. Like the camera was tilted to the right, slightly, which made the shot seem out of perspective. Visual Effects were realistic and gritty. Nothing fancy or excessive. The horse riding scene was way off. They did not put enough time and effort in correcting the green screen. The colours did not match. I enjoyed it more then black swan and the fighter. I hope they win an Oscar.

<sarcasm> To be honest with you, I am surprised. </sarcasm> http://www.gearlog.com/2011/02/glasses-free_3d_a_huge_flop_in.php

I was not joking. I could not find it. Thanks for the link.

I tried looking for Sunrise but irrelevant results returned. What's the IMDB for that film or documentary?

Reading the links now. Thanks

That's the largest wide screen film I have ever seen. Why did they choose to do it that way?

LOL @ Avatar winning best cinematography. When I saw it I was disappointed. I am hoping Inception will make them go deeper.

Wally Pfister for Inception. I hope he wins. A brilliant cinematographer in our age of digital non sense.

I searched but couldn't find it. Thanks.

Nolan has resisted to shoot the film in 3D. Warner Bros have allowed him to shoot it on IMAX. If it's true then it would make sense to shoot the whole film on IMAX because it is the final one. I would assume they would like to end with spectacular imagery and a story.

To my perception, Kubrick did not write most of his stories. He has set the bar very high with his technical knowledge and perfection to a film but most of his stories came from novels. So, I guess you can't be good at everything.

Great, a 4th Bourne film. More crappy camera work. The best handheld camera work I have seen was in Saving Private Ryan and City Of God.

I would be worried if they did not have an Intranet.

Marcus got it right. BBC tested both systems with multiple video files to see which could handle things faster and premier won because of Nvidea's dedicated GPU and 64 bit. Also, they have made the switch because of After Effects and Photpshop. It's easy to switch between programmes rather then export and import files. Their PC's don't need to be connected to the internet and they won't have virus problems. Simples.

I agree. It's not a serious App.

The Bourne trilogy. Worst camera work ever.

It's a very expensive equipment. If you are able to afford it then got for it.

Are you related to James Cameron? 3D is the worst technology to happen to cinema.

Even has been very patient with me and giving. I have actually learnt something new because of our chat. I am still reading your blog, Even.

I would advise you to buy the panasonic GH2. It does exactly what you are looking for and will not cost you an arm, a leg and maybe you head.

I understand you now. Films that are run horizontally have a wider area because as you have mentioned, it's like drawing on a A4 paper. If you do it in landscape you will have more room to fit what you want. However, if you do it in A4 size, that is, vertically then you will have to squash more in. I have a lot ahead of me to learn. When I am wrong on anything, please correct me. Thank you for your support Evan.

Oh never mind. I think I got it. I will return with my theory after I eat. Very hungry right now.

When you speak of imax film running horizontally you mention "exposure". What kind of exposure are you reffering to? Is it the exposure of color or the exposure of area. I am trying to connect the lens to all of this. Lens's can give you a wide view so you would not need any more exposure of area since the lens covers that part. What I am trying to study currently is what kind of exposure does a horizontal placed film have more then a vertical. I am reading your inforgrah now. I have to read it several times to digest and absorb the technical bits.

That does make sense. Are there any film cameras like arri or panavision which take film horizontally? So, a wide angle lens can expose the picture more and has to make up for the horizontally placed film. What if, for example, you use the imax camera with film placed vertically and a wide angle lens. That would mean a greater exposure on the subject. Or am I wrong?