Jump to content

Tyler Purcell

Sustaining Member
  • Content Count

    5389
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    122

Tyler Purcell last won the day on May 19

Tyler Purcell had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

535 Excellent

2 Followers

About Tyler Purcell

  • Rank

  • Birthday 07/28/1978

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Other
  • Location
    Los Angeles
  • My Gear
    Arricam ST, 3 perf, Aaton XTR Prod +, Aaton 35III 3 perf, Bolex EBM, K3, Blackmagic Pocket Camera
  • Specialties
    Cinematography (digital cinema and 16/35mm) and post production (DaVinci/Avid/Final Cut Pro)

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.tpproductionfilms.com
  • Skype
    tye1138

Recent Profile Visitors

56832 profile views
  1. Looks like California will re-open Friday June 12th! Production is slated to start around the same time. If that's the truth, that would be pretty good.
  2. Pro Res is a "variable bitrate codec". So it will vary on how much data is needs to be encoded.
  3. Resolve works in progressive. It's part of the reason why people struggle to get MPEG TS streams for broadcast out of resolve. It just can't do interlaced.
  4. Yep error in pro tools not your project.
  5. I use Fusion to do this work in Resolve. It's extremely fast to deal with issues like this, but it's also very power hungry. I doubt highly your system would run it sadly. We have 64gb on our "modern" Ryzen 3950X build and it's slow at rendering and playing back Fusion jobs. Mind you, they're 4k and such, but still. In the past I've used a similar technique to yours, but in After Effects.
  6. Every time you re-encode a .h264, you lose quality. Pro Res HQ is considered a "lossless" codec, there is no perceivable loss in quality no matter how many generations you re-encode. This is why people master to formats like Pro Res, no matter how good or bad the source is.
  7. That movement is very expensive to convert, the cost would be several thousand dollars for the movement alone. I was quoted $5k for the job on a moviecam years ago and that was back the parts existed. Andree Martin is the only person who could do it these days, but the savings you make by shooting 2 perf isn't really made up by the exorbitant amount of money put into the movement. Now a 3 perf conversion, that's doable and Andree may have the parts still.
  8. I've been an Tungsten and HMI guy for years. I love experimenting with new things and a few years ago, I DP'd two industrial films back to back and on one we shot Tungsten/HMI and on the other, we were 100% LED, using a friends Arri LED kit. We had L series and Skypanels of various outputs and I gotta tell ya, I was very impressed. The first day we set them up, having never used them before, I was able to get the look I was after in some difficult mixed conditions (daylight bleeding into scene) and honestly, I was impressed. Where the output of the sources wasn't anything like that of a similar sized tungsten light, being able to adjust the color balance without resorting to gels and being able to run many sources off "house" power, were both incredible features. I was impressed with the light quality as well, it was the closest thing to Tungsten I've ever seen come out of an LED. I'm sad that show is the one I shot with the F55 because it's such a "cool" looking camera compared to Arri or Canon, but still I was able to do a satisfactory grade that didn't look completely like shit. lol 😛 Since then, I've shot with a lot more LED's and my experiences have been varied. I think that's part of the reason why so many people continue to prefer Tungsten because there are situations where it works great and situations where it doesn't. Tungsten always works great, there really isn't a situation outside of electricity and heat limitations, where it doesn't work. In those cases, if you have no choice, then you'll go for LED's. I think that's the power of LED, as an alternative to the mainstream solution. I'm still a tungsten guy. There is no denying that I probably won't buy LED's anytime soon and I'll continue to expand my Tungsten inventory once I have more space. You can throw up a tungsten light and it will be perfect every time you turn it on, just like shooting on film. Ya know for fact, the results will be what you expect in post, without having to really worry about the nuances that make shooting with modern tech so tricky sometimes.
  9. HAHAHAH! But in all truth, we do a lot of 1.85:1 grading, so we need a 17:9 aspect ratio monitor. 😛
  10. I agree. This thing has been tossed around the film groups on Facebook for a week now and I'm so over it. Absolutely nothing to see here. Who cares if some super famous musician had their boring music video shot on film. The hipster look doesn't make me wanna listen to the music anymore than if it was shot on 65mm.
  11. What I meant was because the owner hadn't tested the camera before, there wasn't a "known good" status given to it. Thus, the list of probable causes isn't as straight forward as (it worked yesterday and now it doesn't), which is the case in most camera services.
  12. Oh! Just found out the prints were made and are waiting to be shipped! 🙂
  13. Ah got ya, so it could be anything. Just double checking that this problem isn't something new. Ohh and also... what were your loop sizes like? Maybe you're just dealing with a slightly tight loop.
  14. Interesting display. My only gripe is that it's 16:9 UHD resolution and not 17:9 4k. 😞 I'm still using an antique LG 31MU97 still, it's only 300 nit, but it's 10 bit, 17:9 and true 4k. I just turn off the lights when doing a final grade. 😛
×
×
  • Create New...