Tyler Purcell
-
Posts
7,485 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Tyler Purcell
-
Bro tell me about it. I'm on a Facebook group for independent filmmakers. There are guys on there making 8 features a year who don't even understand the 180 degree rule and then argue with me about how making features is all they know how to do. I'm like bro, I shoot better home movies lol
-
It's why I never invested in video gear. Makes no sense honestly. Unless you're renting to a big show for months on end, you'll never recoup the initial cost on new/top of the line gear like an Alexa 35. Smaller productions don't even care what you shoot on. I bet if I had an Alexa 35 I'd be busy shooting at least once a week, but would it pay more than my job? Probably not enough to pay bills AND the lease on the camera. So then you're talking about buying an older camera, which is less appealing. So sure you'll get SOME gigs, but not the same ones who want "the hot" new camera. So you're 100% right, most people will just buy a A7SIII or a Pocket 6k Pro and have at it. Very low entry fee and with programs like DaVinci Resolve, you can easily do beautiful finish coloring and mastering right at home FOR FREE. Why do you need a pro for anything really?
-
WOW! Our 2 story place with a 25x30 garage, 10x20 storage closet, 10x10 laundry, 750 square feet living space, 2 bedroom, two bath, full attic use for storage, is $2400/month. It's not in Burbank, it's on the border of Sherman Oaks in VAN NUYS, right on Burbank/Woodman, but it's not a bad neighborhood. I've seen similar places rent for $2800 in our neighborhood. I've even seen full houses in Burbank rent for $4k with 3 bedrooms, 2 baths, full garage, etc. We're always looking to move into a bigger place, but $4k is out of our price range.
-
I did a little video a while ago that I forgot to post about Resolve post stabilization to demo how well it works.
-
No, there is no 8k system. You're right, two 4k projectors could work, but there is no playout server. -
Yes super 8 at 24fps, is nearly identical in price per finished minute to 16mm. We're talking a few pennies more per finished minute on 16mm. There really isn't any benefit to super 8 unless you're looking for a particular look. We shoot quite a bit of super 8 because I'm doing a film about living in Los Angeles and I wanted to carry around a super 8 camera with me all the time, so we have a few small super 8 cameras, which are always loaded with film around for just that purpose. I would use a 16mm camera, but I haven't ever found one anywhere near the size of a super 8 camera with a built in meter and such. Otherwise, shoot 16 of course.
-
Post stabilizing is amazing today. I have gotten away with horrible camera shake issues, where my heart actually shakes the camera and it's not even noticeable on the final file. No issues what so ever. Logmar cameras are hard to get ahold of. May have to find a user willing to let you borrow one.
-
Very! Sage advise! Burbank is pretty awesome. I remember my first year here and how lost I was. It takes a while to find your "home" really. Even though I don't love the area I'm in, sadly it's it's the most "centric" place I can be for my business. Burbank would be ideal. Just too expensive.
-
Hence why I live in the valley. I don't even go to Long Beach anymore. It's way too dangerous.
-
Much of the film industry is in the valley or just on the other side of the hill in the Hollywood area. You can find good employment AND a good life living in the Pasadena, Glendale, Burbank, North Hollywood area. I wouldn't go much more west than North Hollywood. Then you've got a quick jump over the 101 or Barham to Hollywood. You can also live in a more urban area if you stick to those areas, rather than it just being straight city. Lots to do; Angeles crest for hiking, theaters, shopping, awesome food and not too far from the beach. It's also not horribly expensive compared and you don't really need the highway to get places. It's all accessible via short stints on the 101/134 and backroads. Having lived here 21 years as of this September, I can attest to how lovely it is living in this area compared to being stuck with freeways. Stay away from Long Beach, it's pretty bad. Santa Monica is very nice, but expensive and you're stuck there. Hard to get out since you're beholden to the 405, which is one of the worst highways in the entire country.
-
Any standard "film" vintage bridge plate will work https://www.ebay.com/itm/175818449635?hash=item28ef98a2e3:g:3dgAAOSwtytksm7y&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA4Ba3nQjvxPMwVQhlTnmNbSwQhHs%2FFwnyd7nWDG0WWo30ZAYILCE9B%2BuavRYmR2zUoAtigEy7wYjIIJ4B4%2FNUU9%2FXA%2BrxMxCoIlwZquAHJJwBKiXCkj6Hhe8m4CBPVbW5T%2BpWGnY1WBjg8eYp839%2BbRYCkzGJTIOQP8CqO3mzEwOZbh0yd5v8w9zVApQuoFy%2FWwbksHGwnKp7QwMnsykgOlbeMut0tOQjNu1841acPqeJ1hUFEz3Wt883iPCiCCtkGl7JFfsvZyqs3YkhnHLvKA6IDUQe%2BrXeK2NkkIRYfxb6|tkp%3ABk9SR6zD6Na1Yg
-
What does box-office have to do with anything? The studios spent 200M easily on marketing alone.
-
The lenses can't get near 11k. But if you do the math, 35mm still film which is 8 perf 35mm retains 6k easily. I've physically done that test when compared to an 8k digital stills camera with a similar sized imager. A 15 perf frame is several magnitudes larger than 8 perf 35mm. The resolution does scale. The problem is the lenses and the way motion picture film is shot compared to still film. The only way to really test this stuff is to do it with optical printer lenses, not vintage full frame lenses and to do it one frame at a time. Digital has the benefit of having no blur between frames, images stay on screen longer as well. So it "appears" to be sharper simply because there is so much more stability. When analyzed as a "still" image, you can tell right away how much different things are. IMAX 15P when projected, is closer to 8k resolution than 18k, which is what it "could" deliver, that's mainly due to the issues with optics and film projection in general. There will never be an 8k digital projection system using current technology. Even the best multi-projector 6k systems used in a few domes today, are still sub-par due to source limitations. Also, record-out systems are limited as well. So how many 15P movies are made, where the prints were struck from the original camera negative AND they had no record out's?
-
The 5 perf shots were cut, then a 5 perf IP was made, 15 perf blow up was made and those shots were cut into the 15p OCN string. So they were already 3rd generation when they hit the 15P negative. That's a lot of resolution loss.
-
What price range are you looking for?
-
Wikipedia has a great page on it as well.
-
Plz do! I think everyone should see it. Such a wonderful movie.
-
Sounds like they copied it perfectly!
-
Thanks Scott and to think people bitched about the cinematography on several reviews of the film. Holy shit, I think Hoyte killed it. So impressed with his work. Just wanna find him at an event and shake the mans hand for such a stellar job. Drama's are not easy, especially shooting at the pace this film was shot at. Many DP's flounder in his shoes, but man he just bangs it out of the park. I thought the tricks he used to keep the speed of production up, like blasting light into the windows, really worked well. Not distracting at all and gave him plenty of light to work with. The night cinematography too, just lovely work with practicals and some light augmentation.
-
Shit if you're in Copenhagen, you're lucky. Ya got two REALLY good cinema's! I wish we had good ones like that in Los Angeles anymore, but alas with Covid, many shut down. I have a bunch of friends in the area as well, all huge fanatics of 70mm. Enjoy the show!
-
Yea, right? It seemed fine to me too. Good observation on the reflections, I too noticed that, but then again I was very engrossed in the story.
-
The explosion was a few seconds on screen. It really doesn't even play much if any role in a 3hr movie. They did the close up's perfect, that's what it looked like. The wide "false perspective" shot was the only issue. I think it was on screen for less than 2 seconds. If that's what people complained about, they probably missed the first hour of the film LOL ?
-
It was horrible, absolutely atrocious. If that was "quality" then what is bad?
-
Welcome to the forum! Umm, not sure exact numbers. I doubt IMAX or Nolan want people to know because it would undercut their "profit" venture, of over-charging people for IMAX shows. I would guesstimate around 20 minutes of the 3hr movie are IMAX. There are NO and I mean ZERO complete scenes in 15P IMAX. Unlike Dunkirk and Tenet, which have entire 5 minute segments entirely in 15P. Oppenheimer uses 15P for the master wide and then cuts to 5 perf 65mm. It was annoying actually, VERY annoying, because you'd start a scene in a lush, crystal clear, full screen IMAX frame and suddenly the moment someone started to talk, you'd dump into a grainy, matted (with huge bars at the top and bottom) 5 perf shot that looked nothing like the IMAX opening wide. Had it been my movie, I wouldn't have even bothered with IMAX. I would have shot the entire film in 5 perf 65mm. I would have done it with the 1.90:1 aspect ratio in mind. Made a big stink about it being an IMAX show, but formatted for IMAX laser. Then focus on the 5 perf screenings. Not only would that save a boat load of money, but also deliver the same quality image for the vast majority of screens. The sparse 15P shots, were not worth the experience of seeing 5 perf shots (the bulk of the film) looking like crap compared.
-
Simple, it's too expensive. When I mean too expensive, I don't mean like $1.50 cents a foot. I mean like $200 dollars a foot. Remember, there are only a hand full of CRT recorders left. Once those tubes go, that's it! No more IMAX record out's. So anyone doing a DI finish is... well, finished. Fotokem is in such a horrible position because they want the work obviously and they want to do GOOD work clearly, but their hands are tied by the tech they have. IMAX records everything 15p internally, but Fotokem does the rest. So since most films are DI workflow, the cost just doesn't make any sense. It's super frustrating when you see films like NOPE shot with 15P and not a single IMAX print made. Nobody has seen what the 15P looks like but the crew. Of course a photochemical timing job is probably cheaper, but who is going to do that? Fotokem's timers are retired guys they bring back, when they decide not to come back, who will it be? Hoyte is talented, he knows what he wants, he knows how to get it, but he doesn't have time to consult on everyone else's movie. It's probably an older projector in the theater. IMAX flicker a lot of times is caused by a dying lamp. Many theaters aren't doing the maintenance they should be, hence the gate weave. FYI, our absolutely abhorred presentation on 15P was rock stable and very little flicker. Dunkirk was horrible. Our 15P print (which I assume was the same source) the 5 perf shots were atrocious. Not only was the timing all over the place, sometimes shot to shot, but the B&W was of course green. When one of the super rare 15P shots would get up on screen, the timing was flawless and the image was remarkably crisper. I have a feeling, your projector was soft in general. 15P is going to come back because they are making 4 brand new sync sound (quiet) cameras that will be out next year. These will allow filmmakers to shoot in 15p without changing to other formats for dialog scenes. So hang tight, I have a feeling this roll out will be like Hateful Eight and the projectors will stay put in many of the houses, just pushed into the corner.
