Tyler Purcell

Well 3 perf is S35, so if the 2C is also S35, then a standard 1.85:1 would be fine. The frame lines of 3 perf are 1.78:1, but nobody uses the frame edge, you'll always crop a tiny bit to 1.85:1 anyway.

Short ends come from big films. Who is shooting black and white on a big film? You can buy short ends from the Kodak Hollywood Film shop.

Absolutely, 100%

Are you sure? I was told by the BMD guys, the little secret is that they debayer in the magic box and the software simply controls that box with a "raw" video feed, similar to BRAW, but it's post debayer.

No, there is no magic that turns negative into positive. You'll have to shoot reversal (I don't know anyone processing 35mm E6) or you'll have to shoot negative and strike a print from the negative. The negative to print process is a contact print, the two elements touch each other and has a colored light which exposes the film. Most real labs can do this work, but it's expensive, especially if you want a shot by shot color grade, which is important if you're shooting different stocks and different stops. If you keep the stop the same throughout and insure there are no massive shifts in DR, you could get away with a single light print from the negative to project. Also remember, most cameras today shoot S35mm, which is not projectable. So you will need to shoot "normal" 35mm which for 2x anamorphic is standard, but for 4 perf, everyone shoots S35 today for digital scan and digital finish. This isn't a big deal, but you'll need to make sure if you're going to print, to shoot 4 perf "normal" 35mm.

Rumors around the mill, not just from me talking to the right people, but also others communicating to me, is that BMD do have a new imager, but there is something not right, which is why it's been delayed. I have this funny feeling, it's going to be a "Cintel Pro" or something of that nature, which will be more money, but obviously be made out of the same metal bits, just with a new internal computer. The Cintel does everything localized in the scanner. So the drive control system, debayer, stabilization and framing, is all done in scanner. The software simply tells the hardware box what to do. This means, the load on the computer side is basically non-existent. Clever for sure, but it means that fancy box they built, needs to be all-new from scratch, which is very costly. I can't imagine them using the standard moniker for this clearly all-new machine, when they JUST came out with the Cintel 3 few months ago. Another side note; BMD do not have a global shutter imager, which is required to do the kind of work they are trying to achieve in this scanner. Nor would they ever use their 12k imager in this thing, I can't imagine them trying. So whatever imager they use, it will be a purchased imager, not something in house. That's another side note of perhaps why it's taking such a long time. In the past, BMD have not liked to compete, they've made whatever the competition doesn't make. Now, for the first time, they're directly competing in the camera industry. They have a real cinema camera, something they haven't made until today. They have real accessories and a fantastic commercial workflow. If this is successful, maybe it's time for BMD to step out of the shadows and onto the playing field and dominate with a sub $50k scanner that does everything a Scan Station does? They already have the 8mm, 16mm and 35mm gates and sprocketless drive system. They already do optical audio. They already have great software. I mean, the only thing missing is a fancy imager.

It's hard with digital cameras because they could have hidden issues like hot pixels that don't show up until the camera is warmed up. I always shoot with the gain all the way up and the lens cap on, to see if there are any stuck/problematic pixels first. That's one of the best ways. This way you can truly tell what's up. Other than that, the standard overview to make sure the fans aren't clogged and such, so run the camera at a high frame rate (so it uses more of the cooling) and see what she does. If it doesn't keep cool and starts to through overheating errors in a few minutes, something could be wrong. Red's are very temperamental when it comes to hot pixels and hot bodies. Thermal issues (runaway) can cause them to fail. So be careful. Also check the imager for any physical issues like fungus. If it's coming from Brazil, be very careful, humidity is a big problem.

Unfortunately they stopped making reversal print stock years ago. They had Ektachrome and Kodachrome variants, but they don't anymore. I guess if you timed Ektachrome, maybe it could be a substitute, but it would be very tricky to get right.

@Aapo Lettinen Exactly, the pyxis is an imager away from being great.

Oh no, lol The Lumix is a joke, it's not even 6k actually. But remember, two different industries. The Pyxis is the same camera as the FF Pocket 6k. Just in a box that can cool better, which will help up the road with a new processor and imager, which I bet will be out next year at NAB. They'll absolutely make a MKII version, I know the WRGB imager will exist in more cameras eventually. So the current Pyxis, if you're not using Resolve for 100% of your post production, is not worth it. The slow imager refresh is fixed with Resolve in real time, but not in any other program. They can get the refresh much faster with the WRGB imager in the 12k.

Honestly, 6k or 8k for acquisition and 4k for finish/delivery, is basically what everyone should be doing today. The only reason why it's not done as commonly is thanks to the modern Arri's being stuck at 4k. Any show shooting on an alternative camera, is going to shoot in 6k or 8k. I prefer 8k for post, but 6k is adequate for slight cropping here and there, with 4k deliverables. My first entirely 8k show was in 2021, 8k in and 8k out. Since then, I have helped many people conform their 8k shows to 8k deliverables. The reason why is very simple, 8k is beyond future proof. We will all have 8k TV's in a few years, as they'll stop making 4k ones. They need 8k to differentiate what you can buy on physical media, from what they can stream to you in the house. So the days of "just 4k" are actually behind us in my opinion. The industry has been nearly entirely 4k for the last decade and now it's moving on. So yea, HD today is basically 480i and 4k is the industry standard, the "new" HD. The reason why is very simple; bandwidth. HD bandwidth is horrible, it really is pitiful on streaming platforms. When you finish in 4k, the bandwidth is so much higher, the streaming looks WAY better, night and day honestly, even if you still deliver in h264 like I do. I have yet to find any benefits in .h265 deliverables FYI OR uploading Pro Res, there really aren't any benefits. But HD vs 4k, it's night and day, even if you're only playing back in 1920x1080. So most companies will require scripted or documentary series to be delivered in UHD. Things like game shows and unscripted, generally deliver in HD still today. Shit, even my races have been shooting and streaming in 4k since 2016. So yea, HD = dead.

It's 100% a tap scratch. Reflections can't do that. The key is how it moves and how it flickers. Those are two indications. You may not see it on the emulsion if you aren't trained properly. You have to look at the bounced reflection from a soft white light source in order to actually see the scratch. We have one built into our scanner box and on our inspection table, it's critical for determining where scratches are. This is a common issue when the loop size is too big.

The studio's are dying, not feature films.

Are they? When movies are $18 bux a seat and streaming services are so expensive, people have backed off substantially, which has caused them raise prices. The streamers like the studio's are in the middle of collapse. The same thing happened in the 1970's, but today it's even worse. I just found out, Warner sold the entire lot in Burbank and of course, we already know Paramount did as well. We've never seen the strongest studios have this happen. This is free-fall territory.

Arri spent a lot of money transitioning from film to digital. At one point, they had several models of camera and now they've focused on one single camera; the Alexa 35. Once the rental houses owned the Alexa 35, who else is really buying? You have to release a new camera every two years to really continue the success necessary to truly be a market dominant system. So sure, Arri has other revenue streams, but lenses, lighting and camera line are probably the three biggest markets and are completely and utterly dominated by other brands if you simply account for units sold. The days of Arri lenses, lights and cameras be night and day better than the competition, are behind us. Big shows shoot on Arri simply because of preference. There are several solid camera systems out there today, all of them can deliver an image which nobody can really argue with. Just look at "The Creator" using a toy camera and how the look is simply fantastic. The days of needing/wanting your show to be shot on Arri Alexa, they're gone. There is no more prestige, just like the prestige of film has kinda faded as well. Arri for better or worse, has forced the other brands into territories nobody expected them to be in and Arri themselves, haven't dramatically innovated. Sure the Alexa 35 is a stellar camera, with wonderful color science and an imager which has fantastic dynamic range, but so is the Venice II and Burano. So is the Red V-Raptor. So is the new Blackmagic 12K Cine. So are the Canon C300MKIII, C400 and C500MKII. Etc... I mean the list goes on and on. Arri needs to re-invent themselves, and I guarantee you, it's happening right now. They a very smart company, full of extremely talented individuals who understand the industry better than most of us. From the outside, it's easy to look in and criticize them because let's face it, the competition has caught up. From the inside tho, I bet they're doing fine. They have diversified pretty heavily and I simply can't imagine the camera business being top priority like it's been in the past.

So this is a "tap" scratch in my opinion, the film is tapping something mid frame. Usually this is caused by the loop tapping something, either upper or lower. It's for sure emulsion side. That "dust" is absolutely emulsion. So start looking at your loop size. Are you properly using the film holders on the pressure plate? Check the screws that hold the guides inside the magazine (picture above) and make sure there is nothing that could touch the film.

The problem is that billionaires by up huge swaths of land and never use it. If you inhabit land, there is no exit tax. If you don't in habit the land, then you need to in habit it or get the F out. I see abandoned houses everywhere in CA, there are at least three in my neighborhood. We use to hike a lot in the Santa Monica mountains and there are huge mansions up there, which lay dormant, so maybe one day they can sell or put one of their family members in. The big problem with CA is actually the pensions. The police, fire and government worker pensions, which started in the 1950's, have literally destroyed California financially. People are living way longer than they ever have and the pensions keep adding up. So 1/3rd of all tax money going to the state, is going directly to pensions. Which means, they only have 2/3rds of the tax money to do anything within the state, which is partially why nothing gets done. The other big problem with CA is poor management of said money. They blow it on the dumbest of projects, many of which take decades to complete and when done, the entire state has radically changed, so whatever they did, would be useless. They're building this high speed rail for instance, something nobody will ever use. They have been building affordable housing, but it's a lottery system and if you don't get in early, you don't get it. Most of the people who need it, aren't sitting on a website refreshing constantly to apply. California is also anti-business, you should be "privileged" to have your business here in their mind, which in my mind is wrong. I get why they think that, but it's not 1990 anymore. Many of the great jobs are leaving state for shit stains like Texas and Florida because they need to diversify. The film industry has already done that, you no longer need to shoot in CA and crew are moving anywhere they want near an airport and simply fly to the shows. It costs a tiny bit more money, but it's not the end of the world for a big project. In the end, if CA lowered fuel taxes, if they incentivize small businesses with tax breaks, they could easily rebuild. But at this point, I don't see them ever doing that.

Yea canon doesn't have the noise reduction tech that Sony does. So it'll always be more noisy. It's also running an F4 lens vs an F2.8 lens. So it's running a stop behind. I could have gotten the grain down on the R5 by doing a longer exposure, but seeing as we mostly shoot things in motion, we kept the shutter speed higher, like 1/60th or something in that realm on both cameras. 800 is pretty good honesty, it's the first time I had ever shot with it. Yeah 35mm still film is crazy these days, it's an added expense that seems hardly worth it. At least 16mm has a very different look than 35mm.

Yea, tho I will admit our R5 does create some nice images in 8k, nothing like a BMD 12k Cine, Red or Venice however. Canon's raw color science is bullshit, it never works right. Yep, but again more hardware. The C80 looks like a decent option, I was pretty confused when I saw that announcement. Canon literally undermining their own product launch (C400) with something that is smaller and lighter, but basically the same. Kinda blew my mind away.

Bro, this is how the Japanese brands work these days. They use to just release an updated version of the cameras, but everyone has to make every "type" of camera now. They can't just have "betacam cheap and betacam expensive". Na, they've gotta have a C70, C80, C100, C200, C300, C400, C500, C700, then update each of them on different schedules. So the newest one is some random variant. They're literally taking the same imager and compressing its capabilities down to save a few bux. But the C80 which hasn't come out yet, appears to be the same as the C400, minus a few functions that probably nobody really cares much about, for only $2k less. Like, what the F are Canon smoking? They release two cameras, with the same imager, make one 1/3rd the size and are like "ok which one do you want"? First off, flabbergasted they can't make an 8k video camera, which IS THE MARKET. I don't care what anyone says, 8k is the market. This whole screwing around with 6k nonsense, it's just horseshit in the long run. The market is 8k and the reason is so simple; being able to crop and reframe in post. You basically get 2x the focal length for a 4k output which means you can really do a lot of work in post, which saves a great deal of time on set. Shooting with the Red in 8k and now a bit with the Blackmagic 12k cameras in 8k, I'm sold on the entire concept. Sony is just as bad too, they have overlapping camera lines all the way up and down the board. However, Sony purposely hinders their lower end cameras, literally purposely making them shit, so you buy the more expensive one. The Venice II has a great imager, wonderful color science and decent refresh. The Burano with the same damn imager, has a 18ms refresh. Are you fucking kidding me? Blackmagic's 12k Cine in 4x3 open gate full imager 8k (what you'd actually shoot normally) is only 6.7ms. The Alexa LF is around 5ms. So if Blackmagic can do it for $16k with a full kit, including storage, fucking Sony can do it, but they just don't give a shit. They purposely screwed the users, so they'd have to buy the Venice to get a decent imager refresh? 18ms is useless bro, 100% useless. Blackmagic knew it was such an issue with their 6k cameras, they literally designed an AI tool in Resolve to fix it, with a little check box in post. Bam, fixed instantly. It uses the gyro of the camera to cleverly figure out the camera movement and then re-builds the image based on that. So you can shoot open gate 6k full frame on a Pyxis or 6k FF pocket which is 25ms readout and with one checkbox, fixed. Sony on the A7SIII can do 8.7ms readout. That's the best of any full frame imager camera that isn't something specialized. So they stuck that imager into the FX6 and left the damn FX9 to languish with an older imager with a 22ms readout. Like what the F are you guys doing? Why didn't they just use that imager to make the FX9MKII? Are they going to stick the shitty refresh imager from the Burano into the FX9? Yes, it's frustrating.

Not if you care about using the raw files. You need one heck of a beefy system AND storage for them to playback in real time. The newer X-OCN codec that launched few years ago and has been adopted by the Venice and Burano, is much better.

Forget that, the codec is basically a dinosaur, good luck getting it to work in anything smoothly.

Ohhhh Hmm, the 5DMKIV is a way better imager, night and day. The R6MKII is an even larger jump forward, but the "filmic" aspects, is kinda tough with the new Canon color science. I find we have to do a lot more post work with the R5 (same color science as the R6) vs the 5D's. Tho I will admit, I haven't shot with the MKIV before. Only the 2 and 3. This is an example of the edge of highlight clipping, but notice the details in the warmer tones with the R5.

Ahh yea, I stopped doing that years ago. Seeing as you still need the original files on the storage anyway, might as well just link the media to the editors. Tough with avid, but fine with premiere and resolve. Our last show was 50TB of 8k red raw, edited with the original media and the moment the show was cut, we just deleted the raws as they were backed up onto original drive sets, one of them was in a vault.

Welcome to CMOS! LOL What camera is this?