Scott Pickering

Any recommendations for anamorphic lenses with 1.6x squeeze that won't break the bank?

Sirui Venus T2.9 1.6x 5-Lens Kit with Hard Case (35/50/75/100/150mm, L-Mount) Tyler (or anyone)- whats your thoughts on these lenses if using anamorphics and resolving power?

Tyler. You've seen lots of work in 65/70mm. If shooting in 12k and downrezzing in post to 8k, what lenses are going to give you the look in terms of rez as a 5/70 print?

I'd have to do a sole proprietorship as we don't have LLCs in Canada.

Thanks for your thoughts guys. Good info too Tyler. Looking at the Cine 12K, the body itself is only 3 grand more here in Canada, but its the accessories you have to buy to use the Cine 12K which is killing it for me. And its only in EF or PL mount. The batteries on the Pyxis are fairly common (BP-U) and cheap enough, and the chargers arent much. I already have some CF-E B cards that I use on my Fuji camera. Lenses are easy to find when using L mount (many adapters). When going the Cine, the prices of the needed accessories ramps up the price to basically double. The Pyxis is more budget friendly. Hard to say what camera they'll put out in a couple years time. If you were using the 12K camera, to get the best 8K image, would you let the camera downrez to 8K right off the bat, or is it better to downrez in Resolve? How soft is the sensor really? Any links to tests I could look at? Another question I'll ask which has nothing to do with gear. When paying your crew/ actors, what is the recommended way of giving them payment, if this is really a low budget film? This might be out of pocket for this. Or do you absolutely recommend registering a company for the 1 year it would be operating? It wouldnt be incorporated of course. This whole feature may be a one off, as no future plans to make more films down the road, unless somehow this first film does make money. But it may not make any. Its just a labor of love to do this project.

In the next few years or so, Id like to shoot a feature with a small crew here in the Fraser Valley BC. My main issue is finding ways to shoot at specific locations, which may scuttle doing the feature if this isn't solved. Whether we are allowed to shoot in a store location, or have to fabricate one somehow on a set, I havent figured out yet. Once that is figured out, and the money to shoot becomes available, I'll be looking for a small crew and non union actors. This is a very low budget film, so most of it will take place inside or around a store location. I might end up doing the camera work myself, but also hiring a boom operator and a lighting person to work with myself on DOP work. I have a friend who works in the Industry in Vancouver, and he has offered help for this feature. For now the script is being worked on, and will continue to do so up to the point of preproduction. I might end up directing as well, or co directing with my friend. I have a pretty clear vision of what Im after as far as the story and what I'd like from the actors. That all aside, I've been looking at the up and coming Blackmagic Pyxis 12K to shoot this feature with (since Im very low budget), and it seems to fit the bill. Im aware of the reliability of Black Magic cameras while in use on productions, but Im not sure the company has made strides to improve this area today? I will be using the 12K mode, as the final file will be in 8K for delivery. Im aware 8K is not a well used standard, but at least Youtube has accepted its use. If the film ever did well enough to bring in some money, I'd consider getting a film out print in either 35mm or even 65mm. I know there really is no lens that will resolve 12K, and may even struggle for 8K. Someone suggested 160 lines per mm for 12K in what the lenses would need to resolve. But they also said the softer look you'd get in 12K with most lenses (it sharpens up downrezzing to 8K), gives a film like look. The Pyxis 12K uses the same full frame sensor as the Cine 12K. This sensor claims to have 16 stops of dynamic range, and the color off these sensors is very good as well. I think most lenses resolve around 50 lines per mm. Im thinking to get the L mount version for auto focus at times when I need that, especially when its just me shooting and Im in the shot. I dont know if there are any recommended L mount lenses anyone would suggest? I have read to really make use of the sensor I'd have to use expensive CINE lenses. I could also shoot in anamorphic to use the full sensor for better resolution, but Im not sure what is not too expensive to get for this camera? I'd probably have to get the PL mount if I went that route. Is there such a thing as PL mount autofocus lenses? Im not aware if there is. I dont think PL uses any contacts either. Has Adobe Premiere Pro improved its RAW conversion for BM, or is it still worse then Resolve? What lenses, whether spherical or anamorphic, would be recommended for the 12K? Which lenses give a cinematic look (I know these two questions are not the same result). I might use a Fuji XH-2 for secondary camera work (in 8K), since I own this camera. Any comments on Blackmagic 12K cameras for their use or output? I'll probably get a few 4TB CF Express B cards for daily shooting.

It seems Niagara doesnt use a laser out, but a screen. Not ideal. Cinelab uses a laser to 16mm. Not sure they do 4:3 16mm or if it has to be Super 16? What is the rez of the files to go onto the film with them? Is it basically 2K or can you do 4K files for 16mm?

I'm aware of places that do color digital video to color neg 16mm stock. Being in Canada I looked at Niagara Custom Lab as they do do this. First off what resolution should the video file be for the maximum resolution for film outs (and what format as in file type) for 16mm 4:3 color neg? They use 50D for the negative. But what I'm wonder is if they can film out to B&W neg stock like 7252 using the same machine? Video will be shot on an 8k Fuji mirrorless camera and framed accordingly for wide-screen letterbox. I know 8k is overkill for 16mm film outs. End result is a film scan and also a 16mm print. Does anyone have an uploaded film to look at for film out projects, especially 16mm?

So you're telling me developing it as a reversal, which includes extra steps, than as a negative, will give you a better image? Let's not talk about how a negative allows more control over the image itself, instead of a fixed exposure shot. I fail to understand why doing it as a negative instead of a positive would be worse for image quality.

I have rolls of the Plus X reversal film, which I want to do as a negative. Thought I mentioned that, but maybe wasn't clear. The film was bought off Ebay during its lifetime, so I can't say how it was stored before me. I'll have to test it first.

Talking with my ex brother in law, we are wanting to make a 4th film. Most of it will be shot on digital 8K, but select scenes I'd like to shoot some Super 8 Plus X stock I have stashed in the freezer some years ago. Not sure how good that film is, so I'll test it. Camera to be used is an Elmo 612 S-XL which apparently has the sharpest lens in their lineup for the time. It will be shot at 24 fps. The camera apparently has a 220 degree shutter angle. Since I will be using the camera meter in manual mode, setting the aperture manually, what is the best approach to metering the light for the scene? Im used to shooting film stills, but not motion picture stock (for metering). I do have a Sekonic L-508, but it doesnt have normal use for motion picture stock. I'll ask what ISO I should set it to for Plus X as a neg. Now second question. With the Plus X (Super 8), its meant for reversal processing. I want to shoot it as a neg. What ISO rating should I set it to for this film, keeping in mind its aged as well? I think the normal reversal EI is 80. Not sure how that converts to ISO? I have 6 rolls of the Plus X at 2 minutes each, so I want to make sure I get this all right, as once its gone, its gone. Again the film has probably aged a bit, even if frozen some years of its life.

Greg. I agree on the difficulty focus pulling IMAX film cameras. I use 6x7 film format myself with a Pentax, and I did a shoot 2 weeks ago, where I missed focus on most shots at f2.4. So I can understand where you are coming from. Maybe Im a simple guy, but can you elaborate with examples on how Nolan has become self indulgent or too clever? Im not seeing what you are alluding to. But then again I notice more technical stuff then story process, etc. I'll note while I was in the Oppenheimer show a second time, the people I sat next to told me about a technical issue at the Langley theater that stopped a show last week. So my theater wasn't immune to these issues either. Its been commented who will still use film or make film prints when directors like Nolan retire? They say we may only have 20 years left with film. I also heard IMAX is considering putting back more 15/70 projectors in IMAX theaters around the world, due to demand.

Well I saw Oppenheimer in IMAX 70mm again today. Seeing the movie a second time flowed better and made more sense this time. You obviously miss a lot on first viewing. I also noticed a lot of out of focus shots in this film. Im really starting to think IMAX print is closer to 8K in rez seen. It looked sharp, but not digital sharp. It still had that soft film look, but with more detail. Grain was noticable on many of the shots. Of course 15 perf worked the best for everything. It produced the cleanest image of all of it. I liked the film more the second time. It certainly ranks as one of Nolans best work.

Tyler. Was there not a demo by NHK some years back in a theater showing some sports event? One person said it was like looking into a window. Also Samsung is supposed to be coming out with a short throw 8k projector.

I know they are out there, but is 8k laser projection possible today? Could they do like IMAX and put two 4K projectors together to make 8k rez?

Cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema NSC FSF ASC gets up-close &… | Kodak

So being a big fan of true IMAX using 70mm film prints, I had to see this release in 70mm when it came available in my area once again. I saw Dunkirk in this same theater in 70mm IMAX 6 years ago. This was one of the few theaters left that still kept their 70mm projection system. I have been watching real IMAX since 1986, when it first became available in Vancouver BC at Expo 86. That theater has since shut down the IMAX films, so Langley was the only one left. Im not sure if the OMNIMAX at the Science World still offers film projection. The Langley theater has had its IMAX venue since the late 90s I believe. I saw quite a few true IMAX films in this theater over time, with quite a few of them being Nolan films. Why is Nolan the ONLY director that will still insist on 70mm prints for his films? I wish more of them would. I was also happy to see this release with the B&W portions shot on real B&W film, as I too myself wished I could make a film that way at one time. Nolan is the guy who could get that done though. Now on to this new release. I got my tickets a month in advance and it slowly sold out each showing the closer it go to release. I got my ticket the first day it was available. My ticket was for the 2PM show on Saturday the 22nd. Once I knew Langley was once again showing a 70mm print, I was waiting to get my ticket. The day we got there, the theater was of course sold out. People were wandering all over trying to find their seats. The ushers came in to help. There were people from all over in our viewing. I sat next to a couple guys who came all the way up from Seattle to see this here. They no longer have 70mm options in their city to see it this way. I heard some other people flew in just to see this show. Before it started, one of the theater staff introduced the show and talked a little bit about this presentation. I missed out on getting the handout film print clip of IMAX. They ran out. So the movie began and it was how I remembered film prints being. This print did weave a little at times, you could clearly see the flicker on the screen, and the image was not quite rock steady. There was dust on the print a couple times too. So this was obviously a film print I was watching. You get so used to the clean stable digital presentations, that seeing film once again is a little unusual. I loved what I was looking at. Being one of the 31 theaters showing in IMAX, I felt privileged and very lucky. The presentation didn’t have any mechanical issues like some other venues in Canada have had this last week. I hope they get their problems sorted out. The 70mm 5 perf sections on the print looked very good. Better that Dunkirk did on its print. I could still see a bit of a contrast difference between the IMAX and 5 perf sections though. The 5 perf stuff held up very well on the IMAX print. The B&W portions showed the grain, even in 70mm. The B&W IMAX sections were noticeably less grainy, and that surprised me, since 5 perf isn’t that much of a blow up if at all. I didn’t really see much of a tint in the B&W segments, as some others have reported showing green tints. I still think it would have looked better if a B&W print was an option. Duping B&W to color print stock never looks as good. But it was a real treat to see B&W in 70mm. I wish this would be an option again for future film makers. Fotokem said they would consider doing it again if the right amount of stock was sent to them. But their lab manager says no to that. The color segments of the film looked softer than I remembered IMAX being. A softer look is a film trait, even in 70mm. I certainly don’t see how IMAX can be 18K rez, after view IMAX film again today. I think 8K would give it a run for its money. But needless to say Im a tried and true film nut. I love using film myself for photography. I really have to admire for Nolan sticking to his guns using film for his movies. He and I would make many of the same decisions if I was making films myself. Old school just looks better. The movie itself was good. I need another viewing just to try and make sense of some of it. I wouldn’t say this was Nolan’s best work, as its different to me than some of his other movies. But I have to admire what he was able to achieve. I hope there are more opportunities to see 70mm IMAX here in BC. But Im concerned at some point they may give it up, especially if Nolan stops making films. Scott Pickering- BC Canada

Thanks for the reviews guys. Im seeing the film tomorrow in IMAX 70mm. I too thought the optical dupe on Dunkirk was poor, and the 5 perf shots looked way off compared to the IMAX sections. I expect now this to be the same situation for tomorrows showing.

Tyler- Are you sure this is a "One OFF" for B&W 65mm? I contacted Fotokem and asked him this very question. This is what was said: "Hi Scott, 65mm black and white negative processing could be reestablished on a large enough project. It’s a huge undertaking each time we switch the 65mm negative processor over to black and white. We have never established 70mm black and white print processing - that was not possible for a number of reasons. Andrew" So this comment above suggests they will do it, if the amount is enough to merit switching the tanks all over again. I also asked what process they used to copy over the B&W segments to the color print stock, since doing just that usually looks not as good as printing to a B&W print stock. I wondered if maybe the B&W was scanned, manipulated for color print output, and then laser printed onto color stock. Nope. It was optically printed direct from the camera negative to color print stock, making sure the color was as neutral as possible. "The black and white negative is contact printed onto color print stock. We worked hard to maintain the neutrality of the image, through color timing and processing control. Andrew" I have my tickets to see Oppenheimer at my local IMAX theater which is one of the few still showing in 70mm film prints, as they kept their 15/70 projector in the booth all these years. Im just glad I can still see it this way, as I love "true" IMAX projection from film. Nothing touches it. I've been seeing true IMAX since 1986. And lets not mention how rare it is just to even see a film print projected these days. I hope there are more possible chances to see 15/70 at this theater in the future. Im going to see the movie this Saturday in the afternoon. Its at the Langley IMAX here in BC Canada.

David. Apparently Fuji stopped making motion picture film in 2013, long after the movie was released.

Just watched this film for the first time on Blu Ray. I haven't seen this film before, but I've been wanting to since before it was released. I have seen Ron Fricke's other features like Kooyaniqatsi and Baraka. I haven't seen Chronos yet. Technically a very well done film as per usual for Ron Fricke. I wondered how he got some of the shots he did, as I can't imagine a crane being allowed in some of the locations. Theme of birth, death, and rebirth were evident. This film really exploited the degradation of human society. Looking at the transfer, I wondered- was this filmed on Fuji stock? It seemed to have Fuji colors all over it. It was a very cool toned film with excellent greens and blues. After watching, I still think Baraka was his best work, though the imagery in this one was excellent. The tracking shots during time-lapse were great. Anyone know the technical info on this film?

Actually I believe Ron Fricke did shoot a film in IMAX. Late 80s. Chronos.

If this film was a digital intermediate and filmed out via film digital printer, I wonder if this was because of the problems with Dunkirk with 5 perf looking so different then 15 perf? I wonder if that is why they went this route this time? I wonder what rez they did the film outs? I know they can print out to 8K with their 70mm unit, but it is expensive. It would certainly add cost to the film budget doing this, but at least they will have a decent file for the 4K disc when it comes out.

My IMAX theater here that still has its 15/70 projector (unless they removed it recently), isn't showing it on film this time around. They have the movie listed for release on the 27th here in Canada, and the IMAX is only showing it on digital. Shame because I was really hoping they'd use that projector again.

I asked Fotokem once a few years back about shooting 65mm B&W. They said they have a machine that can do it, but its not in operation. They considered it and came back and said they won't use it as it wasn't worth their effort to put it in operation. I'd love to see an old Western in 65mm IMAX in B&W though.