Ira Ratner

I came back to this party even though this is a losing battle where logic is concerned: Ian thinks that the stock K3 Meteor Zoom is all you'll ever need in life... Second, that a 20mm 4.5 fixed Super-Takumar for 50 bucks on eBay is totally ridiculous... Third, that there's something wrong with anyone who disagrees with his logic that his zoom is as good as primes... And finally, that in Florida sun, you can't use a 4.5 lens!!!! For Christ's sake! We can use a 4.5 down here with 25ASA at 250, let alone with slow cine speeds!!! That's why they made these damn slower lenses!!! If you can't use them where I live, you can't use them ANYWHERE on earth!!! What the heck don't some of you guys understand here?

And I can't BELIEVE that I took your original post at face value.

Walter--don't want to start any rumors, but the guy was a total sleazebag, as I suspected in the first place, whether you worked with his associates or not. You simply can't rewrite history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eddie_Antar

I just remember that there was a lot of fishy stuff going on. Is Carrol still alive?

Hey, I'm all confused here, and I just realized it: Bernie is at S16, and I had emailed Duall!

Bernie answered, and too expensive at $450 for me: "Yes I can do the S16 upgrade for the K-3. Price includes widening of gate. Removal of viewfinder mask. Pro upgrade (removal of loop former system ). And camera servicing (polishing of all roller , sprockets & film guides, and of course lens collimation). There is no lens centering or viewfinder masking available with this upgrade." The collimation is worth bucks, but I'm not really interested in that now--prefer to use a bunch of primes. And I just don't know what removal of viewfinder mask means. Anyway, I have to email him back to get more specific pricing, but if I just want to go S16 without this other stuff (especially the loop removal), I can do it myself for $200 via NCS. However, if he would substitute his laser mirror brightening for the collimation, we might have a deal.

Jerry Carrol--now I remember. And if the stores opened in 1971, that's when the spots started. His first store was in Brooklyn on Kings Highway, off Coney Island Avenue. And we were amazed to turn on the TV every day, watching these awful commercials, only to see him announcing yet the opening of ANOTHER new store. And yeah--he had the lowest prices, because he was ripping off his suppliers. Which should kind of make us rethink the effectiveness of these commercials in the first place, or at least the role they played in the "success" of the chain.

Walter, did I have the timeline right? The earliest spot I could find was the one I linked, but I think they went way earlier. From what I remember, he was a Syrian Jew, and the legend around my Canarsie, Brooklyn neighborhood was that he first lived there (or maybe Mill Basin) with a vanity tag that read "SyrianJew." (Seemed like too many letters to me, but that was the rumor.) The one thing I remember, besides how bad and annoying those spots were, is that they did TONS of them. They never ran the same spot ad nauseum. (Spelling?) Also, what do you know about the announcer, Eddie Carrol? A friend in the radio business told me he actually owned the production company that produced them, and cleverly got recognized as an agency to get the 15% media discount kicked back. I know kicked back is kind of a negative term, didn't mean it that way, but you know what I mean.

I feel more than semi-qualified to chime in on this: Some of the worst spots by professional standards have been the most effective. And as hard as it may be to swallow, the client doesn't give a crap if the ad is annoying and universally condemned--as long as it does its job. Accept this fact and be miserable producing crap like this but take the money, and you'll be fine. Walk away from this nonsense with your head held up high, and you'll ALSO be fine. I don't know about the rest of the world, but in the U.S. and where I lived in New York, the absolutely worst spots, the FIRST of these bad spots, was for an electronics store in Brooklyn called Crazy Eddie. It later became a massive CHAIN of stores because of these horrendous commercials. (It eventually collapsed because the owner was a thief. I think he's now doing 20 to 50.) Wanna see bad? Lookie here: This one was from 1985, but they started doing these spots in 1972--way before VCRs and methods were available to record them.

I've always found that it's important to show empathy for the prospective employer, important to make all of your communication as "informal" as possible, and to NEVER state emphatically why you would be good for them, but to instead, make it easy for THEM to make that decision in a sneaky way. For example: "Hi, Mr. Smith. My name is Brian, and I just completed my masters in film at Whattsamatta U. "I know that production is kind of slow these days everywhere (with the bad economy and all), but I'm looking to secure my first position/internship with a company in the immediate area, since this is where I grew up and want to remain for a while. (I have family here.) Besides film, my main area of interest and background is in American history, which is why I think could be a good match for the kind of work you do. Of course, I'll leave it to you to make that final determination. "From the production end, I..................... "Well, I guess that it's for now! I appreciate your time, and you have any questions, I can be reached at............ "Thanks!" The guy thinks this kid understands that things are bad nowadays (empathy), he's not BRAGGING and making outrageous claims (humility), and he specifically wants to work HERE (motivated and right for us). Smart kid, not a shmuck, sounds easy-going and well thought out--let's give him a call.

Give the man a cigar!!! The reason it was so good was that it was 100% realistic. Watching it, it even SMELLED like a real NY subway. The great story didn't hurt either.

I know I'm late to the party on this one, but I loved it. And I'm not even embarrassed to admit it!

HOLY CRAP! At least you're allowed to smoke!

Walter: Best NY subway movie ever made? Even though it's a matter of opinion, I'm sure you'll nail it.

How do you build a stainless steel token booth? And replicate the rest of a subway station? That would look REALLY fake. The Subway Museum idea is great, except the problem is once you get legal and official, they always say no or make it a PITA. Same deal with contacting the MTA. It's a student film, for God's sake, and the worst that can happen is they'll tell you to stop. BUT, and this is a BIG but and I just realized it: Having moved to Florida from New York 15 years ago, I have no idea about the SECURITY paranoia (rightly so) that now permeates the system. So if you want to shoot the establishing shots clandestinely and you look Arab, forget it. If you don't, at least wear a Yalmaka (Jewish skull cap). HAH!!!!!!!!!!

Whew! Back to a real keyboard now! Thanks for waiting boys! Ian, your lens is NOT 1.9 across the entire range, regardless if you think it LOOKED like it is. No zooms have the same effective aperture across all focal lengths. WHich brings me to the point of the fact that although my 20 is slower, so is the Meteor, which still does the job. Let's also consider all of that extra glass in a zoom, all of those moving parts, which inherently makes them less sharp than primes. Let's ALSO consider your statement: "I'd have thought the benefit of the zoom is the fact that the 'look' will remain the same across a whole range of focal lengths, rather than possibly changing each time the focal length of the lens alters." Well, I kind of got you more than one way here. First, you said there's no difference in look between lenses in the first place. (Hey, don't get mad at me--YOU said it.) So this moots the other point. More importantly: Uhhhh--ever think of using different lenses for different projects? Or WANTING different looks for different scenes within the same project, whether you do or don't get different looks depending on.... Wait. My brain just blew a fuse trying to figure which argument you're making. Do different lenses make a difference or NOT make a difference? Also, the term "adequate" is not accepted in my universe, because I just don't know what the heck that means. And Max--yeah! I heard of day interiors and night exteriors! But did you ever hear that you can actually screw (or twist) your lens off the camera and replace it with another that's more suitable for the conditions? And that I'm not obligated by law to use this lens for day interiors and night exteriors? And that's why I want to own a wide variety and large collection of lenses? Or maybe the work I'm doing doesn't require night exteriors? Or day interiors without artificial lighting? DUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I can't believe I'm typing here and wasting my time entertaining this nonsense.

I'm on my iTouch now, but when I get him, I'll further engage in this ridiculous argument that some of you can't possibly win.

Did you leave the house yet? I missed your latest posts. HAVE A GREAT TRIP!!!

I was riveted by them, and I'm not the type who is easily riveted. The main girl was great, but that detective was beyond BELIEF. It takes a lot in a foreign language subtext to do it all so well that you don't even NOTICE it's in a foreign language. I don't know who that guy is, but man--this was acting at its BEST. Like a Clint Eastwood type of presence. The only negative I have about the Japanese scenes is when she went into the disco and the audio cut in and out to reflect her deafness. It was a mundane, trite technique, and it was done so poorly that it took me a few seconds to realize that my DVD wasn't faulty. And as much as I'm a fan of his work, I thought Pitt was the LEAST interesting part of this movie. Everyone ELSE was a hundred times better, right down to the masturbating kid.

Good luck with the project, Kevin. I kind of guessed you might be shooting in Florida because we're such a close neighbor. As you progress, let me know what types of locations you're looking for. I would really get a kick out of researching and driving around the state to find the appropriate spots to take photos and detail the specifications for your review, not to mention handling the other logistics, including permitting. Which isn't much of big deal down here for small productions nowadays. In THIS economy, the county and city agencies responsible for attracting film production just want productions to put on their resumes to justify their JOBS. Again, any way I can pitch in, I'll be glad to help. At 52, married with children, and as a graphic artist for the Turnpike, I don't expect fame or a buck for this. Just want to have some fun. And if you can modify any scenes to take place along Florida's Turnpike, as well as in a Service Plaza along the Turnpike (including inside concessions), I'm sure as hell that I can help you with THAT.

Breaking the law: You yourself should just act like a tourist, and have your talent walk up to the booth to buy a token, ask for information, etc.--and get your footage of all this, plus him/her walking away. (I'm assuming you'll be working with available light.) Shoot like a maniac at various distances, don't take your finger off that trigger, various points of view, angles of view, etc. And keep the clerk either out of frame, blocked, or impossible to distinguish in the shot. You'll be able to do this for like 60 seconds, 2 minutes at that end of the station, so now do the same thing at the other end of the station (if that station has two entries), or get on the train and do it again at the next stop. And the next. And the next. We're not talking about a lot of work here--this will only take you an hour or so. Now you got your stock footage, and the REAL interplay between the two actors can be done on a simple set, hardly even a set at ALL. A tight shot of the clerk with a bulletin board or other props behind him and a microphone in front of him is all you need. (I'm assuming those booth clerks still have those mikes. Ex-New Yorker here.) And the talent outside the booth is also shot real tight. He/she is just seen leaning on a counter with the back end of the mike coming into frame. In other words, the actual exchange between the actors doesn't have to visibly appear to actually be in a subway. You just have to use other footage to support that premise. Do it right and no one will ever notice--but lighting is key when you do the set shoot (you want it to kind of match), as is sound, so you want to record a few minutes of uninterrupted subway background noise, and mix your dialogue with that. As a matter of fact, if you DID shoot this all at an actual location in real time, it could be real headache because of all the ambient/background sound (people and TRAINS!!!) that would sound all chopped up when you edited it later. It's kind of hard to guess when those trains are going to screech into the station, or to lose that noise in post later.

Max, ever hear of sunny Florida? We simply don't have those clouds and rain that you guys have to deal with--only an occasional hurricane now and then. A fixed 20mm, even at 4.5, shooting naked chicks sunbathing in South Beach, is just fine. And it's a Pentax. (The 50 is a Pentax too, which means I'll be loving life like Chris does very shortly.) And Ian--I don't want to get into a debate about the stock Meteor zoom as opposed to primes--plus, it sure ain't 1.9 over the full zoom range. But it's pretty much a given that primes are superior to comparatively priced zooms. But be that as it may: If you always use the same lens, doesn't everything you shoot always LOOK the same?

Mission accomplished, so we'll see what he says. I dropped your name, so if you're in contact with him soon, mention me, because my business with him may save YOU a few bucks next time.

I'll email Bernie now, but what NCS does is send you a different gate for $265, you do the install and return the old gate, and they send you $75 back. And that's it. Nothing with the viewfinder or anything else--they don't touch or ever see your camera. I know this has been answered a gazillion times but I can't get my mind to wrap around the concept. The viewfinder has to be modified for WYSIWYG, correct? Or is this ALMOST like WYSIWYG--and that's where the recentering ring comes in?

K3 owners with M42 mounts, beware: The availability of low-cost SLR lenses for this camera is a curse. 20/4.5 and 50/1.4 on the way. That makes 13 lenses.