Ira Ratner

Paul, I apologize.

David, you're bringing God into this? Case closed and there's no reason for further discussion: You simply can't have a real intellectual discourse with people who pull the tooth fairy out of a hat. Especially since my God can kick the crap out of YOUR God anyway. My God is a big rock in my backyard, and I call him Harvey. But this is all based on science: When I pray to him, I get about the same results that the Gods with much better publicists do. But I digress: For millenniums, men have been sticking their penises into vaginas. And out, and in, and out...and you get the point. (I could go on forever about the ins and outs thing, but after three ins and outs, I myself am usually finished anyway. I have no staying power at ALL!) Where is the sin in this, or the sin to look at it, if there IS such a thing as sin in the first place when it doesn't hurt or affect any 2nd party? Sorry, but we ARE no better than the apes. In fact, we're WORSE. I know the truth hurts, especially since apes DON'T have any Gods to argue and fight and kill each other over--unlike us "enlightened" human beings.

I think I like Deep Space 9 the best is because it's funny and goofy at times. And couldn't things be funny and goofy in the 25th Century as well?

I'd like to know what's going on with this thread here, because all of these responses were DELETED yesterday for a long period of time, and they now miraculously reappeared. In addition, Denisse sent me a scathing PM on how mean and nasty my post was. She was most pissed about my comment about the redundant "s" in her name, and then went on to make cruel comments about my obviously horrible name of Ira, and that I was no Spielberg and that I should basically drop dead and rot in hell for what I posted. Guys--was I THAT mean in my post? And is it possible that my sense of humor could go THAT way over someone's head?

Paul, this makes total sense to me, although there are probably other instincts that come into play is well. And the key word here is "instinct," which I have always believed to be the case. Because although we like to believe we're evolved and above the rest of the "animals" in the animal kingdom, we're really not at all. A short guy like me couldn't do squat with the ladies like the tall guys did, and that's because the tall guys are STILL perceived as better physical protectors against predators, even though in in 2008, this means nothing. And that's why so many women "change" their attitude toward their spouses after the kids are born: Once he does his job making the kids, and based on the legal system and semi-guaranteed financial remuneration, they dump his ass. He's simply not needed any more.

To me, there's nothing morally wrong with porn. Hell, it saved me from going nuts as a teenager and into my 20s in the pre-computer days. What I can't figure out from a business standpoint is how it still flourishes, since every type of girl and guy in every conceivable situation with every conceivable type of body and in every conceivable combination(s) has already been shot. Know what I mean? There's so much sameness to it that I can't understand how more productions keep getting made, and keep making money! But I guess that it ISN'T all the same, since people's erotic tastes differ. Hell, I've been married for 20 years, and at this stage, Joan Rivers is looking good to me. "I greeted my husband at the door, totally naked and wrapped in Saran Wrap, and he said, 'What? Leftovers AGAIN!?' "

This is where I'm going to show my ignorance again: I knew that a matte box can hold filters, but what does a matte box actually do in addition to this? Is it used mainly for its wings/flaps to control light? If yes, I understand. If not, why not just the existing filter holder?

Sorry Paul--but you're the one who may be nuts. Or who has Alzheimers: There were quite a few comments about it, including the audio and bad actress, plus more. This thread had about 5, 6 or 7 replies--and now there are none. Someone here is trying to pull something and thinks the rest of us are stupid enough to buy it.

I posted a thread this morning because I can't seem to able to include a photo in my avatar. I've tried to do it several ways...I asked nicely...yet that thread was deleted? What the heck is going on here?

You guys here in 8 have all the fun. We're just a bunch of STIFFS over there in 16! But this is interesting and maybe NOT so interesting, when you consider this: I worked for a major New York ad agency for a number of years (not in film or anything; print production), and the two main award organizations were the Cleos and the Addys (Addies?). Anyway, these organizations were huge, highly respected, but what they did had nothing to do with recognizing quality ad work at all: It was just a business. You paid your entry fees (and boy did those agencies pay!), and maybe you got your statue and could then boast about winning. Hysterically, when the Cleos went bust a number of years back, at their very last ceremony, before it even started, everyone had to leave because they hadn't paid the catering/venue deposit, and waiters were literally pulling the chairs out from under guests and guests were running on stage grabbing and stealing the award statues!

I tried this a few weeks ago, but I was drunk and no success. So I figured I would try againg before I GOT drunk again: How the heck do you do this? I made an avatar 64 by 64, uploaded it to my Flickr, but can't figure out how to link it to the Avatar setting here. When I paste in the url, it says invalid format or bad link, And when I past in the Image Address, same thing. Does anyone here use Flickr to host the image and link it as your avatar? I was able to upload this same image 150 by 150 for my personal photo, which I guess can now be viewed in my profile. Haven't looked yet.)

This is weird: I remember a bunch of replies to this thread, including a HILARIOUS one from me. What the heck happened?

You lost me: If you have dozens of 3X3 filters, why do you need a matte box? In other words, you're talking about square Tiffen filters, right? Like the Cokin system? (Didn't even know and/or remember that Tiffen made the square filters.) Do you now have a way to mount them to your lenses via a holder, and if so, what are your plans for the matte box then?

Rich, I gotta tell you: Your post was wonderfully honest and intelligent and well thought out. And it could have referred to a THOUSAND occupations, not just filmmaking. Whatever the occupation and the limitations of the tools available to us, we all bitch that we could do better with better equipment. But we still keep DOING it until that day comes. I'm an old fart guitar player who has owned and sold dozens of guitars over the years, and believe me--the more expensive guitars didn't make me any better of a player. Sure, the better ones sound better and play better, but to the people I was playing to, they couldn't care less whether I was playing a $200 one or a $3,000 one. Have you ever heard of the director Werner Herzog? Check out some of the early stuff he's done with the CRAPPIEST equipment on earth. In fact, his first few films were done with a 16mm that he STOLE. If you're producing the next Star Trek, you need the best. For what a lot of us are doing, for now, we don't. Just DO it, and dump that guy. His passion is in the equipment, not in the art involved.

Hi, Nicholas. I'm a K-3 guy with the M42 mount. I wouldn't make a camera decision based on those lenses--they're not what you would call spectacular and better ones can be found very cheap on e-Bay. I've been buying lenses left and right off of there, looking for the gems, and there are some great values to be found. In addition, remember that if you go to 16mm K-3 with M42 mount, your 135 is now in effect a 270. So the ones you need are the wide-angles. I have an 8mm, 28mm, 35mm, and 37mm--and the only one I can consider wide is the 8! (The 16mm I want is $300, but in this economy, it'll wait.) Also, you can get a K-3 for around $200, and there's a Danish company now making a crystal sync motor for it (real easy install), but it's $500! http://www.electrologic.dk/ Not saying this is the way to go. Just one of the possibilities. I went this route because I'm a rank amateur/hobbyist...it was a cheap way to start...and I wanted to do film.

Hi, Denisse! I thought it was great for a first film--but the extra S in your name is too redundant. HAH! Anyway, as the South Florida chapter leader of "Cinematographers Against Shooting Close-Ups of Feet and Putting on Slippers When Someone is Getting Out of Bed," it is my duty to remind you that now that you've done it, you're not allowed by law to do it again. Seriously, it's a great effect for some reason, but it's been done in every film on earth. Now try thinking of a different, more creative point of view for a cut there.

How does ASA 6 sound to you? http://spectrafilmandvideo.com/Film.html Scroll down to Spectra's b&w hi-con

Cokin makes one which will screw onto any lens, with the proper ring, but it's a fortune. $400 plus! http://cokin.com/ico6-mattebox.html Or you can start with this as a base for 13 bucks, and maybe build onto it: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...em=320204810436

Can someone give me a dummy's lesson on what this means to a dummy like me? In other words, all you have to do (if possible for your camera) is expand the gate 7mm on two sides, and find someone who can process and telecine the stuff?

CRAP! WHY DIDN'T YOU TELL US THIS BEFORE!? This was a joke, and please don't be offended by my post. But you have to admit that this part of YOUR post is pretty rhetorical.

Wrong, and here's why. And mind you--I'm no financial wizard, just another shmuck, but see if this doesn't make sense to you: Stock prices at one time KIND OF reflected a company's profitability, or potential for profitability. And you had a % of the population playing in the market. Let's say 20% of American people invested in the market in 1970. This is a total GUESS on my part here, but I bet I'm not far off. Well, guess what else we still had in 1970? We had company sponsored and paid for pension/retirement plans--THE MAJORITY OF DOLLARS OF WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH INVESTMENTS IN THE MARKET, UNLESS YOUR PLAN ALSO INCLUDED FREE COMPANY STOCK. Otherwise, the dollars were just deposited and actually earned respectable interest rates at the time. None of this affected the play of the market. Fast forward to Reagan and the 401K plan, where your contributions were tax-deferred, and most companies MATCHED your contribution dollar for dollar from day one. Remember that these were the old STUPID days of America, where it was still actually considered okay and non-communist to provide workers with a reliable retirement plan. But there was a big rub to all of this: You now HAD to put your money in the market. You're not even given the OPTION of putting it into a safe savings account guaranteed up to $100,000. So what happens next? All of this money floods the markets, prices are now bullshittingly (is that a word?) mis-inflated beyond belief, and nothing means nothing any more. The market has always been and always will be a sleazy shell game. Except now, you have 80% of Americans in on the action because it's the only pension/retirement action in town. And only the brokerage houses are making money left and right with all of this. Of course, the government makes out pretty good too--because despite all of the prosperity bullshit, tons of people have to pull money from their accounts, pay the regular tax, PLUS AN EXTRA 10% PENALTY!!! And oh--little by little, companies didn't even bother matching dollar for dollar. They made you wait 5 years to be fully vested, and even then, you were lucky to get 50% of your contribution matched by them. Then, year by year, they gave you less and less. Because the standard was polluted. It was the destruction of an American RIGHT!!! That if you worked 20, 30 years for a company, that you were entitled to a decent retirement! But the Republicans pulled their normal BS and somehow said that this idea was BAD for America. That helping workers like this was DAMAGING our economy. And by doing away with this, businesses will do better and ALL Americans will prosper like never before! And of course, Mr. Genius Bush and McCain actually had the balls to try and push through privatizing Social Security to perpetuate this same madness, investing that money in the market. I will just never understand what planet some of you guys on the other side of the aisle are living on. But thank God, that's over for now.

Ryan, where do you live? You should go configure your About Me/Profile page so it shows up in your avatar when you post. That might help you get some bites or info from members here in that area. What kind of project(s) are you looking to do? Indie film?

Well, you should have said that in the first place: So all you really need are good spots for the t*ts and a**es, right? HAH! SOMETIMES I EVEN CRACK MYSELF UP! Wish I was still living up there, because I would volunteer to do anything just to be on that set. And it's a good thing you chose Hispanic girls, because believe me, you can't pull this off with Jewish ones.

Shatner would just be a distraction to me. BUT BRING BACK GEORGE TAKEI! Oh my!

Contrary to popular belief and opinion, Florida is still the SOUTH. But I now realize that I misspoke: I'm married with kids, and never go to Friday and Saturday evening showings, so that's the big difference. We always go during the day. Friday and Saturday evenings are indeed 10 bucks: http://www.fandango.com/regalmagnoliaplace...1481_REGWebsite