Trevor Masid

I had the incredible fortune to see a 70mil print of baraka at the aero theatre a couple of months ago.. truly a life changing cinema experience, although I couldnt even imagine it being screened at the dome or even the Egyptian, where the screens are quite a bit bigger than the aeros.

seconded!

While on the subject of the green screen, one that thing that really disappointed me and took me out of the moment was the opening scene with leo and mark on the boat, with some extremely bad green screen behind them, much worse to me than the shots in the jeep driving up to the compound.

sadly, you're part right about the new mainstream, but as much as I can help it, I absolutely REFUSE to accept with my tv sets, and I know there will be purists ((however few there may be)) that will be on my side. WE NEED TO BAND TOGETHER, haha.

and sorry to double post, but i'm trying to decipher all this information in my head: can anyone tell me... is that disgusting "smooth motion" effect due to the refresh rate of the tv? or is it an option on the tv that can be selected and de-selected?

I'm glad finally someone understands what I detest so much in those tvs! It tends to be exhausting trying to explain to someone who isnt "in the field//industry" that something about the picture on a tv with "smooth motion//120hz//whatever you wanna call it" is just not right. I tried watching Magnolia on one of those tvs and it completely ruined the movie. I honestly hope most tvs have an option to turn that off, because I know very little about HDTV's, I dont know if its on account of the refresh rate, or just other video option crap the manufacturers put on there.

thanks for the response! The only thing is with that whole "120 Hz!" or "600 Hz" crap is honestly, I absolutely HATE it. I can 100 percent tell the difference between a tv with a refresh rate of 60hz and one with double or triple that. The "smooth" motion makes a movie literally unwatchable for me. There will be about 15 frames that look normal, but anytime there's any sort of camera movement, or character movement within the film, it instantly looks like a reality tv show shot on HD.

I highly doubt fincher approved//sat in on that process, considering it's a canadian HD-TV rip, basically. "It appears to be a release, in the Canadian market, of a transfer originally made, one might guess, for HDTV pay per view, or some such thing. That said, contrary to what some disgruntled reviewers have written, the image is outstanding, within the limits mentioned above, with good luminance, which is very superior to the DVD version, excellent color and very sharp detail. The text of the opening credits have been repositioned to appear correctly in the reduced aspect ratio, which supports the idea that the transfer was originally made by the studio for HDTV."

so I've been looking into getting a new HD-TV, and seeing as how I trust fellow DP's opinions over anyone else's, I was curious if you guys had any suggestions//recommendations based on what you like or personally have! LCD? Plasma? Which is better? I dont need anything bigger than 42 inches, but I obviously want 1080p. thanks!

Does anyone know if the universal city imax screen is a "true" imax screen? As far as I could tell when seeing the dark knight there, it seems to be. Its a huge screen, more square than rectangular, and as far as I know, they do project 70 mil there. Does anyone know for certain?

absolutely beautiful work. What kind of frame rate were you shooting those at?

I personally cannot wait for a BR copy of saving private ryan. I think that and se7en are the two I'm most excited for. Hopefully, they'll get fincher to approve the process, because we all know with fincher, there's no way he's going to approve of a crappy, sup-par transfer like some of the other blu-rays I've seen.

Hi everyone, I recently had my first experience with the red camera while test shooting for a short I'm going to shoot in January. I just wanted to share with you guys a small clip of one of the test shots, and see what you guys think of it. After all I had heard and previously seen of the camera, I have to say.. I was pleasantly surprised with my results. Anyways, here's the link, and let me know what you think!

He should follow sofia's example and stick to film. However, the trailer is shot fantastically.. I just dont like the "digital" blown out highlight effect that usually is the dead giveaway for someone shooting digitally.

that specific shot is my favorite from the whole movie.. the way the sounds just fades out to him just naturally enjoying all the choas and anarchy he's brought on.. it's really beautiful. Not to mention the fact that it was shot on IMAX and it looks absolutely gorgeous.

It's definitely not me hating on the medium.. seeing as how I thought benjamin button should've won the oscar for best cinematography. Fincher has shot his last couple of projects digitally, and they have come out absolutely beautifully. I have nothing against shooting digital, as I have shot digitally myself a few times. It's just mann's choices of going nuts on the gamma, especially on a period piece like this.. I believe personally, that it just kind of takes you out of the moment when it looks "digital".. A modern piece would not be as distracting, but for some reason to me, it just takes me out of the believability of the movie as a whole.

Agreed. The skin tones alone are enough to make me wanna turn it off, even though I truly enjoyed the movie, everyone is so disgustingly orange, it makes everyone look horrible.

I'm so glad you guys agree, I was already super excited for this movie, but then I remembered that for some reason, Mann now chooses to shoot his movies digitally, and personally.. I think miami vice and collateral were two of the worst looking films I have ever seen. Absolutely disgusting. Going from how fantastically "heat" and ali were shot, to miami vice disgusting colors and video noise? So disappointed right now.

I'm a graduate from the LAFS, ((april 2008)) and honestly.. it's such a horrible program now. They changed everything about their program that made it appeal to me when deciding to go there. My program was a year-long immersion, hands-on program.. now they ONLY offer a 2 year degree program.. which allows you to get your degree in "film and science" whatever the hell that means. You have to take math and science classes now, which is one of the reasons I wanted to go to lafs... If I wanted to study math and science, I would've gone to UCLA and taken their film course. All their classes from what I've heard are a lot shorter and less detailed. So honestly, I would recommend checking out somewhere else... or just check it out for yourself and find out all their information, but I'm just glad I graduated before all the changes. Hope this helps!

man, I would love that issue. They dont have it on their online digital archive.

Hi guys, I recently got my L-75B light meter, and I was wanting to use it for both film and photo shoots, and I was wondering if any of you guys knew how to go into "photo" mode.. or wherever I can change the actually shutter speed, and not fps or shutter angle. Thanks!

Hi guys, I recently got my L-75B light meter, and I was wanting to use it for both film and photo shoots, and I was wondering if any of you guys knew how to go into "photo" mode.. or wherever I can change the actually shutter speed, and not fps or shutter angle. Thanks!

Awesome, thanks a lot guys! So I'm assuming that the fact that I'm not sigel basically means that I cant purchase any of that ekatchrome stock?

I was curious.. Does anyone know what stock Schindler's List or "3 Kings" was shot on? And does anyone know of any articles, whether it be A.C. or not about either movie? Thanks!

I was originally just going to get the black hard-back edition, I believe it's 8. It really looks like a bible, haha. 9 would definitely be your best bet, because with whatever additional processes//cameras// since edition 8 would be updated with 9.