Simon Wyss

Great post indeed. For someone like me entirely based on materials the abstract functions within computers and other electronic devices will always remain abstract, as quick as thought but also invisible, untouchable, unreliable. No electricity, no anything. Our manual dexterity makes us divine humans, never our abstract functioning brain alone.

All my best wishes to everybody for this new year

We must not forget the past. The Panavision cameras are basically the Mitchell design which themselves go back to the Leonard camera of 1917. When Robert Gottschalk started his business he bore in mind that there are too many Mitchell models and variations around, so he swore to himself to not step into the trap of concurring cameras. They all ought to be up to date. Which he implemented.

But why the 17.67 percent ? Couldn't it be 16⅔ or 18 ?

Now, it had to come to it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-7QoiOH9r0 Gerhard Polt dubs Adolf as about a car leasing contract. If one understands German that is so beautifully frantic it could easily be redone in Red versus film.

At a first glance I didn't notice the subtitles' content because I immediately went with the dialogue, and know you all, Bruno Ganz, the actor in the Hitler role, as a compatriot is not our best export. I just had a talk with a friend yesterday on Dällebach Kari, a 1970 production in black and white and 1:1.75, which excels every swiss movie. Anyway, this made me laugh at last, and the other versions, too.

Who only thought of a look of their films in the past ? When has that sordid word only come into use ? Let me be a little provocative, you all. Let us be honest. One always worked with what one had. There was absolutely no question of how my picture looks but of what it tells or asks. The superficiality of the question bores me to dust. I have eyes in my head and I know what I see, I don't need an image image.

I like the ping-pong cutie.

I believe that the best move movie theatres can do today is bringing back the Academy aspect ratio, but big. At Walt Disney Studios the managers were so afraid of a classic like Bambi becoming cropped that they had it reprinted with the height of the 1.85 aperture. Such 35-mm prints with black spaces on the sides were about as ridiculous as an Academy picture is on a low wide screen. Citizen Kane isn't probably the best film ever. I'd prefer The Third Man. Anyway, the first 50 years of motion pictures were 3:4 screens. It is a dynamic aspect ratio and has a pulling quality to it. Have you ever seen Stagecoach 6 meters high and 8 meters wide? In favor of the 4-perf. standard, Simon

I am trying to not hum around all the time with that woman on my mind whom I met a few days ago although I have already thrown myself in. Such a sweet blonde with grey eyes . . . Else an overhaul of our company's home page, metal work with a friend down at the local port, gallons of coffee, and they wait and wait and wait and wait. Know the title?

You have to be "in", in discussion. I make myself heard of. That a producer saught after her/him, not the other way round Display uncut footage and same edited You have to be able to order reshoots. I decide on everything pertaining to the editing of a movie, not only parts. Surely traditional film and magnetic film handling and editing, be it in an American Moviola or a European editing table cutting room Very simple: the production has to be open to an editor, i. e. encounter her/him with some gratitude for the engagement. All too often I have felt that the editing is seen as not more than a technical stage. Then the invitation to participate in a production from script on. Finally the paying. Almost always how someone introduces pace, rhythm, to images and sounds, how tension is built up, and the art of omittance. That question cannot be answered in a general way. Solutions derive mostly from the content. Footage lists are only organizational items, have to do with appearance, not with meaning. Who wants to convey what and how, is the question for me.

Depends on the lubrication of your actual thing. With film it should hold any length at 64 fps. Better don't run the camera faster than 32 without film. An old rule

Make up your mind whether you want to go old style with your Arriflex and a tape recorder and a clapper board or to rent some equipment. You didn't explain why you don't like 16mm. Fine. A noiseless camera for direct sound you have not, so an Arriflex 35 BL (the older the cheaper you get them) might do. Dubbing is not stupid, it teaches you a lot. Then you can use your camera. The sound studio is eventually cheaper than the noiseless camera. A fluid head is not very expensive, and that is now really something to be considered on rental basis. Your Arriflex with flat base fits on many a nice head. There are movies without any camera movements. Cinema is first what moves in front of the lens.

Also, ich möchte das Verhältnis Bild-Ton ansprechen: Während das Bild mehrere Stränge ausbreitet und wieder auflöst, baut sich die Musik mehr und mehr auf, was eine eigenartige Spannung erzeugt, die aber nicht entladen werden kann. Ich hatte merkwürdigerweise eine Aversion gegen den jungen Mann im Bademantel am Ende. Er geht so dekadent lässig, dass es nervt. Filmisch sind wir in der Werbung, ganz klar. Translation Referring to the relation between image and sound, the first spreads out several lines and dissolves them, the latter comes in an heightening manner. This produces a strange tension which will not be discharged. Remarkably I had an aversion for the young man in bathrobe who walks in a decadent way. The whole thing is clearly advertisement. The green background is awful.

Paul, I think you're quite right in your approach to what optical projections are. When I study pioneer films they invariably establish total focus pictures, so to say. Donisthorpe, Le Prince, Dickson, Démény, Skladanowsky, the Lumière, they all saught everything to be sharp and neat although they struggled with light. Still, it is reported that Lumière operators liked to stop down to 4 or 5.6 in the sun but they had the most sensitive emulsion of all. I have a lot of admiration for Jacques Tati(cheff) who was not afraid of a very slow pace in his films, of long shots and little to no bokeh. One can say he is close to filmed theatre. Tati is very filmy. When we look at the beginning of Play Time (in Todd-A. O. 70 mm) for instance he literally plays with an unidentifiable aspect of a hall, is it a hospital now or an office building or are we at an exhibition? For this he shows all detail, and that is very modern to me whereas today's movies represent some fallback into the period of Have-you-now-finally-seen-what-it-is-about-? of___C o l d___W a r. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-7YaZS_KKI

Double interpositives can be seen as true duplicates of a double-band original in the formats 35-CinemaScope or, more often, in 16mm. Whatever form the original (negative) is in, you have two bands, usually called A and B band, that permit those overlapping effects.

Let me only add that these films have become obsolete as Gigabitfilm can act as universal stock for all the purposes. Its characteristic photographic curve is almost a straight line up into highest densities and embraces nine stops. Compared to Gigabitfilm processed in the original chemistry the traditional stocks look coarse-grained.

That's why I invented a new mechanism which has no reciprocating parts, only revolving ones. It shouldn't jitter. Doesn't anybody know somebody who'd invest in this project of building the camerast camera ? :mellow:

my words

Was it Everyone Says I Love You ?

What can 35mm do that video can't? From the strictly technical standpoint there is one thing film cannot do yet: exposure time as long as with video. NTSC and PAL systems offer 92 percent picture and 8 percent non-picture. The maximum for a film camera shutter angle is still 235 degrees out of 360 (Mitchell 16 HS), equivalent of 65,28 percent vs. 34,72. Then, with film you can expose single frames for years if you want ― without electricity ! No such thing in video Next: elimination of flicker has been made with film projectors since 1895. The Skladanowsky Bioscope is a duplex machine as well as the Prestwich-Green wide film apparatus of 1896 is. Smooth transition between frames Film is capable of resolving power values beyond reason. At the sacrifice of speed you can capture every tiny detail a lens sketches out. Fuji Eterna RDI and Kodak Vision x242 are such stock. Film takes you to 500+ frames a second without any compromise in quality (16 mm), to 425 fps (35 mm). Millions of fps are feasible with the drum camera, on a lesser quality level but it's there. Film cannot be deteriorated magnetically in transport. Not everybody has a 35-mm printer at home, even less 65-mm machinery. It is simpler to keep hands on an original than with video. Film can be projected in the light of a 4 kW lamp without cooling, no beamer will do that. You can draw and paint directly on film. Video will never offer this. Enough ?

Paul (of age unknown) You don't need to blame yourself. When you're right, you're right. Remember that German Hausfrau in Woody Allen's I Forgot the Title: "Whenn your numberh is upp, your numberh is upp !"

Three minutes more time of preparing my post . . .Yes, correct, each alteration in the basic light controls calls for compensation. You change the shutter angle from 180 degrees to 90, the iris diaphragm has to be opened by one full stop. You increase the frame rate from 24 a second to 96, the iris has to be opened another two stops. In case you'd set a light filter between film and object, that will have to be taken into account, too. The last point to consider is when you pull out the lens in order to shoot macro down to 1:1, then correction must be made for the inherent light loss but I think this subject can be left out for the moment. To retain a certain diaphragm opening you will have to either increase the illumination of the object or replace the raw stock by one of higher sensitivity. I am sure you are aware of the influence of the lens diaphragm on depth of field. With a reflex camera this can be observed by the price of a darker or brighter viewfinder image.

― pimp my crank ― :o

When you are right then it's a dying place. Fear is so outdated.