Mike Lary

That's what I thought you meant. I assumed it was the grid pattern resemblance that earned the name.

Because they look like egg crates? Egg Crates

Good glass is expensive and slow to manufacture, and sensors are getting bigger. I wouldn't hold my breath for a lens manufacturer to start targeting this market. Their focus should be on accommodating future sensors that won't be covered by existing glass, not the other way around.

The internal battery for hot swapping is a nice feature. There are already external solutions for primary portable power. You can run a brick from an adapter cable if you don't mind (or want) the additional weight on the rails. Ikan just announced a tiny 12v rail mount adapter that will take batteries from Canon and other manufacturers, as well. edit: Not much detail on the specs for the Ikan converter yet, but I shot them an email.

Hey Justin, If you have the cash to spare (I think it's around $30), you should look at PCam for mobile. You can quickly calculate exposure based on light intensity and distance. It has a slew of other features as well, more than you'll probably ever use. It's real handy for planning and for quick reference on set, and it's a solid app that's been around for years.

Ah, the sign of quality journalism: ending the title with a question mark...

If you have the budget for experimentation you can purchase short ends (leftover film from productions in varying lengths sold at a discount), then shoot in different environments (day, night, artificial light, etc). This will give you a general idea what to expect from different emulsions. I've found it's easy to get Kodak short ends, but Fuji is more difficult. If you're shooting 16 or Super16 you'll find a world of difference between slower emulsions and faster emulsions grain-wise. Personally, I prefer Fuji's look if there isn't much budget for grading. If you plan on spending a lot of time (and $) in a professional grading suite, your choice of stock as a beginner isn't going to make much difference.

Hi Jon, That's a good idea. I'm not sure I can acquire high res source on all the footage, but the reel needs an update anyways.

Try 7000kbps. You can go higher than their spec. Just watch for stuttering on slower systems.

Thank you, David. I'll give that a shot.

Is there a good alternative to a Whiskey filter? If so, what differences would you expect to see between the two?

Hi Peter, Sorry, but I can't help you there. The custom patch sets and algorithms are all proprietary, so you've got your work cut out for you. You might try to enlist the help of an RIT graduate who's studied the subject in-depth. Best of luck, Mike

Hi, We're looking to purchase, new or used: 6.6x6.6 Whiskey #1 6.6x6.6 Streak 1mm 6.6x6.6 Streak 2mm 6.6x6.6 Star 4-point 4x5.65 Whiskey #1 4x5.65 Streak 2mm 4x5.65 Star 4-point

Hi, As the title says, I'm looking for an Ultra Prime Lens Set ( 16,24,32,50,85 ), new or used. Thanks, Mike Lary

This wording is a little off. It should read "it uses a matrix based on a cube, so it allows for independent color mapping".

I think I know what you mean about water-like reflections from gels, but your wording is a little odd. Gels (regardless of whether they're mounted in front of a light source) can bounce reflected light in water-like ripples onto walls, and the effect is more pronounced as the gels are more warped or angled from the light's direction. It sounds like you need to create a cookie or to flag a large light source to create the window shape, then work the effect inside that shape. You could also try bouncing light off a bounce board covered in crinkled foil, but controlling the shape of the reflection might be tricky.

Hi Peter, The use of curves for R, G, and B falls into the 1D LUT realm. They're generally used for simulation (artistic "look" previews) and situations where color accuracy is less crucial (especially where ambient lighting conditions can't be controlled). A 3D LUT will give you much more accurate color transforms because it uses a matrix (allowing for independent color remapping). You could build a LUT that incorporates both a gamma curve for the Log-to-Lin transform as well as a color transform or you could separate them. Workflow considerations will influence your choices, especially in regards to placement. I don't work much 'under the hood', so I'll let others comment on the math. There's a very interesting project you might want to look at and see if it offers you ideas or solutions: http://dispcalgui.hoech.net/

Great film, and possibly Tarantino's best work as well, well crafted and executed.

Hi Peter, That approach sounds a little simplistic. Have you looked at the solutions available? LUT-building software requires the display, measurement, and analysis of thousands of custom patch values that are used to determine the entire gamut of the target device. This makes it possible for accurate color transforms to happen when any color numbers are thrown at the LUT. What you're describing is the requirement for two conversions. One is a log to lin conversion and the other is a colorspace conversion. Both can be accomplished with a single LUT, but the conversions need to be precise. If you're not clear on the necessity of a log to lin conversion, this will help: Understanding Log Grading: http://mikemost.com/?p=251 The ARRI tool that David linked to is actually just a shell that spits out prebuilt LUTs based on the selections you make in the GUI, not an actual LUT generator as the name implies. If you need to do a color transform to a specific device (the projector you mentioned) and not a specification like Rec. 709 you'll need a custom solution.

I've thought about that as well. Niche market products still exist for mediums that have digital alternatives. Someone who paints with a Wacom tablet on a PC has relatively low overhead. A traditional painter pays exponentially more for paints, brushes, and other supplies on an ongoing basis.

Those are scratches. Most likely the magazine wasn't properly cleaned or a foreign particle was introduced when the film was loaded.

Agreed. I kept thinking that throughout the "experience". This movie convinced me not to drop any more dollars on 3D tickets until something in the process changes substantially. If a feature film with a massive budget can't compete visually with CG spinning text, it's going to lose my vote.

This was a big part of what took me out of the film as well. If these characters were two days off a meth binge I would accept their illogical and at times idiotic actions. If you subtract all the 'he/she wouldn't have done that in that situation' and 'but that couldn't have happened because" instances the crew never would have left the ship that first day and there wouldn't be much of a story. It was all fairly stupid.

This looks like a reflection bouncing between glass elements before hitting the image plane. It can happen with some lenses and/or stacked filters when you have a hot light source in the frame. Near the end of the shot in question the camera turns slightly toward the sun, which makes the effect more pronounced. However, you can see the effect creeping in before that as the subject becomes more back lit from the sun.

The sensor is the same size. On both cameras the sensor is cropped when you shoot lower resolution. Scarlet sensors don't meet EPIC's spec. That's why they have frame rate and compression restrictions.