Giray Izcan

Tyler, is your mission in life to go against the grain every chance you get? I admire what you do, trying to keep film alive. But frankly, your know-it-all cavalier attitude is wearing thin I suppose. Anyhow happy holidays.

Tyler, you are indeed interesting. No film seems to be up to your standards. It makes me wonder what movie is up to your standards and why? In the last 2 years. Thank you.

Matej, What kind of recorder did you use on your d21?

Maybe I should not have said talking head films, but his movies don't draw me in as much as let's say Scorsese movies. I like Tarantino movies , but can't say that I absolutely love them.

I'm not a huge Tarantino fan either. His movies are ok I think. My problem is that they tend to tell the story through excessive dialogue rather than just pictures - talking head films in other words.

I strongly recommend you to see it on print. The print was was rather scratch-free with beautiful blacks.

I just saw the movie on 35mm print. I am glad I went to East Hollywood to see it on film print rather than my next door ArcLight Hollywood. The film was superb except for some one line jokes. Also, I did not like seeing Vader's face at all. Other than that, the movie was fantastic in terms of its story and its cinematography.

The Tree of Life has pretty much no lighting.

I just watched the movie, and really enjoyed it. There were a few cheesy moments but was overall pretty good actually. Cinematography wise, I found it marvelous. There is definitely a Hoytema touch to it, which I really appreciate. Much like his work on Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, he really pushed the boundaries with underexposure and working at stocks' toe, which is always interesting. I guess I don't see why some people had issues with the cinematography of the film. The Alexa footage sticks out for sure but it was so minimal that it did not bother me. Overall, I'm glad that I saw the movie, because the cinematography was pretty inspirational actually. Lots of silhouettes, and half keyed characters and minimal fill light... stunning. Many hats to Mr. Hoytema.

I read the article in AC. The article mentions that he preferred 35mm format lenses because he believes that you use the best part of the lenses on s16 which is the center of the lenses. It may be true, but from my personal experience, one has to be really careful with flares due to an excessive amount of light in the gate area will cause a loss of contrast and as a result a less perceived sharpness overall.

Even with an SR 2, the camera won't be quiet enough for dialogue recording in a small room - not necessarily a tiled bathroom but even a regular small bedroom. You would need a barney with 2's too for sure.

Visual Products.

I'm revisiting this movie since I just bought a whole bunch of oldies on Blu Rat. I hadn't seen this for years. Watching it on high definition, wow, I mean such a wonderful piece in terms of the story and the cinematography.

I just watched the Blu Ray copy of the movie. I forgot how gorgeous of a movie it is. Wonderful and inspirational lighting and compositions - truly a masterpiece.

It might be spelled as Kristy's Editorial.

David, there is a place in Burbank called Christy's Editorial. They have tables and everything you need.

3:1 is a pretty conservative ratio - I'm not saying it can't be done but will be pretty limited. It depends on the film too. I wouldn't go below at least 5:1 but 7:1 or 10:1 is more ideal for sure.

I just saw the movie at arclight. I thought the film was pretty good - maybe dull at times but good. I thought s16 served the film really well. It looks painteresque and poetic. It was great seeing how s16 holds up on the big screen - even the 500 stock. Also, I like the fact that the DP chose to use older Cooke lenses...

It was 4perf and I think we shot 8000ft of film.

Thank you. I shot it on my bl4s camera with my Cooke 20-100 lens on Fuji Eterna 500t and Eterna Vivid 250d. Some parts I underexposed the image to print up to accentuate grain. Although this version of the film, which I'm not particularly crazy about was desaturated by the editor/director of the film, but o well I guess.. Since Eterna 500t is an older stock, I rated the film at 250. All of the interior stuff was actually lit but only to different exposure levels. If I don't remember it wrong, my ambient exposure in the living room etc was 3 stops underexposed to have dark overall image with tight grain and some what definition on the objects.

Hello everyone, here is a short I shot that will be screened at the Chinese Theater in April, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpv4WKHSTx8 Let me know what you think.

Mark, There are plenty of career 1st Acs. It is just a preference really, personally and professionally. I disregard Richard's auto focus comment.

Richard, What makes you say that? No, it was not a sarcasm attempt at all.

Richard, What can I say? We can't all be as accomplished as you. Thank you for being a great influence to all of us. You don't have to rub it in though... I'm sure Gregory would love to be as accomplished as you one day. Have a nice day sir.

Richard, You're right sir. What am I saying? His body of work ONLY as a focus puller. I must have forgot it's so easy and trivial a monkey could do it.