Phillip Mosness

Hello, I was wondering what the "Buckle switch" was referring too. It that the little switch that gets thrown when you lose the loop? It took me a bit of playing around before I figured that one out on my BL4.

https://www.sharegrid.com/sfbay/browse/cinema-lenses--4/?lens-type--4[]=anamorphic--4&sort=score+DESC

These seem like a bargain. Do they all have the same number of iris blades?

Out of curiosity, is your choice on the format an aesthetic one or more practical? Super 16 fits the HD aspect ratio closely with out much cropping, which is why many choose it these days, but if you prefer to shoot in 4 by 3 it was the standard for many decades. Also I don't know if that camera's a good candidate, but there's also Ultra 16, which is easier to convert on some cameras, and lets you use a lot more lenses, and keeps the optical center in the same place.

I've never seen one like that. I do have a vague recollection of 200' metal spools. Is that what this uses?

Not sure if they's ship to you but.... http://www.ebay.com/itm/BIRNS-SAWYER-HOLLYWOOD-CA-TRIPOD-HIGH-HAT-for-ARRI-35MM-35MM-MOVIE-CAMERA-/182296394777?hash=item2a71b63c19:g:igcAAOSwNRdX7J3T And a little different... http://www.visualproducts.com/storeProductDetail02.asp?productID=924&Cat=48&Cat2=49

Just before the trailer starts, there's a 5 second trailer for it. We live in interesting times.

here's a DIY cloud tank vid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_100958439&feature=iv&src_vid=RypKl8MJPRE&v=-qou5sDOO8k#t=47s Sounds like some people use dairy products/condensed milk, etc.

I was about to ask if there was a method to determine how much over-cranking for different sizes of miniatures, but there's a formula in http://minimodelfx.BlogSpot.com/

I've also heard that Panavision uses Nikon glass, but from an interview I read, some of the early Panavisions were using the same glass from the Bausch and Lombs cinemascope lenses that the industry was moving away from.

So far we've really only seen the 65mm in action and housings (mock-ups?) for others. Although the test footage looks good so far, who knows what a wider 40mm could look like. It's the focal length I would need first , though, and I hope it's up to the same standards. I don't know much about the designer, but I would think it would take years to design a lens as complicated as an anamorphic unless you took an existing one as the basis for rehousing. Not sure about patents these days. I read that 20th Century Fox realized too late that they only owned the rights to Chretian's original design but not anamorphic as a concept, so the other studios quickly got a hold of their own lenses to avoid having to licence from Fox. But I digress.

I'm definitely one of those guys that was surprised by the initial focal lengths. But as a novice I am probably mostly influenced by the lengths of the vintage sets I've been seeing for years. Almost anything that's been within reach for purchase have been 35/50/75, or 40/50/75 with a 100mm as a possible one to get down the line. In the interview he mentions 32/50/85 as in the works, and if I had the option of only one choice that would be set I'd get, but they've got their reasons for which ones to start with. Suffice it to say, I'm kinda over the moon that SOMEBODY is attempting to pull off lenses for this price range. There's clearly a market for this in the same way there's a market for those Rokinon Xeens. They must have seen some of us mounting old anamorphic projector lenses onto our cameras and figured it was time for another option. Why now, would I spend 5-15K on an Old Lomo when these are actually less expensive and possibly better in most ways?

http://www.newsshooter.com/2017/04/24/atlas-lens-co-orion-anamorphic/ According to this interview, they're hoping to produce some other focal lengths after the first three, a 32mm, 50mm, and 80mm. I kind of wish they'd started with those lengths. Either way I have high hopes for these, because there's such a big gap between the work-arounds like mickey mousing projector lenses, used Lomos and full prices name brands(Cooke, Hawk, etc.) If they're good enough for feature work, they'll be a bargain.

https://atlaslensco.com/ Anyone going to Nab might want to stop and see these. Pricing looks surprisingly affordable. I'd like to see some more tests, but if they perform as well as it appears these could be a big deal to those of us who've watched decades-old-Lomos get super expensive.

Hello, Very nice. can you tell us anything more about these? Maybe some specs? The horizontal flare seems more subtle than many vintage lenses. Are they multi-coated? Any idea what the price points are for this set?

There's an antique shop near me that got several from an estate sale. If you'd like to pm me I can give you the low down.

I'd forgotten about this scanner until I ran across this. At $30,000 It falls into an interesting niche of the market. Not cheap enough for most enthusiasts, but maybe not right for the bigger post houses either? I could see a few people pooling recourses, figuring it could pay for itself after a few short's worth of scans, though.

The starting point in crop factors is 35mm Full Frame still photography or sensors like the Canon 5d mark II DSLR The focal length of a lens doesn't change when the format changes. A 9.5mm lens will always be 9.5mm whether it's on a large format camera or a tiny super 8 camera, but changing formats will change your field of view. Having said that though, that 9.5mm was designed for that camera format and wouldn't work on a 35mm camera. The image circle wouldn't cover 35mm film and would vignette horribly. If you wanted to have a similar shot of your actress above with a 35mm or APS-C camera you'd probably grab an 18mm or 20mm lens. What the rental guy said about "twice the FOV of the actual focal length" is confusing.

This interactive comparison might help. https://www.abelcine.com/fov/

People have funded way dumber things, but I'm not sure a post house would scan anything unless the owner has the copyright, anyway. How old is the cartoon?

Aapo Lettinen "I have have exactly the same kind of problem with old unknown history 50D EXR except it was pumping red layer, not blue. "I've never seen a red problem outside of the light leaks one gets when they load daylight loads in ....daylight. Those are usually on the right side of the frame and I at least know what happened. I realize second hand film is a risk, but I've had such good luck over the years . With this batch it was the pulsing that was driving me nuts because a consistent problem could be worked with more easily, and they were still factory sealed. I guess I shouldn't have left those rolls in the MRI machine that one time. hehe

If anyone recognizes these problems, I’d be curious to hear. I bought this film second hand so it’s impossible to know how it was stored before I owned it. It’s the first time I’ve run across problems that looked like this, however, and I’m trying to determine what the problem was/is. I’m tempted to say it got large doses of x-rays going through airport security, bit one roll seems to have come out fine. All were Vision2 and 3 500T in 100’ loads in a Bolex super 16. A combo I’ve used many times with no problems. Any ideas? Thanks! https://vimeo.com/157816781 Password: superprob

A quick vid on the Coens and Roger Deakins use of putting the camera inside the conversations rather than over the shoulder.

Hi Lena, There's some info on this subject in the FAQ on anamorphics at the top of this lens forum. "To be safe one should calculate the depth of field based on the actual focal length of the lens."

The second one (8 second mark) looks like the ones I've had in my footage. The first one (2 second mark) is stronger than I've had, but outdoors on a sunny day it's certainly my guess. It would make sense if you were looking through the eyepiece to make sure you were getting your sync light and then momentarily looking away to put the unit away somewhere. The fact that it's a steady shot and that it comes and goes so quickly tells me it's not a light leak.