Phillip Mosness

Could the effect be shot by itself then projected onto the actress? Like in small format, 16mm or super8 reversal and projected? Or with a video projector?

Is there also a problem with the rear element protruding further than 35mm lenses? I was told this when I bought some PL mount 16mm primes recently.

Other than the shapes of lens flares, what difference is made by the number of blades in the iris mechanism?

I can't really tell 100% from the video assist, but at first glance it doesn't really look like 2.35, which seems odd considering P.T.A seems fond of anamorphic (when he's not shooting 65mm) I'm guessing 1.85....OK after writing that I looked up the film on IMDB and it says 1.85

Well good news, it wasn't the camera. The post house put up the footage again and it's fine now. It was some problem with the film not seating properly in the gate. On a side note the Optex converted Zeiss 12-120 T 2.4 is a swell lens.

Well it looks like the filter rings may be why I had severe vignetting with my first test footage. I'll try again with those off and I bet I'll see a big change. Oddly, the previous owner has lots of nice filters for the lens, but how he used them is now baffling given what I see happening with them on the lens. He claimed not having any problems like this. On a separate note, I've heard that gel filters are more consistent than glass anyway. Not sure if that's true, but it may be my only choice.

What zoom is currently on it? Is there a problem with it?

Alrighty, I held a piece of scrap film against the gate and re-tested and now I feel better about the readings with the exception of the 400 asa setting. For some reason it doesn't work with that setting. Must be a bug. I'll probably rate 500 asa at the 320 setting anyway, so it should be OK. I have noticed that I tend to underexpose more often than over, so I'll try to go a bit thick on my neg as a general rule.

Registration seems fine. Nothing else that would indicate a problem. The lens is a PL mount Zeiss that's been great in all other footage, so I'm again thinking transfer. At least I hope.

if a loading issue? Just got an HD transfer back of some 50D and the left side of the screen is noticeably softer than the razor sharp right side. It was the first footage I shot with the camera, and nothing since then seems to have the same issue. The post house is going to look at it again, but they suggested it could be due to a loading problem, like the loop wasn't quite right. I suspect it's a focus issue with the Spirit gate, but they say it wouldn't only be on one side. Other footage with the same lens, etc seems perfectly fine. Anyone ever have this? Thanks, Phillip

I'm getting a 404 link on this. Just me?

Thanks for the responses. If I'm reading this accurately Mr. Lewis, The way the meter works requires film in the gate in order to get an accurate reading? If it's indeed measuring light bouncing off the film plane, then that might explain why I'm getting odd readings from the meter with only the pressure plate in the gate. This would be a rather unusual system compared to what I'm used to on some smaller format cameras. I'll need to test again with film in the camera because as it is, it really wants me to open up wider than my Sekonic would have me believe. Thanks.

Just curious if anyone has the meter option on their LTR. It seems to be somewhat rare, and I'm wondering of it's considered pretty accurate . Thanks

Possibly a silly question, but after years of using it, it just occurred to me that Kodak went with a 500 speed film instead of 400, which would be more natural in terms of stops than 500. 50, 100, 200, 400, 800 etc. Is there a particular reason for this? Was it because it was the fastest they could get with the best of grain structure possible? I might as well ask the same for 250 D

I noticed that Les Miserables has a lot of close ups and I wonder if it was partially artistic and partially for technical reasons. Unlike many other musicals this one was done with actors singing live rather than to a prerecorded track, and I'm guessing that in order to insure good production sound they needed mics as close as you would in most dialogue situations for clean recordings, hence many close ups. Am I assuming correctly? I know this isn't the first musical recorded live, but I'm not sure which others were done this way, so I don't have any to compare.

Hello, Not sure if this has been covered before, but when shooting, let's say Vision 500T for a B&W movie such as The Artist, would yellow filters still have the same effect that it would with B&W film? Thanks, Phillip

I thought I was getting one to put my 10mm Macro-Cinegon on my Beaulieu 6008. It showed up today and it's not going to work. Is their more than one size of Leica M mount? What I received was much larger that the mount of the lens

Is it a standard 50' reel? Either the reel is upside down, or the film was wound onto the plastic incorrectly, but I've never had that happen before. Try running it through the projector while holding the reel separately with a pen, or chopstick, or whatever. Then rewind it correctly onto the original reel.