David Cunningham

Very interested but not sure how I could pull it off.

Thanks for that David. I was not aware of these diopters so had no idea how they worked. Very cool. I still hate the effect though. It looked so odd in the Hateful Eight.

I'm going to see Star Wars again tomorrow so I can pay more attention to all the fine details of both cinematography and story line since now I don't have to worry about following the story as a whole. I would imagine that the 4K digital projection would be somewhat close in quality. I still think a correctly projected 70mm print would be far superior especially for those outdoor scenes with the mountains and trees in the distance. Even after the many generations to get to print that 70mm print should be in the 6-8K range at least if not higher. Interesting about the "mask". I did not notice anything odd about the mask in either 70mm projections I saw at two different theaters. It looked like a gate mask top and bottom to me. Perhaps I'm wrong. Also, the second presentation I saw had virtually no dust, scratches or jitter. Only the lateral gate weave was present... But still less than the first showing. Although I didn't see the digital version, I have no doubt that the blacks and highlight details and the contrast of the two was likely far superior in the 70mm print.... Even with the best new digital projectors.

The Boston Experience I have to say. Overall, my experience with the Hateful Eight has been fantastic. Both the Somerville Theater in Somerville, MA (just outside Boston) and the Coolidge Corner Theater in Brookline, MA (basically down town Boston) were great. However, the Coolidge showing was far superior. Everything was pretty much perfect with the projection. The outdoor scenes and indoor scenes all look just like I was expecting and were stunning. I was most moved by the close-ups of the 6-team horses and carriages throughout the movie as well as the one scene that begins outside looking at the barn and without cutting moves to a table inside and then again without cutting moves to the bar. Amazing stuff! The nice and shallow depth of field in addition to the wide format made for a fantastic setting inside the cabin. Just fantastic cinematography. The only two issues I had with this were the excessive use of focus changes during the guitar/coffee scene and their special effect used to deal with the depth of field "problem" with Jackson on the Bed and the Sherrif in the foreground. The guitar scene, although I know what they were trying to do, overused the idea of changing focus. Especially with the distortion of the anamorphic a it was just too distracting. Just doing it 2 or 3 times total would have been ok... But they did it a bunch. The foreground/background issue where they needed SLJ to be in focus on the bed and the Sherrif in the foreground just looked weird. I don't know how they did it, but the background directly behind the Sherrif being out of focus but suddenly being in focus on the right side of the screen was just weird. Most probably didn't notice it.... But I was there for the format and it was distracting and annoying. Overall, very pleased with the movie. It met all my expectations. Too violent as a whole for my taste, but I knew it was a Tarantino movie. So, I knew what I was getting into. Now, as far as the theaters. I've had an ongoing issue with the film projections at the Somerville theater where they try to turn their lamps up too high to "bring more detail out of the shadows." But, what happens is it causes the bright scenes like the bright outdoor snow scenes to actually flicker badly and the indoor scenes to have blacks that aren't deep but almost gray. It was rather disappointing. I wasn't sure if I was just being too picky. I had the same problem when they showed Interstellar. So, I went and watched the showing at the Coolidge down the street and it was 100x better. The blacks were black and the whites were nearly flicker free. Beautiful! Both locations had lateral frame movement that I assume was just old/warn projectors so the film floated in the gate a bit. The Somerville projectors also had some vertical jitter... It wasn't quite registering right. It was only distracting on the static scenes. All in all... It was great! But go see it at the Coolidge.

Boooooo

I have seen that before on scanners that are not properly calibrated and thus are creating vertical line noise in the bright highlights which are actually very deep blacks in the negative itself... Like trying to get the detail out of the shadows on a print, the sensor is creating that noise trying to get the detail out of those highlights. Definitely a scanner issue.

I have found that with aged reversal you are best to get as close to the original exposure/Iso as possible. Over exposing just Leads to way less highlight detail and, with color, way less saturation. If it were negative i'd say over expose by one stop but that's just too hard to do correctly with trix.

Bernie is great. He just returbed my eclair ACL and mags and they are better than new.

I think it was because everyone thinks they already know everything there is to know about Steve jobs. There have been many movies and documentaries already, so even a jobs fan like myself never made the time to take in this movie... And I'm a huge celluloid guy. I just wasn't feeling a jobs movie. I will definitely watch the blu Ray when it comes out if for no other reason than the cinematography.

The only negative go the acl for me is the oscillating mirror. It's a big hassle when you use lenses with larger image circles or even standard lenses when they flare. It hits the mirror when it's out of the way and causes annoying strobing. Otherwise great camera.

My super 16 ACL is whisper quiet especially since Bernie at super 16 inc survived it. My wife asked if it was even running from across the room. She couldn't hear it at all. It's now my favorite camera to shoot with. My bolex rex 5 I sold to pay for the ACL was crazy loud... That famous tick tick frame counter.

You can rent fantastic 35mm glass on the cheap and use decent still lenses for productions not requiring zeiss super speeds.

Yeah. Again. 2perf 35mm way more interesting than horizontal 2perf super8. Truly ideal would be an all in one easy to convert 35mm capable of 2, 3 and 4 perf (both regular and super35).

Because these days the slit master rolls on an as needed basis on a very infrequent schedule. It's not like the old days when they basically produced as much as they could. Now they know for both qc and financial purposes they have to run low before they produce more so as not to risk sitting on stock or paying more labor hours than necessary.

Ditto on the 2 perf 35 mm

My super16 5k sample to 4K Prores 4444 negative scans from perry in the ScanStation are mind blowing. After basic correction the image looks better than the timed work print I have of the same footage and that pains me to admit.

That is correct.

Yes. But they also say that it has been discontinued and this recent delivery was the last. All they have is what there will ever be.

Sadly, it's actually the Alexa, not film: https://twitter.com/mattreevesLA/status/655510303224926208

Well that's it... it's now discontinued and Wittner has it's last batch on hand. They estimate their current supply will last a year or two. Come on Film Ferrania!

Not that I used this film anyhow as it was not good in the Super 8 format, but it has been discontinued. Availability is now while supplies last. :( Come on Film Ferrania, you are our only hope! Well, maybe that very low chance that Fuji will come around some day. But, I doubt it.

HAHA... right ultra... sorry about that. Yeah, it's very interesting and looks like it's gonna be cooky. We shall see. But, no such thing as a waste of 65mm film. Whatever sells more Kodak film the better! It will keep us Super 8 and 16mm users alive.

Confirmation that in the greater Boston area the real photochemical print of The Hateful Eight, direct from Fotokem, will be showing starting Christmas Day at the Somerville Theater just outside Boston in Somerville. It will be an actual, real Super Panavision 70 experience. I cannot wait, even though I think the film is going to not be that good. LOL.

Now, if you want to see an amazing 70mm film projection, find one of the locations that will be showing an actual Super Panavision 70 print of the Hateful Eight on Christmas Day. I have a feeling the movie itself is going to be crap, but the cinematography will likely be fantastic and an experience to behold. I'll be going to the showing at the Somerville Theater, just outside Boston, MA.

Yeah, if you want to have an idea of what this will look like, check out the last Star Trek movie. Although shot on film, it will be done all DI. So, a 35mm print of Star Wars won't be anything like a 35mm print of Interstellar... all photochemical. But... If your local digital theaters aren't very good and/or only do 2K projection, then a 35mm or 70mm print laser produced from the 4K source will look better. If your local theaters are true 4K projection... and actually good projection... you're better off seeing it in 4K digital.