John E Clark

The first one is the original... But there was a certain amount of irony in the thread in regard to getting lights that allow for accurate recording, yet, in the case of the 'fake', most casual viewers couldn't identify the fake.

Sometimes I wonder 'why bother'... Dulwitch Picture Gallery in London put up a chinese 'fake' of a master painting, then asked patrons to 'identify' the fake. Apparently only 10% of those responding to the test, did so correctly... Here's the two works... which is the fake for $120... and which is the original, perhapsworth perhaps millions...

Landon D. Parks said: --- I love mt 70" plasma as much as the next guy, but it's maybe 1/100 the size of a standard cinema screen. ------ I'm somewhat of an oddity... I prefer my 32 in. screen to the 'big' ones that I see...

You should see of there's someone in the UK that can 'lend' you a Sekonic C-700 to create graphs of the various spectra, and also the 'color bins' which their respective CRI values. The nit I have with the C-700, was that apparently one can not get the spectra out as a say an 'excel' or even a CSV, spreadsheet. But the 'PDF's generated do have the more pictorial representation of the spectral info. Another poster here, Stuart Allman, who also has a blog on tech topics, mentioned it a few weeks ago in another thread, and I visited the Sekonic 'table' at NAB... I may or may not be able to get a demo unit in the future... I've known the rep for a number of years, but the device is going to be popular...

I got hung up on the "I am not a robot' question, or is that a statement, or an assertion... eventually I decided to say yes, i'm not a robot and voted.

If you had 600 fps, that would serve both 25 and 24 fps... 600 being the least common multiple...

You could take the standard complementary colors and pair up say, Cyan/Red, Magenta/Green, and of course Yellow/Blue. Using this image, you can easily select color pairs for contrast.

There is Frame Forge, which is relatively expensive... and I've not found a really good free/cheap alternative, that is set up for film storyboarding.

While not quite the same thing, for the few still photo fests I've judged, and the Wife who has done far more of this at various 'pro' organization conferences... sometimes 'stuff gets through'... Some set of people were asleep at the stick when going through 5000 entries or whatever for some of these big name fests, etc. But sometimes it is just sort of 'which is worse', and picking the least worst... rather than, which is The Best... So, I have tended these days not to 'worry' about individual submissions that happen to show up, and induce me to ask 'why was this selected'... Overall the big name fests do attract a better quality, and by sifting through, one can find learning opportunities.

In a certain regard to the discussed clip... I've gotten over these sorts of things a long time ago. While some may argue that back in the olden days of Film film, people produced better... I would disagree. The biggest difference is now many more people can actually see offerings of many levels of quality, rather than only via 'live projection'... The several years that the Wife was in various 'film classes', where one either made videos, editing on U-Matics, or 8mm shorts, had all levels of quality, and mostly embarrassingly bad... The Wife of course only made quality stuff... but she never did take to 'moving pictures', and returned to still photography after her degree...

I've been strongly suggesting they go Ficore... But I do leave it up to them. One doesn't like speaking roles all that much, but the other... well, she'll talk your head of if given a chance...

Uh? Well, I think it's back to figuring out how to work my dogs into a short film that I can submit to a local fest...

1/2 hour TV shows hosted by Hitchcock, and he apparently directed 17 episodes, would indicate that he saw some is merit for 'shorts'. While it may be true that one can not 'live' on making shorts if they are one or two a year... but for TV, or in the modern era, for some sort of Internet channel, shorts may begin to have some economic viability. The biggest problem of course is getting one's work out there for people to know about and then view...

For me the look of the redish cast is sort of 'even' across the entire frame. I would conjecture if it were 'Infra Red', then sources of infra red scatter/reflection, in the scene would show pollution. Hence I would not expect to see it in the 'clear sky' area.

This looks like a Maxfield Parrish, and as such, many of his paintings have a soft light and wrapping effect, so, a large softbox, or the like would be in order. However, as a painter, Parrish could 'control' the light far 'better' than a photographer may for a group shot like this. With sufficient lighting, and flagging, one may be able to get close. But this would require something bigger than a single china ball.

I have a similar problem... no money... but I am starting to develop contacts with real estate agents who may be 'sympathetic' to my need a house or office, for a day, with no impact on the property... I don't know how successful this may be... For one short I participated in last year, we 'built' a hospital roomesque set in the corner of a day activities room at a apartment complex.

There is the micro Cinema Camera, which I think had a price tag on the display of around $1200. But one would have to 'build up' a camera, as it was just a housing with sensor and lens mount... pictured as a 'drone cam'. Now if they had just a 'view finder' app for an iPhone or Android... As it was once I made a pass through the camera area, I headed over to see the Fusion demo on the Mac. If BMD continues the free tools concept, it may be for many people's needs, not worth it to by in to Adobe or the like...

It would have been called "Jacob's Ladder"(1990)... It's sort of interesting that the writer for this movie and "Ghost"(1990) was one and the same... Bruce Joel Rubin. Adrian Lyne is said to have been influenced by Robert Enrico's "An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge"(1962).

For me the use of 'master pedestal' is somewhat of a hold over from Analog TV. In the various signalling methods, of which NTSC/RS-170 is the one I'm most familiar with (and have been trying to forget for years...), Black on the TV screen was determined by 'no electrons hitting the phosphorous'... and so the 'black pedestal' would set the analog voltage for that level. (For example, in US NTSC, the 'pedestal' was 7.5% IRE, while the 'blanking' level was 0 IRE, and the sync pulse was -40 IRE. But NTSC-J had 0% IRE for both 'black' and 'blanking'.). All of that 'disappears' with Digital, although, when creating media for TV display, one had to account for these sorts of things. In film there may be a sort of analogous parameter, namely Film Base + Fog, which sets the minimum density of unexposed film, which will set the 'black' level of the negative relative to creating the 'positive' image.

Then there Uwe Boll, who would rather go a couple of rounds in a ring with critics than make a 'good' film... (of course he gets money some how some way... so most of his films technically are 'good' from that point of view...).

hit the wrong button... delete this post.

The Wife is hyper critical and in many cases it become an impediment for her to get work out. Sure, take care, do the best, but at some point one must publish. Perhaps it is ok if one is working for one's self, but for work that is 'commercial'... the hypercriticalness is a killer. Hypercriticalness is a killer for one's own work because one may hang on some point rather than moving on and learning more.

I was referring to the changes in exposure as you moved. The app that I use for the iPhone allows one to fix the exposure, with highlights blown out, depending, but it doesn't change as windows or lights move in and out of the field of view.

Dynamic range is defined as the ratio between the smallest recordable 'signal' to the largest. So even with a 14 bit ADC, one may have noise such that the smallest recordable 'signal' requires some number of 'counts', say 16 counts, that's 2^4, and the max range, is 2^14 one has a dynamic range of 2^14 / 2^4 = 2^(14 - 4) or 10 'doublings' or stops...

There are a couple of iPhone apps that allow one to have 'fixed' exposure settings. Then one would not see over compensation for the ceiling lights or the background window. Even if these are test/teaser shots, I think it would help in getting a better image.