cole t parzenn

 

Well, I guess I break that law... I'm sort of in the F/64 camp for stills... diffraction be damned... and use swings and tilts to adjust the plane of focus for 'infinity' sharpness... rectangular lines be damned...

Large format! So THAT'S why your Hasselblad system sits unused in a closet. The idea of a Hasselblad owner giving up film completely always struck me as odd; the ones in my stills forum seem to have an almost sexual love for them.

Is there less gained from scanning a dense negative than printing it or are you recommending they get the look in post?

 

From ARRI's website FAQ:

Does ALEXAs exposure latitude change with different Exposure Index (EI) settings?

 

No, it does not. Most digital cameras have the greatest exposure latitude at a specific EI setting (often called the 'sweet spot'). Choosing an EI setting that is higher or lower than the optimal setting will result in a sometimes surprisingly large loss of exposure latitude. ALEXA is unique in that its exposure latitude of over 14 stops (as measured with the ARRI Dynamic Range Test Chart (DRTC)) stays constant from EI 160 to EI 3200.

As I suggested before, the reason many other cameras do change dynamic range at different ISO's is that they are trying to hide problems at the noise floor of the signal. And you'll find that the cleaner the signal from the sensor is in general, as part of the design, the wider the dynamic range because there are more usable stops at the bottom of the signal.

Digital sensors tend to have a hard clip at the top of exposure when the sensor photosite can't handle any more light/signal, it's just overloaded, but at the bottom, the problem is that detail just starts to fall into the noise floor making it unusable, so it's often the noise in the system that limits the dynamic range to some extent.

 

Could it be that Alexa footage just looks cleaner, since we're almost always seeing it downsampled? That would be unique, I was led to believe.

If it did, I missed it. :/

Is everyone but me at Cannes? I thought this wasn't out, till July.

Sometimes, I walk onto a location set (not sound stage) and see the perfect lighting coming through the windows. For a moment, I think I should say "ready". Of course, an hour and a half later, when the actors come back to set in makeup and wardrobe, I think ... Good thing we set those big HMI's up outside. Otherwise, it would look like crap now :)

 

Which reminds me of a commercial I was booked a day on to operate Steadicam on many years ago...

One day shoot in a national park. We walked a few miles through the forrest to a special spot. It was a skeleton crew. Maybe 5 people. No lights. We set up and rehearsed the shot. Then we waited. And waited.

 

Finally I asked the director / DP why we were waiting so long. He replied that we were waiting for fog. "How long will we wait?", I asked. "Up to six weeks" was the reply.

 

If you can make films in this fashion, you don't need any lights at all.

 

I asked the park ranger about the weather forecast for fog. He said that fog rarely comes in at this altitude...

 

At 3:00pm the fog rolled in! We did one take. The Director liked it. We went home :)

Without six weeks' pay. ;)

A lot of your questions would be answered if you read John Hora's article on anamorphic lenses in the ASC Manual...

I'll look that up - thanks!

Yep, another 2k DCP. The film prints were made from a 4k master, that's already been confirmed. So why would they make a 2k DCP? Ridiculous!

What percentage of screens are 4K? Perhaps they wanted to optimize for the prevailing format?

That does help. David is probably 110% on the history of anamorphic lenses but he seems to be busy, right now.

I had read about the focus issue in an old thread on early anamorphics. In any case, why do anamorphic adapters need to focus?

Thanks. Why do front anamorphic elements have to be focused along with the rest of the lens? What image would a front anamorphic element alone form?

I've heard of a rear anamorphic adapter (Duclos) but only one - anyone know if it was single focus?

 

Haven't seen it for a while but that looks a bit like "Turkish Delight"

Never heard of it. Yall want a hint?

Your "makeshift video tap" is actually close to how the first video assist was done: a video camera with a zoom lens on top of the film camera, so that the side-to-side framing matched.

If you use the video camera's built in mic and the video camera is next to the film camera, the dialog may be drowned out. Are lav mics an option?

 

Satsuki,

 

>Tilt and slant affect focus whereas shift affects field of view.

 

Could you explain it further?

http://www.toyoview.com/LargeFrmtTech/lgformat.html

haha

If only video came with those colors! S35 Eterna/Eterna Vivid.

Presumably, one of the wider Panavision Super 70 lenses. There's a fair bit of vignetting...

It was a different lens?

Here's hoping it does. Did post go smoothly? Any new thoughts on the pros and cons of photochemical coloring, now that it's fresh in your memory again?

@ cole t parzenn...

RIP Fuji Eterna Vivid, you will be missed.

What do you prefer about 60s and 70s film ("Alien" was on 5247)? If you want more grain, you can always shoot in S16, like Aronofsky does. Filters could get you closer to the look you want in camera.

join the Hasselblad and my 4x5 in the closet to be sold in the estate sale following my death... otherwise unused since being placed in the closet...

Not even for fun? Most Hasselblad owners have an almost carnal fascination with theirs.

You didn't go to see H8ful Eight in San Diego?!?!

Did a print make it to San Diego?

It's good, isn't it?