cole t parzenn

I'd imagine focus pullers appreciate HD monitoring but what else?

How do the two transport mechanisms work?

The way you guys talk about MP cameras, I thought they didn't wear out, at all, especially big German ones - how do you break an Arri 765?

That's sad. What happened, to the other seven?

Just an update in my research, Arri will be discontinuing service of their 765 later this year. Evidently they have three working camera's left and will be discontinuing service sometime this year. I'll have more information and numbers next week.

What does it mean, to "discontinue service," of a camera.

Ozu and his 50mm?

Certainly safer - even professional stunt crews get hanging wrong! (E.G., "Back to the Future Part III") Yikes!

We are picking up a third scanner this or next week which is 35mm at true 5K i.e. 5K R,G and B.

What's your current 5K?

Birdman's that film I keep not getting around to seeing; I just popped in to note that Lubezki is now the first person to win the Academy Award for Best Cinematography in two consecutive years. The honor of winning Color (Special Achievement) in two consecutive years, however, still goes to just William Howard Greene.

This all ignores theater design, video formatting, and where you're sitting, of course.

Ooh, pretty! Which frame lines did you end up using? Have you shot anything at T1.3, yet?

deleted

So, was 1.66 used more for technical reasons than artistic, then?

Why did 1.66 stick, in Europe? (Or did it?) Is it so hard to switch between 1.66 and 1.85? If 1.85 was considered the most drastic crop you could get away with, how did 3- and 2-perf 2.35 come into use?

1.66 is beautiful; I wish it were used more.

I've never understood the argument that 2.35 is "hard on humans." If you're sitting reasonably close to the screen, 2.35 draws your attention towards the center of the frame. That's where faces go, in a close up. Gordon Willis liked 2.35, for dramas, because it lends itself to group shots.

I still don't understand the original question. What does 50% refer to?

 

It's a legit 6K scan, nothing kludgy about it.

6K is 50% greater than 4K. I'm curious, what's special, about 50%?

My question was, "what's special about 50%?" Am I interpreting correctly, that there's nothing special about 50%, it's just how the Arri engineers got 4K and 6K scans, from a 3K sensor?

How much time does a lens change typically take?

That is, why 50%, not why does it oversample. Grazie.

But you need to shoot the scene on long lenses in order to make the effect make sense, you wouldn't get a heat wave effect on a wide angle lens.

How wide is too wide? If I'm visualizing it correctly, a long lens emphasizes the distortion and a short one deemphasizes it but the distortion is always there. Also, since heat distortion is partly a consequence of depth, wouldn't an extremely long lens deemphasize the distortion, as well?

2880*1620*12*24=1,343,692,800; 2048*1152*12*3*24=2,038,431,744. ProRes 4444 must use >6:1 compression.

How does ARRIRAW produce more data, than ProRes 4444? They're both 12 bit, I'm led to believe, so ARRIRAW's 2x pixel count should produce a third less data than ProRes's three channels. Presumably, lossless compression can be applied equally.

Could you lower the hd extraction? Who's fighting against letterboxing?

What makes ARRIRAW more expensive than ProRes 4444?

Well, mainly in the blue layer, since it can be much slower in speed.

How much slower? A color temperature filter's two stops, correct? Would that make the speed difference between the blue and red & green layers one stop or...?

You are right David, but the blue layer is already the most grainy one to start with. To me a 250D looks similar to a 100T as far as grain is concerned (subjectively),

Why is the blue layer grainiest?

Plus this was the era of faster processing at higher temperatures and this was having some effect on the look of films.

Could you elaborate?