Nate Downes

Well, in this case sound is not a real issue (no sync sound) just me trying to test some bits through a 3 minute short. Nothing for commercial, just wanting to flex some muscles and actually use the equipment I have already. I am waking up, and am flexing my muscles, so to say.

and 51 years after the original pronouncement......

You know, rather than come up with arguements against a request, help out with that request? My reasons why I wish to be edited with film are just that, mine. I have made my choice, and I would appreciate it if you would respect that.

Slumdog is a mixed format, not a digital film. Some of it was digital, some was film, but all of it was absolutely brilliant. that being said, I still thought Dark Knight was the stronger shot film, but that's me... 8)

??? So, you are telling me that $4 worth of tape is more expensive than $150 for a telecine? I'd like to have what you're having. Sure, if you're doing a feature, the cost advantage comes up, but for a 3 minute short shot on reversal, cmon.

Depends. There are still Horse and Buggy firms around, along with Steam Engine manufacturers. While yes, both are smaller than their heydays, they continue to produce a solid profit for their shareholders.

I'm pondering getting off of my lazy posterior and shooting a short. Over the past year of effort I have realized, I am no good at editing. So, trying to find someone that still works the old method, if any of you still exist out there.

Wrong side of the pond else I'd hire you one of mine.

it has a manual override, which means you will be able to use any stock out there, but you will have to hand-meter it. You will likely spend more on your meter than your camera, but the meter will last you a lifetime.

Part of it is def super8, as I've seen them before. Just standard Vision 200T (not Vision2).

No idea of the model, but if the eyecup is going, so is the interior belt used to drive the shutter. I have a 1206SM which had the interior belt melt away on me. However, I replaced it with a rubber band, and all is good in the world. Camera is one of my two main now. I got rid of the eyecup and never bothered to replace it.

I've yet to find one that could not be made to work with some Marvel Mystery Oil.

Based on my own Filmo, it might be a boat anchor, but it takes great pictures

Pray it's not original film. That boy came out when they still had nitrate film. Can we say BOOM?

I am curious as well. While I could do the Miami, and do own a 35mm setup providing you don't mind the bulk of a hand-crank, maryland is a bit out of my area....

**Shivves at the horror of that thought.... then pets his Cooke lens set**

I'm partly color-blind, my natural vision is pretty similar to the results one would get from such a glass. Needless to say, I don't use one.

And here I am shooting 100T with 1000W.....

You should be fine shooting at night with those lights if you limit your lighting scope. No football fields.

Which kind of film was it? They do send E6 based Super8 out to Dwaynes I believe.

No way dude, use a Cinerama for that real in-your-face detail!

Well, I was thinking in the 1080 he mentioned above and concede the point. Incidentally, there is no 1080p broadcast standard I am aware of.

If you cannot, I happen to have an example of that broken piece that you might be able to use to reconnect it.

I've used the EX1 with the lens adaptor, and found the native Fujinon lens is too flat to take as much advantage from the adaptor as other cameras. Incidentally, he was discussing for broadcast work, not movie making, so the lens adaptor would not be part of the issue in his case I'd imagine.

All three cameras do have progressive modes. As mentioned above, the EX1 is likely the most powerful of the three. It's main drawback is in the editing process, which is non-standard and has given some people issues. Incidentally, HD broadcast is interlaced, not progressive.