Jay Young

I have a framed cinema poster of Star Trek Generations on my wall. I looked at the just last night and thought... 11.18.94... was that REALLY 20 years ago? That's a pretty exciting action film, mind you its no ST6, but still, some of those effects are pretty cool. I also have to agree, 2009 star trek was very nice. The others are just... meh.

And here I was just thinking: Sometimes big CG ships on fire crashing into the planet look GREAT. I also agree, I enjoyed the last one, I'll watch this one. However, as seen in the trailer, I will not enjoy it on a "Premium large format screen" - I'll enjoy it on my local cheap cinema 1.85 screen, as I can't be bothered with Regal's blue lights everywhere during the film. I can be bothered to pay Cinemarks' $15 premium experience ticket price when this dolby 10 atmos athmospheros [explicates redacted] whatever sounds terrible because managers that can't even spell cinema think they know how to run one. Anyhow, I'm excited.

I'll concede all rights to you, just list my name somewhere in the middle of the list where no one is paying attention anyway, perhaps after food services.

I'll likely go see it and I'm 34. Traditional story telling and values are still useful - unless there's a twist ending where all the animals turn into zombies. Then I'll be right put off.

I totally agree, I thought a road show! was one in which you had to WAIT for the film to come to a city near you. It's cool that he wanted to install 70mm projectors in a bunch of cinemas, but ultimately not as workable as a plain old roadshow version.

I understand that cinemas in general are a "hard to ROI business" and decisions have to be made by people who usually can't be bothered to see films in the first place. I understand that a 70mm print is expensive but I would FOR SURE if paying for the actual printing costs have to have a contract to keep the print forever in my cinema if I was actually not renting the print. That probably could have been worded better, but its early. This just sounds like TWC wanting to make money.

Will we see the window? Is the shot locked off, or does the camera move for those two shots you have listed above? If we don't see the window ever in frame, then you could use that led but it wouldn't necessaraly have to be outside the window, especially for the second shot facing the door.

YAYAYAYAAAAAAA.. Now I don't have to drive more than 4 hours to see it! I always avoid reviews, as they are generally wrong in my opinion.

This feels to me like a lot of steadycam work. As for the lens, without knowing specifically, most of this looks to be wider than 50mm, so perhaps a 28mm? A little of the lateral shifting produces what looks like a non-rectilinear warping which leads me to lean towards a wider angle lens. You could pull most of this off with a somewhat normal-wide lens and one of those hand holder things, one can usually find those on the web. In fact, literally searching for "canon 6d stabilizer" turned up several usable results.

I have been revisiting older programs, and am currently on the 8th season of "The Andy Griffith Show". The switch to color was a jar, not because of the color, but because it took me two or three episodes to realise they rebuilt the entire set! The previous black and white footage, I assume being data scanned now is some of the most exceptionally sharp, crisp and full of depth black and white pictures I have seen in television. Most of the time it has a very deep focus aspect. Everything is in focus. They have issues with color medium close ups and trying to soften the female faces, but on medium and wide shots it's a clear as any digital image. I've only seen one boom and one flag adjustment in 8 seasons, which is pretty good! I"m also glad they didn't (unlike the X-files) RE-frame everything for 1.78.... Last night I noticed they very well could have re-framed the entire episode as there was generous headroom and negative space all around the TV safe area.

This must be where all of David's black leader went! That's 1300 feet of black. Cool.

Anyone know if there will be a show in Atlanta? Thats the closest place Interstellar was shown in 70mm

I was literally just watching this last night as well. Even the face lighting didn't seem overly exaggerated or unmotivated.

And here I was thinking all I needed to do was have a 400' magazine 3D printed for my Konvas...

Thanks David, I think I was thinking about it too hard. Sorry for the confusing post! Yes, all I have to do is think of the stock that's in the camera as 320, and not worry about what it says on the tin. That's the ticket, 320 and 200 are not that far off, but I'll have to print a test to see if the 200t can be printed at a matching density.

So the details: I have 7219, rating at asa 320. I'm lighting to the meter @ asa 320 for a key stop of f8. I'm shooting through some wonky lenses that loose at least 2/3 a stop (let's say 1 to be safe). That means light hitting the film is around f5.6. But the film is actually 500t that I'm overexposing, so what's hitting the film is actually 500t @ f4.5? Or so? I can't find anymore 500t (thanks walking dead), but people have loads of 200T - If I light for 200t @ f8, then loose a stop the math then works out as follows: asa 320 = f8 on the meter (loose a stop due to lens = f5.6) asa 500 would = f4.5 as we gain the loss from the lens back plus the stock sensitivity. Really, were only talking 2/3's over exposure here. asa 200 would = 2/3's underexposed meaning I would then need to shoot at f...3.2? to gain the loss back? I want to intentionally over expose the 500t by 2/3 stop. I want to match this footage with the 200t, but I don't want to relight the scene! I don't really need to over expose the 200t if I can get away with opening up the lens from f5.6 to f4 or so. Thoughts? Math is hard.

I just spoke with a supplier in Boston who says Acetate black leader is impossible to find as he spoke with someone last week in California trying to purchase 11,000 feet with no luck anywhere. Apparently 100 foot rolls are hit or miss at most suppliers.

I was able to find that Anscochrome D/500 was available for scientific purposes in 1968 or there about. In the 1955 Journal of SMPTE there was a 16mm reversal available for EI 32. The 1952 Journal entry states Anscochrome Color Negative with an EI of 16 as you said. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that they could have shot at EI 32 on color negative. After all, the SMPTE article says that the film could be pushed at least one stop with more grain, and that higher speeds were available but only usable for scientific research as too much grain shown.

Ah, I love Anamorphics!

I just want to say I love my CP-16R, it's super quiet too. Would I like to have an Arri, sure! But, I would also be fine with another CP - of course my only problem is lenses and adapters that don't interfere with the mirror. Speaking of Nikon, that elusive CP to Nikon adapter would be awesome for me, because then I could actually afford to not pay tin-foil-hat prices for lenses. It's not light weight, but it makes a great tripod/dolly studio camera. I'd love to have a 2C instead of an Eyemo, but for that matter - since we're talkin Super 8, I think an Arri 16s with 100' loads would be a better choice.

I can't find any information about the Sony's stop motion functions. Apperently, the new Alexa MINI firmware 3.0 will allow stop motion mode, but I can't even find real evidence of that on Arri's website. I'm going to say you'll be better of with a PL mount DSLR for stop motion, but if you wanted to try the Arri out, others would be interested. The "Stop Motion" effect can be gained by shooting each frame twice, for an over exaggerated effect resulting in a feel of 12 frames per second.

The problem with the Eyemo is that for some reason, people of the internet have deemed it ultra-rare museum status so it's price has risen to $1000/oz.

Lets not forget that for whatever reason, Kodak says 7219 is on back order. I don't know how a manufacturer of a product can be on back order of their own product, but whatever. I can't buy 500T in 16mm currently from Kodak. I haven't checked in a week or so.

Didn't someone already make a "new" Super8 quadruple pin registered camera with holographic projection and defense turrets or whatever? I might have made that last part up, however a $5000 price tag on a super 8 camera, no matter how new, is not something I'm ever going to buy. I can buy 35mm cameras for that price. In fact, for that price I can buy a 35mm camera AND get processing and workprints done!

Yes, and who/what would scan it?