Jump to content

Dominik Bauch

Basic Member
  • Posts

    100
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dominik Bauch

  1. Check this out:

    https://www.sagaftra.org/files/safety_bulletins_amptp_part_1_9_3_11.pdf

    Page 51

    states that 'mineral oils should not be used...'

     

    I always used to use DF50 but was wary given that I mess around at home from time to time...

    Rosco V Hazer is pretty nice but not as bullet proof as the DF50. I'm wary of the oil residue. I've only noticed it on my viewfinder. Never anywhere else. But if I mess up the couch at home over time I'm a dead man....

  2. For various reasons (SAG compliance, residue etc.) I'm using a water based hazer.

     

    Initial impressions are that the haze seems to swirl around more in bright sources (sunlight, flashlight). I don't remember this being so much of an issue with oil based hazers. Any tips to mitigate this issue? Is it just a case of serious wafting or running the hazer through a box fan?

     

    I assume that major movies and TV shows have to use water based haze for SAG compliance, so they must all be using a Rosco V Hazer or similar?

     

     

  3. All Great questions.

    It really varies and I definitely want to be prepared for the future as well. So, while I might not be in large fully controlled spaces now, I can't predict how next year will look etc. As for handheld / tripod, I would say it's an even split. Probably will be a little more on sticks with anamorpjhics stylistically speaking, depending on what I'm shooting obviously.

  4. In a set of 4 anamorphic lenses, in addition to 35, 50, 75. Which is generally the most useful 4th lens - a 100 or 135?

    Obviously totally depends on the situation etc. spherically I tend to like longer focal lengths but I don't have a huge amount of anamorphic experience. i.e. in general would a 100mm will be more useful than a 135....?

     

    Also do extenders play well with anamorphic lenses? I have a 2X Angenieux Optimo extender, wondering if that will help if the flange distance works out.

  5. Thanks for all the feedback.

    Definitely a tough one, there really isn't a no brainer out there. Of course different projects call for different looks but in an ideal world there would be a modern anamorphic lens that is under 5lb and retains classic anamorphic characteristics without costing insane money.

    Absolutely planning on testing thoroughly. I'm just trying to figure out if Master Anamorphics are desirable enough to be a selling point to own a set.

    Sharegrids Anamorphic lens test is super useful to start with. I just wish they had been able to use some Panavision anamorphic glass as a comparison.

     

    Crazily Kowas are close to $100k anyway, so I don't think that Master Anamorphics are that ludicrous considering the benefits. if only Cooke anamorphic weren't so heavy....

    Assume that Master Anamorphics can be used without a lens support on an Alexa Mini? Obviously 100+ will need one.

  6. I'm looking into Anamorphic glass and would ideally like to go modern. I've shot with Kowas and didn't love them. Flare is ok in my opinion and the distortion is pretty extreme in areas.

     

    Anyone have real world experience with the Arri Master Anamorphics? Sure they are clean but technically it's not tough to add some vignetting and light edge blur in post to mimic older lens artifacts. They are supposed to be more gentle look-wise than Master Primes and some amazing stuff has been shot with those.

    I love the relatively light weight, low T-stop and the fact that every part of the frame is in play but I'm just concerned about the supposed clinical nature of the image...

     

    Are these in high demand and is the resale price high? i.e. are these a good investment?

     

    I would love to look into Hawk V-Lites but they are aggressively rental only... The size and weight are awesome plus the look is more classic.

     

    Cooke Anamorphic i SF seem amazing but the weight is a real issue. Ideally I'm trying to still be in gimbal weight territory.

     

    Any thoughts or advice much appreciated.

  7. Have filming coming up and plan to use DF50 for some light atmosphere.

    Im filming in a medium sized open plan office and a number of smaller rooms.

    Anyone have good tips on how to get a nice consistent base?

    Once thats in the pocket, typically how long before having to add more haze to keep consistency?

    Really want to avoid moving haze or indoor fog look. Haze is done so well on many episodic shows, hoping some veterans can tell me what the haze workflow looks like pre rolling camera.

     

    Many thanks in advance, any help or tips greatly appreciated.

  8. Just wanted to get some feedback from people who use these regularly.

    I am interested in getting the Angenieux 2x extender for my Optimo Styles.

     

    Obviously 2 stops of light loss is the main Con, but if I were to compare an Optimo Style at 76mm with a 2x extender, T5.6 (Effectively now 152mm), with a 150mm zoom or prime, also at T5.6, would both images have similar depth of field / AOV?

    Any other major downsides? In daylight situations I regularly use a .6ND on a mini anyway so the 2 stops of lightloss isn't a big deal vs the flexibility of having a decent long lens option without the footprint...

    Also if it softens the image a touch, that could be a bonus in some situations. How noticeable, if at all, is the softening?

     

    Thanks in advance for any advice or experiences.

  9. Say what you want about Cloverfield paradox story but it undeniably looks awesome. Great, great looking movie, love his lighting style. Great art direction and set design too. Super inspirational work.

    Force awakens was crazy good too, the scene with the storm troopers in the drop ship at the beginning, insanely cool...

    • Upvote 1
  10. Hi,

     

    Wondering what methods people here have found to get 'sourceless' undertones into the shadows of an indoor scene. i.e injecting some cyan or steel green into the shadows.

     

    Trying to avoid any hint of cast shadow / source-y or too much additional fill on subject. Interested to see what techniques others are using to achieve this successfully.

     

     

  11. Look, anyone who has shot tons of movies with arguably one of the greatest directors / storytellers of our time is obviously supremely talented but....

     

    I've been re- watching a bunch of Spielberg movies recently and all of his 'recent' efforts in my mind are marred by egregious diffusion / blown out, glowing highlights. I just don't get it, the whole netting the lens really looks so over the top and flat to me. Film looks great as is...

    Minority Report, AI, Bridge of spies, Indy 4 (By far the worst culprit.) to name a few.

     

    There's insane art direction, set design that just gets nuked with huge soft blobs of diffusion.

    Occasionally there's a close up without a hot light source in frame where the diffusion looks great on skin but as soon as something hot creeps in frame...

    Am I missing something? I'm not against diffusion filters; I love an 1/8 Hollywood black magic for example but the lens net look is just too much for my taste.

     

    • Upvote 1
  12. For Rosco Steel Green gel, what color temp is the gel designed to work with to produce the classic Steel Green look?

    i.e. are they designed to work with tungsten fixtures or HMI?

     

    Take any of the Maze Runner movies or Gotham season 4. There's a lot of really nice steel green undertones. Are they gelling Tungten or HMI lights to get that look?

    Totally get that camera color temp is a huge factor but lets assume that camera is set at 3200K.

  13. Totally agree r.e. lighting and composition. I just mean that I've been impressed with the color and contrast of the image I've been getting out of the zooms.

    Wider aperture is nice for sure but most of the time, unless I'm using MP's or Summilux, the primes are around a T2, so I'm a stop slower with the Angies, which I can partially offset by raising the iso half a stop. Then there's not much difference other than the slightly shallower DOF I would get at a T2, and the closer minimum focus...

  14. I've used Angenieux Optimo Style Zooms on the past 3 projects and other than the amazing flexibility I've found the image to be very nice.

    I'll probably get crucified for saying this but I honestly prefer what I've been seeing out of these image wise than many prime sets I've used; Cooke S4i, Leica Summicron C, Ultra primes, Speed Panchros etc...

    Obviously speed is an issue at T2.8 but wide open I've had less issues with purple fringing etc than S4i's...

     

    Cinematic image is most important for me, definitely trumps practicality but other than losing a stop and being slightly heavier than a prime lens; any aesthetic reasons why these are inferior to a good Prime lens?

    I'm really tempted to get a couple of these as for the money, I could barely by 2 good prime lenses, plus I gain the tremendous practicality and speed that these offer but I want to make sure I'm not missing something....

     

     

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...