Tiago Pimentel

Hey Giacomo! I already knew that video and love it. That's the kind of thing I'm looking for. Thanks for posting that!

After some reading, I think they're the same lenses, only with different mounts. I was wondering if some of you actually own a set of these lenses (or the CP.2 which have the same optics) and could chime in and advise on the best lenses of that set. I wanted an ultra wide, wide, medium and portrait. Thanks guys

Hey guys I was looking into buying a book (well, videos would be better) that is up to date with digital technology and teaches creative ways to light a scene for film. Ideally, not only lighting but other components such as lens and filters choices, hazers, gels, etc. I'm not really interested in film stock oriented teaching, as most of my work is digital. I'm mostly talking about lighting for a specific look and mood, not really three point lighting and other basic stuff of the sort. Thanks!

Does this mean there's no cheap(er) alternative for this particular Cooke lens? :) Doesn't even have to be the same focal length. Just a similar look.

Hey guys I tried the Cooke varotal 20-100 on a recent shoot and loved the look. That is the kind of look I want. Unfortunately I didn't want to spent the 5000eur this lens costs in the used market, so I wanted to ask for some help. Is there any lens that might deliver a similar look for... say less than 2000eur? Something like an old angenieux zoom? Thanks

Hey guys, I have a Ef mount Ursa camera and I wanted to buy a Zeiss set of primes that would emulate the look of the CP.2. From my readings, the CP.2 have the same optics as the Zeiss contax but with different housing. I know the ZEs are different, but what about the ZFs? Are the Contax and the ZFs the same optically? I was inclined to buying the ZFs as I have a bunch of EF to Nikon adaptors. Thanks

Thanks David! Oddly, there is no stock of the Ultracon 2 for 77mm anywhere. I just called Tiffen and they told me they had to manufacture it. Is it too much to start with the UC 3? Maybe too strong of an effect

Thanks David! I don't mind halation. I actually like what it does to the highlights. But what I'm actually after is a filter that creates that nice rolloff to the highlights and the shadows, without making the image look filtered. I love Hollywood Blackmagic, but if you have a strong light source, the filter instantly gets all the protagonism :) Between Ultracons, Digicons and Black Satin, what would you recommend? If I go with Ultracons, is the UC 3 too much for medium to close up shots? Thanks!

Hi David, sorry to bring this thread back again, but I was wondering what you think about the Tiffen LC vs UC to get this effect we're talking about. Red cameras and BMD cameras are fantastic pieces of gear, but I feel they need some help in the highlights and shadows roll off to achieve that creamy Alexa look. Especially in skin tones. Do you think the UltraContrast or Low contrast might help? If so, which strength would you choose from each one? Thanks!

Hey, Not really a cinematography reel. I've worked as a director / videographer / colorist and this is an overview of my most recent work. I know there are some unusual things in the reel (like the colorist segment in a non-colorist reel), but the industry in my country works in a peculiar way... Anyway, here it is. Hope you guys enjoy and if you have constructive feedback, please share :) (btw, I know it's a bit long...) https://vimeo.com/279230211

Hi guys, Like most people shooting digital, I've embraced False Color as my go to tool to properly expose a scene. I have a question though (not necessarily to do with false color alone). If i'm shooting a subject with half his face lit one stop over the other half, I should expose the lit half in the usual 70-75 ires, right? While keeping the other half one stop less. But what if the next shot is a side shot of only the shadowed part of his face? Should I keep the consistency and expose it at middle grey or expose it one stop over where caucasian skin usually falls? Thanks!

Actually I don't know the answer, but I was curious. I remember reading somewhere that Lubezki used some very wide lenses on this project and had the camera placed close to the actors to create this distortion of reality. I used a 16mm full frame lens on a S35 camera last week and it was wide, but I still couldn't get some of the more extreme looks of that film.

Hey guys, I was wondering which focal lengths you think are being used in the shots below (let's assume an S35 sensor):

What about something like this? https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1203052-REG/came_tv_j10002_j6502_sd14_dm14_b5_fresnel_tungsten_video_spotlight.html It's fresnel fixture which I really like, because it allows me to direct my light and, if I want to, I can also diffuse it. It's a bummer it doesn't include the softboxes and I wonder if they actually have softboxes compatible with this model. Have to check that...

Hey guys I usually rent lights whenever I need them for a production, but now I was kind of hoping to buy a very simple kit of lights that I can use in small productions (mainly narrative work). I don't want to budget a lot for this (otherwise I'd just keep renting), so probably LEDs are a bit out of reach as the really good ones are still expensive. I just want good tungsten lights with dimmers that are light enough to be portable and used on light tripods. If you had to go for a lighting kit that's not expensive at all (let's say 700usd) but good enough to shoot any small production, what would it be? Let's assume we can have some complex lighting and not just 3-point stuff... Oh and the budget doesn't include flags, gels, etc, but I would like it to include some sort of soft box... Thanks!

David, when I say creamy, I mean something that would take out that videoish sharpness of these new 4k sensors when combined with modern lenses. I like sharpness, just not that video enhanced kind some sensors have. That's the main reason I use a lot of vintage lenses with 4k cameras. They produce beautiful images without that sharpness overkill that tends to distract. Those Tiffen you mentioned seem exactly what I need. What would be the difference from the black nets? Thanks!

@ David Thanks! So for my purpose of creating a more creamy image, without the apparent loss of sharpness, what strength would you advize? Maybe the 1/2 for wide shots and 1 for close ups and medium shots? @ Daniel Yeah, not sure I'd be comfortable doing that. And anyway, it's not an option for me, as I am located in Europe and any order from the US would be taxed by customs... The other option would be renting, but in my country it's extremely hard to find a good selection of filters for rent

Thanks David. I've never read a lot about them. These come in multiple strengths from what I understand? How do they differ? I read at BH site that the FX3 is used to create a soft glow like a dream sort of image.

Hi guys, I was looking for a diffusion filter (needs to be circular, 77mm) to use with new digital sensor cameras. My goal is to take the edge off the 4k sensors, making the overall image more creamy, but without halation on the highlights. Something that would also help with fine lines that sometimes create aliasing would be nice (I know OLPF would be the best choice for that particular issue, but maybe a diffusion filter would also help with that). The only diffusion I've tried was the Hollywood Black Magic 1/4 which I liked a lot, but found them to halate a bit too much. I also found that, when shooting against a light source, it creates flares in the form of tiny spots (which I assume has something to do with the inner pattern of the glass in the filter). Any ideas? I was thinking something that would ressemble the look Paul Thomas Anderson got from his Phantom Thread. I know he used Low Cons but then again, he was shooting film, so that's a whole different ball game. Maybe Tiffen Ultra Contrast? Digi Con seems to be pretty popular, but they don't make them circular, do they? Thanks!

Hey guys, I'm writing a new short film that I'll be directing and DP'ing. I'm in that phase of thinking where I want it to go visually as well as dramatically. And how both will interact with each other. But the reason I'm writing this post is the visual component. I'm in love with the latest PT Anderson film, Phantom Thread (not necessarily the story, but the cinematography). And that is the look that I'm after for my short film, no question about that. I know PTA only shoots film, and that is not going to be possible for me. I will be shooting digital (Ursa Mini 4.6k from Blackmagic). But there is a distinct look to the film and I'm wondering what will I be able to do in camera to get there and what will only be possible to achieve in post (grading). For example, the color bias and texture of a specific stock will only be possible to get in a Resolve suite, I imagine. As is the grain. What would you say is important to get in camera, during production, given this specific film? In other words, what would you take with you to shoot this look? (please bear in mind my short film will be low budget and the camera will be the one mentioned above). For those who didn't watch the film, here are some stills (not the same thing as watching them in motion, though): Thanks! Tiago Pimentel

Though I never tried it, the Heliopan variND seems to be the champ with almost no color shift and tack sharp. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/765517-REG/Heliopan_707790_77mm_Vario_Neutral_Density.html Tiago Pimentel

Thanks Philip. I've had my eye on that olpf for a while. My only issue is that i don't get moire on clothes like most people complain. That seems like aliasing due to some bad downscaling. I usually shoot in 4.6k raw and then edit and export in a 1080p timeline in Resolve. Maybe I'm doing something wrong. I'm wondering if a olpf would prevent it from happening again and what is the tradeoff regarding overall sharpness...

Guys, Watch the tree branches. Would you say this is moire or aliasing issues from scaling down 4.6k footage to hd? And what would be the best way to avoid this? Thanks

Stuart, probably a dumb question, but the rear element has thorium (I imagine it was probably to let more light in). Can this harm the camera body in any way?

Thanks Stuart. I really like how these vintage lenses work with modern ultra sharp sensors such as my ursa mini 4.6k. I'm suspecting that the biggest problem with that Takumar will be to match it with other primes...