Stephen Perera

Yes I'm known to bore people philosophising, pondering, questioning......and I do it as a lifelong teetotal to boot....no help of alcohol or substances hahaha just green tea et al.

No info on Tech specs but for my eyes screams FILM - Vision3 500T galore.....HBO seems to support film productions..... anyone care to disagree on the medium shot haha

Well I just shot Double X and never entertained the BW conversions after all........Vision3 to BW gives you the film grain of course and the BW conversion is doable in DaVinci etc and it all costs less.....grade it to BW to your heart's content.......but Double X is a special film......has a special look.....not to untrained eyes of course......I shoot it for its heritage, its history, for the love of BW film..... its not an easy film to shoot.....latitude is narrow, plenty of people like Ed Lachman talk about it, Jarin Blackse etc.....you have to know how to use a light metre...the highlights can blow easily.....in post when you see there's no grain in the highlights you know you're not gonna get anything back hahahah.....beautiful film, long live Eastman Double X!!!! I only know this stock in 16mm format though......

I have not seen the series let alone the episode but have watched the trailer (only So hardly a good way to judge) to it and it screams digital to me.....the tonality is not film......to my eyes...the closest camera to film are the RED cameras to my eyes...

very interesting information Dom and thanks for coming in on the thread...... hope you enjoyed the film as much as I did..... I'm a lifelong Elvis fan...my first LP was Elvis Golden Records Vol II which belonged to my aunt and ended up as my one and only record on my plastic red/cream suitcase record player....so this film was of interest on other levels too

for those that do not know..... Kubrick was a photojournalist before he was a filmmaker. At age 17 started shooting for Look magazine in New York where he shot everyday life and celebrity portraits....he shot with a 'film noir aesthetic" that was new to photojournalism at the time (source: Vanity Fair)

Saw it last night on the big screen.....superb....I predict it will win awards for Editing if nothing else.....the editing was outstanding in my view.....highly recommended (see, I can wax lyrical about a film shot in digital too haha)

A huge hit at the box office.....

.......is there a case for saying the cost of a mayor film shot on digital is escalating at a rate higher than people care to admit given the amount of people and hardware needed to run those big cameras...... interesting that the film v digital debate brushed aside as 'boring' by some of the top dogs is just always always there..... .....perhaps the future of motion picture film is brighter than we dare think...

My simplistic statement once again....we need the big directors and producers to choose film.....for it to trickle down to us at the bottom....I speak for myself.....but hey there's always Ilford atc to keep us photographers shooting

I have and use a tent…..you don’t get the sweats so much with the tent haha…..I mean if you are shooting Aaton and you are taking camera bags and stuff u might as well set up the tent……

Saw it too…..magnificent film…..really enjoyed it….the casting was so good…..albeit could not get beyond Ethan Hawke being Ethan Hawke and not the king he was playing…..I see the dilemma they have with choosing the next James Bond in that you can’t get beyond previous roles with some actors…….didn’t feel that with Nicole Kidman or Defoe……the film was engrossing to watch…..not saying Ethan Hawke didn’t act well mind….. the cinematography was superb…..a key fight scene with the lava etc magnificent to watch…..the dialling back of the colour worked really well too…..the 35mm the perfect choice…. chapeau Jarin…..keep shooting our beloved film my friend so that we the minions can keep putting it in our Hasselblads et al

showing the perfs etc (cant remember what the term is) on the super 8mm is a bit of a YouTuber signalling ''look Im shooting film'' moment but hey, the great unwashed need to be taught about film hahaha so i don''t mind.....the video look is fun.......I''m fully up to the latest episode now and looking forward to episode 10...... The Nike moment we all remember from THAT episode......Michael Jordan signed with NIKE back in 1984 for 250,000 dollars and his own line of shoes....Converse had failed to agree with his demands apparently......his net worth is 2.2 billion dollars v Magic Johnson (he signed with Converse) net worth 600 million dollars hahah "Both companies were trying to sign the league’s hottest rookie. Nike, which was still trying to establish itself, didn’t have the cash Magic was looking for and offered him an option in Nike stock to sign with them. Still young and thinking dollars more than sense, Magic took $100,000 in cash from Converse."

The one stop for every ten years comes from the photography world probably E.g. If your film stock is 500 asa set your light metre for 250 asa and work as normal……can’t think of a simpler explanation that’s this……whether it be ambient light readings or spot metres off a grey card……i shoot expired film all the time in my photography…..have stock from 2012 I use with no issues. Tell the lab to develop normal. No N+1 or anything like that personally I don’t give expired film an extra stop as I found it was giving normal results with my normal film rating….which in the photography world is not normally box speed

Superb comments thanks for coming in……I’m so enjoying this series…..charismatic is the one word I would use to summarise it