Robin Phillips

I would think its possible, but it wont do you any good if you want to project it given you'd need a non standard desqueeze lens on the projector. If you're doing this as a backup for archival purposes its probably fine so long as you tape desqueeze instructions to the box. But I would talk with the labs about this, especially if you want to include sound on the film

the tobin ones were the most recent made for them I think, IIRC they were actually made in the 90s. I've seen those go for as much as $800 USD

I suspect it started in some part due to the at the time new high / dual ISO digital sensors, and seems it got turbo charged when the skypanel soft-lights became all the rage.

just FYI the ANSI S35 masks for the 435 and 535 seem impossible to find, its not clear how many they actually made. The closest you'll get is the 4 perf universal mask which is a tad cropped in from the ANSI s35 spec. I might have a spare DIN 1.33 one, but Im 90% sure the one I've got in storage is cropped in from the universal mask so if you're trying to maximize your negative its probably not what you want

have you inquired if the lab/scan house was doing any sharpening processing on the scanity? or if some features were turned off on the scanstation? do you know which version and resolution of the scan station it was?

is it just the nature of the transfer or did the pre vision 3 stocks just have a little more character?

You also seem to be assuming they didnt want the breathing on the lenses. On a show this large, its a safe bet they tested various sets of lenses and chose these for artistic reasons. That is, they wanted the breathing. If they wanted no breathing, like you said they could have chosen master primes.

I think without the answers to those questions we cant really know. I can tell you a while back a show I was on we just bought a $800 projector off amazon, I believe it was 60hz. playback was 30fps because of the approved background (which was licensed, annoyingly only came at 30fps) while we recorded 24fps. We were on battery, no phase sync. Looked great. Given the projector was 60hz I believe it was showing each frame twice on playback. We ran the playback off my macbook pro with the screen mirrored via HDMI. We tried a 24fps conversion on the 30fps stuff the day before we shot, and that caused an image stutter, but the stutter was visible to the eye as well as on the monitor. That led us to go back to the original frame rate.

if you're looking for a XTR Herman at cameramarket.eu has some available. I've had good dealings with him in the past, including on some expensive items. When it comes to ebay, NEVER follow up on an offer to buy outside of ebay. its 99% of the time a scam, and you will loose any ebay buyer protection as 1 it isnt even a sale through ebay and 2 it violates ebays terms of use

I would just call the film office to get some info. I do think it may be worth hiring a cop to babysit a show in SF depending on what youre doing. Even news crews have been robbed for their gear in the past few years, including an incident in oakland where their security guard was shot. Im not saying thats the norm, but I dont think I'd be one to use personal gear stealing shots or being in a skeleton crew without hired security of some kind.

was it a virtual rear projection setup (aka the camera being tracked with an unreal or similar background)? Do you recall the projector settings? Was it a 144hz projector or less? Was what you saw on the monitor or to the eye (or both)? Was the camera on battery or was it running house power? Was it on the same circuit as the projector or a different one? Do you recall the playback file's frame rate and the camera's frame rate? Do you recall the device (and if a computer, the software) used to playback your projected material?

the problem with that idea is that where is everyone gonna get the 65mm compatible lenses? Vista Vision was one thing, theres tons of glass that covers 8 perf. But when you get into 65mm territory you're really in lens rental territory just to be able to use the thing. So then suddenly that camera body is a rental only. Maybe Panavision would order a custom build for it, but since the Alexa 65 is rental only as well and I believe you can pair it with super 70 glass or the like, then unless there is a serious indication of demand from panavision's customers for a Red sourced sensor Im not sure why they'd order it. I have CCDs come down in price? I thought the reason that entire approach was abandoned was because a 5k RGB, 1080p resolving CCD sensor cost alone the same as a full Alexa at launch (IIRC the sony F35 CCD block alone was like 70k USD, with the full F35 camera being around 250k USD) and there was no indication it would ever scale.

It depends on the demand. Going larger than full frame in fabrication means fewer sensors for a given amount of material, which makes mass production costlier, especially if there are failures in a given batch. It may be somewhat more cost effective to use multiple smaller sensors stitched together after fabrication

unfortunately sometimes old film cameras are like old cars, and things just surprise break on you even if its been in the shop. Tech can't fix it unless it malfunctions while they have it.

This was to be expected. The DA's office idiotically charged Baldwin under a law that was passed 7 months after the shooting. You cant charge someone ex post facto in the United States. The DA's complaining about "big city lawyers" in their statement is also not confidence inspiring. It also looks like Baldwins motion to remove the special prosecutor might actually hold water given the prohibition of a legislator also holding position in another branch of government. This is turning into a clown show that could be ripe for appeal if there is a conviction... edit: I should note when I say ex post facto, Im specifically noting that in the United States you can not be criminally charged under a new law passed after an incident has occurred, which the 5 year firearm enhancement charge was.

If someone who does tech word doesnt reply by tomorrow, I'd email Andree at AMcamera.com and/or Rick at Visual Products. Between the two of them Im sure they've seen everything. I know Andree had a guy that could do some board level repairs, so I'd start there. Definitely check the battery adapter output port to the camera with a multi meter though. elokuvakonepaja step up adapters run around 26V (a little higher on a full charge). If yours is outputting 14.8 instead, then thats your problem and you need to send it back to them for repair/replacement, though TBH I feel like the SR3 wouldnt even light up with 14.8V.

@Tyler Purcell I got my 2 cans yesterday, honestly Im unlikely to be able to do a real test as I'd hoped this month the way things are going. If you want 1 of my cans just DM me and I can send it to you if you wanna run an additional test at box speed so we can all see how it looks.

I need to pester some people then. I know on the first JW there was some 435 miniatures work, more than I expected. Josh Livingston had the old ILM kuper out for it. Love that stupid crane of doom. Sounds exactly like the carbon freezer in Empire Strikes Back lol

I think ILM was still using vista vision through episode 1 (or so it appears from several bts photos). But digital compositing got so good and the grain got finer on the stocks it just wasnt necessary. The mid 2000s also gave us the 435 Advanced and Xtreme, which was basically the ultimate film vfx camera. Damn it now Im wishing Arri had made a 435 VV camera. that would have been cool, though probably minimally used. Its still too bad their 3 perf 250fps version never made it out of the prototype stage.

I'd love to see the raw footage, the youtube sample seems to be killing the grain (or it was denoised, possibly sharpened). The eyes look a little soft in the demo but overall theres a degree of sharpness I wouldnt expect for such cheap lenses. Very curious how well calibrated their housings are. Boy would it be great if they also made a wider lens option in the future too

So I think this is really more of a taste thing than a practical thing. That is, if you have specific fields of view you like to tell your stories with, that step well in terms of cutting tighter, those should be the lenses you get. If you dont know what those are, or are not married to anything in particular, I think a zoom might be your best bet. Otherwise you will be buying more prime lenses to make up for that indecision about which lenses you want to use. Personally I only really shoot with a 18, 35, and 85 on super35 (or closest set equivalent), so I'll build my lens choices on a rental around those core lenses, followed by a maybe the widest spare I can afford should I literally shoot myself into a corner and cant move a wall. If Im not shooting super 35 I cross check the fields of view on the technical sheets to be sure, especially if testing isnt in the budget. But its a taste thing. I like how the jump between those lenses escalates the audience focus. I also just like how those viewing angles look. So you may need to either test some stuff out (ideally) or watch a lot of lens test samples on youtube and vimeo. Unfortunately I just dont think there is any right answer, its all about knowing what your go to lenses are and tracking them down at an affordable price if you're looking to own.

This is probably one of those things where the only way to get the part is if you know someone at Arri in Germany, or if Andree (AM Camera) knows someone at arri in the US who might have the part. Its not uncommon for one to go directly to arri to find out something is discontinued/not in stock, but then someone else is able to find a way to get someone to look in the right box in the right back corner of the right warehouse. I suspect it would be quite challenging to build a new part given how precisely machined it seems to be, but thats a little speculative on my part. It may also just be that its not gettable anymore and the only solution is to get an advanced camera body.

The stills samples they posted definitely have a look, almost like theres extra silver retention but with maybe more limited dynamic range than we're use to? I ordered 2 rolls to test, should be interesting to see the results. Very curious how it'll look with the ultra 16s.

I'd follow Chris's recommendation, but would also note that if you can do a 444 transfer you should. The source many not have had that much data in it, but if you're going to have to pay someone to dig out a D2 deck anyway I'd recommend getting everything out of the source that you can

its worth noting the Evolution was an upgrade for the SR2 to an SR3-ish state. I dont believe there was a further upgrade from the SR2 Evolution to fully be an SR3, though if Im wrong someone please correct me