Jump to content

panagiotis agapitou

Basic Member
  • Posts

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by panagiotis agapitou

  1. Thanks guys for your answers !! I want also your thoughts ... As i know Kubrick in the Shining and Full Metal Jacket used super speeds MKi T1.4 and the Cooke varotal 20-100T 3.1 .... According to Larry Smith In Eyes Wide shut used super speeds mkii 1.3T, the Cooke Varotal and a bit of the Variable Primes In an interview Leon Vitali said thatt a very common focal length for Kubrick was 24mm ... I guess in EWS he achieved it with the Variable Primes .. But what about the two older movies where Variable Primes wasn't made yet ?? (According to Garett Brown in the Shining he used an "24mm Distagon" ).... But the 24mm focal is only in the Standard Primes 2.1. series !!! So the perfectionist Kubrick considered that the image quality of the Variable Primes is better than the standard primes ?? Right ??
  2. What you think about image quality?? ... Are variable primes FAR better than Standards Primes ?? or the diffference is minor ???
  3. I always was curius WHY Variable Primes wasn't succesfull in the market .. 1. They have the quality of a fixed lens 2. They are extremely time-saving ... No changing lenses for finding the right focal length .. or changing lenses with different focal length 3. They also can be used as a PARAFOCAL MINI-ZOOM (ok very short zoom .. but still zoom) -Many accuse them for their weight .. But if you compare (for example) Master Primes it's not a big deal ... The VP1 16-30 weights 4.4 kg and the Master Prime 21mm weights 2.4 kg !!! Also in NOWADAYS with the digital cameras weight isn't a problem (even for steadys) -Also isn't a shame that the OLDEREST Standards Primes 2.1 are in almost in every rental house and VP's are so rare ??
  4. What excactly do you mean "cinematically" ?? (By thw way .. He is also a grantuated director .. has direct many TV SERIES !!!)
  5. I have one ( a bit odd) quastion ... Could a -best of the bests- TELEVISION cameraman, experienced in major LIVE broadcasting football matches (and also in series, shows etc) work for FIRST TIME as A Focus Puller on an Arri Alexa Mini ?? Thanks for your thought
  6. I edit 'cause i had worng length from that site : http://www.gcmstudio.com/filmspecs/filmspecs.html Sorry Dave .. I didn't saw your last post ... 1.91200 inches = 48.5648mm 65mm film width is 48.5648mm 35mm film width is 20.96 mm so to find the crop factor we devine 20.96 by 48.5648 and the Crop factor is :0,4315883108753665 .. Right ?? So a 50mm lens on 2001 equals to a 21,57941554376833 lens on 35mm standard film camera format right ?? (50 x 0,4315883108753665) So ... 28mm = 12,08447270451026 55mm = 23,73735709814516 75mm = 32,36912331565249 100mm = 43,15883108753665 Right ???
  7. Sorry Dave .. I didn't saw your last post ... 65mm film width is 48.59mm 35mm film width is 20.96 mm so to find the crop factor we devine 20.96 by 48.59 and the Crop factor is :0,4313644782877135 .. Right ?? So a 50mm lens on 2001 equals to a 21,56822391438568 lens n 35mm standard film camera format right ?? (50 x 0,4313644782877135) So ... 28mm = 12,07820539205598mm 55mm = 23,72504630582424mm 75mm = 32,35233587157851mm 100mm = 43,13644782877135mm Right ???
  8. I'm a little confused about this ... in what excaclty format was 2001 shot ?? I want to know the excact aperture width of the 65mm frame to find the convertion factor .... Thanks again !!!
  9. I bring up the thread becouse I just found some very very interesting Daily Continuity Report's from 2001 ... Take a look at the FOCAL LENGTHS The original source is this .. (i just made the pictures to look more clean)
  10. According to the article "The Steadicam and "The Shining" (American Cinematographer - August 1980) Garett Brows says : "To annoy him we would indicate the forest of TV antennas aimed at the studio from suburban Borehamwood and imply that the TV signal was escaping the sound stage and being watched by a gaggle of “Monty Python” women every morning: “Ooooh, poor Mr Brown!… That take seemed perfectly good to me!” Somewhat later, our imitation ladies got even more sophisticated: “Ooh, must be the 24mm Distagon!, see how it’s vignetting in the viewfinder!” I was thinkking if that "24mm Distagon" is a Zeiss Standard Speed 2.1 (in The Shining kubrick used Super Speeds 1.4) OR the Canon 24mm ASPHERICAL 1.4 he used in Barry Lyndon ... As i know .. 24mm Zeiss distagon doesn't vignetting !!! but a Still converted to Cine lens ??? -Probably Brows called "distagon" the canon not becouse it's is "official" name but becouse of his curvness -Also the 1.4 speed of Canon would be a great advance in this low ASA 80's What do you think ?? Thanks
  11. According to Larry Smith's interview on American Cinematographer : Kubrick framed Eyes Wide Shut in the standard 1.85:1 format, primarily using a set of Zeiss Superspeed T1.3 spherical prime lenses, but occasionally opting to employ Arri’s T2.1 variable prime lenses or a zoom. (...) The results of the two-stop force-development are clearly evident in the film’s FIRST major setpiece (...) The scene was lit almost entirely with a huge wall of ordinary Christmas lights (...) " They were very low-wattage (...) The effect is obviously enhanced by the force-developing, which made the lights appear to be much brighter than they were(...) "We decided to shoot nearly all of the picture at a stop of T1.3, and since we were pushing everything, we were able to create a wonderful warm glow. We also used a Tiffen LC-1 [low-contrast] filter for our night interior scenes, and the effect it produced is especially evident in the party sequence—it made the lights glow and gave everything a slightly surreal edge." Although the filmmakers used no additional lighting in wider shots of the party, Smith did modify his approach for close-ups of the actors, utilizing a China ball containing a dimmer-controlled 200-watt bulb. "The China balls were very useful if there was any movement in the scene, because they’re very light; we could just walk around with them and do anything we wanted. Normally, I only used a small amount of fill light when things began to get a bit murky, because I knew that the force-developing would give us the exposure level we needed For the scene in which the Hungarian FIRST approaches Alice, I created some fill with a smaller curtain of the Christmas lights." -So Larry Smiths says that they shoot nearly all of the picture at a stop of T1.3 ... And as we know the ballroom was low lighted so they should use the zeiss super speed T1.3 WIDE OPEN (f1.2) .. RIGHT?? -We also know that the Nicole Kidman's dance was shot with the Cooke Varotal 20-100 f2.8 T3.1 Note the word "FIRST" on Larry Smith phrase : "For the scene in which the Hungarian FIRST approaches Alice, I created some fill with a smaller curtain of the Christmas lights." The "first approache" is that shot which include a ZOOM IN around in the half of it's length : Then it cuts to a static shot with much more sharpness and longest Depth of Field And then, starts the dancing, which as i can figure out, it's a 360o rotation round the camera's tripod 1. So for the dancing they had the china ball ABOVE the CAMERA'S POSITION ?? 2. The need of the "small curtain" ONLY in the the "approache moment" ,was it beacouse of the "wide" open shot of the ZOOM LENS in the beggining ??? And china balls wasn't enough to "cover" the f2.8 of the Cooke zoom lens ??
  12. It's Zeiss super speed mk i .... i read it on an article ....
  13. Thanks for your answers guys .. There's also another photo from a scene that was later cut from Full Metal Jacket ... (The Stanley Kubrick archives ) but the camera is out of focus ...
  14. Yes I have it seen .. But I want to know if he used and other zoom lenses on his last 3 movies
  15. Yes it's an official information that this one used in the ballroom dance of Nicole Kidman in Eyes wide shut, but i can't figour out if it's the same on picture #2
  16. Hello .. Can anyone identify what zoom lenses are ?? I'm pretty sure the one from 'The Shining' it's Cooke Varotal 20-100mm T3 But what about the other's ?? Thanks again !!
  17. I want to thank you again !!! You have helped me so much !!! If in post production i cut a centered and symmetric frame with 20.96 width (like the green one in the image) ... So then I will have THE EXACTLY frame that Kubrick would have with it's 35mm FILM CAMERA ? Right ??With the exactly same perspective ... Right ?? So in what MODE should the footage be recorder on ALEXA (I want in ARRIRAW) so that this "ZOOMED IN" would be lossless of quality on a 1080p export ?? Thanks again and Merry Christmas !!!!
  18. Thanks for your great answers !! I got it ... I have also another question .. what happens if i don't use Alexa's 1080p but i go with ALEXA mini on 4K UHD ?? Thanks again !!!
  19. Can anyone identify in the movie what part is that ???
  20. Hello Sorry if it's a silly question but i'm new to all that ... These lenses from this RENTAL STORE are made for 35mm Film cameras ... right ?? (ARRI Master Prime , ZEISS T 1,3 , ZEISS T 2.1, Cooke S4, Cooke Zoom 20-100mm, Ultra Prime) And also are compatible with Cine PL digital cameras like ALEXA, RED, Canon EOS C300PL etc ... Right ?? But according to this chart ... If I want to use a 18mm lens in the way Kubrick it .. it's impossible with the Digital cameras .. Right ?? And the CLOSEST to that is Canon C300 with 99% !! Right ?? So the Canon C300 is better on that point than the high end ALEXA and AMIRA ?!?! And what is the solution to achieve an 100% result ??? Thank you !!
×
×
  • Create New...