Matthew J. Walker

Wouldn't the word "Reverse racism" suggest that racism can only apply to someone who is not white? However, Caucasian is a race. I'm not quite sure I understand the article title.

Price lowered to $850 or best offer + $120 shipping. Again, Shipping will include signature confirmation and insurance via USPS Priority mail and will ship one business day after the payment is made.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/293635925639 Purchased last year and never tested it because the cost of testing and potentially fixing at the time would have been too high. I've since purchased a Super 16mm camera. The seller who sold this to me sold it to me as a "IIC", however upon inspection, this looks to be a standard model IIB as the ground glass is not removable and the shutter is not variable. Standard IIC's aren't variable shutter, however all IICs have a removable ground glass, this one does not so it is a IIB. The rotary shutter on this particular model is a "butterfly" shutter as is with every model after the IIA. The mirror is clean including the ground glass, internals look clean as well including the 4-perf gate. The ground glass baffles are still within the glass and unbent. Power cord is not in the best condition and as shown and the 3 pin XLR will often slide out of it's metal covering. The hand grip motor is untested. Upon rotating the shutter by hand, it seems to rotate smoothly and the lens turret rotates normally as well. This model has three Arri Standard mounts, unlike some models which have two standard mounts and a single bayonet mount. The viewfinder compartment door mechanism locks and unlocks as normal, and the mechanism that closes the eyepiece works as intended. The rubber eyecup is unusable as it has dry rotted. The 400ft magazine is again untested, but seems to be in good mechanical condition. The locking mechanism on the magazine locks and unlocks normally. The feed spindles and take-up spindles spin smoothly including the footage counter. The Matte box has signs of heavy use and needs cleaning. Overall the camera body and magazine appears to be in heavily used physical condition. Serial number of this camera is Nr.4221. Price is $999.97 or best offer + $120 shipping. Shipping will include signature confirmation and insurance via USPS Priority mail and will ship one business day after the payment is made. EDIT: Before I even get the question I am going to clear this up, because I've gotten it before. I CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT THIS IS AN ACTUAL IIB AND NOT AN UPGRADED IIA. There were two models of the IIB in 1960. There was the Arriflex 35 IIB which had a 180 degree fixed shutter, and there was the Arriflex II BV which had a 0-165 degree variable shutter. It's very tricky because the serial number starts with Nr. on IIA models and No. on IIC models, but with IIB models, some used No. and some used Nr. It doesn't help that the IIB compartment doors could fit on IIAs and actually many IIAs were upgraded to IIBs by simply using the newer style magazine, compartment door, and handgrip motor. The II series started around 2000 and ended all the way well into the 15000s with the IIC meaning this could be a fairly early model IIB or a late model IIA. Either way it has the new compartment door, magazine, and handgrip motor making it either a IIA upgraded to a IIB or an actual IIB. I will say though, The internals look identical to the IIC at a glance, which the IIB was. The IIA internals were very different in appearance. It's very hard to find information about the IIA or IIB because the IIC dominated the MOS camera industry. I come to the conclusion that it is a IIB, whether upgraded or not, because in almost every instance it appears that way and I don't have an Arri technician to do a serial number lookup.

In the United States, things are more tricky because of the constitution. Because of this, things are less likely to be censored without legal repercussion and/or exorbitant press. In this case, the documentary mentioned falls into the category of free speech which is the first of many amendments of the constitution, and an important, if not the most important piece of U.S history at that. I cannot speak on other countries, however very good question. I love hearing any and all European's point of views on various subjects in the states, this is a new one to me. There are loads of documentaries on platforms such as Netflix here in the U.S. so perhaps VPN as an IP address in the United States, and you should have full access to the U.S. catalog. The only political documentaries I ever watched were Fahrenheit 9/11 and Bowling for Columbine, both of which are outdated, considering the immense change that happened after 2001.

Whilst one might purchase a roll of 250D and 200T and test this out as I would, as it happens, I have been wrung out of all my money the past three months. So, rather than try to self hypothesize in my head, I may as well put the proverbial nail in the coffin in an attempt to suppress my ADHD and OCD. Which leads me to my questions... A) Color-wise, what can one expect when using a tungsten balanced stock with an 85 or 85B filter, rather than simply daylight stock aside from the two-third stop of light? B) To further elaborate on question A, normally how significant is this color change? C) Lastly, For a pre eighties era film style, do you recommend using daylight balanced stock for all exterior daytime scenes, or go as far as to strictly use tungsten stock with an 85/85B filter for all exterior daytime scenes, a very common practice of a tungsten dominant era? Until of course I actually go out and test this myself I won't really have an answer I can be one hundred percent satisfied with, but rather one I can at least accept for a short while. And yes, I am aware of the 200 kelvin difference of the 85 vs 85B filter and will be putting this to the test as well once I can economically prioritize doing a film test.

This definitely looks similar. After your input and @AJ Young's input, combined with the wisdom of @David Mullen ASC, I believe majority rules. I think you are all correct. You all said tungsten balanced stock, you and @AJ Young both said CTO gelled key at blue hour, and @David Mullen ASC hit the nail on the head with the 500T stock. Definitely some color correction as well to single out and ramp up the blues, magentas, and oranges. Now it's time to play film chess and put this to the test... That is when I actually have some income!

Well the music video was filmed in 1994. Back in '94 most skyline shots of big cities had for the most part all matching lights because more than 90% of bulbs were incandescent which have a 100% CRI, unlike the skylines of today with a mix of daylight, fluorescent, and LED bulbs with a mixed CRI. So that explains all of the lights matching in color. However, the then dominant "soft white" (2700K) incandescent bulbs as they call them in the light bulb world wouldn't be that orange with a 3200K balanced film stock to the point that they would match the color of a CTO gelled tungsten key light using the same stock would it? Another thing that catches my attention is at the end of the sequence when Bruce Springsteen leaves the frame to reveal the burn barrel and the skyline, I notice there are no other colors in the entire composition other than what looks to be indigo and orange. Even the highlights of the cloud are pretty much vibrant purple. Here's the video, the sequence begins at 2:18 EDIT: Also there looks like some weird outline around the people standing next to the burn barrel at 2:40

The last thing I'm going to want to do when our current health situation is over is stay at home ?. On a serious note that's only me and your point is a simple but valid point if you look at the direction society is moving. We'll have to see I suppose. After all things only get more etxtreme as time goes on and that also applies for the entertainment industry/show-business. Hell, what do you think a caveman would think of a skinny, albino, hairless, person who has no nails? Some millions of years and I bet that's what we all look like. Look at movies, fashion, language, you name it, it's all gotten more unpredictable and I personally, I want to stress personally, believe that everything is going In the direction of at home entertainment, especially with the progression of hologram technology and so forth. Gee, now that I've read my paragraph I better stop writing. I'm starting to sound like one of those crazy conspiracy people. Noooooooooo!

So I'm in the music mood, watching the music videos to some of my favorite songs, I decide to watch Streets of Philadelphia by bruce Springsteen since I had never watched it. I'm sure like many of us on here I sometimes do want to simply be a viewer, however at the same time I'm always keeping an eye out for thing that catch my eye. I'm sure many of you can relate. In any event, I'm watching the video and I notice this and I'm thinking "That looks beautiful" then it turns into "How the hell?' then I gave up thinking. Well, fast forward months later and It's still bugging the hell out of me. Now on to my question... How on earth was this effect achieved? The only thing I could think is, A) Putting a blue filter in front of the lens while shooting on daylight film stock at dusk with a tungsten/orange key light. B) Using tungsten film at dusk when the sky is already naturally extremely blue which would amplify it, however in such situation, the city lights wouldn't be as orange as displayed, and an orange or 85 filter would remove the blue from the sky. C) What I'm leaning towards, and that is with manual colorization of the negative, an example being the music video for Basket Case by Green Day. I'd love to know some experienced people's opinions, maybe even someone who has worked in the big budget music video scene back in the 90s when Im sure effects like this were used quite often.

*Cut to 2025 where all movie theaters are drive in* Hey, it's possible, after all history repeats itself. However, extremely unlikely unless there were some post 9/11 security measures as with everything in the twenty first century.

Will always be my favorite picture. Moody blue lighting that brings out the fictional sort of nightmarish night time feel, quiet suburban neighborhood which makes the viewer feel comfortable and vulnerable enough to believe what they are seeing, groundbreaking low budget cinematography and editing, and of course the beautiful pastel colors of the Eastman 5247 that so many films of it's time were shot using. Severely underrated cinematography wise.

I did see that converter once before. It would work, however a 50mm becomes an 80mm and as you said, you lose one and a third T stops. Not worth it but thank you two for the input.

I was wondering if there was any way to convert a C/Y mount to PL mount without a full rehousing. I would love to have a set of MMJ Contax Zeiss lenses in PL mount but so far I haven't seen little to any information regarding this subject. I know it's possible to convert a C/Y mount to M42 so maybe it would be possible to convert it to M2 first, then screw on an M42 to PL adapter which might work on few C/Y lenses but I know for sure the diameter of the particular Contax lenses I want would be too wide to fit inside of the adapter. And I I know It wouldn't be possible to make the flange of the PL mount adapter flush with the flange of the C/Y Mount because the flange focal distance of a C/Y mount needs to be 45.50 mm from the film plane and a PL mount needs to be 52.00mm from the film plane so in theory would need to remove 6.5mm worth of material from the rear of the lens to accommodate for the difference in FFD (Which wouldn't normally be TOO hard), however of course on majority of the C/Y lenses the aperture ring is pretty much right up against the flange of the mount. I guess I could remove the aperture ring but then what? Maybe someone has any input as to how I could possibly pull this off but I believe I've hit a dead end.