Jump to content

Malcolm Ian Vu

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It is unusual. It's a very soft edge on top and bottom. You can even see through it at times, almost like thin fabric strips were placed in the gate (or perhaps a homemade painted gradient filter). It also completely opens up to full aspect ratio in one shot and then closes back down. I know that it was heavily cut against his wishes. Maybe just a bungling editor and rushed cut. I'm sure someone else here will have some insight.
  2. Malick's "A Hidden Life" displays deep focus in almost every shot.
  3. The Sears lenses, much like VIvitar, were made by 3rd parties. The range is limited for primes 28/50/55/135/300 (that I know of), but there were also some zooms in between. Some of these lenses appear to be identical to ones made for other distributors. A 55/2.8 macro by Komine that also exists for Vivitar, for example. Most of them come in a variety of mounts. Historically, the Sears name kept the prices on these lenses very cheap. Some of them still are. But the 55/1.4 started going up in the past ten years. There's a thread at the Pentax Forums where they know much more about these lenses. Sears Lens Club I've owned the 135mm/2.8 Macro. It's more of an "art lens" in most situations (but still very cheap).
  4. Well, the Kodak Signet 80 had its own set of glass. 35/3.5, 50/2.8, 90/4. The 50 and 90 can be acquired cheaply on Ebay, usually on the camera. The 35 seems harder to come by. The 50 and 90 are radioactive, so some level of discoloration is present in all examples. I have no idea how you'd adapt and use these lenses, or if the quality is worth the trouble.
  5. I'm still waiting for some crazy person to attempt using the Hasselblad X-Pan lenses (Fuji glass) for "large format" filmmaking. I'm sure most competent directors could make do with 30/45/90mm.
  6. You could always dig up the Cinemiracle cameras from whatever ancient tomb they reside in. Those ought to be able to run independently, with modifications. I believe each had their own motor and shutter, unlike the Cinerama system. Assuming you could modify it for horizontal operation, that would give you a six perf negative, about 28mm x 25mm. That would make for a great mini-Imax format. Or shoot with Cooke 1.8x anamorphics and have a range of choices from 2:1 to 2.35:1. There ought to be at least three of them somewhere in the world. Added bonus: Six perf projectors already exist (Cinerama) and were functional as recently as 2012. Not horizontal, though. I have no idea what the operation of these cameras were like. Perhaps they were louder than a hydrogen bomb.
  7. 2:1 was used in 1930 on The Bat Whispers. Which was also the first usage of 65mm film.
  8. Terrence Malick has just dispatched Ninja Assassins to your location.
  9. It's not nearly as old as you describe, but perhaps this is the book you were looking for. "Special Effects: Wire Tape and Rubber Band Styles" (1984) by L.B. Abbott Picture of the cover: https://www.amazon.com/Special-Effects-Wire-Rubber-Styles/dp/0935578064
  10. The Bat Whispers (1930) was shot in a 65mm format, so yes.
  11. That's why I said "mass market". If they were relying on sales of Super 8 film, they'd need to move a few million cameras. Only way to do that would be at ~$299.
  12. Perhaps my subconcious mind was just fantasizing about Kodak needing to turn to another source of movie film revenue to keep operating. Like, oh I don't know... a new Super 8 camera for the mass market. But that's just crazy talk. :)
  13. Without knowing the precise language of the contract, that first article doesn't really tell us anything. Also, my post was really just a hypothetical. How long does Kodak live if they can no longer sell motion picture film? If they shut down, would that particular variant of movie-making cease to exist? Would another company fill the gap?
  • Create New...