Jump to content

Wendy Sanders McDonlad

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wendy Sanders McDonlad

  1. I've had similar problems, but not as bad as yours... somebody told me it's because I loaded the film looper too tight(short) and it's creating vertical streaks?? then I sold it...
  2. I metered at iso 1.6 or so... I like it but 2383 handles underexposure very badly... you have to really nail the exposure, otherwise it has very little room to work with and everything will turn out blue AF.
  3. I'm eyeing on an Iscorama 2001 MC, (uniblock in Nikon F mount) But I dug up some old post saying the contrast is very very low, however I'm wondering if anyone has real hands on experience with this lens or any footage/ photo for me to see them as a reference. The only ones I could find off the net is for Iscorama adapters(36, 42, 54) and a scarce few off vimeo of a 2003 with Pentax K mount version. Thanks in advance.
  4. I was doing some tests on my rooftop which has these garden foot lights, and it created these very prominent flare/ghosts that I don't know how to get rid of. Yes, lens hood did nothing. :( https://ibb.co/3RHsMrt https://ibb.co/XY1TbkM
  5. I have done it and still been doing so with 2383 ( the 35mm equiv?)
  6. well, I still don't quite get your argument.. so basically, any focal lens is close to the human eye? This statement of 50mm is close the human eye has been said many times, and I'm only taking it for face value: the fact that looking through a 50mm lens on a full frame camera with one eye, objects in the shots looks more or less the same size as what I see in the other eye. But this is not entirely what I am asking here, but the point that people had put this statement in the context of full frame cameras, however Bresson and Ozu had obviously been shooting 3/4-perf but still making the same claim, appears to be very inconsistent. In other words, they are saying a 75mm on a full frame looks closer to what human eye sees. ....
  7. So, I took a lot of still photos with 50mm lens on full frame film cameras such as the Nikon FM series. And I'm a big fan of Robert Bresson and Ozu as such. However, I stumbled upon a few articles presumably states that Bresson used 50mm lens exclusively and then claiming that it is the closet focal length to the human eye. Now wait a minute........ Were they all film on 4-perf film with soundtracks back in the day? So by motion picture standards, a 50mm is more or less a 75mm? How can that be said about being closet to the human eye???? What did I miss???? PS: Bear with me, as I'm still learning. Read them here: https://blogs.iu.edu/aplaceforfilm/2018/11/15/robert-bressons-surrealist-affinities/#:~:text=The 50mm Lens&text=He is famous for always,how the human eye sees. https://www.rogerdeakins.com/film-talk/call-me-by-your-name-single-lens/ https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/features/notes-from-cinematographer-leonce-henry-burel-on-robert-bresson
  8. I think I'm ready to abandon this post. I think I got all the answers I can, from the internet. Thanks everyone.
  9. Oh, I understand that, "they" will make and take whatever makes money, and this has always been the case in the history of man-kind, about movies or not. But what is the standard Hollywood way?
  10. I'm beginning to realize that. My short, 25min long is really more of a set piece, and I'm working on coming up with something under 10 min, after reading replies from this post. Thanks for the headsup.
  11. 1) Yes it matters to me. My end goal is not to make a living off it, but to realize my ideas. This is why I do not hop on the scifi, horror, or whatever wagon that is trendy at the moment of discussion. 2) I think nobody knows the future of the industry at any given point in history, let it be 20 years ago, right now, or 20 years later. 3) Yes, I'm looking at only fully funded programs. If I had money to pay film school, I will obviously make something with the money instead.
  12. but then what?... I'd seen some mediocre films made by some youtuber with a large following, and got millions of views... it made me cringe. If the eyes and praise are from those teenagers on the couch, it'd be pointless to me. My goal is to move forward, not to hear from other people's congrats... :'''( Another plan is to use this short film to apply for a fully funded film school, so as to buy me some more time...
  13. thanks for the advice... that gives me some confidence as I think I'm on the right track. we have a very small crew of 4, and two actors... There's not much credit to begin with, but a realistic budget in the $10K, due to the fact there was one crowd scene, and we rehearsed and shot it over a month. So I can't brag about the low budget and short shooting days even if I want to.
  14. The thing is the short film has no connection to the feature script I have, except they belong to the same genre.
  15. Morphed from my previous post about my prejudice against the small, insignificant film festivals. Rather, I thought it's more relevant to ask which ones that is more suitable for what I'm looking for, among the oceans of festivals. I have a very tight short film that is 25 minutes runtime, about a simple scene in a couple's life: two actors, and one location. It's more structured like a one-act short play. It had received almost unanimous positive feedbacks from the 10-12 people I'd shown it to, who are not my friends per se. My ultimate goal is to attract attention from interested parties that can lead to conversations about moving forward with my feature length project. In this case, what are the film festivals that is best for what I want? I can't submit to Cannes, because they limit it to be less that 15min long. 😞 Thanks in advance.
  16. Ok, I think at this point what I need is advice for the kind of film festival that is suited for my project. I'll make a separate post about. Thank for everyone's input.
  17. Maybe, I'm wrong, but I think you are talking about feature films, not shorts? I guess, I want to attract attention and claim awards at bigger festivals so I can get interest in my feature length project.
  18. I'm at the stage of planning ahead after I finish my short film. And I see there are about a million no-name, insignificant film festivals out there - as long as you have a post code, there is at least one film festivals attached to it. Hell, nowadays, with the majority of them going online, you don't even need a post code. I find it rather meaningless, if those awards are simply given by some kids out of college, who can't make a proper movie, and decide to put up a party to feel relevant. Then there is the million insignificant short films put up their posters with laurel wreath ribbons from those insignificant festivals pretending to be some kind of hot shot, followed by hollow self-serving youtube Q&As, of them ranting about what filmmaking is, or what the industry should be, after making just that one big steam pile. It make me a little sick. But to wail back to the topic --- Is there really any point in wasting money on those festival fees whether I'm getting recognitions or not, if it ain't the big names like Sundance, Cannes, TIFF, Venice, Berlin..etc...
  19. And I also predict in 3 years, they will make even worse movies than the politically correct fabricated propaganda movies we have today.
  20. but it is just a mac screenshot from a ripped DVD9. Maybe this particular copy is especially good? I skipped to other scenes with blacks... they look consistent with this one. Magical...
  21. yes, but why aren't the other images toss away and replace with black, instead of the ugly clusters.
  22. could someone explain why the last photo from the Leopard has zero such issue? It's got black all over, but absolutely no pixelation.
  23. Unfortunately, yes. I took some STILL photos just 2 days ago, and even in still pictures this happens. Sadly those DSLRs, however expensive they are, sucks balls at low light. Below is the photo I took at ISO 6400, same camera as yours 5D MK II. The lights are from the city's installations itself. So I doubt it had any jells whatsoever. Now, I think it is useless unless at night.
  24. This is some insightful information. I wonder if there was any case they specifically made short-end reels just so they can tweak them scene by scene instead of the whole reel. But that would be splitting hairs on information got lost a long time ago. Thanks again David. Just like everything else, I find the whole coloring/filming process always started with a structure with more control and freedom, and gradually moved to more and more restrictive formats to color stocks, to digital... much like the political atmosphere, and the internet... something tells me it's not a coincidence.
  • Create New...