serge

Hello - I've just run some tests with the F900, and came up against two problems: 1) straight lines warping (fisheye effect) - i believe this is a lens problem (using Canon HJ 21x7.5 KLL), but would love to hear if otherwise: please look at the two images here. 2) motion "stutter" - especially over bright background: please take a look at this very short clip: when the boy moves his head back the left side of his face strobes or "stutters." (I don't mean the horizontal image breaks - that is of course an compression artifact) what i'm wondering about is the edge of the face "stutter" - and i see the same problem when i play back the tape on an HDCAM deck. i am shooting at 23.98PsF also, i'd love to hear/read a general comparison between shooting at 23.98 and 29.97 on the F900. any and all ideas/suggestions welcomed looking forward s

I'm sure the topic title is very vague. I'll try to explain: I've seen many film where the camera scans a document, or a painting, or a photograph, very closely. I suppose it's done with a macro lens, by getting very very close to the image, but that's not the issue. The issue is that the movement is very smooth -- the camera must be on a tripod -- but panning or tilting at such close range creates awful line distortion (I'm not sure I'm using the right term): in other words, lines don't look straight when one pans at close range, they tend to curve up, etc. In the films I'm thinking of (many many classic films, like Andrej Rublev) the movement is perfectly even, as though the camera is tracking. Are they really tracking with a dolly at such close range? I know that one can just import an image into FCP or equivalent and generate movement, but it looks dreadfully mechanical (though maybe there's a way of making it look more natural?). and suppose you wanted to do it with a film camera? It seems like a really simple problem, but I can't figure out how to slove it without building some kind of a moving platform on which to place the document? thank you for reading my post...

It may be much too late to come in with this posting, but I have come upon this thread and wanted to clarify my confusion. The originator of this thread seems to be talking about super 8 PLUS-X Reversal Film 7276. This posting may well belong in the super 8 section of this forum, but if any of the pros should want to answer it here, it would be most kind of them. PLUS-X Reversal Film 7276 is rated: Daylight-50/18 Tungsten (3200 K)-40/17 this information is here: http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products....12.4&lc=en#H05 Plus-X film is said to be balanced for daylight, and the filter notch (actually, the absence of notch) in the cartridge removes the 85A filter found in most super8 cameras. The change in the film speed between daylight and tungsten seems to be not a function of the filter, but of the light itself. If B&W film is more sensitive to the blue end of the spectrum, then it makes sense that in daylight it would be slightly faster than in tungsten (nothing to do with filters). The technical data sheet for this film goes on to say that if the film is exposed in daylight with an 85 filter, the film speed will drop to ASA 32. This goes for manual cameras, where the filter is set manually, that is the cartidge will not remove or set the filter automatically. Am I right in my understanding of the mechanics so far? And why would you want to shoot daylight balanced B&W film in daylight with a color correction filter? Also, why does Kodak have a different film stock (Plus-X 7265) listed in their super-8 portfolio? http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/super8/f....4.10.4.4&lc=en Now, I would like to extend my musing into color reversal films: Both Kodachrome and Ektachrome super 8 film stocks are said to be balanced for tungsten. They are rated: Kodachrome ASA 40/25 Ektachrome ASA 125/80 This means, I gather, that in tungsten lighting they will have their respective speeds 40 and 125 without a color correction filter in place. However, the filter notch on the cartridge (for both films) leaves the color correction filter in place. Why? Perhaps people at Kodak assume that the amateur filmmaker will not be using these films under studio lights, but outdoors. In manual cameras this, of course, does not matter; but in automatic cameras the film is set to be used outdoors, in daylight. Then, with the filter in place, the respective ratings are: Kodachrome 25 and Ektachrome 80. So now, it seems that the Daylight/Tungsten rating difference in color reversal films is a mechanical matter -- filter takes away some of the light. but in B&W films, the difference in the rating is a chemical matter -- the film chemicals are more sensitive to the blue end of the spectrum -- nothing to do with filters. Please let me know if all or any of this is correct. I must apologize for the article length of this posting, or for its possible misplacement in the forum subsections. But the strange vagueness with which exposure index for super 8 film is handled on various forums, and the effort i expended in puzzling out these matters for myself, prompted me to submit this overweight posting. regards s