Edith blazek
-
Posts
175 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Edith blazek
-
What the title says. I was reading interviews on the behind the scenes of nomadland and the cinematographer, Joshua James Richards said he used natural light most of the time but brought in lights like litemats when needed, which in the context of an expansive freeflowing style such as Richards, how do you make that work? Where would the light come in? How do you make it work with natural light? I know some cinematographers like Fraser or lubezki feel you can't as they've expressed in interviews and that's why within their work they prefer to shape the natural light whenever they can. But another I wonder with using litemats to supplement natural light is because of how bright the sun is, wouldn't you need powerful lights to match that? Litemats are efficient but I wouldn't say they're particularly powerful, how do you make that work?
-
Hey, I know that the Arri lf sensor has a native 1.43:1 aspect ratio and that interested me a lot, but i know that the venice is not that much shorter at 1.5:1, so i want to know if there has been any project that has utilized the venice for 1.43:1 IMAX exhibition and if so, how it went.
-
Bump
-
Hello, I'm interested if anyone has the original bausch and Lomb cinemascope anamorphics for 35mm film which were arguably the very first complete set of anamorphics for film and used the original baltars as taking lenses (I know there's a set on fjs, I'm just not interested in paying what they're offering it for) or the super cinemascope lenses for cinemascope 55 that can cover full frame and is the first lenses mentioned on Arris white paper about using the Alexa LF and anamorphic lenses. If you have either of these lenses and are interested to sell them, contact me.
-
Hello, I'm looking for the series 1 cooke speed panchros, in particular the 24mm, 28mm 35mm, 47mm, 58mm, and the 108mm (listed in the brochure as 4 1/4") as these focal lengths are special to this iteration of the panchros, but if you have these or the other focal lengths, those being the 32mm, 40mm, 50mm, 75mm, and 100mm and you are sure your lenses are series 1, please let me know.
-
Yeah, I'm looking for these very rare super 16 lenses, they include that 4mm t2 that goes fast, and a 5.5mm and an 8mm lens, if you have them and want to sell, please let me know.
-
Heya, are you still searching for the other lenses and if not, have you thought about selling your 55mm?
-
Yeah but here's the thing, no rental house in my area has 35mm motion picture film cameras, or any motion picture film cameras for that matter, I'd be the rental house in that case.
-
Hello, so I found a Aaton 35-iii for a decent price but I have some questions. Like how bad of a buy would it be? The reason im not super interested in say, the moviecam is that for how much it costs used, it rents way less than say, an Arri 435 which I can get for less than an sl mk2, doesn't sound like a solid investment to me, I was worried the Aaton 35-III would be similar as the Penelope rents and and arricam lt cost about the same used when fully kitted out, but the lt rents for almost $1000 more at camtec for example, so if anyone like @Tyler Purcell could give figures for how much they rent their 35-iii that would be helpful. Also, is there any way to get it to be quieter in 4 perf? I heard it's like 32db in 4 perf which for a sync sound camera is loud but knowing entire films have been shot on the 35-iii I want to give it a chance so if anyone has advice please come forth on how I can make it usable in 4 perf as that's all I was able to find of the 35-iii's available whenever it does pop up.
-
Am I crazy for not feeling 35mm film nowdays?
Edith blazek replied to Edith blazek's topic in General Discussion
Weird question, did you do grain reduction on the night shots (which I assume were shot on 500t)? -
Also known as the lomo 35bas26-1, this is one of the widest vintage 35mm anamorphic lenses and its very rare, so I'm here to see if anyone has either the cylindrical elements or whole lens and if so, if they're willing to sell it, if this applies to you, contact me.
-
Hey so I just watched la la land with the knowledge that it was shot on 35mm film with panavision c and e series lenses and that it was inspired by older movies, it was an amazing experience but what I want to discuss is the epilogue or so called alternate ending as the movie shows what could've been between Mia and Sebastian's relationship (spoilers if you've haven't seen it) I want to discuss is the shift towards a softer, more classical aesthetic that to me looks a lot closer to the movies that this film was inspired by (again, I'm not talking about the shot where 16mm film was used), as throughout most of the film I thought the image (I need to stress in terms of the standpoint strictly relating to camera and lens package and not in the million other factors that this film feels classical in) looked modern and not like the films Damien and Linus say they were inspired by but in the video I linked I feel like it has a more classic, romantic feel to the image, not unlike the films of the era they were inspired by, did anyone else notice this or was it just me and if anyone else did notice, do you know how it was done? Like was it a change in stock processing? Lenses? Was it here they used the c series while most of the movie used the e series? Let me know
-
Am I crazy for not feeling 35mm film nowdays?
Edith blazek replied to Edith blazek's topic in General Discussion
Looks nice, what lens did you shoot it on? -
Am I crazy for not feeling 35mm film nowdays?
Edith blazek replied to Edith blazek's topic in General Discussion
Except I'm not sure as on one hand one can argue what we collectively think of as film is not from capture stock but from a degraded print stock as the winning time cinematographers have argued in the go creative show episode on it but on the other hand, 16mm, in the same circumstances as 35mm nowadays still looks filmic more often than not, even with the changes in lighting and post production workflow, I just think the issue is the 35mm rendition of the vision3 stocks are too "good" now. Also, I guess I should've added that euphoria and winning time do avoid the pitfall of looking similar to digital as even other hbo shows shot on 35mm film do, but that's probably more due to the fact they have very special circumstances to their production (euphoria was shot on Ektachrome that was cross processed and winning time had additional film emulation on top of the base negative). I guess it like 16mm, it still has the quality of not looking clinical even with so called clinical glass so there's that, but I just don't feel it as being intangible to emulate with a proper post production workflow, again, unlike with 16mm as I've just not seen as many convincing 16mm emulations on digital. And maybe there's something to be said about the disciplinary aspect of it but personally, if I'm going to go through the process of shooting film and all that brings, I want something to show for it in a way I just cannot get with digital, which is why I'm in the camp of super 16 over modern 35mm stocks. -
Hello, so to me, 35mm motion picture film just doesn’t have an aesthetic quality over modern digital cameras as I struggle to tell the difference half the time, unlike with say super 16 which I find does register with me as being filmic, even with grain removed. Like, I have to tell myself as I watch a modern 35mm film that it was shot on film, some examples for me are don’t look up and the northman, and even with films that attempt to emulate older time periods like licorice pizza and once upon a time in Hollywood, I just don’t see the image find it looking like eras they’re emulating, they look modern to me, which is not to say they’re bad, they look great, I just struggle to feel those films as being shot on film despite the fact they were. and whatever textural quality there is to 35mm film, I find is easy to replicate with film emulation, and I even heard of some 35mm productions like hbos winning time using film emulation as the film was too clean on its own so they added grain that would look more like 16mm film and at that point I ask, why not shoot it on 16? But then again, maybe I'm wrong and there is an inherent quality to 35mm film, let me know your thoughts.
-
Alright, these were 16mm film lenses made by kowa for cinema products and were branded as Ultra T. From the brochure "Cinema Products' ultra-fast Ultra T lens series consists of four prime lenses: 9mm (T1.35); 12.5mm (T1.25); 16mm (T1.25); and 25mm (T1.25). UltraT lenses are remarkably suited for filming night-for-night with available light, providing extremely sharp definition and high resolution, with excellent contrast, good depth penetration and well balanced color saturation ... which makes them ideal for all professional 16mm production applications. " And "Ultra T primes are presently available in Cp, Arri Band Eclair CA-1 mounts. " If you have any of these lenses, contact me.
-
Wait, do you still use the Aaton 35III? I thought it was not a good buy because servicing on both hardware and software is impossible, is it not?
-
Ok, I found multiple arricam studio cameras for insanely low prices and that include shoulder pads to use handheld so Arri clearly did think people were going to use the studio handheld as well as the lite, but I just want to know, how much worse is the handheld experience compared to the lite? I know it's heavier, but at the same time I'm not convinced it's heavier to a degree that would significantly make it worse as in my view, I wouldn't want to use either of these cameras handheld extensively but hey, maybe I'm wrong, so those with experience, let me know.
-
*Without the blimp
-
Hello, I'm thinking about getting a 35mm motion picture film camera to rent in my area as no one else is, but I don't want to spend that much on it as truth be told I'm not that passionate about the look nowadays as I am with super 16 because it lacks the texture I like in film but I otherwise I like the look of it in terms of lenses vs super 16 so in order to get a feel for it I thought of getting a 2c as for it's price on the market it rents out well and has so many accessories to customize but it's an mos camera, meaning it's loud and that would work against me but I really want it, so I ask, is there any way to make the 2c work with the dedicated blimp that makes it as big as an imax camera? Are there any parts I can get that's not the 2c blimp that I could use to shoot sync sound with this camera like say the georg jenson motor for the 16s allowed that to shoot sync sound or is it not that simple?
-
Sorry, I guess I should've said carefully handled, it's just so many 35mm projects I've seen nowadays look indistinguishable from an Arri Alexa to me. Yeah I think the grain was removed for some scenes, like the bedroom scene, but the swiss bank and Dominican republic car chase scenes still have grain, especially if the video is selected to 1080p as YouTube compression will kill grain in lower resolution setting options. But even then it still looks filmic and to me, that's the magic of 16mm, being able to still register as being film, even when manipulated.
-
Well that's the thing and reason I'm asking as I don't know if I'm misremembering the dp saying this is 35mm or 16mm as to me, it feels like a it's either specially handled 35mm anamorphic so as to still look filmic or just 16mm anamorphic, I remember the now gone insta post having Cooke anamorphic as a hashtag so its either or as I know Tyler and luis love shooting film and pretty much have since igor, I just wanted to know if anyone here also saw that Instagram post or if I'm misremembering.
-
It's just I remember there being an Instagram post from the dp Luiz Perez saying it was shot on Cooke anamorphic lenses with super 16mm film, and I just never heard of someone using 2x anamorphic lenses with super 16 and I thought the effect was great as it really did have a classic feeling I feel lacking in modern 35mm anamorphic projects, of course I know there's more than the lens used, I just found it interesting. Now that post isn't there and I didn't know if I misremembered so I was asking if anyone could confirm or correct.
-
Bump
