Jozo Zovko

Hi Seung - I spoke to a few of the lens techs at Otto Nemenz (Deakins's rental house) and they let me try out the lenses they modified for the film. One lens was the old Kinoptic 9.8mm without its front lens group. The second was a 50mm Zeiss macro that they added different wide angle front elements to. One of the front elements being from i think a Nikon fisheye lens. But basically what you got was an image whose center was relatively well defined but whose edges were wildly distorted, out of focus, and full of chromatic aberrations. I hope this info was helpful.

Hello People always comment on the bad colors and weird skin tones etc Word of advice for all future watchers of Superman Returns Take a look at this image made by Alex Ross (and others if you'd like) http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9...yAlexRoss02.jpg Then see the film again You'll understand why the skin and the colors etc were MADE to look like that Have a good day Joe Zovko Camera Dept LA, CA

DAVID wrote >>> The shutter was 180 degrees, but the frame rate was 6 or 8 fps, then each frame was reprinted 4 or 3 times to get back to 24 in an optical printer. At 6 fps with a 180 degree shutter, the shutter speed is 1/12th of a second, hence all the motion blur. <<< In reply - There "may be" one scene where they did open the shutter past 180* - if you look at the scene where the power goes out and the store is lit with candles - you will see all sorts of vertical streaks running up the frame on all of the highlights and candle flames - my only guess would be that they shot the scene with a MovieCam compact (who can open up past 180* - though not marked that way) or maybe shot with an Eclair CM3 (some models can go as far as 220* i think - correct me if the numbers are off) Doing so would have only added 1/4 of a stop - but at those low light levels - every bit of stop helps But the smears that were mentioned before were of course due to the longer exposures during the scenes shot off speed and step printed - as David pointed out Adios - have a good day Joe Zovko AC LA, CA

Hello - 'Evan Kubota' wrote I wasn't aware that split diopters were used >(in "Come and See")< - it looks like the shot could have been done by taking two separate takes of the scene with different parts in focus then optically blending them later... ...it looked to me like the shot was done twice and composited, but I guess a diopter could have been used there. There is a very visible blurred line between the halves of the frame. ME>>> Here are two screen captures from the film (Come and See) - this is my first time posting pictures to the web - so I hope this works - I'm posted them as attachments - so if there is a better way - please tell me Have a nice day, Joe Zovko AC IA 600 LA, CA

Hello - Thanks for bringing up "The Black Stallion" Jason. That?s one of the films I ONLY watch in 1.33 - regardless of what the filmmakers intended. I hope one day to ask Mr. Deschanel if they did compose for 1.33 since the film is just stunning in that frame, or at least more so then the 1.85 since it is amazing in any frame. It will be a sad day when 1.33 is cast away. I love the frame and hope it lives on at least as long as i am around. Who can imagine Bergman's "Persona" or Tarkovsky's "Mirror" or most films made before the 1960s in any frame other then a nice square? I can't thank Gus Van Sant and Harris Savides enough for the last 2 films they've made together. I just hope more follow down the path. Have a nice day, Joe Zovko AC - IA 600 LA, CA

Hello - I have a feeling that there is a ton of physical set tricks - post tricks - spinning double anamorphic element tricks The one sure thing........ tricks... (of some sort) Have a nice day, Joe Zovko AC - IA 600 LA, CA

Hello - In reply Chris>>> I'm very interested in the use of split diopters and how cinematographers have used them effectively. ME>>> Some of the best work with the split diopter is in one of the greatest works of art ever made. The Film "Come and See" Its use is daring in every way. It isn't used in the traditional way. The filmmakers didn't try to hide the edge in any way. But when it's used a couple of times throughout the film, emotionally it just hits a grand slam every time. The film is on DVD. Try to find the double disk version made by RUSICO/Kino ? not the wretched single disk Kino version. Any one that has not seen this film should run out the door to the store in a foaming, rabid, animalistic fashion the moment you finish reading this sentence. Back already?? Wow! Hope you like the film as much as I do Chris>>> I'd like to hear what you all think of them and if you use them in your productions? ME>>> I worked on a film where the cinematographer used a split diopter in a "backwards" kind of way - he used it to make a person MORE out of focus. It was an over the shoulder; the characters were not overlapping though. One actor was playing a ghost in the scene and was placed further back and in line of the diopter while the lead actor was in the clear area, in sharp focus. Have a nice day, Joe Zovko AC - IA 600 LA, CA

Hello Guy ? I had the pleasure of working with Gianni ? he was like you said, ?ice cool? ? a real super guy ? nice ? quiet ? never frazzled ? and his use of hard light was refreshing ? it was almost odd to see on set since so few people shoot in such a way now a days ? but just squint a little bit and it all makes sense He taught me a very valuable lesson On the film there were often pauses for a bit of ?creative discussion? between some of the film makers ? as the minutes/$$$ piled up ? Gianni looked back at the crew and shrugged his shoulders ? letting out a sigh Now when I?m shooting and am surrounded by a horde of bickering headless chickens ? I just think of that shoulder shrug and that sigh ? no matter how big or how small the shoot ? sometimes all you can do is sit back ? bite your tongue ? and shrug your shoulders I really liked him ? first as a person ? second as a filmmaker As for ?The Adventures of Baron Munchausen? It is a great film ? if you like ?Time Bandits? and ?Brazil? then you?ll love it ? I just wish I wish I wish that special FX can always look as nice and ?physical? ?palpable? as they do in Gilliam?s early films ? my eyes always light up while watching those films Have a nice day, Joe Zovko AC LA, CA

Hello - I just finished a shoot where we had an occurrence of "the rainbow flairies" - just a happy accident though - it was the sun shining through thick trees - falling across a car windshield - then bouncing up into our Ziess super speeds - shooting at the end of the day - the lens was around a T2 / T2.8 ??? - the lens was probably a 50mm - the rainbow flair was in a corner and was about 10* degrees worth of the outside of a circle - and of course - our flair was not of the net flair family you see in some films - just your average everyday run of the mill cute little optical anomaly Have a nice day, Joe <<<I noticed the lens flares had a very attractive rainbow around the edges of the lens flares. What series of lenses might that have been?>>> Thanks, anyone who can give this question a shot! -Chris