Mr. Macgregor

0,25? would be around $0.30 per frame at 2k. I import the cineon files in after effects. No problems at all. Then i render a 720p quicktime file with time code so i can edit anyware i want (Vegas in my case). Later i just have to go and do the same editing with the cineon files in the original quality. Sure this is not the smartest way in a world of EDLs, but i´ve heard of no one who edits with native 2k cineon files, so this is kind of being pioneer. :lol: Footage is 100 Gb, so not too big for any fast machine.

;)

Hi, the price i got was around 0,25-0,3? per frame. So you can just multiply to whatever you need. The last one has level and gamma correction, so it looks more like night. The files i got are cineon files, yeah. Too much grain for my taste. What do you think?

Hahaha, no it is not the remake. I guess it is just my style. At last i got the 2k scans from the actual film:

The software is not important. You put a square in the color you want, apply a guassian blur. And combine it with screen mode. Any software can do that.

It is easily done in post. I love the hypnotic feeling of this kind of intrusive lights. Someone should develop a flare software to do these things... :D

. At last I got the test footage that i shot with the 200T film stock and cooke lenses set at f2.0 and 2.8. It´s in DVcam so i cannot expect to judge resolution but i think latitude was very good. I can see horizontal movement. I hope it comes from the telecine and not from the camera itself. video 1 1Mb video 2 2 Mb

At last I got the test footage that i shot with the 200T film stock and cooke lenses set at f2.0 and 2.8. It´s in DVcam so i cannot expect to judge resolution but i think latitude was very good. I can see horizontal movement. I hope it comes from the telecine and not from the camera itself. video 1 1Mb video 2 2 Mb

They trow away some vertical pixels, but even doing so, it delivers more resolution than the HVX.

Can you afford the P2 cards to shoot with the HVX? If you want more resolution you can try the XL H1 or the upcoming new smaller and cheaper canon HDV cameras, which deliver 24-25f and offer more resolution than the HVX. However HDV compression sucks if you plan to do heavy color correction. But i wonder if having 1440x700 (vertical aprox resolution) pixels in HDV is better than 960x540 dvcproHD image from the HVX200.

I will tell you tonight when i get the tapes. Changing to fuji now, uhmmmm. Did you read a review that said that it had less grain or you are telling me your own opinion? What about latitude and colors in the 250D?

Hi, is there really a big difference between the scanners that work at 2k? Or they perform more or less the same in detail and latitude.

hahha, I understand what you mean David. My answer is: from 50d to 250 D theres is a big step in grain. Whith white environments grain seem to be more noticeable to me. Therefore i want the smallest grain. :)

I went and did test today. I hope i can see results tomorrow. However, i think overexposing 1 stop will make all details in the white wall to disappear even when you try to recover it during DI. A white wall overexposed 1 stop is far from a grey card i think. What i did was to use 200T +85 which gives 125iso, but i just set the lightmeter to 100iso, so that is a bit overexposure but not too much.

Are they sweet at T2.0 or better to close to T2.4 or T2.8 for better results?

Hold on. I am in this location. Do you think it is a good idea to over expose so much?

Super 35mm and later DI. Right now i think 250D is the way to go and use a ND filter. But i could be wrong.

After doing some tests, i need a film stock rated at around 125 iso for 5600º light. However this tock does not exist. The kodak 50d stock is obiously too low to be used. The 250d might give more grain than what i want, and an extra stop that i dont really want to use. I could use the 200T with an 85filter so i would get 125 iso, however the grain between 250D and 200T might be the same, and the extra glass in front of the lense is something to avoid in order to get the sharpest images. So what do you recommend me?

Hi, will the "flicker free" option of an European HMI work at any speed? Or they only work well at 24 and 25 fps? Can i shoot 65 fps? 150 fps without flickering? Thanks

Hi. I am shooting a nice film in a futuristic environment. Camera is Arri 435 set in super35mm. Framing will be 2.35 and we will later scan the film for color grading. Since i want dramatic shots, with very low depth of field, i want to shoot at f2.0. I had reserved the Zeiss superspeeds T1.3 in order to use them at T2.0. However today when i went to pick up the camera equipment to make some tests, the superspeeds were not available. So i had to take a Cook T2.0 set and used it at f2.0 and f2.4 for filming these test (this tests were mainly for evaluating film stock and environments). So i have the option now to continue with these lenses or to return them and get the superspeeds. What lenses do you think will perform better at f2.0? Simple question. :D

Hi. If i remember well, the Arri Scaner has different resolution outputs: - 2k resized from 3k - 2k resized from 6k - 4k resized from 6k - 3k native - 6k native For a film i think we just have to forget about 4k and 6k. But what about 2k and 3k? Has anyone made a test to see if there is a visible difference once printed? Does the 2k resized from 3k and 6k look different?

Why did they converted to 8 bits then? You say that 16 is clearly better but you could not see it on the flame monitor. Then i guess you could only tell the difference in the theater. Is this correct? Thanks.

Hello. I shot a shortfilm in s35mm 3 perf. Only one roll. Nothing more. So aproximately 90% of the footage will be in the final cut. Now i have to scan the negative in order to edit and color correct the film. I asked the lab for prices and options. And here comes the problem. This is Spain, not the US. They have the tools, but this kind of work is not what they usually do. So i must give them all the details. They usually give the frames in TGA. I wonder if TIFF files would give any advantage here. Will both file systems offer more than 8bits? Will the scanner be able to deliver 10bit? Even 16bits per channel? Will this make sense? Tiff files can handle 16 bits per channel. However i am not sure if there are displays capable of showing it. Will actually FCP or After Effects be able to work with such color resolution? Also, since the final negative must be projected in scope 2.35, what do you think, should i render the secuence in the end in anamorphic myself, or just deliver to the lab the 2k frame sequence and let them do the job?

Hi there. Do you know of any online test comparisson between stocks from kodak and fuji? Something that analizes saturation, grain, highlights and sadow capabilities... There must be something. Thanks!

Hahhaa, yes, but digital cameras started this century. How did the do last decade? How did they do on those dozens of films where you see the night cityscape on the background? Did they just use polaroids? Take Heat, for example.