Jump to content
Tyler Purcell

Delete thread please

Recommended Posts

Tyler, if you're gonna try and pass yourself off as an educator you really should know what you're talking about. Nearly every time I read one of your posts there's some false piece of information that you present with an expert's confidence.

Now this thread, also full of misinformation.

 

A few things to note about these lenses, the first is close focus. The 24mm and 50mm, have a 10" close focus. This is critical to me, the CP2's I use all the time from school, don't get near 10" even though they advertise 12, it's more like 14 - 16 in real life. The Xeen's focused so close, the mattebox flags actually hit the object I was focused on during testing. So yea... that's pretty magical.

 

We've been over this before.. the 24mm Zeiss CP.2 has a close focus minimum of 10', same as your 24mm Optar, as do the 21mm, 27mm and macro 50mm CP.2s. The wider focal lengths and the 35mm have minimums of 12'. So not much different, even considering that these are lenses that cover full frame, a much larger image circle than your S16 Optars.

 

If the minimum on the focus scale says 12', then the lens focusses to 12', there is no difference "in real life". If the focus scale is off then the lens has a fault. Have you actually tried measuring from the film plane to see what distance you're at?

 

 

Yesterday, I brought the lenses over to my friend with a collimator. I also brought my Super 16 Optars and we had a set of standard speed Zeiss lenses there for comparison on the S35 side.

 

We started with the Optars, these are MK2's, and they're in pretty good shape. I was SHOCKED how good they were wide open, between .0010 - .0017 off and they were sharp as a tack all the way through from wide angle to long. We hit up the old Zeiss standard speeds, wow those things were crisp. I was shocked how little glass there were in some of them compared to the Optars. Yet, the Zeiss held very well, nice and crisp across all the lenses in the set.

 

Finally, we threw up the 24mm Xeen and to my dismay, all the way open it was really soft. Now, the moment you stopped it down even a slight bit, the lens started working properly. We both felt the lens under 2.8 was totally fine. Just as crisp as the other two lenses. The 50mm Xeen seemed to be better, all the way open it was pretty crisp, not quite as crisp as the other two 50's we tested, but it wasn't anywhere near as bad as the 24mm.

 

 

I use a collimator every day in my job as a lens technician, it's a handy tool, but it tells you nothing about how sharp or crisp a lens is.

 

If you're interested, I can explain it for you, but please stop posting about things you have no knowledge of as if you're an expert, it just spreads misinformation and lowers the trustworthiness of this site.

 

The worst thing in the film industry isn't someone who doesn't know something, we all started out like that and even seasoned pros have gaps in their knowledge, no the worst thing is someone who doesn't know something but thinks that they do.

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all good Dom, I've got a great group of top experts here in L.A, who don't beat me on the head with a mallet if I say something wrong. If I misinterpreted what they said, that's my fault and again I'm not a bench technician, nor have I ever stated such. Yes, I service my own cameras, but that's out of necessity. Plus, why would I listen to someone who only badgers others about their own experiences.

 

I'm very lucky because I get to use a wide range of products on a regular basis and get to share my own personal experiences with them. Sure, my experiences differ from the "norm" because I'm not the same person you are and maybe the products I use are heavily modified, I don't know. What I do know is how they function on set, that's truthfully the only thing that makes any difference.

 

Anyway, I guess nobody gets to hear my experience with these different lenses. It's a real shame because I think people who were thinking about spending money on glass, could have learned something. I also think we could have had a nice chat about it when the footage comes back because who else would shoot with Xeen's and 35mm film cameras? I guess I'll just share my experiences with another group of people who understand that what I say is just my own opinion based on experience using the products. There is nothing WRONG with someone's opinion, there is only accepting it and moving on.

 

Thanks for ruining another thread. Clearly posting personal experiences and opinions isn't a possibility here.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohh and P.S. whoever is giving me negatives all the time, grow up. If you don't like something someone says, be an adult and post your reasoning.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My message to Tim.....
Tim. I do not believe that those who bring about their own embarrassment should have the option of simply editing their posts or post titles (at leisure), or having posts deleted to try and eliminate that embarrassment. Fortunately in this case Dom has generously quoted him, so unless the thread is deleted, the facts will stand..

 

(my edit in brackets)

Edited by Gregg MacPherson
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyler, I'm not beating you on the head with a mallet, I'm clearly banging my own head against a brick wall.

 

You can get all pouty about it, but I'm just correcting misinformation that shouldn't be allowed to stand on a site that people use as a reference. Sharing personal experience is exactly what this site is about, but that's different to talking authoritatively about something factual when you don't know the facts.

 

You can't have an opinion about something like what a collimator does. Saying that a Zeiss CP.2 "in real life" doesn't focus as close as it advertises is not an opinion, it's just plain wrong. And how would it be useful to people thinking of investing in lenses to read your assessment of a lens when it's based on a complete misunderstanding of the test equipment? If anything, you're misleading them.

 

What's really frustrating is that you call yourself "an educator" but seem to have no interest in learning from others. When I offer to explain what a collimator does, you decline and instead berate me for ruining your thread. You just want this to be the Tyler Purcell show.

 

Sorry mate, but if you keep posting misinformation people will keep correcting you. I try to keep my posts limited to what I know or can research from credible sources, but if I make a mistake I welcome any corrections. That's the whole point of this community, we learn from each other. I know you have a lot of great knowledge to pass on, I'm just asking you to try and recognise when you might not know something and be a bit humble about it.

  • Upvote 5
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the original poster has lots of enthusiasm and desire to work in showbiz, however his postings to this forum are too often anecdotal if not completely wrong. I think it is necessary and just for people on this forum to call him out.

 

For instance, he stated that Emerson college doesn't have or use 16mm. I live in Boston and while strolling through the public garden earlier this week, I saw two, three person crews of student filmmakers shooting. Both groups were shooting 16mm (Bolex) with guess which college's name on the case??? Emerson.

 

This is just a small example of the incorrect info that he states as fact quite emphatically, time and again. I tend to skip over his posts and look elsewhere for advice.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For instance, he stated that Emerson college doesn't have or use 16mm. I live in Boston and while strolling through the public garden earlier this week, I saw two, three person crews of student filmmakers shooting. Both groups were shooting 16mm (Bolex) with guess which college's name on the case??? Emerson.

 

I missed that one. Hilarious.

 

We scan 16mm for emerson students all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim. I do not believe that those who bring about their own embarrassment should have the option of simply editing their posts or post titles (at leisure), or having posts deleted to try and eliminate that embarrassment. Fortunately in this case Dom has generously quoted him, so unless the thread is deleted, the facts will stand..

There is nothing embarrassing in my original post. I deleted it because I knew the thread would go south just like it has and I didn't want people sifting through the bullshit of you guys arguing with me about my own personal experiences with products that again, maybe heavily modified compared to stock.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the original poster has lots of enthusiasm and desire to work in showbiz, however his postings to this forum are too often anecdotal if not completely wrong. I think it is necessary and just for people on this forum to call him out.

First off, everyone on this forum says wrong information all the time. It's just, it's generally so grievous in error, people just laugh and move on. Even Dom has been completely wrong about many things, but I've simply corrected him and not been a jerk about it.

 

Since this is a professional forum, the way to correct someone is to simply state in their own opinion, a certain circumstance is different. There is no reason to badger, there is no reason to CONSTANTLY bring up the past.

 

For instance, he stated that Emerson college doesn't have or use 16mm.

Why are you putting words in my mouth without linking to the original source so we can find out why I would say something like that?

 

I am from Boston, I went to Emerson, I work with fellow Emersonians all the time at my film school. I actually just wrapped up a rental of my XTR with one of them last week. He's a senior at the California campus and maybe I was referring to that, instead of Boston. I bet if you re-read, there will be context.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's really frustrating is that you call yourself "an educator" but seem to have no interest in learning from others. When I offer to explain what a collimator does, you decline and instead berate me for ruining your thread. You just want this to be the Tyler Purcell show.

You have showed on countless times, you have zero interest in educating anyone. You don't want to help anyone, you just come on here to "correct" what you feel others have said wrong. I look at ALL of your postings and they're pretty much all the same. Again, I have a hand full of professional bench technicians here, who I'm friends with, who I learn from.

 

I know what a lens collimator does, it's designed to measure back focus. However, the lens technician I work with, showed me a few other things a collimator is good for like being able to tell how crisp a lens is at X given stop. Sure, you'd normally use a lens projector for that test, but he showed me how a collimator can be used for similar testing. Maybe he doesn't know what he's talking about, but his explanation was pretty rock solid.

 

When ANYONE posts something, to be badgered in the first reply... is uncalled for. All you had to say was; "in my experience, XYZ is different". You didn't have to beat me on the head. Also, generally speaking, people who make new threads, want an engaging conversation not a badgering/belittlement session.

 

Dom, you also make a lot of mistakes and correct yourself constantly. I see it, I read your posts, I see the mistakes being fixed. We're just human mate and just because I teach people the creative side of filmmaking, doesn't mean I need to explain to them how a collimator works and why it's an important tool.

 

P.S. When you become a "creative" and you start renting and owning equipment, then maybe you'd understand the discrepancies between a manufacturers spec and what us, the cinematographers actually use. I'm in no position to dismantle the products I use in order to determine if there is anything wrong. I just use them and if they don't work up to my expectations, then I will comment about my experiences.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have showed on countless times, you have zero interest in educating anyone. You don't want to help anyone, you just come on here to "correct" what you feel others have said wrong. I look at ALL of your postings and they're pretty much all the same.

 

Like a number of other folks here, I've chosen to avoid these arguments if only for my own mental health. However, this is just way off-base and needs to be addressed.

 

Dom has been very helpful to me many times related to getting my Moviecam up and running again, generously offering his expertise and experience from years of professional camera service.

 

There are only a handful of qualified technicians in the world who would come on a public forum and give guidance on how to re-center a ground glass or using the correct oil to lubricate a movement. Most would keep that info for themselves and only share dribbles and dabs of specifics with other technicians. So thank you for your generosity, Dom. Without people like you, this forum would be a darker, more ignorant place!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When misinformation or simply confusing information pops up now and then, we should present the facts as we know them, hopefully backed with some evidence, and move on. Getting personal is always a temptation, even I fall into it, but it doesn't help promote a sense of community here.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David,
The censure of the forum community is the only thing holding Tyler in check. So, does that community need moderation, or does Tyler? Your view?

If the community can't rein in Tyler we will swim in a cesspool of quasi facts, non facts, delusional nonsense. The good people will drift away. We will become a happy community of fools.

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you're right David, your example is actually what I aspire to. Sorry to Tyler for letting frustration get the better of me.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where I appreciate the apologies, it doesn't matter how much people apologize, this keeps happening over and over again. The thread is gone and so is all the work I put into it.

 

I only wrote this thread because I told my lens technician friend I wanted to write something about the Xeen's and how they compare to other lenses. I took four hours out of my day and he took two billable hours out of his, so we could work together and do the test I published here.

 

So there is a lot more going on behind the scenes and even though the data may not be technical, it's not suppose to be written that way. If I wanted to write something technical, I would have had my friend write it for me. Most people can't interpret technical information anyway, they simply want a few factoids and that's it. Just easy to digest personal experiences, which is what I posted. Otherwise, it's just a technical document or a product review.

 

Anyway, I'm disheartened my work went to waste, yet again. I'm just tired of taking time out of my life to share my experiences when all it does is lead to this mess time and time again.

 

I will try again someday, but not for a while.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greg your posts display some sort of grudge against Tyler.

 

Your actions are those of a forum Troll.

 

Maybe you should seek professional help.

 

Maybe you should just be banned.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JD, the current political concept on this thread is that we should attack what we find dissagreeable in someones posts rather than the poster. However, sometimes, what a person is and what they write may be hard to separate. So maybe you/we can direct our energy to that.

 

You are very careless with the Troll word.

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are very careless with the Troll word.

A Troll is someone who follows around someone else and makes comments about everything they say, mostly negative.

 

I do think JD does have a point and we'll see how the future presents itself.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tyler,

Any criticisms I have made of you or your posts have been been very reasoned, logical, thought about before being written, and normally are an attempt to limit voluminous offerings of poor quality content (that pretents to be authorative) being (posted) to the forum.

 

May I ask, Tyler, when there are clearly several people on this thread who dissaprove strongly of what you write, why you chose to single me out?

 

(Edit in brackets)

Edited by Gregg MacPherson
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This definition from wikipedia may help re-orient those wishing to oportunistically missapropriate the word Troll...

 

"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll's amusement."

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Metropolis Post



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Rig Wheels Passport



    Visual Products



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Glidecam



    Wooden Camera



    Paralinx LLC



    Tai Audio



    Serious Gear



    CineLab



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Ritter Battery



    Abel Cine


×
×
  • Create New...