Jump to content
Stephen Perera

Dream 'job', massive budget - would you shoot digital or film?

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, aapo lettinen said:

 

 

OH WOW this is great, finally I got some scientific results! 

 

We can see here that Tyler's attitude has changed 3 FULL STOPS in only couple of years 🙂 

First he said that 500T was too grainy. So he wanted to use 200 or 250 ISO stock instead normally exposed. That was good and nice. OK.

THEN, he switched back to 500 ISO.  AND right away pushed two full stops to 2000 ISO. 

Sadly, just pushing film does not increase latitude in the same relation than it lifts the middle tones up. So he is underexposing a lot, then lifting if back up in post but just gets lots of unwanted grain and noise and lifts the shadow detail but his tonal range gets shallower. 

I really need to try NeatVideo on his comments, to see how it goes! I believe it would make wonders and tune the noise levels back to an acceptable level 😄 

OMG it worked great!  Maybe we can switch the noise reduction permanently on in this forum?

Dont worry he also thinks you should under expose Log footage .. to protect the highlights .. ! more prices Purcell Pontifications ..

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

all comments underexposed and then the shadow detail is lifted up so that you get only the dark tones and lots of noise. 

We need to see more highlights, I am sure they are there somewhere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It starts a rather boring and also unprofessional witch hunt, which throws no good light on the forum here. Clarify this on the phone or in a bar.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Philip Reinhold said:

It starts a rather boring and also unprofessional witch hunt, which throws no good light on the forum here. Clarify this on the phone or in a bar.

 

 

 disagree .. trying to save the forum.. wait till you have been here for longer and you will see the problem.. that is the very unprofessional  aspect here.. not those who have had enough of it.. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Philip Reinhold said:

It starts a rather boring and also unprofessional witch hunt, which throws no good light on the forum here. Clarify this on the phone or in a bar.

 

 

You have to admit that the NeatVideo would be a great idea. Look how polite and respectful the filtered comment sounds on the previous page VS. the original one 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2019 at 12:34 PM, aapo lettinen said:

How many ASC members we actually DO have here regularly posting? 

David is active of course but I haven't seen Shelly J.  post in a long time. Any others?

 

23 hours ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

Also probably because they don’t like to be told by ‘random internet guy’ how they should have shot their movie... 🙂

 

21 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

This was Larry Fung’s ASCs last post back in 2017:

“It's true I hadn't been to the forum in a long time, and when I did I was confronted by a rather insulting post regarding a project I poured my heart and soul into, which reminded why I don't sign in more often.

All cinematographers work extremely hard to do their best and it's unfortunate when our community is disparaging rather than a source of encouragement and support.”

Paul Maibaum, ASC and Eric Steelberg, ASC also used to post here, as did a number of other professional DPs working on shows that you would have heard of. It's impossible to say what their reasons were for ceasing to post, but it's not hard to imagine that they too became disenchanted with the tone of some of the posts here, and the descent into wild speculation, ill-informed opinion and blind arrogance.

Any internet forum is only as good as the people that post there, so it's up to us if we want Cinematography.com to remain a place where information is shared and advice is both trustworthy and freely given. I suspect that the vast majority of members here would prefer that it did remain a resource for learning and discussion. For those who want nothing more consequential or reliable than a chat room, well, there are plenty of other places to frequent.

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to get back on track, I would like to shoot a 70mm picture.  Ultra Panavision would be great if the subject matter warranted, but a good Musical would be great too! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dream shoot would either be Labyrinth 2 or Stephen Kings "The Long Walk".

Alexa + Cook Anamorphics for Labyrinth. 

The Long Work would work best on iphones, android, go-pros operated by the actors with the odd domestic drone shot to space. Intercut with 2/3" news footage shot on Digi-Beta.

Failing to get the rights to those, there are a few comic personas on RED USER that would make the perfect subjects for a "Gondryesk" meta comedy. I'd write that soon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amongst other things, I'd like to make a musical like South Pacific or Carousel. Can you imagine the sort of talent, money, but above all spirit and drive and faith!! that such a production needs from those at the top. And with the original story, intent and tradition without trying to be 'correct'. Can we even find singers who can sing like that? Yes, shot on 65mm would be the way I'd do it too. And a traditional western with 'good' values of faith and steadfastness and the things that have sustained human beings for thousands of years. Not cheap and boring violence for the sake of something to fill the minutes on the screen. Films about suffering, loss and redemption. Hope. You name it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2019 at 11:01 PM, Satsuki Murashige said:

Ok. I agree, but I don’t see what this has to do with my question. 

Are you really suggesting that Roger Deakins and Lawrence Sher are ‘guilt-tripping’ their directors into shooting digital, when they really wanted to shoot on film? Seriously?

On 10/4/2019 at 2:57 PM, Gregory Irwin said:

The reality is that Larry Sher always wants to shoot large format, digital. He likes the workflow and the immediate feedback of what you see is what you get. That’s been our method for several pictures now. GODZILLA is the perfect example of Larry’s preference for digital since we shot Alexa 65, anamorphic. Todd, on the other hand, was more comfortable shooting film and preferred to shoot on 65mm celluloid. In the end, between Larry pushing for digital and the studio, Warner Bros,  to say that film would be too expensive to shoot since the studios are already set up for the digital workflow, especially for post.

Edited by Tyler Purcell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Dom Jaeger said:

we don't want to do is to turn off people with exceptional experience because of ignorant and unwarranted criticism of their work

Joker: 

On 10/5/2019 at 11:05 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

The film itself was really good. Cinematography was excellent, acting was excellent, I even liked the pretty basic story. It's just an over-all great movie, met all of my expectations and I think will do very well in the box office. The 70mm print was excellent, very consistent color wise and literally no noise. Only reason anyone would know it was shot digitally was from motion blur and some of the over-exposed sections were very digital looking. Still, nothing bothered me, it was just super fine filmmaking. I hope it does really well in the box office. 

 

Interstellar: 

On 11/8/2014 at 1:19 AM, Tyler Purcell said:

As a Nolan fan, this is by far his best over-all movie because it's the most accessible, with the most interesting story. It also makes the audience think, like Momento or Inception, rather then simply watch eye candy. Every bit of dialog or action, moves the plot forward, there is no time to waste in this movie and in my eyes, that's how proper movies should be made.

Phantom Thread: 

On 12/25/2017 at 4:48 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

In retrospect, one has to admit this could Paul Thomas Andersons best movie and looking back on the years movies, by far the best movie of 2017 in my opinion. It has everything anyone could ever want in a movie, wonderful story, brilliant acting, set on a stage thats entertaining and provocative. Then you add all the technical accolades and the entire picture is perfect in my mind. As the movie finished and the credits came on, the finishing touch was the photochemical credits, something that nobody does anymore and it just reinforces the artistic beauty of the format. This isnt just a movie about whats on screen, but also a swan song to the photochemical process and the beauty that lives within. This is a movie that MUST be seen by any film buff, anyone who cares about the artistry and photochemical process

 

Edited by Tyler Purcell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2019 at 11:01 AM, Satsuki Murashige said:

Also probably because they don’t like to be told by ‘random internet guy’ how they should have shot their movie... 🙂

Batman V Superman

On 3/27/2016 at 11:17 AM, Tyler Purcell said:

In terms of the movie itself? Just one solid piece of poop. To me, it seemed like a 200+ minute movie which was cut down substantially. There wasn't a moment to rest, contemplate, nothing. It was solid poop from the credit sequence with the Batman origin story told once again, through the end where it was clearly leading up to a sequel.

 

On 3/27/2016 at 5:34 PM, Robin R Probyn said:

I think I predicted this film would be rubbish way back.. 🙂

 

154757729_RottonTomatos.png.b2bed9741ca03a91cbac0ba848307742.png

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_v_superman_dawn_of_justice

 

Love it or hate it, Warner Bros. promised that over thirty minutes of footage would be added to the extended cut of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, and they made good on their promise. Fleshing out subplots and adding some much needed character beats, the additional scenes made the blockbuster meeting of DC’s juggernauts flow better throughout its three-hour runtime.

https://collider.com/batman-vs-superman-ultimate-edition-differences/

 

“Everyone has their opinion. Does everyone have to love the movie? Of course not… visually I feel like me and my crew killed it, so when you hear things about it, it kind of hurts. To be honest the weirdest thing… I’ve never really talked about this. But the weirdest thing, and this has happened a lot, I’ll have a stranger come up and say, ‘Batman v Superman really sucked… but don’t worry, what you did was great. It looked really good. It wasn’t your fault.’

“And I listened to that for a while and was like, ‘Okay, well thanks.’ But then the more I thought about it I thought I’m not going to accept that. Because everyone’s working towards a common goal, right? And Zack’s my brother, I’m not gonna go ‘YEAH!’ you know, ‘HE did a horrible job… but I didn’t! I just did MY job! That’s right!’ I don’t accept that. If you make a baby together you’re proud of that baby. You can’t divide that up.”

https://www.flickeringmyth.com/2018/06/batman-v-superman-cinematographer-says-severe-criticism-of-the-film-hurts/

 

Edited by Tyler Purcell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the " known issues with Arri Minis.power boards ".. ?     and the ditching of Alexas by rental companies every 3-4 years .. also well known..in Hollywood....  you have a quote for that .. still waiting ..

My comments about a film are its contents .. I don't  tell  the DoP.. whether  they are ACS Oscar winners or fresh out ion film school .. how to shoot there films.. what  lights they should use and how they should light it .. and  even what format .. or that the focus puller is rubbish.. and that it would look so much better on film.. you still dont get it ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/11/2019 at 6:09 AM, Philip Reinhold said:

ok lets put all these energy in shooting some good stuff out there! No matter what Format.

That's what I'm doing. As everyone else is being a hypocrite, I've been busy working. Just had a few moments to "catch up" prepping for my final shoot weekend on my first feature narrative in years. I'll post something about it soon, but we're just waiting until principal is over before posting actual stills from the shoot that aren't BTS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Robin R Probyn said:

And the " known issues with Arri Minis.power boards ".. ?     and the ditching of Alexas by rental companies every 3-4 years .. also well known..in Hollywood....  you have a quote for that .. still waiting ..

Sadly Robin, I'm not your gopher. I can't take a day off and go around Hollywood, asking a dozen rental houses the same questions I've already asked.  Plus, even if I did all the leg work,  you wouldn't believe it. None of your issues with me would be settled, you'd just move to the next one because your laundry list is a mile long. 

1 hour ago, Robin R Probyn said:

My comments about a film are its contents .. I don't  tell  the DoP.. whether  they are ACS Oscar winners or fresh out ion film school .. how to shoot there films.. what  lights they should use and how they should light it .. and  even what format .. or that the focus puller is rubbish.. and that it would look so much better on film.. you still dont get it ..

Robin, this is a place to discuss things.

You guys have spent the last 2 days discussing me, all the things you hate about me, direct horrible comments that anyone who knew me, would throw back in your face. However, my friends stay off forums because they would act the same way I do. I like internet forums because I like absorbing ideas from other people and discussing concepts and being a vocal member of the community. If this place was just a bunch of ass kissing, back patters, nobody would be here. 

So if you get bent out of shape because someone whose been in the industry for over 20 years has an educated opinion about XYZ, then maybe internet forums aren't for you.

Edited by Tyler Purcell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The Anamorphic stuff looks really bad. They didn't even bother lighting, they opened up the lens and yelled action. I'm under the belief, if you have to use 500 ASA stock (I assume they used Vision 3 500ASA) for critical dialog scenes, you've for sure under lit too much.

the original one.

 

 

Quote

I didn't particularly like the look of the Anamorphic scenes. I would have personally used more light but of course I don't know what the exact shooting conditions were so this is only hypothetical. To me it looks like they wanted to shoot wide open as an artistic choice. I think that 200T stock is better suited for critical dialogue scenes because it has slightly less grain.

And the one edited by me containing the same opinion but just told nicer way so that it does not offend people and is clearly your personal opinion, not a stated fact which has to be challenged.

 

You can say the same things more nicely if you just want. This applies to the other people on this forum as well including me. It is the common problem of internet forums in general, it is so easy to write insulting stuff without even realizing it and then read it couple of hours later to find out how harshly you really said it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Sadly Robin, I'm not your gopher. I can't take a day off and go around Hollywood, asking a dozen rental houses the same questions I've already asked.  

This seems to be your stock answer every time you are challenged on one of your claims. You don’t have time to get proof from the rental houses. You don’t have time to find the quote from Deakins. You never have time to provide actual evidence for any of the far-fetched things you say, and when you’re corrected, you double down on whatever dubious assertion you just made. You’re your own worst enemy, and it’s no wonder that people doubt every word you post.

Theres a simple answer here. Don’t make claims you can’t support.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

Sadly Robin, I'm not your gopher. I can't take a day off and go around Hollywood, asking a dozen rental houses the same questions I've already asked.  Plus, even if I did all the leg work,  you wouldn't believe it. None of your issues with me would be settled, you'd just move to the next one because your laundry list is a mile long. 

Robin, this is a place to discuss things.

You guys have spent the last 2 days discussing me, all the things you hate about me, direct horrible comments that anyone who knew me, would throw back in your face. However, my friends stay off forums because they would act the same way I do. I like internet forums because I like absorbing ideas from other people and discussing concepts and being a vocal member of the community. If this place was just a bunch of ass kissing, back patters, nobody would be here. 

So if you get bent out of shape because someone whose been in the industry for over 20 years has an educated opinion about XYZ, then maybe internet forums aren't for you.

Tyler ..YOU were the one that made the crazy claim that Arri mini power boards were a known problem ..NOT ME !!.. Dom proved that was rubbish.. and made up.. I m asking you what do you say Toi that  ,now thats its shown your claims were crap..  you have no answer ..

Its not opinions you claim everything as fact or well known issues.. HOW MANY TIMES DO I AND OTHERS HAVE TO SAY THIS..!! 

OK IM signing out of this thread.... .  you are really dragging this forum down your own rabbit hole.. get some help man .. 

Edited by Robin R Probyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, aapo lettinen said:

And the one edited by me containing the same opinion but just told nicer way so that it does not offend people and is clearly your personal opinion, not a stated fact which has to be challenged.

I have a problem with getting straight to the point and I get SUPER annoyed when 100M+ movies, suffer from issues amateur's have already figured out. What you're reading is all my frustration pouring out onto the page because when your film is inch perfect everywhere else, but it has some very key technical issues that are so easy to solve, my personal level of frustration is hard to keep back. Trust me, I restrain myself 90% of the time, but when other people complain about the same things I take issue with, the flood gates open. I think if you re-read my most angry posts, they don't happen without provocation.

Honestly, if a 100M+ movie doesn't have the time to add one more lamp in order to make it a tiny bit brighter so you can stop the lens down and guarantee a successful focus pull, I don't know what to say besides being upset. 

Edited by Tyler Purcell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Stuart Brereton said:

Don’t make claims you can’t support.

How can I support a claim you wouldn't believe.

First off, nobody is going to go on camera and tell the world, these cameras have issues. Imagine a rental manager doing that? They'd be on Arri's blacklist forever. 
Second, even if I got all the service records for the cameras, how do we know the issues weren't caused by damage done to the camera by the user? 
Third, Lets say I was able to get e-mails from all the rental houses, describing the issues but there were no names. You wouldn't believe the information, you'd just say I made it all up to fight my case. 
Finally, Dom already admitted he's seen failures, he just calls them customer manifested. In my world, if the camera has no physical damage and no liquid damage, but still fails, it's not the customers fault. 

I'm certain if I did all the leg work, Dom would come on and say "see, it's all user damaged cameras" and I would say it's a poorly designed camera that allowed for that damage to happen in the first place. So we'd be at a stalemate forever and nothing would be solved. 

In terms of my Roger Deakins claim, I mean people change. Roger went from someone who really loved the classic celluloid filmmaking style, to someone who basically doesn't want to work with it again. That's a huge paradigm shift and I'm certain the articles I remember reading, were before his full-time switch to digital. So even if I dug them up, you'd just say they have nothing to do with the modern age. I did find a more recent interview where he did seem to have interest in 70mm exhibition and did really like the classic film experience Tarantino made with "Hateful Eight". However, he then reversed and said for him as a filmmaker, he likes digital because even though you can get a few film screens to look great in the major cities, with digital it looks great everywhere. I agree with that statement of course, but the question asked of him, wasn't the right one. Perhaps someday if I do run into him at an event, I will get my chance to ask him. Sadly, he doesn't go to many events, he's a busy guy and I keep missing the events for the same reason. 

Edited by Tyler Purcell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:
 
The reality is that Larry Sher always wants to shoot large format, digital. He likes the workflow and the immediate feedback of what you see is what you get. That’s been our method for several pictures now. GODZILLA is the perfect example of Larry’s preference for digital since we shot Alexa 65, anamorphic. Todd, on the other hand, was more comfortable shooting film and preferred to shoot on 65mm celluloid. In the end, between Larry pushing for digital and the studio, Warner Bros,  to say that film would be too expensive to shoot since the studios are already set up for the digital workflow, especially for post.

The reality is, after Larry convinced Todd to shoot digital, Todd understood the advantages of going digi over film for JOKER. That’s not to say he’ll never shoot film again. Time will tell but if Larry is involved, it’ll be digital. 
 

G

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Gregory Irwin said:

The reality is, after Larry convinced Todd to shoot digital, Todd understood the advantages of going digi over film for JOKER. That’s not to say he’ll never shoot film again. Time will tell but if Larry is involved, it’ll be digital. 
 

G

Hi Greg,

At the risk of opening another can of worms...

Can I ask if you had the sense that Larry would have been open to shooting ‘Joker’ on film if budget had not been an issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Satsuki Murashige said:

Hi Greg,

At the risk of opening another can of worms...

Can I ask if you had the sense that Larry would have been open to shooting ‘Joker’ on film if budget had not been an issue?

Absolutely not! He wanted digital all of the way! We could have shot film but like I’ve said, Larry was and is committed to digital. 
 

G

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.



  • Serious Gear



    Visual Products



    Rig Wheels Passport



    CineLab



    Ritter Battery



    Paralinx LLC



    Gamma Ray Digital Inc



    Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS



    Metropolis Post



    Tai Audio



    New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment



    Broadcast Solutions Inc



    Just Cinema Gear



    Wooden Camera



    FJS International



    Abel Cine



    G-Force Grips



    Glidecam



    The Original Slider


    Cinematography Books and Gear
×
×
  • Create New...