QuickHitRecord

I'm not too worried about a short that will be sent out to a dozen or so festivals and then make its way onto YouTube. If I was hoping for distribution, that would be another story! I remember seeing this trailer! I think it’s a great one to add.

So far, we have: The French Connection The Day Of The Jackal Escape From Tomorrowland Chubby Rain Woody Allen (Annie Hall, Hannah and Her Sisters, Deconstructing Harry) Lost in Translation I think this is a great list! I know that Sean Baker’s Tangerine was shot this way, but I’d rather not sit through another of his films. I've written a drama short. Two characters, 11 pages, lots of walking around town. I live in Portland and I’ve shot all over town before without ever once being hassled (except by some in a crisis of mental health). But I’m really more interested in seeing what kind of aesthetic choices might even be available to me when balancing that with coverage needs, moving quickly, and not attracting too much attention. I'm always so envious of New Yorkers for this very reason. You can fill the frame with sidewalk commuters and often no one will even bother to give you a second glance. I can’t think of any other US cities where this is true. Lovely screen grabs, Kye. If any of these were publicity stills for a film, I’d want to check it out. Especially the 68mm shots. Great mood and sense of place. I think that this quote sums up some of the decision-making that I am facing. I could totally go in there and “wing it”, just figuring out my shot as I went. But I want to rely on natural light, which means timing certain shots for certain times of day, and then that raises the question of how much planning I want to put into each scene, and ultimately how the visuals will compliment the story. I’d rather not lean too far into the documentary aesthetic. After shooting my last five shorts with my C70s, I’m actually thinking about shooting this film on a hacked EOS-M with c-mount lenses. I’ve been collecting them for a while and have three sets of primes, plus some great zooms. I’d personally put the aesthetic available with this (windowed) sensor and these lenses up against anything, I like it that much. I think the reason that no one really wants to do this is because it’s one of the most difficult digital cameras to work with, AND on top of that, the most difficult lenses to work with. But I’ve been tackling the challenges presented by these one by one, and I think I have them pretty well sorted. We shall see! Current plan is to hide a Deity PR-2 recorder with a lav on each actor and attach a timecode box to the audio input of the camera. Stabilize with a steadybag. Transmit the image wirelessly to a producer and make up artist in a car, along with refreshments for the actors. If I end up working with long zooms, I might give direction over a phone and provide a discrete earbud to each actor so that I could also monitor.

Can you think of any narrative films that were shot with natural lighting minimal crews in busy areas/cities? I’m doing some research for an upcoming zero-budget project, trying to figure out a solid approach to the aesthetics. I really want to get out of a locked set for this one.

I've never been tempted by one of these smaller pocket gimbals, but the image quality actually looks really nice. It doesn't look over-sharpened or GoPro-like at all. Of course, it's Brandon Li, who can make anything look good. The detachable remote is also really clever. I want my next short to be captured guerilla-style in the city. I was originally considering the hacked EOS-M, but this has me re-thinking my strategy. I just really wish it had a mic input so that I could capture timecode.

That GH2 footage looks great. Makes me want to take my GH1 out again. Any one of us would have been overjoyed to captured that footage ~15 years ago when that camera came out. And even now, it looks great. I don’t think I would have ever guessed that it was from an 8-bit mirrorless camera. I’ve been really enjoying shooting with outdated cameras and applying modern post to them, especially degrading them further to hide the imperfections. I don’t know that I’m achieving something that I couldn’t with more modern and convenient cameras, but I feel like it takes a lot of performance anxiety away and that may have an impact on the way I’m shooting. I think it’s nice to go in thinking, “this will probably look terrible” and then it just becomes about enjoyment, and less about the result. And then when you do manage to get a nice shot, it’s all the more rewarding. I’ve written a short that I’d like to produce later in the Summer or Fall. Since it takes place outside and mostly downtown, I’m kind of liking the idea of shooting it guerilla-style with a hacked EOS-M.

The HVX200 (not A) was the primary camera at my first paid staff video position back in 2009. I traveled and shot with it extensively. The combination of that camera, the lights that were available to me at the time (Arri tungsten & Kino Flo), and the hoops that we had to jump through for basic color correction did not create a very compelling image. Or, they didn't with my skill level. I remember trying to get a wide shot of all four members of OAR in a tiny hotel room and having to use the Century wide angle adapter, with it's massive distortion and blurry corners. I think we took down one of the hotel curtains and draped it over the couch they were sitting on because its floral design didn't match the subject. It was such yucky footage. The first time I saw 5D, 7, or even GH1 footage, it was profoundly gorgeous by comparison. There's not really any part of me that misses the HVX, though sometimes I'm tempted to track one down just to see what I can get out of it with 17 years of experience and all of the modern support tech. But even that experiment isn't worth a couple hundred bucks to me. I do think that some of the later 2/3" CCD bodies were capable of something unique in the right hands, if you're willing to deal with the bulk and weight of a historical ENG/EFP camera. I'm not. I've mentioned it before but whenever I get the itch to shoot with a CCD camera, I reach for my trusty FZ-47. It has a bigger CCD than the HVX but is a fraction of the size and weight, and costs next to nothing. No, it doesn't have any professional I/O or features, but it is fully manual and I think it's way more fun to shoot with than any of the behemoths that came before. The image is gloriously junky, and it the way it handles skin tones is wierd but kind of cool.

Ah, my favorite topic (and it comes up every couple of years). Hopefully we can have this discussion without the usual accusations. I've done a lot of personal experimentation in this area because most cameras looked off to me. Where I've landed is that I don't think that global shutter or CCD sensors is a surefire recipe for pleasing motion. I spent a lot of time and money figuring that one out. My list of favorite motion capture cameras is a motley crew and includes the Red One MX (but oddly, not the DSMC1 line), the EOS-M in 1:1 crop, and believe it or not, the hacked GH1.

Got a link to the film (or a trailer)?

Wow, I think that one speaks for itself. I actually just made my first ever purchase from Buyee. The lens was not well photographed or chronicled, but it was listed for a price that I couldn't pass it up. I think one of the things that has stopped me in the past is that I didn't know what the shipping fees would be, and now the tariffs are an x-factor as well (I read 17% a few days ago, but who knows). But for $30, it seemed like an experiment worth trying.

2023 was so poor for me that I almost left the industry. 2024 was enough to get by on. 2025 seems like I'll gross 10-20% more than last year, even though my costs are up significantly across the board. It's still by no means a "well-paid" job. And I don't know how sustainable this is, because I haven't felt like my market would support a price increase for the past three years. I haven't given dared to give myself a raise. This is one of the problems about making a living in video production and editing into the second half of one's career. @fuzzynormal touched on this above; I can't expect to increase my rate based on experience alone when I am competing with people who are literally half my age. Now that I'm in my 40s, the stability and security of a staff position hold more appeal. And yet the job market is so volatile that I might have better job security being self-employed -- for now. My problem is that there is nothing else that I am equally drawn to. Almost every role that draws a decent salary involves sitting in a never-ending stream of unproductive meetings, and I can see a lot of those going away as a result of AI in the next couple of years. I can't reach a place where a career shift makes sense.

Thanks for sharing. I felt like this actually made a strong case for the Remus lenses! I found that look to be way more interesting. I'd still miss that 2x stretch though. You did a really nice job here. It's very closely matched! But I think it's the bokeh and the pincushion distortion that sells the effect for me. I think you've made a solid case to me for going with a more vanilla modern anamorphic lens (maybe a 1.8x) and dirtying it up in post. But at that price point, I think I'll rent on a project by project basis. The old school adapters are still inexpensive enough to own. I've discovered in my EOS-M that ML has a 1.175:1 aspect ratio available. With a 2x stretch, that's 2.35! It's very clean. Unfortunately the quality of the HDMI stream from this camera is pretty terrible and difficult to focus with, so I'll see if I can get the same thing from my 5Diii. Also, I spent way too much money ordering all of the parts for Lucas Pfaff's PFocus B anamorphic focuser with the hope that I could successfully assemble it and have a nice universal focuser for any cheap anamorphic adapter. However, I accidentally ordered it to be printed with 100% infill, so I fear that it's going to be a brick. But we'll see, maybe it will surprise me. If I did it again, I would only go this route if I had a 3D printer at home, or a friend who had one. From a cost standpoint, it doesn't make sense to order it from a site like Shapeways. @kyeHave you ever thought about purchasing a cheap 2x adapter? Given what I know of your aesthetic, I think you'd get pulled in!

It's a pretty subdued look, but I like it. I can't make out as many fine details as usual and I love when she's just a little out of focus. Also, I'm kind of over the horizontal flares. Nice shots. Especially the cows. Anamorphic projector attachments are definitely a way to burn up a lot of money on a whole lot of nothing. I could have made a down payment on a house with the amount I spent on them (though I did recoup some when selling). This time, if I end up buying anything, it will have to be pretty inexpensive. I can't look away from poor financial decisions as easily as I did in my younger days. I had a random memory of this test that I posted here 11 years ago. I never did anything with this combination. I should probably give it another shot. It's unique and I still have all of the components. And maybe there are better wide angle converters that will yield different results.

I'm looking around to find an example to explain this better. Most of what I'm seeing is too sharp. This is nice. I find that sometimes I actually like when anamorphic lenses having taking lenses that are focused just a little off. Here's my B&H single focus vs a Sirui 1.6x that I rented. I'd happily just stick with the B&H if I could go wider with it. I also like what I'm seeing from the Kowa 16D in terms of character, but it's not going to play well with a ~50mm lens either. That is a really nice lens. Very smooth bokeh, and a little CA in the bokeh wide open (which I quite like). I think those Voigtlanders are known for holding circular bokeh for longer when stopping down, a very nice characteristic for pairing with an anamorphic lens. I think you're onto something. Check out this video. Tropical was the wrong word. But it's super humid! I liked in Kobe for three years. I've owned the Helios three different times, and sold it. I just don't get along with that lens. If I can find a decent mod on a fast 35-50mm lens (with no streak), I'd consider it. From what I've seen, the mods still don't have the weirdness of true anamorphic. What Blazar is doing is really neat. I think they are doing it with their new Beetle lenses as well.

@Ninpo33Thanks for such a detailed response. It's good to know that there are still some out there making beautiful images with this old glass. I love the idea of Buyee for vintage lenses, but it never seems like it was more cost effective than just waiting it out on eBay. And that was before the tariffs. Plus, it seems like a lot of older glass imported from tropical climates has more fungus. How do you make it work for you? I can't find anything written about this. Is it as simple as unscrewing the back panel and popping out the anamorphic element? Seems like a steal compared to some of these other variable diopters. Are there any known limitations? Is that a YashicaScope? Would love to see some footage!

I'm looking around at the current anamorphic landscape and finding that while much easier to work with and capable of wider angles, the new offerings from Sirui, Blazar and Laowa lack the same jaw-dropping quality that footage from the older adapters had. I find them so clean (yes, even the Blazars) that I think that it defeats the point of shooting on anamorphic. So that brings me back to the vintage adapters, which seem to have come down in price since the modern lenses have hit the market. Plus there are now several variable diopters available for single focus. Going on character alone, what are your favorites? At one point or another, I've owned 10-20 different adapters, and I still have a modded Bell & Howell Single-Focus. But after an 11-year hiatus from anamorphic, I am looking for fresh perspectives.