Jump to content

Ivor Koons

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ivor Koons

  • Rank
    New member

Recent Profile Visitors

795 profile views
  1. Most of the people attending this forum do so because they think you observe the development of affordable film or video equipment with reason. 1.I dare the assertion that most of your (and everyone's) favourite films were shot on film stock. 2. Let people decide what emulsion e.g. film or digital they want to choose. They have their reason. A lot of important director don't like the look of digital, even of an Alexa, and the don't like it for workflow reasons. Michael Haneke, for instance. Because even an experienced DP sometimes has to use gear that he wasn't yet able to accustom himself to. 3. Very simple, indoor vs. outdoor. You know why so many people are enchanted by video low light scenes? Why so many amateurs test their cameras for low light? Well because the look better in dim light that in sunlight. Check No country for old men. Desert shots, film stock. Hard to beat. Check Skyfall, Roger Deakins amazing cinematography. Wit one exception. Last sequence with Moneypenny on a rooftop. Daylight. Mmmh, the scene looks very digitally recovered. It looks familiar. Overexposed scene brought back with "Clarity" or whatnot. Not really pretty. Film stock is far more forgiving in that case. DR and highlight rolloff. Hard to beat on film. Same goes to stills. BW street photography: OVer or underexpose, doesn't matter, the image is all there. Try that with a raw file. You can wrangle the latter a bit, but every experienced eye will discern just this. Go in a photo gallery. Most of the art stuff is shot on film. It has a certain pictorial quality. Lets be happy to be able to shoot with great IQ on video. And I'm glad fims stays around for a while.
  2. Hey guys, I've listed my trusty Tokina achromat +0.4 (yup, the high quality doublet) plus 2 more high quality achromatic diopters (for close-ups) as a 3 piece set on Ebay Germany. They.. just... work...! www.ebay.com/itm/3-achromatic-diopter-SET-Tokina-AT-X-0-4-CLOSE-UP-Olympus-MCON40-MINOLTA-No-0-/111411315171?pt=DE_Foto_Camcorder_Objektive&hash=item19f0a1c1e3 Questions are welcome and will be answerend during the following week.. Happy shooting! Ivor
  3. Hey Guys, I finally decided to part with my beloved Baby Hypergonar, which as of now is listed on ebay Germany. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Baby-Hypergonar-Benoist-Berthiot-Cinemascope-Anamorphic-adapter-/111411274822? It is perfect for run and gun anamorphic shooting. Pick up and a chat about the lens and the setup in Berlin would be welcome, too!.. A matching Tokina +0.4 achromat is listed in another auction. Best, Ivor
  4. Great job, Richard. One thing we should keep in mind about ground glass. Photographers focus with ground glass, but they expose onto the negative. In Richards prototype, both focusing and the actual exposure /* / is achieved through ground glass, which might cause some image deterioration - it is probably visible here in the zoomed-in parts as these worm-like structures, when digital noise adds up with it. these are only details, though.. Keep up the great work, Richard, thanks a lot!
  5. [quote name='richg101' timestamp='1343395760' post='14620'] depth of focus is more often than not determined by the lens aperture. Maybe the camera operator decided a deeper depth of focus was what was in order. Too much hyper shallow dof used by film maker wannabes at the moment. lets move away from that. Lets be sophisticated. The constant bashing of the sensor size is funny. very few seem to consider how 'low budget anamorphic friendly' a smaller sensor is? Anamorphic is true filmic. And this camera is likely to be a king at the job. on a side note.. The model is rather lovely isn't she. As does the detail. re. moire/aliasing.. I was too busy looking at the subject matter to realize any aliasing. Most viewers of your work won't care about aliasing either. [/quote] Agreed that anamorphic is true filmic, rich. That's why I would like to test The Blackmagic with my anamorphic lenses. And possibly true: the latter can achieve something that the BCC wouldn't get across alone. I don't want to bash the new camera; it is just that, and I think any Dp and even photographer will agree on that, what I'm yearning for is the [i]illusion[/i] of (a) space that you can immerse in whilst you're watching somthing. And let's don't forget the big screen. I'm sure the BCC will turn out beautifully. I guess we all just want to watch less and better stuff - to be honest, that is my impression.
  6. It looks very clean, but I am missing something that the name Cinema Camera promises - a cinematic feel. The DOF is too big, even the GH1 and GH2 deliver a better image in terms of a 3D impression. The colors look a bit washed-out, too. The cheap-looking, commercial-like setting might add to that. I can't get rid of the impression that the scenes have been worked on to look as filmic as can be, but this approach somehow isn't successful. I'm looking forward to seeing some less plasticky stuff. From what I've seen till now, the GH series, if handled well, seems to win over the BCC. But that is hopefully going to change.
×
×
  • Create New...