Bioskop.Inc

Really good test, I got it - so thanks for doing this, it was helpful for us normal people.

As for the negative/stupid comments - people on the internet are dicks most of the time, but we all know this.

Give them their F**KING CATS the next time!

Really good job, watched all of it & loved it!

14 hours ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Yes me too...I never finished watching the film..and it's rare that I do that...the direction felt clunky...none of the characters felt convincing....I found the firefight scene with all the cars parked in line at the border crossing ridiculous...although all the actors were first rate...so I think the blame has to fall on him....of course a lot of people liked Sicario...just did not work for me.

It really feels like a film that has been over edited & some crucial linking material has been thrown out. There are some nice performances & Deakins cinematography fits well, but it feels like something is missing...

My mate loves Scario, but hated Arrival & I'm the opposite - go figure! I just worry that the new Blade Runner could go either way & am not really looking forward to seeing it - i'm not excited, just feel hollow about it all.

I feel that living in the UK, I'm missing out on some really good films - there is no diversity & I'm not talking about skin colour! The big blockbusters just swollow up all the screens & I've missed so many great films because they only get a weeks run, if that. Having lived in France during my 20s, I found that they made the effort to surpress the American Juggernaut of below par films and insisted that a large variety of films from around the world had a even playing field. In the UK even out own mediocre produce (numbers & quality) suffer & it just makes me mad. The only saving grace is the rise of streaming & now I can watch what I like. But I still want to go to the cinema & enjoy that experience too, but am being hindered....

Now the new Twin Peaks series and Valerian have me chomping at the bit.

5 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

Keep in mind that Villeneuve isn't a writer on any of his big films. The only problems I've had with some of his recent films are story related.  I think he's a super talented director.

Well he did write/co-write his early films & this shouldn't be forgotten - he can tell a story & has.

Of his American films the pick of the bunch are Enemy & Arrival, but one shouldn't ignore his Canadian films Polytechnique & Incendies, which are excellent.

The thing I find troubling with him is that he tends to jump around a lot & this makes for a lot of Hit'n'Miss films - I found Sicario to be very dissappointing & not worthy of all the praise it was getting.

10 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

They said that Goseling isn't a replicant in an interview and that it won't be the core of this film. Although you're right about Deckard aging. That answers that unless they reference aging components.

Thank god for that - got kinda worried that they'd go down the tried/tested route & basically remake the first film. I don't read stuff before I watch, as there are too many spoilers getting printed these days & I don't want to know everything before.

But honestly, I think I'm looking forward to the new Alien film more - mainly because that is my favourite Ridley Scott film.

Also not really convinced by the director - his films are up & down quality-wise, but he appears to be a good lap dog.

4 hours ago, Phil A said:

But then BladeRunner (which I love as a movie) was a bad representation of the book "Do androids dream of electric sheep" in my opinion, the book was so much better. The movie diverted so far from the story, they might as well make a sequel.

Yes the book is far better & slightly different.

The one thing that the new trailer has completely overlooked is that the original film always had the question of whether Deckard was an android at its core (depending on which version you watch, obviously) & by having an ageing Harrison Ford, that question has now been answered. But what i did notice is that they have basically pushed that question onto Gosling's character - so yet again Hollywood has rehashed the same story into a more updated version, which will be unsatisfying. Don't mess with the classics, as dissappointment will be the only result!

Seen 2 films at the cinema recently: Guardians of the Galaxy vol 2 & The Handmaiden. One was a huge waste of time, energy & money - also too long at 2h16min (Baby Groot couldn't save it). The other is almost certainly the best film that i'll see this year, by one of the most talented directors around.

I really think people need to forget Hollywood rubbish (they're never going to change & will regurgitate everything in a worse wrapper) & learn to embrace reading subtitles, because the best cinema isn't American or even in English!

I use Firefox & I don't get a colour shift, but things that i've uploaded recently have lost some contrast - not that much of a big deal, but it's there.

I also use FCPX, but have stopped uploading directly & just export the project to ProRes LT or Proxy and then upload that (it does solve the whole converting H264 into H264 via Vimeo).

The browser issue has been known for ages, as is what player you use to view your files on your computer - everything is slightly different, nothing is equal. It is annoying that you can't tweek these things, like you can a TV when you buy a new one! Maybe one solution would be to callibrate your computer screen & save one profile for your NLE & then another for viewing on the Internet......

19 hours ago, buggz said:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Kowa-2X-Anamorphic-for-Bell-Howell-/222495383711?hash=item33cdc2209f:g:q7kAAOSw-3FZB3lF&autorefresh=true

Winning bid: US $1,225.00 [ 22 bids ]

Wow!   That's expen$ive!

Damn! Now i've got one of these that i don't use anymore & if they go for this sort of money I might just put it up on ebay!

Is this a real price, as i've been looking at selling off some lenses, but difficult to know what price to put on them?

Anyone know what a Isco Widescreen 2000 &/or a Iscomorphot S8/x2 (fixed focus) go for nowadays?

Really wish that I had the cash to buy one right now, but need a new computer so.....

Just going to hold tight & wait for the prices to drop - i'll just have to learn to be green with envy!

9 minutes ago, Oliver Daniel said:

 

I've been using resolve on and office the last 6 months - I definitely think it's better than Premiere (which I find to feel a bit ancient in terms of it's usability and UI). 

I saw in your post you haven't tried FCPX in a few years.... do you know the version available today is much much much better now? Give it a whirl!

I like the way Resolve is evolving and some of the features are unique (grading, audio editing, CDNG), however because I find FCPX so much faster and enjoyable to edit with (like the Magnetic Timeline 2) - when I edit wth Resolve I really miss the modern fluidity you get with FCPX. 

Resolve really needs more plugin support from third parties, plus a few cool tricks on timeline editing to challenge FCPX's "scary at first, but really awesome new way of editing". 

That said, Blackmagic are probably the most interesting and exciting video/film industry product company in the world right now. Top job. 

Still can't believe that sooo many people bought the marketing BS of Adobe when FCPX came out! FCPX was re-built from the ground up, and yes it took a few months to get all the kinks out, but once they did it proved to be one of the quickest NLE's that i've ever used. I remember when I first started out I kept wishing that the NLE i was using (FCP & Aivd) would do things this way or that way, because it was more logical & would speed things up - FCPX made all those adjustments a reality.

FCPX is not iMovie - pure & simple!

Premiere is like going backwards in time now - clunky, awkward & just not up to the job. The only reason I can see why people still use it is because they pay the monthly subscription for AE & PS!

Really want to use Resolve for grading....

The proof in the pudding for me came when a job at Aardman was advertised (i'm in Bristol, the home of Aardman) & it stated that you HAD to have experience using Resolve - they didn't care about Premiere, FCP or the like!

The only problem with Resolve for me, & i'm sure a few others, is that you have to have a decent/newish computer to run it - all the other NLE's are much more forgiving....

I miss Zach - maybe because, at times, he made some of us look a little less sane than we thought we were. Absolute star! I bet he turns up having made some crazy ass doc, in the style of Nick Broomfield, which everybody raves about as being pure genius - all filmed on his T2i!

Don't miss the 60yr old filmmaker from Egypt - he used to piss me off no end with his constant BS & chest puffing. Funny that it took a scam to rumble him, not the fact that no one here could name an Egyptian filmmaker if they tried & would trust his word on everything!

Miss maxotics too!!!!!

46 minutes ago, redimp said:

Can you go with 40mm pancake with bigger iscoramas, like 42 and 54?

The only problem with the 54 is that its a beast of a lens & dwarfs small lenses, so you need to use it on a rig or hold it all very carefully - but just too precarious without.

I do like using mine with a Super Takumar 35mm or 55mm - looks stupid, like you've added an oversized bazooka to your camera.

Don't have FF, but I happily use a 30mm with aps-c.

The thing about the 54 is that you can use it with bigger lenses without it limiting the F-stop - so with most lenses you will actually be shooting wide open when you have your taking lens set that way.

Bolex-Moller looks the best!

Iscorama is easier to use? But does the Core DNA even the score?

Iscorama is going to set u back more!

14 hours ago, HockeyFan12 said:

What AKG model do you recommend starting with? I'm dissatisfied with my current headphones, would love to sell them all and get something that does it all well.

I haven't used AKG much but I'm dissatisfied with headphones from the ranges I'm most familiar with so anything that good I'll welcome. I find Stax far too etched in the treble region, sounds like a Grado on crack, very good for a demo but too fatiguing for me. Grado is the same but without the technical proficiency. Sennheiser too veiled. Beyerdynamic has a bumpy frequency response, even the Tesla models a bit less than coherent overall even if they're very impressive generally. I do like the sound okay from them in terms of signature. Never used a Sony I liked at all for listening. Currently using the Koss ESP-950 electrostatic headphones through a high end DAC and tube amp and while I find them preferable to any Stax (I haven't tried the 007 or 009 yet, to be fair) the bass is severely rolled off below 100 hz and electrostatic headphones in general lack the slam I want. But I find the detail and separation to be very good, and so they are still my preference over dynamics. (If you have not tried the Koss and you like electrostatic detail without the "hi fi" treble-heavy sound signature, you should, I would vouch for it over the Stax. However it lacks the bass slam I prefer, as do lambdas.)

I'm looking for something with bass and sub bass resembling a planar or dynamic with just enough thickness and distortion and slam, but with the detail and transparency of an electrostatic minus any tizz or etched treble. Would the K240 be a good starting point or am I looking at something higher end? I am at wits end I spent thousands on headphones but have never been satisfied but you and a coworker have both recommended the AKG so I think perhaps my search is over and I can sell all this nonsense once and for all.

It all depends on what price range you're after, but yeah the K240 is a good starting point - AKG have a good range (price/quality), but even their cheap Y50 model is good. Always best to try things out if you can, as everyone has a preference between on-ear/over-ear & open/closed. As I said, lots of good deals on Amazon ATM.

However, having said all this it is worth noting that plugging headphones straight into your computer isn't that great. I use an Apogee One, mostly for recording electric guitar & music etc... but it really improves the sound for headphones or if you are feeding the sound into a proper amp/speaker set-up.

1 hour ago, Orangenz said:

I try to avoid mixing with headphones as much as possible, but when necessary I've always had good results from the AKG K240 http://www.akg.com/pro/p/k240mkii

AKG headphones all the way, once tried you never go back.

Amazon have got some really good deals ATM - the K240 are going for about £65, unmissable deal.

Also, test on speakers, throught a TV & on crap headphones - not everyone has great listening devices & you need to make sure everyone can experience your sound in the same way.

I want my ZX81 back! NOW!!!!!

Been waiting (& saving) for a new iMac for a while now & this is very welcome news.

I was thinking of jumping ship, but use a PC at work & they are SHIT compared to a Mac - always have been & always will be. Using a PC is like walking through mud backwards blindfolded with your arms tied behind your back!

As far as editing is concerned, FCPX is really the Dogs Bollocks compared to Premiere (outdated & clunky) or even, dare I say it, AVID (& I've used Avid in a pro environment a lot). FCPX is just so quick & intuitive to use, I can get a project done in half the time of the other systems. The whole marketing around Premiere, when FCPX cam out, was just so funny, since no one I knew was using Premiere (& by that, I mean in a big pro studio environment) - it always was Avid/FCP.

The Dugdale vid is quite old.

The two best out there for the money, which i've used are the SLR Magic or Genutech Eclipse - the rest have problems, be that image or price

I used to use MPEGstreamclip as well - it was all to do with H264 filming & uploading file sizes.

I don't upload directly via FCPX anymore as well, as it produces too many artifacts.

Export master file 2K & as ProRes Lt - no problems since.

Just remember, you don't have to spend a fortune on lighting etc... & you don't have to buy the brand new stuff.

You've got a great [cheap] camera in the BMPCC & buying a cheaper one will probably cause you to spend more on the other stuff in the long run.

The whole point of that guy's video, is that he has a camera & instead of buying a new one, he spent some money on lighting, sound etc...

So, you've got a really nice camera, with great dynamic range (you don't need to shoot RAW, the ProRes HQ is amazing!). Why not go to IKEA or somewhere similar & buy some China Balls for lights & if you can get your hands on some old filament light bulbs great - or you could just put stronger light bulbs in & shoot with natural light with some boards. You can buy some secondhand cinema mics for under £100 & a simple analogue field mixer, which you can plug into your BMPCC & get great sound with the right lead.

3 minutes ago, Dude_ger said:

Ok so they sent me the wrong pictures, thanks!

Lots of people are pretending that these are a good option for filming with - for £50, but if you're paying anything in the £200 range, you can do a lot better.

Have a search in this section, so much advice - hell, buy a copy of the Anamorphic Shooters Guide! It does need updating, but has a lot of info in it.

Alternatively, if you don't want to spend any money, just take a look at Tito's info:

2 minutes ago, Dude_ger said:

Do you know what this lens is all about? Got an offer, seems like a anamophic zoom lens, or is it just something like a lens attached? It says 110mm-4,3 on it and it´s a 35/70mm lens

It's a projector lens & not a zoom lens - you'll need a taking lens & a lot of patience!

There are just too many films out there for the term Cinematic to have any real meaning or relevance to filmmaking. Personally, I think the term should really refer to any film that gets shown in a Cinema.

The way the term is thrown about in forums makes me laugh, because every film is different & so the requirements are also different. So, basically if you want your film to have a documentary feel to it, it will be pointless to make it look like a big budget Hollywood blockbuster with fancy lighting etc. & vice versa.

As far as a camera goes, the term that should be used is Filmic & by this I mean a digital camera that tries to or does replicate celluloid/film [without it being so].

If you only watch Hollywood films or big blockbusters, then you really can't have a good grasp of how many films are out there, with so many different styles of cinematography!

Remember The Blair Witch Project? Shot for the price of a used car, got shown in cinemas all over the world & made a shed load of money - cinematic? Who cares - it got made for the price of a used car, got shown in cinemas all over the world & made a shed load of money!

2 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

I'm not sure it's a good idea to be selling and buying new equipment all the time. You'll probably lose money that way. You have a great camera in the bmpcc, why don't you stick with that? Do you have anything else you have lying around that you don't need that you can sell? It's amazing how selling stuff we don't use can add up to a bigger sum quite quickly.

This & only this!

Stop worrying & shoot something!

ATM i'm editing up some footage shot on a Canon 60D from years ago & it's not the greatest IQ wise. The main thing is...I don't care what people think of the footage, it's not important to me, the only thing that matters is if the story/idea for the film works.

Wasn't the whole point of this thread, originally, to show what this adaptor can do i.e. allow people with FF cameras to adapt MF lenses to a different sensor & allow them to use these lenses the way they were meant to be used?

Perhaps I'm just being silly here?

I personally do not really like using speed boosters on the Pocket cam - I bought it because of its physical size, the S16 sensor size (which was more to do with nostalgia), ProRes HQ & the price!

I use anamorphics to get a wider FOV & step back a little.

I hate wide angle lenses.

Oh, and i'm the guy that refers to a 24mm lens as a 24mm lens, regardless of what sensor i'm using it on!