Bioskop.Inc

The latest stats for world wide sales figures recently put the French coming second to the USA - apparently they do massive business in Asia. It kiinda made me feel like the world hadn't gone completely made. Unfortuneately, the UK still laps up the American Bullshit films like there is no tomorrow & there isn't a great amount of diversity. I rarely go to the cinema anymore, as most of the films that I want to watch either just don't come to my city or are gone in a flash. I'm left watching most things on Blu-Ray, which isn't all that bad - can drink, go to the toilet, just do what I want really...
When I lived in France, there were local council funded cinemas that would show films no one else would - got to see all of Wong Kar-Wei's films in a lovely refurbished old fashioned cinema that projected prestine prints (yep, no digital nonsense all celluloid).
The problem with the 70s was that they were given too much freedom, made great films, but spent a load of cash in the process for very little [immediate] return - they are the ones that fucked American cinema in the ass.....! Now we're left with this pile of horse shit industry that couldn't give a rat's ass about making good films, just ones that they can rip off the idiots with - shame, a real shame.

The outside looking in is always an interesting perspective.  The USA is typically a bit of a mess, and there's a blessing in that.
You might as well.  We all do over here too.
And I wouldn't worry too much about it.  Intellectual films will always be niche.  Dumb films just have broader appeal.  It's quite simple, really.   A genius, sitting amongst a crowd of morons, can appreciate stupid slapstick and a fart joke.  
However, those morons wouldn't feel comfortable at an art house while that same genius chuckles knowingly at the cutting cultural insight of a witty turn of a phrase or convoluted allegory.  
So what'cha gonna do?  Smart films have to stay small, dumb films go big.  Some try to have it both ways and succeed.  It's all part of the mix.

I dump all my footage to the SSD and edit, then move finished projects to external drives. I don't save unedited footage, just high quality versions of the finished piece or clips trimmed down for B-roll if I need to repurpose. I have about 800gb of free space on my 1tb drive, that's usually more than enough for what I do.

Redstan has an adaptor which you attach to the back of the Iscorama54 & you can then mount it on rails. However, someone who bought one told me that it doesn't attach to the taking lens properly - so might not be a problem for you.
http://www.redstan.com/index.php?route=product/product&path=33&product_id=63
Personally, I use a Zacuto lens mount that has a system to clamp it securely down, but I would never leave it like that without attaching it to a taking lens.
The 54 weighs 1kg & you'll need something robust to keep it secure on rails - I just think that it's too heavy (& expensive) to have it free standing on its own. Safety first?

Apple quietly made a few upgrades to the Late 2015 iMac retina update, most notably the screen is now 10-bit and the SSD's are PCI-e 3.0 - which makes them ridiculously fast. I tested one side by side with my 6-core mac pro and the iMac smoked it. So I sold the trashcan and bought a loaded iMac, 1tb SSD, 32gb ram and the 395x card. How fast? Check this out.
 

Not sure what gains a refresh will bring, the new 10bit screen calibrates beautifully and the thing is so damn fast, plus Late 2015 moved to Skylake. Apple seems to be moving toward USB 3.0, I prefer a slew of ports over a breakout box.
Refurbs save about 15%, I bought used off Ebay and saved a little more, plus shipping was free and no tax - my machine was almost 30% off new price. Mine was only used for a couple months, so right now 33 months remain on the applecare warranty. Full spec on mine is 4.0ghz, 1tb SSD, 32gb ram, 395x video card with 4gb vram, it trounced my 6-core 3.5ghz with dual AMD500 video cards, 256gb SSD and 32gb ram. But the new iMac have the updated SSD's and I've read that larger SSD's are faster than the smaller ones. Its a powerhouse machine. My main gripe with the 2014's was the fan noise when pushed hard. That's the reason I went with the trashcan - its so quiet. I've only one the new one for a couple weeks, but I've yet to hear any noise from it at all.
Side note, the built in speakers sound surprisingly good, lots of bass with the sound reflecting off the desk. My studio monitors and headphones sound better, but they should.

I was waiting for the new iMac/s to be released & now i'm not so sure - might be cheaper to get a refurbished one?
Thanks for those speed test results, really interesting.
The whole FCPX hating was complete rubbish, as FCP7 was worlds ahead of PP & the only reason people stuck with it was because of AE - the rest was a shambles.
Hats off to Adobe for running a great negative campaign against FCPX, but those of us who went with it & stayed got the updates, which were always coming, and that have made it one of the most logical,fast & bug free editing programs out there. The redesign of Motion was also a welcome surprise.
Just hope they don't go the subscription route, but if they do i'd still pay them over Adobe - who really need to rebuild PP & fast, if they want to stay relevant!?

IMHO anything promoting the BMPCC [or BMMCC] over 4K 8-bit cameras is a good thing.
I know no camera is perfect (especially in the prosumer market), but in my experience the Pocket was the image & codec i'd been longing for ever since I had to take a hit & demote myself to using H264. It's not 4K, but when I saw the image quality and started working with ProRes (let alone RAW) I knew I'd finally come home - no more wasting time on dreaming about which camera to own next. Some people might say it's only 1080p, but with an anmorphic lens it ends up being way over the standard Cinema DCP 2K (2.39) & you end up squeezing the image down rather than up. I still have my 60d for taking pictures & that's why I bought a hybrid in the first place - the video mode was always going to get replaced with something better sooner or later and now I have the best of both worlds.
As far as marketing/advertising etc., of course one must always beware with these capitalists! But when they bring people's attention to something good, i'm more forgiving - at least for the time being.

I'm fine with the Pocket & don't understand why people find it hard to use - set the WB & set the ASA/ISO & then all you need is to tweek the F Stop and/or the ND. The battery life is a not a point of contention, as when you swap the SD card, you swap the battery - 45mins is fine & you get used to switching the unit off/on when not in use. I've used it for Run'n'Gun for shooting concerts & in more controlled settings - practice & getting to know your camera, that's the key. And it's nothing like a DSLR & that's what stumps most people - learning a new technique/camera is fun IMHO.

IMHO anything promoting the BMPCC [or BMMCC] over 4K 8-bit cameras is a good thing.
I know no camera is perfect (especially in the prosumer market), but in my experience the Pocket was the image & codec i'd been longing for ever since I had to take a hit & demote myself to using H264. It's not 4K, but when I saw the image quality and started working with ProRes (let alone RAW) I knew I'd finally come home - no more wasting time on dreaming about which camera to own next. Some people might say it's only 1080p, but with an anmorphic lens it ends up being way over the standard Cinema DCP 2K (2.39) & you end up squeezing the image down rather than up. I still have my 60d for taking pictures & that's why I bought a hybrid in the first place - the video mode was always going to get replaced with something better sooner or later and now I have the best of both worlds.
As far as marketing/advertising etc., of course one must always beware with these capitalists! But when they bring people's attention to something good, i'm more forgiving - at least for the time being.

IMHO anything promoting the BMPCC [or BMMCC] over 4K 8-bit cameras is a good thing.
I know no camera is perfect (especially in the prosumer market), but in my experience the Pocket was the image & codec i'd been longing for ever since I had to take a hit & demote myself to using H264. It's not 4K, but when I saw the image quality and started working with ProRes (let alone RAW) I knew I'd finally come home - no more wasting time on dreaming about which camera to own next. Some people might say it's only 1080p, but with an anmorphic lens it ends up being way over the standard Cinema DCP 2K (2.39) & you end up squeezing the image down rather than up. I still have my 60d for taking pictures & that's why I bought a hybrid in the first place - the video mode was always going to get replaced with something better sooner or later and now I have the best of both worlds.
As far as marketing/advertising etc., of course one must always beware with these capitalists! But when they bring people's attention to something good, i'm more forgiving - at least for the time being.

I used that technique quite a few years ago using FCP7 & the thing is you're keeping the colour of the Dress (for example) & then desaturating the rest of the footage, so you should be fine. If you look at the example you gave of the little girl, it doesn't look perfect - i suppose there is a different technique used with film stock.
The thing with H264 footage is, you can do one or two things, but as soon as you start doing major CC etc. it will fall apart. So nail the footage that you take (exposure, colour etc.) as close as you can, so you don't have to bother altering too much in post.
Those books are amazing, they cover everything you need to know about CC & grading - no trick or technique is left out. Really worth the money & you'll never need to buy another over priced plug-in again. The only thing i've bought since is Film Convert - I only use that as a final adjustment layer for the roll off effect on highlights/blacks, applying only their standard setting. If i'm really in a hurry, I'll use the Alexa preset with BM footage, since I hate their BM preset - horrible, really horrible.
I always use the rule of thumb of nailing everything as close as you can get in-camera, as it saves so much time in post.
The saying that you can always fix it in post, is just another way of saying you can't shoot properly.

For the best results, it should be done in post. You grey out the clothes or whatever & then reverse the image, so you end up keeping the colour of the object & everything else is B&W - colour keying, i think that's what it is called. Effects done by a camera are always a bad compromise - it won't look great.
If you're not good at CC'ing or want to learn, the best book/s out there is by "Alexis Van Hurkman - Color Correction Handbook" and the companion book is "Look Book Creative Grading Techniques". If you get both you are absolutely set to go - the books are easy to understand & you'll realise it's a lot easier and quicker to do things than you think (you do things once & then save the template in your NLE).

I hate the fact that you keep peddling these shit lenses to people, they are a complete & utter waste of time & money.
To hell with sharp, as Anamorphic lenses are all about the defects they produce & a little about the flares.
My advice to the OP is to do some searches in this section of the forum, as we have gone over & over which lenses are good.
There is so much info here, it's stupid. Spend a while looking at different posts - you might have to go back a while to avoid all the bad advice that is handed out by this guy Ken.
Don't take offence Ken, but you really do hand out some really shit advice when it comes to Anamorphics.

Shame, I can recommend the Isco Widescreen 2000 as one of the best of the Focus Through/Fixed Focus lenses out there - Run'n'Gun or whatever you want:
 

Hey, Bioskop.Inc, yeah, I tried to focus out of my window from here to across the street, but nothing but a glob of murky smear, regardless of iris or focal distance on my prime. And correct on that light source--I'd never seen a penlight take up the entire frame--like it was set for microscopic levels. I finally gave up yesterday and shipped it back to the seller in Prague (before I accidentally scratch it). Sad, as it was the only Isco I had owned, and now the baby Möllers and Hypers are way too expensive for me. But I have more than enough lenses to experiment with for the time being, and I thank you again for your input and encouragement. I feel like a bit of a quitter, but the window for this $400 lens was closing faster than I was making any progress.
 

I got your point. Looks like he is struggling & was giving out more info in the process - like a good forum member should (not a 60yr old wannabe relic timewaster!)
I'm sure from his pics it's a distance thing, if not......a metallic thanksgiving meal!?

I got your point. Looks like he is struggling & was giving out more info in the process - like a good forum member should (not a 60yr old wannabe relic timewaster!)
I'm sure from his pics it's a distance thing, if not......a metallic thanksgiving meal!?

Yes, I agree - the only problem with stopping down is that most things will look in focus, but are they?
You really need to find out what your anamorphic looks like actually in focus at its optimum. This is because when you focus through you are better able to judge how much off the mark it is - you don't want to end up with some footage being really sharp & other bits which aren't.
It's the same with dual focus anamorphics - sometimes, when you're aligning the anamorphic & taking lens, things can appear to be in focus, but when they really are the image pops up nice & sharp.
Also, racking focus focus when you're stopped down can be done, but it's not as noticeable compared to when your lens is open wider (obvious, I know). The best tip for achieving a good rack focus, with these focus through lenses, is to have a taking lens with a long focus throw - it takes longer to rack, but it shows up more.
@PepperJay - how is it going? Any luck yet or is it a turkey?

That is strange. But looking at the second picture, i would say that you are too close to the TV - so perhaps the minimum is 5m not 5 feet. The light source shouldn't be covering the whole frame. The last pic looks like you're aimed at the wall.
The Iscomorphot S8/x2 has a minimum of distance of 4/5m & the Widescreen 2000 is 5m - so it might be worth trying to focus at something further away. 5m is quite a distance & I had real trouble with this distance in my front room, so it took me a while to get things to focus.
On a 5d2, you'll need something over 75mm. On APS-C or below a 50mm should be fine.
If not try to contact QuickHitRecord - he's a really nice guy & might be able to point you in the right direction.
Experiment - remember to adjust the taking lens, as sometimes the distances on these things aren't that accurate.
 

Yeah the focus through thing is one of those myths/lies that circulates - with these 8mm attachments, it's just wishful thinking. The Iscomorphot S8/x2, which is also fixed focus & it doesn't really play well with racking.
But having said that, I've also got the Isco Widescreen 2000 & in order to rack with that you need a diopter +0.5/0.25 (a weak one) and then stop down the taking lens a little - worth a try if you've got the right diopter.
Good luck

So, I am assuming that you read this post:
You will need to align the anamorphic - the best way to do this is to shine a bright light at it (use your phone's light & don't get too close) & you should see the flares/streaks. These flares need to be horizontal, if they aren't it will be very difficult to get the lens to focus. So you just turn the anamorphic until they are horizontal.
Try to get a clean focus at 5 feet - i.e. without any diopters (measure it with a tape measure to get yourself in the right ball park & set your taking lens to 5feet, then do minor adjustments until the object you are focusing on pops into focus).
Lastly, this is not a focus through - it's fixed focus at 5feet. You use the diopters to be able to focus closer & you just adjust the distance on your taking lens to reach the right focus distance - a lot of trial & error.
Hope this helps.

So, I am assuming that you read this post:
You will need to align the anamorphic - the best way to do this is to shine a bright light at it (use your phone's light & don't get too close) & you should see the flares/streaks. These flares need to be horizontal, if they aren't it will be very difficult to get the lens to focus. So you just turn the anamorphic until they are horizontal.
Try to get a clean focus at 5 feet - i.e. without any diopters (measure it with a tape measure to get yourself in the right ball park & set your taking lens to 5feet, then do minor adjustments until the object you are focusing on pops into focus).
Lastly, this is not a focus through - it's fixed focus at 5feet. You use the diopters to be able to focus closer & you just adjust the distance on your taking lens to reach the right focus distance - a lot of trial & error.
Hope this helps.

MODERATOR INTERVENTION FOR Ebrahim Saadawi
Ebrahim Saadawi please stop posting in any other thread apart from this one , it was left open for you to communicate with the three people you scammed and to make sure you refuned them all in full asap - you have disgraced this forum we all contribute to and love so much.
YOU ARE NOT AT LIBERTY TO SUDDENLY START COMMENTING ON ANY OTHER POST OFFERING YOUR TECHNICAL ADVISE -
STOP IT NOW -
MODERATOR JONPAIS AND MYSELF ARE BOTH UNITED ON THIS DECISSION.
No more tec posting on this forum Ebrahim Saadawi.

I'll second VisionTech - it's easily the best of the bunch by a long way.
But remember that you shouldn't grade too much with 8-bit H264 files, as they'll fall apart. You need to get it as close as you can in-camera, then adjust for contrast & saturation and/or very minor cc.
Cinestyle is absolute rubbish & looks rubbish, it requires you to grade the footage too much & you'll run into problems with 8-bit footage.