Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by DamienMTL

  1. I totally agree with you. Blade Runner 2 is a technical achievement and that's it. Really sad that the sci-fi stapple of anamorphic shooting has been swept aside. And furthermore, the whole picture is way too dead/cold for a new world depicted with an overpopulation of humans and furthermore this new population of uberhumans. Stats says there will be about 10Billions of people in 2050 without taking in considerations the replicant/android cause that's a lot compared to the few amount of people only present in the shots. There's something crazy to me, and I already felt this in "the arrival" and even more in "Blade Runner 2": the fact that even if futuristic cities like LA are overcrowded, the movie is not showing anything about that. Like a low budget movie without any money left for the walk-ons. In blade runner, the streets were jamming full of lively people, but in the 2nd episode, there's about 1 or 2 flying cars in the air, 3 prosti-bots soliciting in the streets, the marketplace is nearly empty, that's nonsense. And it goes in the way that Vileneuve got his inspriation from Tarkovski's movies and photography, the difference that is not making any sens is that Tarkovski depicted a "post apocalyptic" world running out of humans which is the contrary in Blade Runner 2. Nice Tarkovski-like photography but totally Off-Topic in the actual Philip K. Dick vision. This reflects a problem in the director's way to feel the world, his direct surroundings. To sum up, in Vileneuve's eyes, the world is about max 10 critical people (the main characters) and nothing more. In the picture I felt super weird that it's all about 1 man in the frame, sometime 2 or 3 and in public places let's say 5 people, not more, there's even this ridiculously weak rebel army of max 20 people in the shot. wow an army of 20 soldier, that's impressive! The factory with hundreds of kids was okay. The "inhumanity" and coldness of Vileneuve's movie comes from that, TMHO, it's about a big dystopic world of only 10 people (the main characters) and that's it, a selfish shallow egoistic world of coldness and inhumanity, while Blade runner 1 was about 2 androids feelings and falling in love of each other. It was just about the real nature of humanity and what is "being alive" and "being a human" related to memories and feelings. Warm vs cold. life vs lifeless. Love and romance vs apathy. In the "Arrival" I felt actually the same dilemma: few critical leaders of the new world trying to save a planet of nearly 0 represented people. Vileneuve's depicted world is just empty and humanless. That's sad for him, he must be alone in a way
  2. You should take a look at this article. it's working if you can work in a very clean room (as clean as a lab with no dust etc...) https://petapixel.com/2016/09/29/remove-fungus-lens/
  3. You read my mind! I thought about that a long time ago and I think this would be awesome.
  4. Hi that sounds really good! if you are working on a new single focus device and it's still in R&D, I would highly suggest you work also on the mechanical part of it. The perfect single focus device would have a front filter thread/ring that does not rotate, to be able to mount a clip-on mattebox in exemple. the competitors does not have it and it's really annoying. also the distance travelled by the focusing ring is too long both on the "SLR magic range finder" and on the Core DNA. if you can develop a system that does not travel, that would be awesome and would allow to fix the mattebox bracket to the rods steadily and not letting it slide on them. - fixed/non rotating front filter/ring for standard cinema clip on mattebox - non travelling focus ring - neutral color flares - metric and imperial marks - for the price of the rangefinder if you have the 5 features, your system will sell millions of them! Good luck in your R&D
  5. Anamorphic internal de-squeeze? Not available in the pre-release version. Too bad
  6. Looks super nice. who did the lens bracket? I need exactly the same for my KOWA 16H. thanks
  7. The right method to remove fungus and cleanup lens: http://petapixel.com/2016/09/29/remove-fungus-lens/
  8. Thanks Tweak. are you talking about the Canon FD 24mm 2.8 or the newFD 24mm f/1.4 L ( http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/fd/24mm-f14.htm ) ?
  9. That looks nice! any chance to have it ported for android? A cheap tablet, your monitor app and your good to go for an anamorphic shooting. Thanks
  10. Yes I know what you mean but anamorphic lenses are rated with the Vertical Field of view equilvalent to spherical 40mm anamorphic is insanely wide look at the PANAVISION PRIMO 40 on "The Royal Tenenbaums". I'll buy a speedbooster or turbolens M42 probably. It will help.
  11. MIR 1B is 37mm I don't get vignette and it looks awesome. But I don't think it's wide enough with the M43 crop factor. (FF 75mm Anamorphic equivalent).
  12. Hi, Last week I made some test shots with a GH4 in 4/3 with a KOWA 16-H X2 anamorphic adapter. I love the look of the helios 44-2 but the focal length is often too long. I also used a MIR-1B which is awesome and fast enough without vigneting but I don't think the final 2.35 field of view is wide enough for my needs. I tried to shoot with a FUJINON TV c-mount 25mm 1.4 but this time it gives some vignette on the righthand corners and lacks sharpness. What wide angle taking lens would you suggest to fit inbetween with a nice style and without significant vignetting? The wider the better. Thanks a lot
  13. I don't know the weight of mine. I just bought a 52 to 50mm step down ring to attach it cheap. I also ordered a custom support bracket for 15mm rails. you can get an Heliopan 49 to 50mm for taking lens such as Helios 44-2. I also use it with a mir-1B 37mm 2.8 and it's beautiful. I'll get in touch with your guy on ebay. I would love to just have to focus one lens. To be honest double focusing makes shooting nearly impossible on a pro environment.
  14. I have exactly the same lens mine is engraved sankor AnamoPrime. it's awesome and very sharp. the sankor lens is basically the same lens as Kowa 16H and Kowa 8Z with another housing. I had both. Remove all the useless golden tubing and you're good to go. Compact and with the same rear thread as the 16H (50mm diameter). I would love to use this lens with a single focus mod. where did you got it from? thanks
  15. Hello, I bought a colour chart at greywhitebalancecolourcard.co.uk few months ago and I have some trouble using it with my GH4. Before that, I used my friends' gretta mcbeth chart without major problem, 18% plain grey sheet and sometime used an x-rite colourchecker passeport. With this colour chart, I have some trouble to even set up the white balance properly and consistently. I used the card this weekend for a session and shot some charts as required. My strobes are delivering consistent 5600K white flashes according to the manual, I used a 4 point lighting setup with all the same strobes, same age. I shot some pictures of the card in RAW. (files available to download): http://chart.dyrec.com/colourchart1.dng http://chart.dyrec.com/colourchart2.dng We then used the white balance tool in PS or Lightroom. The 3 first monochrome squares give me : 1. 6830K / +3 2. 6600K / +5 3. 6300K / 0 I don't know why, but it's like if the colours on the chart were off. I can see the printing structure on the colour squares, and pixel-peeping is a bit random since one pixel is different to the next one. So I shot a second time the chart but without focusing to blend the details. I have nearly the same bad results. >>> How is it possible to have 3 different colour temperature for the 3 first white-to-black squares? It's a difference of 530K which is a lot. >>> How is it possible to have my white balance determined at around 6500K with strobes delivering 5600K white? That would be so nice if you could share with me your insight about that? I don't know what to trust, my camera, the software values, or the calibration chart? thanks
  16. Hi, I come from a sound engineering/mixer background and currently improving my video skills. And I shoot a lot of photos, with neutrality and balance in mind before providing a personal flavor. I always use color charts to start with... Coming from this sound processing background, we try to correct each audio tracks to get a natural and balanced sound before giving it a special tone/taste. I conceive video as audio or photo, maybe I'm wrong. I had a GH2 and bought a GH4 and everybody is talking about the different color profiles (cinelikeD etc...) some being better than others for color grading. Let's say you start with a neutral/natural look as close to reality, (red is red, green is green,... black is black) then tweak it to taste for a dreamy or punchy or gloomy look... For that I shoot some gretag macbeth charts, like the X-rite colorchecker passport, with the cinelikeD or natural profile. then I use the plugin "MBR Color Corrector 2" which can produce a shot by shot correction to natural, neutral and balanced image. DaVinci resolve does it too. And it's perfect for matching scenes and different cameras, which could be a nightmare. It's simple, quick and easy, and always spot on for every color. Then, I add a personal grading to my taste. Here comes the arty job. Is the process wrong somewhere? Am I losing the flavor of the lens or camera or the tone of the camera profile? If everybody is shooting videos with the mandatory grading step in mind, why not shooting "neutral" vs already flavored by a color profile like cinelike D? Do I lose data-information or is it the appropriate way to do? If so, I don't see a lot of pros shooting with 24 color patch targets and why? I see people with grey cards for white balance and that's it. Is my conception of color rendering and grading wrong, am I missing something? thanks for your thoughts about all that.
  17. ​Thanks John, I did what you adviced. 1. I setup NTSC > oFF/On and it worked. 2. I set it back to Cinema 24 and it's now working and the Anamorphic preset is ok even in 24. I am quite disappointed by the fact it's not unsqueezing in-camera. I'll test everything tomorrow when the sun will be back in Montreal and post some footage.
  18. ​Hi John, I have the same issue. I spin the dial to "creative cinema mode" then > setup > Anamorphic -> Yes Once everything is selected [4K | 100Mbs | A ], and I press the trigger the display jumps from 4:3 to 16/9 and the file recorded is in 16/9. I can't find a way to keep it in 4K anamorphic. How did you fixed this issue? thanks
  19. Hi, the look is perfect for a GH4 to balance the 4K over-sharpeness. Why the need of a PL Mount since the original mount for this lens is a M-42 mount. Does it mean a double layer of adapters or is the original threaded mount removed and replaced by the new one?
  20. Nice article, I am still hesitating a bit between the GH-4 and the G6 with plenty of extras. Andrew is talking about a 1600$ price for the GH-4 body and I never seen such a low price. Any clues about a shop to get it this cheap? thanks
  21. Some nice shots are already available on vimeo thanks to early testers. it seems that the jello effect is enhanced and a tripod will be mandatory. Maybe shooting HD1080 with 4/3 and not 4K with a X2 lens will be the best option, to reduce wobbles artefacts. That's incredibly promissing!
  22. @drokeby is absolutely right. 4512x1920 is the Future. I am really looking forward to watching Andy's 2.66:1 first testshots. ;)
  23. That sounds amazing and I really want to know if Panasonic will work on an update a dedicated to film-makers to desqueeze (display & file writing) internaly our future lovely 4:3 X2 footages. If Panasonic plans on doing that, the GH4 will destroy the indie / Pro-Am market with all those amazing features. Thanks to Andy for pushing our ideas to Panasonic staff's ears.
  24. I wouldn't go with rubbing since it's going to make micro cutting on the surface and you'll lose sharpness and it will look really bad. Somewhere I don't remember, I've heard about SUPER OVEN CLEANER FOAM which by the way removes coatings, anodizing, painting etc pretty well. This product is really really dangerous for skin, eyes etc... I advise you to try on a broken lens outdoor before, just to check the results. Protect the lens barrel with masking tape. And wear the appropriate protection equipement like a mask and goggles and gloves it's extremely corrosive. Try with a bad broken lens and let us know.
  • Create New...