Jump to content

Recommendations?


Recommended Posts

I've been shooting ML Raw on a 5D3 for the past couple years on a short film that has slowly morphed into a DIY feature. I still have a bit to shoot for it but am planning my next film on my downtime that I should start late next year. 

I thought about upgrading my camera for that film, but I'm truly happy with ML Raw. Since I've always wanted to shoot anamorphic, I think a scope would be a better investment of my time and money.

With all that said, I'd love some suggestions to put me on the right path. Obviously, I would prefer a single focus lens and obviously I would love for it to be an Iscorama 36 or 54 but I doubt I could find, or afford a good copy of one. I've also seen some footage from the Baby Iscorama that I liked and from the S8 Animex that looked gorgeous but both seem pretty hard to come by and I assume fetch a good price.

I also like what I have seen from the Kowa anamorphics and I assume I can put one of those rigs together for a lot cheaper than an Iscorama?

So, my wish list is this...

• single focus

• 50mm taking lens

• sharp, modern look

• as compact as possible

The film I am working on now has been run and gun relying on IS and one shot AF. For my next film I am planning on doing a lot more controlled set ups... with a combination of static/slider/dolly shots stopped down with deeper focus than I am shooting now... so I am curious how difficult double focus would be, or how expensive a good focusing unit is?

Anyway, any suggestions or advice would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm glad I could clarify that for you. ( : That's right! If you want to have a wider FOV, then you'd have to buy proper anamorphic lenses like Atlas, etc. No adapter can go that wid

If you have any specific questions about the Sirui you'd like to see answers for - and that haven't been covered in the recent myriad of reviews - let me know here. I'm starting my review today, with

I'm actually working to make this a lot more accessible and easy to navigate! ?  

Posted Images

5 hours ago, mercer said:

I thought about upgrading my camera for that film, but I'm truly happy with ML Raw. Since I've always wanted to shoot anamorphic, I think a scope would be a better investment of my time and money.

Good call! 

5D3 coupled with ML still yields one of the best looking images, IMHO. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

I would love for it to be an Iscorama 36 or 54 but I doubt I could find, or afford a good copy of one.

100% correct, these are the Holy Grails that everyone lusts for. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

I've also seen some footage from the Baby Iscorama that I liked and from the S8 Animex that looked gorgeous but both seem pretty hard to come by and I assume fetch a good price.

These are a bit easier to get. I've seen a couple of them going for sale during the last year. 

However, they are more suited for smaller format cameras (eg. GH5) and shorter focal lengths. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

I also like what I have seen from the Kowa anamorphics and I assume I can put one of those rigs together for a lot cheaper than an Iscorama?

Definitely. 

If it comes to Kowas, the adapter you should be looking for is Kowa 16-H. It's sometimes called Kowa 8-Z or Elmoscope (Elmo) II. 

These are the finest anamorphic adapters and usually cost around 800 - 1000$ (adapter only). 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

So, my wish list is this...

• single focus

If you get a variable diopter (which you put in front of your anamorphic block), then every anamorphic adapter becomes single focus. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

• 50mm taking lens

Sorry, but this is not possible with 5D3. 

The widest you could go on a full frame camera would be ~ 80 mm if you plan on acquiring a 2x stretch factor anamorphic lens. 

You could (though I cannot guarantee that) get away with 50 mm if you bought a 1.5x anamorphic, like Aivascope II. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

• sharp, modern look

This calls for either ISCO Ultra Star or Schneider Cinelux. 

I have both of them and, in my opinion, they are hugely underrated. 

They are as sharp as your taking lens and do not degrade contrast, at all. 

What's more, it's not that difficult to find one in a good condition and they usually run for ~350 $. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

• as compact as possible

Unfortunately, it doesn't go more compact than ~ 600 - 800 g and 10 - 15 cm. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

so I am curious how difficult double focus would be

It's not that bad, but usually takes around 20 seconds to achieve perfect focus. 

The worst thing is: you cannot rack focus. 

5 hours ago, mercer said:

how expensive a good focusing unit is?

From 550$ up to 1000$ if you want to have something you can rely on. 

There are two brands: Rapido (which offers FVD-16A) or Rectilux (and its Hardcore DNA aka HCDNA). 

 

I realize this may sound complicated at first, but if you keep on reading, you'll quickly get to know what's right. 

My interest in anamorphics started only a year ago, so it's not that difficult topic to grasp. ( :

The most important thing here is patience. 

 

If you have any questions, feel free to ask them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, heart0less said:

Good call! 

5D3 coupled with ML still yields one of the best looking images, IMHO. 

It took me a couple years of testing cameras to realize I was looking for ML Raw. And now after a couple years of testing vintage lenses, while I shoot my film on modern, native Canon lenses, I am realizing that a lot of my favorite films have been shot on anamorphics... if I could get a Jaws "look" I'd be more than happy.

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

These are a bit easier to get. I've seen a couple of them going for sale during the last year. 

However, they are more suited for smaller format cameras (eg. GH5) and shorter focal lengths. 

Good to know, thanks. I thought they could be a cheaper way into the Iscorama world, but I need less research obstacles rather than more.

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

If it comes to Kowas, the adapter you should be looking for is Kowa 16-H. It's sometimes called Kowa 8-Z or Elmoscope (Elmo) II. 

These are the finest anamorphic adapters and usually cost around 800 - 1000$ (adapter only).

Didn't realize the Elmo II and the 16-H were the same lens just rebranded. Opens up a few more search options.

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

The widest you could go on a full frame camera would be ~ 80 mm if you plan on acquiring a 2x stretch factor anamorphic lens. 

You could (though I cannot guarantee that) get away with 50 mm if you bought a 1.5x anamorphic, like Aivascope II. 

Hmm, so with an 85mm lens with 2x anamorphic, I'd get a horizontal FOV of a 42mm lens... right?

Thats not too bad, although I was hoping to go wider.

Eventually, I think I'd like to find a 1.5x, although I know they're more rare. That Kowa 35 1.5x sounds like a perfect fit for what I'm looking for.

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

This calls for either ISCO Ultra Star or Schneider Cinelux. 

I have both of them and, in my opinion, they are hugely underrated. 

They are as sharp as your taking lens and do not degrade contrast, at all. 

What's more, it's not that difficult to find one in a good condition and they usually run for ~350 $.

I haven't considered the Ultra Star, but after looking at a few videos, it could be a good option. They're certainly reasonably priced for a starter anamorphic to experiment with. I'm sure it doesn't matter, but gold or red?

I'm also seeing a lot of different branded 16-D anamorphics? It seems they're not highly recommended around here but the price of them do make them tempting. Also Kowa 16-S?

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

I realize this may sound complicated at first, but if you keep on reading, you'll quickly get to know what's right. 

My interest in anamorphics started only a year ago, so it's not that difficult topic to grasp. ( :

The most important thing here is patience.

It's definitely a different thought process but it sounds like a great diversion for me from obsessing over my "normal" lens collection. In fact, I'll be forced to sell some lenses, which is great... I have too many, to afford a usable quality anamorphic rig.

Do you recommend going cheaper with the Ultra Star or a Kowa/Singer/Sankor to get my feet wet? Or is it just a waste of time and I'd be better off searching for a Kowa 1.5x now... or whatever scope I'd ultimately like to end up with?

8 hours ago, heart0less said:

If you have any questions, feel free to ask them. 

Thank you!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kowa 16 d and s are very fine lenses. But they won't cover a wide field of view. They will be perfect for a 75mm anamorphic in S35 coverage (100mm in FF) . Not less unfortunately. 

As for the kowa 1.5. They are rare and very expensive : there are a couple available on ebay right now. They are in the 2500 dollars range unfortunately. They are great lenses though.

But x1.5 or x2 is pretty insignificant. The limiting factor is the single focus unit that brings additional vignetting. You can go as wide as 60mm in FF (40mm in S35) with a x2 kowa, but the limiting factor will be the single focus adapter. And both the rectilux and rapido adapters will only cover around 50mm in S35 (75mm in FF).

An 85mm setup sounds like a good option for you. Rapido has a 85mm contax housing, just pair it with a cinelux with rapido housing and a FVD 16 and you're good to go. It's a pretty modern look, no dreamy veiling flares and no stupid distortions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, mercer said:

Didn't realize the Elmo II and the 16-H were the same lens just rebranded. Opens up a few more search options.

I'm glad I could clarify that for you. ( :

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

Hmm, so with an 85mm lens with 2x anamorphic, I'd get a horizontal FOV of a 42mm lens... right?

That's right!

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

Thats not too bad, although I was hoping to go wider.

If you want to have a wider FOV, then you'd have to buy proper anamorphic lenses like Atlas, etc.

No adapter can go that wide.

It's one of the reasons @Tito Ferradans came up with his 'Anamorfake It'. If your shot calls for a wide angle, then you could get away with a modded spherical lens.

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

Eventually, I think I'd like to find a 1.5x, although I know they're more rare. That Kowa 35 1.5x sounds like a perfect fit for what I'm looking for.

Like I said, you could take a look at Aivascope.

https://www.facebook.com/aivascope/

It's a modern 1.5x lens.
Quite pricey, but people who bought it seem to be really satisfied.

Kowa C35 1.5x is just another unicorn that's hard to find. You'll be more likely to get an used Bollex Moller 16/32/1.5x (the one that @keessie65 owns).

Here is a sample video recorded with 5D3 + ML RAW + Helios 44 + Bollex 16/32/1.5x + Rectilux HCDNA.

Notice the crazy distortion on the sides and in the corners - it's a sign that going even a tiny bit wider could introduce severe vignetting.

 

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

I haven't considered the Ultra Star, but after looking at a few videos, it could be a good option. They're certainly reasonably priced for a starter anamorphic to experiment with. I'm sure it doesn't matter, but gold or red?

It mostly varies on a copy versus copy, but Red Ultra Stars tend to be newer, therefore they feature even better coatings which results in reduced flaring.

I've got a 1st gen Gold Ultra Star and it's already really sharp and contrasty, even though it has some mild separation inside.

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

I'm also seeing a lot of different branded 16-D anamorphics? It seems they're not highly recommended around here but the price of them do make them tempting. Also Kowa 16-S?

What Julien said.

44 minutes ago, mercer said:

Do you recommend going cheaper with the Ultra Star or a Kowa/Singer/Sankor to get my feet wet? Or is it just a waste of time and I'd be better off searching for a Kowa 1.5x now... or whatever scope I'd ultimately like to end up with?

It's quite difficult to answer, honestly.

I'm happy with my middle class setup, since I'm just a hobbyist - that's why I don't need top tier gear.

Every single post from Terrence Wilkins (a DP from UK) only confirms this belief. He uses setups based on Schneider Cinelux and FVD-16A.

 

The law of diminishing results in anamorphics is even more cruel than in photography.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Julien416 said:

Kowa 16 d and s are very fine lenses. But they won't cover a wide field of view. They will be perfect for a 75mm anamorphic in S35 coverage (100mm in FF) . Not less unfortunately. 

Good to know, thanks. Obviously, I am considering taking lenses as I do my research. I have a mint Nikon 100mm series e, do they make good taking lenses. 

Also, I found this video on Vimeo of the 16-D with the Canon 85mm 1.8...

I love the look of this. Is this a typical look of the Kowa 16-D under similar circumstances?

As far as taking lenses go... I already own the Nikon 100mm and a Canon 85mm 1.8. I also have a Nikkor 85mm 1.4 (although I was planning on selling it) and a Rollei Zeiss 85mm 2.8. As much as I am willing to build the optimal rig, if I already own a useable taking lens, then that's all the better.

1 hour ago, Julien416 said:

An 85mm setup sounds like a good option for you. Rapido has a 85mm contax housing, just pair it with a cinelux with rapido housing and a FVD 16 and you're good to go. It's a pretty modern look, no dreamy veiling flares and no stupid distortions.

Thanks for recommending the Rapido solution. I knew they made a focusing unit but didn't realize they make an entire line of products. Their full metal jackets are really cool.

I do like the dreaminess of the 16-D and I also like the clean look from the Cinelux and Ultra Star. 

Hmm... decisions, decisions.

Anyway, thanks for your help. I learned more this afternoon than I have the past few days trying to research this stuff on my own.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mercer said:

I love the look of this. Is this a typical look of the Kowa 16-D under similar circumstances?

Wow, this looks good!

 

I'd say - yes, but the red flare caught me off guard.

16-D usually have blue flares - I guess the setting sun must've altered it.

 

Also, some vignetting is already getting in the way:

image.thumb.png.ca7bcafa507091a167d85b4c4b21800c.png

 

Here are some other 16D videos:

UMP 4.6K , Takumar 55 mm, 16D, FVD-16A

 

Setups described in the description:

A very thorough test:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, heart0less said:

It's a modern 1.5x lens.
Quite pricey, but people who bought it seem to be really satisfied.

Kowa C35 1.5x is just another unicorn that's hard to find. You'll be more likely to get an used Bollex Moller 16/32/1.5x (the one that @keessie65 owns).

Here is a sample video recorded with 5D3 + ML RAW + Helios 44 + Bollex 16/32/1.5x + Rectilux HCDNA.

Notice the crazy distortion on the sides and in the corners - it's a sign that going even a tiny bit wider could introduce severe vignetting.

Yeah, it looks really nice but the Aivascope is definitely out of my price range.

I hadn't realized how much more 1.5x scopes were and how rare. I was mostly concerned with getting the widest FOV possible, but the 50mm FF FOV is one of my favorites anyway, so I obviously need to stop fighting it. Scratch 1.5 scopes off the list. 

1 hour ago, heart0less said:

It's quite difficult to answer, honestly.

I'm happy with my middle class setup, since I'm just a hobbyist - that's why I don't need top tier gear.

Every single post from Terrence Wilkins (a DP from UK) only confirms this belief. He uses setups based on Schneider Cinelux and FVD-16A.

I'm just a hobbyist as well, so I appreciate your POV.

In fact, you guys are really making this a lot easier and a lot less daunting than I had thought the process would be.

Now I just need patience. It's not one of my stronger attributes, unfortunately. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, heart0less said:

Wow, this looks good!

 

I'd say - yes, but the red flare caught me off guard.

16-D usually have blue flares - I guess the setting sun must've altered it.

 

Also, some vignetting is already getting in the way:

Yeah, I like the look of that a lot. As @Julien416 said, I suppose it would be a lot cleaner with a 100mm or longer lens... or maybe even with more static shots?

Thanks for the videos, I have a lot more research to do, but think I may be on the right path with the either Kowa 16-D or a Blue Star/Cinelux set up. Either way, I really like the options from Rapido, so I have to crunch some numbers and see what will be the best option. 

Btw, is there much of a difference between the 16-D and the 16-S?

Link to post
Share on other sites

A few thoughts.

1 - Your first scope is very unlikely gonna be your last. I've grown past my first, second, third, Nth scope. As a matter of fact, I sold all of my adapters except an Iscorama pre-36 I got for cheap because everything else hindered my shooting style. The Iscorama does it too, just less than the others. Get the cheapest one that picks your interest and get used to shooting with it, solve its problems, learn its quirks. Then move up to something better. Some issues will be solved, but there will be an entirely new category of problems to tackle.

Shooting with adapters is a lesson in compromising. You get a little bit over here, you lose a little bit over there.

2 - A ton of people that come to anamorphics think "I just wanna go as wide as possible". The best solution: shoot with a spherical 14mm, throw in a ton of filters and crop the top and bottom. Going super wide won't give you bokeh, so what's the point anyway?

My widest-ever setup was the Contax 21/2.8 and the Letus 1.33x Pro. Super wide lens, subtle scope compression. The result is I would've gotten better IQ by picking a 15mm and framing for 2.35:1.

3 - Read. Lots. Watch videos. Ask questions.
I'm biased because the links below are all mine. No one else has tried to document this stuff as I have. ?

www.tferradans.com/anamorphic
www.anamorfakeit.com
www.youtube.com/tferradans

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, mercer said:

I was mostly concerned with getting the widest FOV possible, but the 50mm FF FOV is one of my favorites anyway, so I obviously need to stop fighting it. 

At first it may look like 1.5x will give you much wider FOV, but it isn't the case.

If you pair 85 mm with 2x scope, you'll get ~ 42 mm horizontal FOV.

If you pair 58 mm with 1.5x scope, you'll get ~ 39 mm horizontal FOV.

It's not that much of a difference.

 

19 minutes ago, mercer said:

I'm just a hobbyist as well, so I appreciate your POV.

In fact, you guys are really making this a lot easier and a lot less daunting than I had thought the process would be.

?

 

19 minutes ago, mercer said:

Now I just need patience. It's not one of my stronger attributes, unfortunately. 

A word of warning:

Getting a scope is just a beginning. You need a ton of accessories to make it work properly.

At first I was so crazed about the idea that I completely forgot about rigging it up - and the next few months passed while I was still collecting necessary parts.

 

So, the most basic setup consists of:

- your camera and your taking lens,

- anamorphic adapter,

- some people use clamps to connect the anamorphic adapter to the taking lens (I don't),

- something to secure your anamorphic adapter to rails (a standard telephoto lens collar is fine),

- rails,

- single focus diopter and external monitor are nice things to have, but they are not 100% necessary

 

The reason I don't use a clamp is: they really slow you down if you want to swap your taking lens.
I prefer having my adapter secured by the lens collar and just let it be. This way I can slide the camera in and out in a matter of seconds.

 

Having a complete setup from Rapido is a bless and will definitely save you a lot of time, though I didn't mind picking every part myself.

( :

 

3 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah, I like the look of that a lot. As @Julien416 said, I suppose it would be a lot cleaner with a 100mm or longer lens... or maybe even with more static shots?

Yup, it definitely would be.

I also happen to own Nikkor 100/2.8 Series E, so if you need anything - let me know. Unfortunately, the closest I can go to mimic Full Frame is X-T3 (APS-C) coupled with 0.71x speedbooster.

 

2 minutes ago, mercer said:

Thanks for the videos, I have a lot more research to do, but think I may be on the right path with the either Kowa 16-D or a Blue Star/Cinelux set up. Either way, I really like the options from Rapido, so I have to crunch some numbers and see what will be the best option. 

That's a great choice.

Good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mercer said:

Btw, is there much of a difference between the 16-D and the 16-S?

They are essentially the same lens bar the housing. It's a very fine lens, really, tack sharp and purple subtle flares. Pair it with an 85 and it should look really good. 

Also, it's a rabbit hole, like all lens collecting, the lens you do not own is always the one you need. 

Go with the rapido housings, they will make your life easier and make those clumsy projector lenses almost professional looking. Unfortunately they do not have housings for your 100mm. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, heart0less said:

At first it may look like 1.5x will give you much wider FOV, but it isn't the case.

If you pair 85 mm with 2x scope, you'll get ~ 42 mm horizontal FOV.

If you pair 58 mm with 1.5x scope, you'll get ~ 39 mm horizontal FOV.

It's not that much of a difference.

This only applies if you're shooting FF and using the entire 16:9 frame. In that case, you'll also have wildly different aspect ratios between 2x and 1.5x.

Take into account your final aspect ratio and that should allow you to explore wider taking lenses, knowing that not all of your sensor will be covered and that's fine (especially on 5D3 ML).

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Julien416 said:

Also, it's a rabbit hole, like all lens collecting, the lens you do not own is always the one you need. 

Go with the rapido housings, they will make your life easier and make those clumsy projector lenses almost professional looking.

Oh I know about lenses and rabbit holes. Sadly.

I'm thinking the same thing about the Rapido housings. The goal is to have one set up I am happy with... or maybe two... one 16-S/D and one Cinelux... shit... it's already starting. 

Do you know if Rapido has any plans to make more of their lens jackets?

27 minutes ago, Tito Ferradans said:

This only applies if you're shooting FF and using the entire 16:9 frame. In that case, you'll also have wildly different aspect ratios between 2x and 1.5x.

Take into account your final aspect ratio and that should allow you to explore wider taking lenses, knowing that not all of your sensor will be covered and that's fine (especially on 5D3 ML).

This is the stuff I need to do more research with. I've always preferred 2:35/2:39 ... I guess I have to give your guide another couple reads.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, mercer said:

Oh I know about lenses and rabbit holes. Sadly.

I'm thinking the same thing about the Rapido housings. The goal is to have one set up I am happy with... or maybe two... one 16-S/D and one Cinelux... shit... it's already starting. 

Do you know if Rapido has any plans to make more of their lens jackets?

Oh I have three of them and planning on buying some others already. I know the feeling. 

As for the taking lens housings, Jim is probably planning some others but I am not sure which ones. As of now he has already a nice selection with contax's, voigtlanders and Russian usual suspects (jupiter 9 and helios). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Julien416 said:

Oh I have three of them and planning on buying some others already. I know the feeling. 

As for the taking lens housings, Jim is probably planning some others but I am not sure which ones. As of now he has already a nice selection with contax's, voigtlanders and Russian usual suspects (jupiter 9 and helios). 

What's your set up?

It seems that the C/Y Zeiss 85mm will be the cleanest, most cost effective solution if I want to go with a Rapido housing. Actually, it's quite possible my Rollei Zeiss 85mm is pretty close in dimensions to the C/Y version... I think they're the same lens optically with the Rollei Zeiss lacking the T coating.

Also, I noticed some folks use the Samyang/Rokinon 85mm 1.4. I have the 50mm and am pretty impressed by it, so maybe that's an option as well if I have to purchase a lens.

Anyway, thanks again for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mercer said:

Also, I noticed some folks use the Samyang/Rokinon 85mm 1.4. I have the 50mm and am pretty impressed by it, so maybe that's an option as well if I have to purchase a lens.

The smaller the front glass element in your taking lens, the better. 

Samyang 85 features 72 mm filter thread, so the glass itself could be ~ 60 mm, whereas most anamorphic adapters have ~ 40 mm rear elements. 

Most likely, the additional stop of light Samyang gives will be lost in the process, because you'll reduce the area through which light enters. 

Not to mention it may introduce vignetting. 

 

That's why people rarely use Sigma Art primes. In theory they would be a great choice, but their front elements are even bigger than Samyangs'. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, mercer said:

What's your set up?

It seems that the C/Y Zeiss 85mm will be the cleanest, most cost effective solution if I want to go with a Rapido housing. Actually, it's quite possible my Rollei Zeiss 85mm is pretty close in dimensions to the C/Y version... I think they're the same lens optically with the Rollei Zeiss lacking the T coating.

Also, I noticed some folks use the Samyang/Rokinon 85mm 1.4. I have the 50mm and am pretty impressed by it, so maybe that's an option as well if I have to purchase a lens.

I have several front housings with Cinelux, Kowa 16h, Hypergonar and Dyaliscope 16
And four taking lenses housings : Jupiter 9, Helios, Contax 50 and 85.
and a rectilux to focus them.

I just switch back and forth between those, creating different looks, from very clean to vintage fest depending on my mood or what I am planning to shoot. I used the Hypergonar / Helios combination on a TV series last year for close ups that I matched with Panavision glasses, worked pretty well but I felt stuck with the vintage look (figured out later that my Helios was a lemon). That's why I went for the "choose your look" route since then with different options.

I know. I am sick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, heart0less said:

You could always try renting your setups to get some money back, if you don't mind other people fiddling with gear. 

Oh, I'd fear some scratches or worse. These are personal toys after all. And I am still not done, I am contemplating the idea of buying a new housing for the Kowa 16d. And those voiglanders would sure look fine coupled with the rest...
But you're right, I'll probably rent them to the production company of the next season of my show as a B set for insert shots. 
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...