Leaderboard

Seems like your the one that's been cooped up too long,.... We do this because we can. There is no right or wrong, there is only the image aesthetic. If it doesn't please you go someplace else. Rapido sure do make some nice kit, i plan on getting the fvd16 fairly soon. Having said that i bet that rapido's first few efforts were not exactly exhilarating to look at either. On set it wouldn't surprise me what a DP' would do to get an image. So long as it doesn't fall apart and kill some poor sod who cares what it looks like. Your last comment is just mean and spiteful. Everyone has been cooped up for the last three months, cosimo is fortunate to have some kids that are happy enough to be involved.

To be honest what Dan Sasaki from Panavision says is much more valuable to me than what you wrote.You can read my private conversation i had with him. These are only DIY prototypes and there is no hacksaw involved, even a child would know that these would of course benefit from a new housing , but since I am not selling it or launching anything on the market I am not worried. But most of all please do not worry at all about my children, I am the father. How dare you!

Your getting in the ballpark. I think your next step is making sure you watch you scopes / parade and adjust just highlights and shadows using the LOG color wheels.

Take it with a grain of salt, BUT despite the clickbaity title (which is totally intentional), it's a solid piece of advice and shows how a professional DP tackles basic color grading.

Hello I am selling my anamorphic Aivascope Pro 1.5x lens, 1st version. It is in good condition except for minor damage due to a fall a few months ago : . the front thread has been damaged, but it is still usable, I have also screwed a UV filter (supplied) . There is a very small crack on the inside on one of the glasses, and some micro micro glass dust. However there is no influence on the image. The focus ring turns well, no dust (or very very little), no fungus, no haze ... There is no Aivascope label on it because I had it in pre-model before it was officially on sale. This anamorphic lens is exceptional, and easily rivals the Bolex Moller 16/32 or the Iscorama 36. However, it has advantages compared to its "parents": it is "single focus" (unlike Bolex ), and the front does not rotate during focusing (unlike Iscorama, which is more practical for variable ND filters), and the minimum focusing distance is close (1m) It works very well on all systems, even full frame. Compatible with primes from 50mm on full frame, 20mm (Lumix pancake) on M4/3. rear thread: 52mm, front thread: 82mm. weight: 760gr Finding it secondhand is a real opportunity! PM only thanks. Or mail sebfarges@me.com. I can provide more pictures by email. I am selling it for 1600 € (price when new 2250 €). A bargain not to be missed !!!!!!!! Paypal only. 20€ shipping cost, insurance included. You can see the films I made with it here : Tag: anamorphic, anamorphic, anamorphic, anamorphot, cinemascope, iscorama, hypergonar, bolex moller

Exactly. The exposure needs to be motivated. It is difficult to force shots that don't exist, especially if you're trying to match contrast through out an entire piece. This is why shooting log footage without a LUT gets confusing. Different colors will appear differently depending on how they are exposed, obviously. The Canon, Red, and Arri all make sure green hold saturation even at the top of the image. All the LUTS you will use are probably balanced for a more standard exposure. If you're doing things like pushing highlights and extreme ETTR, you'll run into problems with saturation on certain colors. Looking at your frames makes me want one of these cameras again. I really love how the footage looks. I owned one 3 years ago. I remember I messed with some of the baked in profiles, those looked really nice as well. Maybe Production Standard? I can't remember. I use the C300 Mk2 now so I get them mixed up. The color seemed a bit thicker than if I shot C-LOG and tried to match what a baked in profile was giving me. You can do a lot in post with those files but you need to know what you want to do when you get into the edit. With the violinist, I would assume you'd want to compensate for the under exposure and then maybe throw some sort of "power windows" or gradient exposure on the clouds to keep some of that beautiful blue sky and green trees. With the portrait test shot / you're essentially exposing for the shadows because of how the light is hitting you. If you opened up to your left slightly and had a bit of diffusion, you could drop the whole image down by a few stops and get a more rich / darker background. As is, the light is kind of a back light / side light. Here is what I came up with on the two frames. I don't have resolve, this is just Magic Bullet Looks in Premiere Pro. I don't have a color checker, but your WB is great so it's not that difficult to just level it out and tweak a few color with the HSL sliders. I did my best to try to match the two frame just for fun.

Generally, the darker the image, the more the saturation. Furthermore, most digital cameras give a lot of saturation in their non-raw files, and Canon cameras additionally boost the reds. Starting with the brightest sample posted, the image below was yielded merely by boosting the gamma/mid-tones, bringing the blacks down to zero, reducing the saturation and backing off the reds (for Canon): If one wants to keep it a little darker (and still have it look like daytime), be more gentle in boosting the mid-tones but further reduce the saturation, and keep the blacks at zero and keep the Canon reds reduced as in the image directly above: By the way, the fringing/chromatic-aberration doesn't look too bad, and a light touch with a CA/fringe filter should take care of it nicely.

Yes, with a motor add on (which won't necessarily be a Tilta one but could be) it will then be a generic product that can be used on any camera with any lens rather than being specific to the Blackmagic as it currently is. A motor option will not be far behind the release of the Blackmagic version.

So your scopes have the blacks a little above actual black. You can see the bottom of your green and blue channels are above your red channel, it's why your shadows appear slightly blue. This is my adjustment, bringing down blacks slightly and warming them up.

Couple notes: That shot is very underexposed, and you want the bottom right of the color chart to be the brightest part of your entire frame. It should NOT be in shadow.

@Cosimo I applaud your work.Thank you for sharing, and contributing. For me and many others, experimentation is the cornerstone of learning about anamorphic. Non-conctructive criticism of other people's work seems petty and antithetical to the anamorphic community. Ignore the haters, and keep doing what you are doing!

Hey guys, I started livestreaming on my channel - anamorphic on a budget, you're not familiar - and I'm doing a Helios 44 anamorfake next Wednesday at 11:30am PST. I'm giving away the resulting mod at the end of the process to someone in the stream, so there's a chance you can walk away with a fresh lens on the way. I'd love to see a bunch of you there. I'm answering questions there too, so if you got something to ask, that's a good chance!

True. Even Phantom Cameras have a Rolling Shutter, with a Global Shutter switch. The dynamic range loss, low light issues and the image degradation must be pretty substantial.

Ok, so I did some digging in my canon resources. First I need to correct the IRE values I gave you earlier. Here is the exposure for 18% grey recommended by Canon, these values are indicated in this great paper for the C300mk2 but I saw similar values for the C200: C-log 1 = 34% IRE C-log 2 = 39% IRE C-log 3 = 34% IRE I think C-log 2 is only available by default when shooting Canon raw with the C200 but there is no C-log 2 for 8 bits recording on the C200 which makes sense considering how "aggressive" c-log 2 is. Personally, I have no shame to revert to non log curve on some cameras because shooting with aggressive log curve on many 8 bits cameras is a non-sense (eg. S-log 3 on sony, D-log on earlier 60mpbs 4k DJI drone, etc.). I see too many people selecting C-log no matter what because it's "Pro" or "better"... This is plain stupidity if you can't nail the exposure (eg. uncontrolled environment outside) or don't have advanced grading skills. Don't forget that you can apply LUT directly to the LCD screen if you prefer to expose "visually" as judging exposure on the screen in Log can be tricky and it might be the reason why you underexposed in the first place. Indeed, on the screen, Log footage looks brighter which is why you should stick to a reference (grey card and IRE value, X value for certain type of skin-tone, or ballpark estimate on the EV indicator). Also, as far as the colors and look goes, check the "Color Matrix" in the Custom picture/HDR menu (where you set the gamma). Here you must understand how it works with the C200. There are basically 2 options to select the gamma curve: #1. Select one of the presets (Off, BT.709 (WDR), C-log, C-log 3), here the gamma curve and associated color matrix are grey out and they are locked inside the preset with these settings (screenshots from the C200 user manual) #2. Leave preset OFF, then the gamma and color matrix are not grey out and you can choose the combination you want. Notice from the table above how C-log 3 uses the neutral color matrix whereas C-log 1 uses the "Cinema EOS Original" which is a color profile designed to match colors across the EOS camera board (eg. C100, C300, etc.). You may want to play with that if you are not satisfied with the color and overall rendering. Finally, you can also tune the colors in the "other settings" option in the CP/HDR menu. Cheers

Hmm, would second that for a L to Mamiya 645 mount. Please! That would give the Kipon Baveyes some good companionship or not.:)

True that. Your other work on the BMPCC looks really good as well. I've been shooting super 8 a bit and I have to agree, it's very easy to grade. I'm trying to get my 16mm setup dialled in so I can shoot something more proper, your work is good inspiration for me, there's something there that just makes you want to do it.

I've been shooting the E2 with anamorphics for over a year now, it's an amazing package for the price. I mostly shoot in 48fps Zlog2 Pro Res for the best of both worlds. A lot of what I do is sports. Here's the latest thing I did with mostly 2x anamorphics, the waterhousing stuff is 1.33x GH5. Just scrub through and you can find some shots. Very happy with the camera.

The lens control protocols of those cameras don't lend themselves particularly well to direct positioning but having said that neither does the Pocket6K and we managed to develop a solution for that in the PBC so it will happen but not immediately. A universal version that supports motors would be ahead of it in the queue as it can be used for both manual lenses on cameras that don't have particularly appropriate external control like the Panasonic but also of course for manual lenses on BM cameras.

Matching different cylinders glass from different anamorphic scope is equivalent of a cylindrical Galilean telescope running backwards, finding a match with different systems that meet the afocal condition. Here are few prototypes I put together and some sample shots. I hope you like, thanks! .

Sorry, I did not mean to sound mean. But this is not how internet works, I am free to voice my opinion. I see a BS post and I call it out. OP pretentiously talks about "galilean action" and "horizontal artifacts", yet the images are highly uninspiring home shots with some of the ugliest flares I've seen. Then he proceeds to post lenses that look butchered. It seems he just took a hacksaw to some schneider cinelux lenses, then butchered some other lenses and randomly paired elements until he got a useable image. Using pseudo scientific terms to describe this process does not make it anything different. Just pure lens hacking. Pointless exercise, because no self-respecting DP will use something like this to shoot anything remotely important. Sure, if you want to learn by destroying lenses – go ahead. They don't make them anymore though. But what really worries me is that I see at least 4 different kids in these shots. I don't know how old OP is, and I don't want to assume their gender, but this is not normal.

No offense, but this is pointless. I mean, maybe if you have too much time on quarantine it's an interesting hobby, but it looks like you simply ruined schneider cinelux lenses. Any cheap sankor lens can do much better than this, with nice waterfall background. Get yourself a good cinelux and it will be a proper lens with good image, that won oscar. I don't know what's a point in these, they look hacked together, not suitable even for lowest budget indie productions. I don't think any DP would put that on their camera. Maybe you should look at Rapido Technologies, they make good products like cases for anamorphics with engravings. etc. They still don't look very good, just a dull black pipe, but anything would look better than this. I think this would scare away any model or client when they see it in front of the camera. Maybe that explains why you only photograph kids and have no serious work to show with these.