RobertoSF

I rate the rumor high as well. Been waiting for this to break.   What I really want to know is, will it be switchable to a 4:3 aspect ratio?   I know this request from the pro community was lodged with Panasonic. I just hope they implemented it.   Like Andrew and many other anamorphic zealots, I'd be very, very happy to finally shoot ~2.35   Keep us posted, Andrew.   Thanks

George is right. Good for him for taking on the fight. He continues to use his influence well. If you haven't seen Michael Clayton take a look. It's films like that, and many others, that are on the line. As for the rest of us filmmakers, everything goes on the table (neck included) when we make a feature. Onward.

A good film, regardless of names or budget, comes up like grass through concrete.   Find  your niche. Germinate. Reach for the sky.

  Amen. Shane is well into the black. Critically, and monetarily, which means he will roll into his next project on his own terms.   I watched the film earlier tonight via iTunes/AppleTV. It was affecting. Well done. The nuance of the story was beautifully subtle but totally there. And yes, by the way, it looks beautiful. it matters. It's cinema.   Gents, ladies, the distribution mold is shattered. Time to make a jail break.   I'm in.

Good for Shane. And us, as audience and filmmakers. A rising tide floats all our boats.

As posted a few days ago, what BMCC announces at NAB will be the benchmark. There it is. A bold new direction forward for many of us.   Onward, compadres.

  Hmmm... Safe to say you are surprised then?   Given your previous quote a couple of days ago on the GH3/NAB post:   ScreenPro: "I'd be very surprised if BM announce anything new, camera wise.   People who stayed patient with BM would be unhappy with a better spec'd camera being announced and the possibility of further delays and pre-order chaos..... Everyone else will just think they are full of shit to announce another camera with the BMCC still massively in limbo.   It's a real shame... Maybe they will turn up with 10,000 BMCs.... Here's hoping."

  G is good....

  Camera manufacturing is not any ease game to get in and stay on top of, compadres. Just ask Red.

  Yes, I believe what BMCC announces at this NAB will be the benchmark for those of us with GH2-3s looking for the next solid camera platform to work from for the next couple of years. If Panasonic makes an announcement in this area the comparisons (which we will probably read here, thanks to Andrew) will be very interesting.

I would add to the list the ability to switch the sensor to record in the 4:3 aspect ratio. This would make a lot of anamorphic shooters very happy. So would 10bit 422, more DR, and an ND wheel.   Fingers crossed for a Panasonic announcement at NAB

Good to see some sobriety taking hold. Past, present, and future is 24p for me for narrative experiences. Sports, a different beast. HD at 2K is solid for a long time to come. The human eye is very comfortable there. And on-line is only going to get more exciting... for all of us.

  Fascinating. I didn't think that a sensor could be out of alignment. But it is part of the chain and therefore a suspect. Maybe not one of the "usual suspects" though, but something to consider. Thanks for the post.

  I like the analogy, and I see where you're coming from (an otherworldly meeting on the beach) but no, didn't have Contact in mind there. Now, if the waves were rolling backwards, as they do in Contact, it would be closer to being an homage. Actually, that could be interesting. Anybody want to roto the characters to make that happen?? ;-)   I think Contact is, btw, a good film on several levels.   The steadicam (pull) shot where the daughter runs through the house and up the stairs and finally reaches up and pulls the glass mirror medicine cabinet open, as if the ENTIRE SHOT had been done inside the mirror, was amazing. Nobody else in the theater noticed that but a filmmaker buddy and I nearly fell out of our chairs. It was sublime.   So was the sound design by Randy Thom. He inspired me to write sound into the storytelling for Mandorla.

  Thanks. It is, after all, the final picture that matters.     Yep, I know. Changed it for the feature edit a while back... good thing about a working trailer is seeing what actually works and what doesn't over time.   For the record, I am a font fanatic. Made my kids watch the documentary "Helvetica." They haven't seen the world the same since--especially road signs.

  Right on. Thanks!

  Okay, gotta like your humor. Maybe that's a patch we have in common...

  This here's Sheriff Reid's blog, folks, and his reputation for being a serious shooter is well earned. Tip of the hat, Sheriff. And to you, deputy Rhoades.     THAT just caused a large laugh to roll out across the high Nevada desert. Can never have too much humor on a camera tech blog. Or on a high desert plain for that matter. Also makes the Sheriff metaphor work. Anyway... back on topic...   On the road back from Sundance. Must return to editing. Will respond more when I'm back in the home studio. My curiosity about the 1 degree of vertical slant on two particular shots in the trailer is growing. It's an easy enough fix, but was the camera just not quite level, or is it something else? Will carefully check other shots when I'm back. I may shoot a test pattern too. I'm not a test-pattern kind of guy, but they have their place and I'm open to find out. As Burnet pointed out, there are a lot of variables, so I appreciate the community help.   Meanwhile, my producer is obliged to keep me on edit and on schedule, but I will get back to the discussion as soon and as often as I can. Hopefully in a day or two.

All, thank you for all your overwhelming support, observations, and questions. My producer has reminded me (several times now) that I need to put my undivided focus back on editing. We have an aggressive schedule to meet.   Best to you all!!!

  Pask,   Two short answers. Yes, there's a difference with anamorphics. Have a look at Andrew's guide. I'm not saying it's BETTER than spherical lenses, but it is different. Let what you feel for the character of a lens be your guide.   Steadicam with a lens "larger" than 75 or 80mm would be extremely difficult.

There is no ADR, as ADR is usually a process after picture editing is locked. We are editing the film now, and this is a working trailer. It is also, as the article's title clearly states, about a very specific type of anamorphic lens, which I find provides a magically slight distortion to reality. A Frazier (correct spelling) lens allows the foreground and background to be in focus, and is great for wildlife shots. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frazier_lens Anamorphic and Frazier are very different animals. This is also not an article about acting, and having seen all the footage of this film, I find the acting to be very good, very natural and real. I see the written story coming to life through the characters. Other professionals in this business, one with two academy awards, feels the same way. His name will be in the final credits. Something else should be said here. Most filmmakers I know salute any filmmaker who goes through what it takes to get a feature film in the can. Whether it was shot on an Alexa or an iPhone. For anybody else reading this, if you have a passionate dream to tell a story in moving pictures and sound, GO FOR IT!! Know the difference between constructive, well informed, and useful criticism, and destructive, sour criticism, which should be ignored. Brush it off and move on.

Hey. Thanks.   I'm extremely happy with the LOMOS and see them as a lifelong investment. Very happy with the GH2 also, I am still shooting with it, but like you, I am also keeping an eye on how the BMCC is developing. It's very impressive, particularly with regard to the dynamic range it offers. If it offered a way to shoot to a 4x3 sensor, which would yield a more cinemascope-like format, I'd jump on it. The RAW route looks like a storage and process intensive workflow for a feature, but I haven't studied it too much.   I think having a set of pristine non-anamorphic LOMOs is fantastic, especially for shooting a feature. Love to have a set myself, but finding a good set takes time, right?   I suggest keeping your GH2, and keeping tabs on the BMCC while you write. Don't buy any camera until you are ready to go for pre-production. Even then, test it first--all the way through your workflow.   Good luck with your project!! At the end of the day, it's the script that matters most, then casting, directing... and eventually cameras and lenses.

  There is no OCT. It was surgically removed when a carefully machined PL mount was installed. PL is the standard mount for most cinema lenses, worldwide. There's a fascinating, largely unknown, and somewhat colorful history about how Russian LOMO roundfronts came to the West to be used in low (and not-so-low) budget cinema. Maybe Andrew will have an anamorphic lens historian post an article sometime.   Anyway, the PL to MFT adapter I use is from Hot Rod Cameras in Burbank, who are the only source most pros trust for an adapter like this. Very serious piece of hardware.   Thanks for your thoughts and observations, I do appreciate them and the discussion we've had. And good luck with your own shooting!!

  There is no taking lens. LOMO roundfronts are single unit lenses. The common standard to test cinema lenses is to mount them directly to a projector (often fitted with a PL mount) and project a test pattern through the lens and onto a screen. As Stuart Rabin at Focus Optic says, the lens is either IN or OUT. These were very much in.

  I see what you mean. The camera rig was placed on the conference table for that scene, I suspect the balance was slightly off. Regardless, will address it on that and any other shots after we lock picture.   Just for the record, the entire lens set was inspected, mounted and projected at Focus Optics in LA before purchase, and were certified as being in perfect alignment and in exceptionally excellent condition.   Thanks for the feedback.