Bioskop.Inc

There are NO RULES/FORMULAS in cinema - well not ones that are easily identifiable or definable. Genre Studies is a long & hard road to follow, with, as yet, no clear answers - otherwise there would no longer be a discipline called Genre Studies.   Genre films continue to exist (some more than others) precisely because they mutate & thus subvert the films that have come before them - breaking the rules if you please! Generic Hybridity & Mutation are the staples of the continued success/existence of films, without it we would still be watching the same stuff over & over & over again. Now that does sound quite familiar doesn't it!? And yes, Hollywood does re-make films because they know it will be a cash cow (a formula if you wish), but for a genre to survive it has to move forward & change - are you starting to see the difficulty/longevity in Genre Studies now?   On a side note, the Horror Film Genre is the longest running & most persistent of all the film genres - there has hardly been a year since 1896 (Le Manoir du Diable by Georges Melies - the first recognised horror film) that hasn't seen the release of a Horror Film. So, no matter how bad some sections of society deem them to be, the rest of us can't get enough!   You need to remember that America isn't the only country to make films, but it is one of the only countries that continually makes bad films! There are lots of different flavours out there, try a few, you might actually like some!   Unfortunately, the whole Innate or Learnt behaviour debate is a very difficult thing to get a grip on & yes Children are a blank canvas when they are first born. However, what forms them is their interaction with society as a whole & not just films, which by the way they do come to realise are fiction. Now the tricky thing comes with Sociopaths, who cannot tell the difference between right & wrong (and never will), and scientists/psychologists have determined that they were born this way (chemical in balance in the brain or something like that). Normal people can tell the difference between right & wrong - this is regardless of any violent acts that they might commit.   Again, ethical constraints within the scientific world forbid experimentation on children - so we'll never know how a child fed only on violence & gore will turn out as an adult. Asking children if the've seen such content has also been seen to be redundant, since children tend to lie in order to present themselves as brave (bragging rights included) or more grown-up then they really are. So all we are left with is to ask adults about violent/gory films they might have seen as a child & the effect such content has had on them - the results show that viewing such content does have an effect, but certainly its never been proved to the extremes of turning them into mindless killers or violent individuals, in fact the results tend to show quite the opposite.   The TV thing is a tough one & will always be so - there's no clear cut solution, apart from good parenting.   I saw many films on TV that i shouldn't have - scared shit out of me (Hands of the Ripper is still a vivid nightmare) & yes, i'm still afraid of the water!

The only problem is people being brave enough to do it. Perhaps if we start then others will follow suit?   (Just as i type QHR gets right in there - nice one!)   My problem is i've only got a 60D & don't trust reviews or should that be, bored of reading loads of them to form a reasoned opinion.

I tried to cc this footage & there was something seriously lacking with it (really lacklustre) - i just couldn't get it to do what i wanted (will give it another go, as i probably gave up too quickly). Just think that the 8-bit quality does need a little help & the theory that flat is best is probably the most misguided advice for DSLRs. You simply can't put back in stuff that isn't there in the first place - this isn't RAW. So dialing down everything, IMO, isn't helping anything, its disabling you. With a DSLR you should try to get it as perfect as possible & then tweek it in post - 8-bit isn't that flexible before it falls apart on you. Was also a bit confused why there was noise at iso 200?   Maybe i'll change my mind, but i'm not overly impressed with GH3. No criticism of your footage intended (as i don't think there is anything wrong with it - just the theory behind it) & I was really grateful to have something to play with.   Thanks, it was really good & brave of you to do this.   Perhaps we could all do this more regularly, so we can really test out cameras before we take the plunge?

Is Tarantino a master? Well he certainly is post-modern (if we're still allowed to use this term) in his use of historical film pastiche - he carefully stitches together elements, whether they be stylistic or narrative in nature, culled from the film archives to make a new whole. Now some people say that he is simply a great copier of other people's work (Reservoir Dogs & Kill Bill being great examples - the former uses City on Fire as a template & the later is an amalgamation of numerous asian martial arts movies) & others claim his brilliance for homage.   Is he an original, progressive filmmaker? Probably not, since he isn't breaking new ground, but is constantly looking backwards to the past. Now, this isn't a bad thing & is his greatest achievement, since he educates his audience in the importance of film history & has helped a lot of people [re]discover films that would've either disappeared without a trace, or simply remained undiscovered. Where would Asian action films, such as John Woo's, be without him? Would their stylised 'ballets of death' have ever become as mainstream as quickly or at all? Hard to tell, but he sure helped! On another point he introduced me to the magnificent films of Wong Kar-Wai - who IMO is a true modern Master.   Is Tarantino in the same league as say Orsen Welles, who at 25 made Citizen Kane, which has nearly every single type of camera shot used in modern cinema. But he certainly is a master at the niche he has made for himself within the confines of American cinema.   On a quick note, he isn't subverting the 'Hero', he readily applies the 'Anti-Hero' as his main protagonist & this characterisation is a whole lot older in narrative story telling than Tarantino's application of it.   And does 'Art Imitate Life' or does 'Life Imitate Art'? I'll leave that up to you.   As far as the violence debate is concerned, this is very tricky ground since researchers simply can't sit a bunch of kids down & let them watch grotesque horror films or explicit acts of violence. These films aren't meant for children (this doesn't mean that they don't watch them) & research does point to the fact that they can have a lasting effect, but there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that it will turn them into mindless killers. Sociopathic personalities are said to be 'genetically based but typically has environmental factors, such as family relations, that trigger its onset'.   Having written a PhD on Horror films, the one thing that becomes painfully obvious is that researchers can only determine the effect of such material after the fact & the inquest/research goes on, but there is still no clear cut answer. What we do know is that Fear & Terror are a part of our lives, and that we learn coping mechanisms during childhood to deal with such feelings - parental comfort/explanation/protection & dreams (nightmares) can play a role. What i would like to say is that making sweeping statements about the effect films have on society is to enter into a minefield & to suggest that society has become more violent as a result is to be completely uniformed about the history of our society. The research that i undertook suggested that the cities that we live in are less violent, than say Victorian times (& they didn't have violent films to watch). I got sidetracked into the Ripper murders & reported violent crime in the Whitechapel district of London - the Ripper murders were by far the worst, but certainly there were some pretty gruesome murders carried out on a daily basis, stuff that would make your stomach churn.   Killings, muggings, rape, child molestation/murder & gangs are not new phenomenon, they are as old as the cities we live - fact. Why are Human Beings so violent/aggressive towards each other? Well that's the eternal unanswered question, isn't it. To blame cinematic portrayals of violence as the main cause is to be simply naive & uninformed about the history of our society. The way the mass media try to scare us into believing a supposed truth is just a smoke screen to hide the fact about the true nature of ourselves & the authorities' ineffectual attempts to stem the problem - scape goating is such an easy option.    Sorry for the rant...

I love the fact that you can crop the Iscomorphot x2 & it still gives the Iscorama a run for its money! I think if you'd left it uncropped it would've been the overall winner, especially at f5.6, which for me seems to be the optimum aperture. I bought my x2 by mistake or should that be a drunken ebay moment a couple of xmas ago & there's something about it, almost like a special coating on the lenses (but most probably because 2 sets of doublets & no moving parts), that gives you that look.   Thanks

@tferradans For all of us lesser mortals without a 5D3, we've not had this yet & using NBs can be a bit daunting - but so glad to have it!   Also, is the 5D3 worth the plunge? Am waiting for their firmware update to see what it does/doesn't do. Also the 7D2 could be v.interesting!   @jgharding Here you go: http://nanomad.magiclantern.fm/nightly/   The newest NB is on this page or you can go back into the archive & the ChangeLog.txt tells you what they've been doing. So glad i took the plunge with NBs. As 'tferradans' stated it is a bit laggy, but worth it!

Finally plucked up the courage to try a ML nightly build (today's) - the anamorphic squeeze in live view works & isn't disabled once you press Rec!   It can do: x1.25 x1.33 x1.5 x1.66 x2   The only downside is that it judders a bit when you pan, but this doesn't affect the end result - it also seems to highlight moire a lot more, so that's handy.   Hasn't crashed on my 60D all afternoon.   Oh! There's a new look interface!

If you're thinking of going up to 135mm, try the russian Tair 11a (its a pre-set aperture with 20 blades) - sharp & awesome!

I'm sure i've come across a step-by-step explanation in the past.   Just found this forum again - its here somewhere: http://www.kyphoto.com/cgi-bin/forum/discus.cgi     or Have a look here: http://forum.mflenses.com/equipment-care-and-repairs-f6.html   If you can't find what you're looking for, then start a new post on mflenses.

The Redstan clamp is just for fixing it to your lens & not for alignment. There should be a button on the Iscorama - push this down & while held down rotate the lens to align (be careful to always hold the button down while rotating!).

Really nice combo, footage & article. Would really like to see some ProRes footage from you. I'll agree on you with the 54s character, but the only thing i've found to be sharper is my iscomorphot 8/x2 (yep tried a 36 - think it depends on your copy). I've found that the 54 is more temperamental with its taking lenses - can't afford a Leica, but the Super Takumar 55 f1.8 produces v.sharp images, so going to have to try the Nikon Andrew recommended. But nothing really beats the 54 & Russian lenses for character (TIP: KMZ manufacturer seems to have produced the best lenses).

Nice one Yellow!   This is exactly why i love this forum - so many helpful people willing to share!

Awesome! I read through the notes that come with it & yes, there'll be a learning curve & a lot of head scratching for sure! Really like the results you get with interlaced footage - the files i take off my Topfield PVR will now look so much better now.   Thanks for sharing & keep doing so... 

5Dmk3 or 7Dmk2 in a C100 body sounds about right, an upgrade but not as good as a C100 - but then why would you buy it?   Its hard to imagine what else they could do without shooting themselves in the foot.   There's a small window to do something, whilst BMCC & Digital Bolex are dragging their feet, but what & we are talking about Canon!

There's definitely something wrong with your Kowa. At a guess i'd say that the lenses need to be re-aligned.   You said that you sent it away to get fixed - by who, because they didn't fix it. There's a list of good repair people in a post - if not sell it on & claim ignorance.   You could try another taking lens, just in case that's your problem. And, look into the Kowa from the front - can you see an oval shape that it should form?

You'd hope they'd go after the BMCC, a little, & abandon upgrading Video mode for DSLRs, but that's just hoping.   Unless they've had a complete rethink about the market & their place in it, but as usual we'll just have to wait for the announcement.   I really wonder what the 7Dmk2 will offer, its got to be better than the 6D - doesn't it?   Canon seem to be like the guy who holds the table cloth, with the intention of pulling off in one clean stroke & says "watch this!" Well maybe they'll get it right one day, but for now its all chipped chinaware for tea!

Hmmm. It might be that i've been studying film for 20yrs, but i found it very average & his voice just annoyed me (monotone & without expression). Also, just when you thought he might go into a little bit more detail about a scene, he just opted for an off hand/uninformative comment instead of really explaining something/anything in the detail that i'd expect for a doc of this length.   The book that it was based on is slightly more interesting, but again there are far better books out there.   Basically, it was for people who know nothing about film - a light introduction, if you'd like, & from that point of view it did the job. 

There is definitely something wrong with your Kowa. It should be sharp when your taking lens is wide open - you shouldn't have to stop down to get a sharp image.   Are you sure that you're using it properly? Set your taking lens to 5ft/1.5m & then adjust the Kowa (you might have to adjust each lens in turn - takes a bit of getting used to) - make sure you're 5ft/1.5m from an object (do this in doors with the lights on & shoot wide open).

@ BR   Can you explain a bit more about x264. Is it basically a codec you can tweek & then use as any other codec with an app?   thanks

Think this question has been asked before (or was it about the Isco's this seller has listed as well) & Alan (Redstan) gave an answer - so have a dig through the posts in this section.   But as QHR has stated, this seller has been trying to flog these for a while, with no takers - if you are interested see if he'll lower the price.

@BR   I've been experiencing that sort of light changes as well recently & i think Vimeo has changed something.   & Wow, that is very detailed - using MPEG or?   thanks, as i've got to upload something soon & have been putting it off because Vimeo quality has gone right down.

This is the new compression guidelines for Vimeo:   vimeo.com/help/compression   But there are tones of how-to vids on Vimeo, itself. The best one seems to be using MPEGStreamclip.

I've found MPEGStreamclip to be pretty reliable, well more so than QT - can't unsqueeze footage though.

Cheers Axel, Tried both ways & there's no real difference in the quality between the native files & the "optimised media" - just smoother playback with the later. So glad i don't have to transcode footage anymore & love the fact that it backs up files if you want. I was so hesitant in getting FCPX because of all the fuss that was made, but it really is great for DSLR footage - really starting to think that the whole Premiere thing was a huge big scam! Yes there are some bugs, but not that i've really encountered them to any degree where i'm cursing the day i bought FCPX & they seem to be fixing them - just hope they do another update so that i can use Neat Video.

@Axel. Is it better to use "Optimized Media" in FCPX & why? As stated above, the 5DtoRGB transcoded files introduced banding when brought into FCPX - i always thought this was the best way to transcode footage, but it obviously isn't anymore. Do you have any explanation why this banding appears when i edit with these ProRes files & not the native H264?