JulioD

Last time I checked there is no ability to innovate. To leap forward. To get a joke. To understand innuendo. AI or computers can only be as good as their programming. They can write a Haiku because it has rules and logic. But they can’t invent “The Haiku”. They are only as good as the person prompting them based on what’s already been invented.

Of course no art is created in isolation. It’s always affected by what came before and what others are doing. AI though is inherently introverted. It can ONLY be based on what’s gone before. It inherently can only copy or emulate as mashup. And even then it can only do so through the right prompting. In traditional painting apprenticeships the students would copy the works of masters. Then they make new works. AI can’t do that. It can only copy paste and mash up.

Like this https://www.instagram.com/p/CjX5DSJrViW/?igshid=MzY1NDJmNzMyNQ== https://www.instagram.com/p/BwnFjGkF77B/?igshid=MzY1NDJmNzMyNQ== https://www.instagram.com/p/6ooQjXmSHT/?igshid=MzY1NDJmNzMyNQ==

If you’ve ever dealt with Panavision then you know they only do their own Anamorphic optics. Meaning they don’t have other brands that aren’t Panavision made. Certainly not In the US. https://www.panavision.com/camera-and-optics/optics#!optics=anamorphic Dan Sasaki is the head of optics at Panavision. He’s the guy who designs the lenses. You can go to him and ask for a custom design. A lot of lenses like the new Panaspeeds can also be custom tuned to your taste. I worked with someone who had a set that had purple / pink flares, worked like a superspeed above T2.8 and had a built in diffusion. Thats not stock, that’s an optics recipe that you can ask and test for. And when you work with Panavision you know that they also make a lot of one-off custom lenses typically to order for a customer.

Read the link? Its a Panavision custom anamorphic lens made by Dan Sasaki himself

Sure AI will have data. But it’s inherently backward looking. It’s not going to be an innovator. Just at best, mash ups of existing auteur. You have to prompt it with whose work you want to plagerise and it’s really good at copying that. It can’t innovate new. All it can do is regurgitate old. Before you had Kubrick how would you tell it to emulate a Kubrick sensibility….

Exactly the type of user this was made for https://www.instagram.com/p/C0mhRzoOIYt/?igshid=MzY1NDJmNzMyNQ==

I think it is similar to what happened with the digital revolution. Filmmaking used to be expensive. It acted as a kind of gate keeper to the unwashed masses who wanted t make movies and was a kind of filtering of the kinds of films that could get made. Digital technologies dramatically lowered the cost of entry. Now anyone can make a movie. Not only that but anyone can DISTRIBUTE that movie too, you’re not relying on old school distribution any more. All that happened over the last 20 years and what has it added up to? I’d say a lot more garbage / noise films that no one watches on YouTube. The digital revolution means anyone can now make a movie. It doens’t mean “anyone” can actually make a movie worth watching. AI will be the same. Just because you CAN make a film with AI doesn’t mean you SHOULD make a film.

I thought we talking Titanic. FYI Hobbit was shot 48fps but with a 270deg shutter.

And as I’m sure you know, Projecting material at 48fps that was acquired at 24FPS doesn’t realllllly make it HFR either even if this is the case.

Yeah this argument keeps coming back but there is never any evidence to support it. With technology as time progresses most things do improve. Bit depth. Resolution. There’s an assumption that faster must be better. But audiences continue to prefer 24

Exactly. The video split alone appeals to the renter customer who are the ones who NEED to shoot 1200 rolls and then move to the next job (as described above) Those aren’t owner operators.

You don’t get it. Here i thought you were industry.

Gaming has been here for decades. Younger audiences are used to and have seen a lot of HFR. Several very top shelf filmmakers have TRIED. Digital means there’s no cost difference to shoot HFR. It failed every time. It’s not just legacy.

Just because you don’t think it makes sense doens’t mean there aren’t already people now shooting super 8. https://www.oldfastglass.com/super-8mm https://www.pro8mm.com/collections/super-8-camera-rentals https://kitsplit.com/rent/canon-1014-xl-s-super8-camera-with-zoom-6-5-65mm-f1-4-brooklyn-ny https://www.sydneysuper8.com.au Away from the major markets people are more likely to use KitSplit or similar. The last link is a company in Sydney processing super 8 and doing a thriving business. They can’t keep up.

Exactly.

Pre sound there was no standard. 18FPS was kind-of the default. Most hand cranked cameras did 9 frames per crank, so two cranks per second becomes the defectors about standard. 16FPS is about the lower threshold where you start to not perceive continuous motion. 24 FPS only became the default with the introduction of sync sound in the late 30’s that required a slightly higher / faster playback. The first thirty years of cinema HAD NO STANDARD frame rate. They could have, and DID shoot a huge number of variations of frame rates. Just like we do today (for slow mo or under cranking) It’s got to be more than just legacy, because there have been decades of options available and audiences continue to preference 24FPS in drama.

You proved it. You said you loved Titanic because it was shot HFR. It wasn’t. That’s makes all your arguments invalid really. 24FPS isn’t going anywhere.

Sorry, my above post was meant to be responding to this one.

Now there is a dud camera. Sure the sensor is nice, but it’s horrible horrible to use and that’s why it failed.

The director himself went back on HFR. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/dec/13/peter-jackson-48fps-tone-down-hobbit-desolation-smaug-hd “Peter Jackson says he has toned down the higher frame rate version of Hobbit sequel The Desolation of Smaug following complaints from audiences and critics about the sharp look of its predecessor.” When the director does an about face and has to talk about a technology component to a piece of entertain,meant, yeah that’s a disaster. That’s because HFR was UNIVERSALLY disliked. https://www.vulture.com/2012/12/critics-on-the-hobbits-high-frame-rate.html# And whole articles have been written about the HFR reaction. You may think HFR is the “future” but you’re in a small minority that like HFR for drama. Good for you.

Maybe you should lead with that instead of making troll-baiting posts with a title of “24p is outdated”. You can’t even tell when watching the difference between 24P and HFR. It’s an objectively wrong statement. End of story.

OK You just screwed your own argument. Titanic was photographed at good old 24 FPS. You can’t even tell. Maybe just turn the fluid motion feature on your TV on and be happy. Avatar is a 3D cartoon. Perfect for hyper realism. Great use of HFR for that specific story telling example. Hobbit was a disaster. So much that they CHANGED the approach back for subsequent films. You’re alone in this opinion.

Couldn’t edit in time. I am not convinced this will succeed by the way. They’ll be lucky to sell more than 100 of them. But it is unique. And niche. And that niche pays.

It’s built for rental. It has a video split. No s8 camera that I know of has ever had one. c mount interchangeable lenses. Not many had that either. That means commercials. And music videos. Commercials and music videos are the life blood of camera rental companies. Thats exactly where this camera lives. And the types of clients that can pay for it.