From psrioux at gmail.com Sat Jul 1 01:12:28 2017 From: psrioux at gmail.com (Pierre Samuel Rioux) Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2017 01:12:28 -0400 Subject: [Konvas] about EDITING free stuff from avid Message-ID: Interesting concept, the article from no school and the link ! http://nofilmschool.com/2017/05/avid-finally-drops-its-free-media-composer-software http://www.avid.com/media-composer-first -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From speedbird at acousticturtle.plus.com Wed Jul 12 04:54:32 2017 From: speedbird at acousticturtle.plus.com (Speedbird@acousticturtle.plus.com) Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2017 09:54:32 +0100 Subject: [Konvas] Fwd: The 16mm Workshop References: Message-ID: <5AA27F31-D97D-4ED5-828B-83323705C6B2@acousticturtle.plus.com> Some of you may find this interesting Rita > From: "Gauge Film" > Date: 11 July 2017 at 21:30:46 BST > To: Michael Hatcher > Subject: The 16mm Workshop > > > View in Browser > > The 16MM Workshop > > 15th of July 10am-7pm > This workshop will be of interest to 16mm newcomers and veterans alike.The Bolex H-16 Reflex and the Canon Scoopic 16M are iconic independent film-making 16mm cameras you will be getting to grips with on this day course. They have been chosen for their durability, versatility, affordability and perhaps most importantly their unique differences. The course covers everything from basic camera operations (such as loading film into the camera) to more advanced functions and features like slow motion, focusing lenses, manual exposure and double exposures. Participants will get to shoot with each camera for the first part of the workshop and we provide film for the day. > After the film has been shot you will learn how to load processing tanks, develop the emulsion and splice and dry the film stock. The image forming process will be explained thoroughly so by the end of the course you'll understand how light enters your cameras lens and creates an image on the film. We will also advise you on how to make your own home-built darkroom so you wont have to rent a space or rely on institutional support. After the films are dry they will be projected and viewed. We digitize the film shot on the day and participants will receive a digital copy of everything shot on the workshop within 4 weeks. > Book Now > > > > > > > This email was sent to you by Gauge Film > Chapel Lane > Dudley, West Midlands DY3 4PL > United Kingdom > Unsubscribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From photones at juno.com Fri Jul 14 10:19:03 2017 From: photones at juno.com (photones at juno.com) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 14:19:03 GMT Subject: [Konvas] Dunkirk Imax 65mm Message-ID: <20170714.101903.17229.0@webmail06.dca.untd.com> I just hope my theater projects this on film. https://www.redsharknews.com/production/item/4729-shooting-christopher-nolan-s-dunkirk-in-65mm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nkovats at gmail.com Fri Jul 14 13:49:11 2017 From: nkovats at gmail.com (Nicholas Kovats) Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2017 13:49:11 -0400 Subject: [Konvas] Dunkirk Imax 65mm In-Reply-To: <20170714.101903.17229.0@webmail06.dca.untd.com> References: <20170714.101903.17229.0@webmail06.dca.untd.com> Message-ID: Thanks! Great article and I will have two 15 perf 70mm IMAX theaters to choose from! On Fri, Jul 14, 2017 at 10:19 AM, photones--- via Cinema wrote: > I just hope my theater projects this on film. > https://www.redsharknews.com/production/item/4729-shooting-christopher-nolan-s-dunkirk-in-65mm > > > WE COULD REALLY USE YOUR HELP! The sharing of information on both the > Konvas.org website and the discussion list takes a lot of time and costs > money. > > Your donations help keep Konvas.org running and are very much appreciated: > http://konvas.org/how-to/help-konvas.org-donate.html > > _______________________________________________ > Cinema mailing list > Cinema at konvas.org > http://Konvas.org - All about Konvas, Kinor and other Russian Cinema Cameras > > Visit the discussion archives: > http://konvas.org/list-archives.html > > Join the Konvas Discussion List: > http://konvas.org/mailman/listinfo/cinema_konvas.org > > Please be kind when replying and crop the replied message!!! > From speedbird at acousticturtle.plus.com Sat Jul 15 06:50:41 2017 From: speedbird at acousticturtle.plus.com (Speedbird@acousticturtle.plus.com) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 11:50:41 +0100 Subject: [Konvas] RedShark News - Shooting Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk in 65mm Message-ID: <45927C8A-810A-4971-AE3F-A9C4391F6768@acousticturtle.plus.com> https://www.redsharknews.com/production/item/4729-shooting-christopher-nolan-s-dunkirk-in-65mm Have a look at the IMAX 65mm camera. This is one big chunk of metal and note the running time!!! Interested to know who actually makes these cameras or are they converted from old camera bodies. Hope you all are having fun. Rita From photones at juno.com Sat Jul 15 08:56:51 2017 From: photones at juno.com (photones at juno.com) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 12:56:51 GMT Subject: [Konvas] US theaters 65mm projection Message-ID: <20170715.085651.664.0@webmail08.dca.untd.com> http://www.indiewire.com/2017/07/dunkirk-christopher-nolan-70mm-imax-movie-theater-locations-1201850899/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bruinflight at gmail.com Sun Jul 16 19:30:49 2017 From: bruinflight at gmail.com (Brandon Esten) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 08:30:49 +0900 Subject: [Konvas] Film grain aliasing Message-ID: <6D426EC7-7A77-4DAF-9809-73E5C37FFB92@gmail.com> http://filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26920 Has anyone here ever come across this problem while scanning? It seems to pop up around ~2001 with early still frame scanners and I figured it was a solved problem; however, it seems to be alive and kicking! One of the claims in the forum I quoted is that for smaller film gauges you need a higher resolution scan... but that doesn't make sense. A certain scanner sensor pixel count per mm^2 that is high enough to get past aliasing should be a constant figure based on ISO (ASA) and not the physical dimensions of the celluloid or gate framing. For a given sensor, a 4K scan of 4-perf 35mm film is apples and oranges to a 4K scan of Super-8? In fact, with a fixed optical pathway, a 35mm size sensor will be 'windowed' to scan Super-8 and thus, with the same pixel density should render the same 'resolution'? There again... does ISO scale with film gauge? I mean, is the emulsion the same between 35mm 200ISO and Super-8 200ISO? I always assumed 'yes' and think I remember folks mentioning it... but... idunno? Perhaps I'm getting tangled up in different but intertwined issues. Peace, Brandon Sent from my iPhone -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From colcam at aim.com Sun Jul 16 20:03:33 2017 From: colcam at aim.com (colcam at aim.com) Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 20:03:33 -0400 Subject: [Konvas] Film grain aliasing In-Reply-To: <6D426EC7-7A77-4DAF-9809-73E5C37FFB92@gmail.com> References: <6D426EC7-7A77-4DAF-9809-73E5C37FFB92@gmail.com> Message-ID: <15d4ddb7319-c0c-1489@webjasstg-vab32.srv.aolmail.net> Most of the problems with conversion from film to digital files are centered on the number of colors-- get that wrong, the picture looks lumpy and the colors look fine-- and it shows up in the number of steps in dynamic range. You may have to scan something for each color independently AND then scan for brightness of total combined colors AND wind up with a huge file that cannot be used except to produce 4k masters. I had a single scene of 5227 stock that had very bright, changing colors with backgrounds that were flat and had no fill, and it took a dozen scans per frame to get it up for 720p HD format. They just redid that footage for a new 4k master and it took over eighteen scans per frame, each color, one by one, plus scans for the brightest areas, scans for the darkest areas, and marriage scans to allow them to be combined. The number of powers of enlargement play into it, and that's why the small frames require higher resolution, and you should only count the line pairs of the scanned area. There are at least a dozen different issues, some based on colors, some on brightness, some on contrast, and to make it worse, the new digital files are different than anything before so the guys doing the work may be guessing, too. -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Esten via Cinema http://filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26920 Has anyone here ever come across this problem while scanning? It seems to pop up around ~2001 with early still frame scanners and I figured it was a solved problem; however, it seems to be alive and kicking! One of the claims in the forum I quoted is that for smaller film gauges you need a higher resolution scan... but that doesn't make sense. A certain scanner sensor pixel count per mm^2 that is high enough to get past aliasing should be a constant figure based on ISO (ASA) and not the physical dimensions of the celluloid or gate framing. For a given sensor, a 4K scan of 4-perf 35mm film is apples and oranges to a 4K scan of Super-8? In fact, with a fixed optical pathway, a 35mm size sensor will be 'windowed' to scan Super-8 and thus, with the same pixel density should render the same 'resolution'? There again... does ISO scale with film gauge? I mean, is the emulsion the same between 35mm 200ISO and Super-8 200ISO? I always assumed 'yes' and think I remember folks mentioning it... but... idunno? Perhaps I'm getting tangled up in different but intertwined issues. Peace, Brandon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From colcam at aim.com Sun Jul 16 20:09:17 2017 From: colcam at aim.com (colcam at aim.com) Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 20:09:17 -0400 Subject: [Konvas] Film grain aliasing In-Reply-To: <15d4ddb7319-c0c-1489@webjasstg-vab32.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <15d4de0b308-c11-146e@webjasstg-vab21.srv.aolmail.net> Oh, and remember this is CMYK based. -----Original Message----- From: colcam--- via Cinema Most of the problems with conversion from film to digital files are centered on the number of colors-- get that wrong, the picture looks lumpy and the colors look fine-- and it shows up in the number of steps in dynamic range. You may have to scan something for each color independently AND then scan for brightness of total combined colors AND wind up with a huge file that cannot be used except to produce 4k masters. I had a single scene of 5227 stock that had very bright, changing colors with backgrounds that were flat and had no fill, and it took a dozen scans per frame to get it up for 720p HD format. They just redid that footage for a new 4k master and it took over eighteen scans per frame, each color, one by one, plus scans for the brightest areas, scans for the darkest areas, and marriage scans to allow them to be combined. The number of powers of enlargement play into it, and that's why the small frames require higher resolution, and you should only count the line pairs of the scanned area. There are at least a dozen different issues, some based on colors, some on brightness, some on contrast, and to make it worse, the new digital files are different than anything before so the guys doing the work may be guessing, too. -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Esten via Cinema http://filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=26920 Has anyone here ever come across this problem while scanning? It seems to pop up around ~2001 with early still frame scanners and I figured it was a solved problem; however, it seems to be alive and kicking! One of the claims in the forum I quoted is that for smaller film gauges you need a higher resolution scan... but that doesn't make sense. A certain scanner sensor pixel count per mm^2 that is high enough to get past aliasing should be a constant figure based on ISO (ASA) and not the physical dimensions of the celluloid or gate framing. For a given sensor, a 4K scan of 4-perf 35mm film is apples and oranges to a 4K scan of Super-8? In fact, with a fixed optical pathway, a 35mm size sensor will be 'windowed' to scan Super-8 and thus, with the same pixel density should render the same 'resolution'? There again... does ISO scale with film gauge? I mean, is the emulsion the same between 35mm 200ISO and Super-8 200ISO? I always assumed 'yes' and think I remember folks mentioning it... but... idunno? Perhaps I'm getting tangled up in different but intertwined issues. Peace, Brandon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bruinflight at gmail.com Sun Jul 16 20:22:32 2017 From: bruinflight at gmail.com (Brandon Esten) Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 09:22:32 +0900 Subject: [Konvas] Film grain aliasing In-Reply-To: <15d4ddb7319-c0c-1489@webjasstg-vab32.srv.aolmail.net> References: <6D426EC7-7A77-4DAF-9809-73E5C37FFB92@gmail.com> <15d4ddb7319-c0c-1489@webjasstg-vab32.srv.aolmail.net> Message-ID: <11846238-483D-46E3-AC3A-908B794C3F3B@gmail.com> > Most of the problems with conversion from film to digital files are centered on the number of colors-- get that wrong, the picture looks lumpy and the colors look fine-- and it shows up in the number of steps in dynamic range. You may have to scan something for each color independently AND then scan for brightness of total combined colors AND wind up with a huge file that cannot be used except to produce 4k masters. Fascinating! This kinda sounds akin to HDR. 17 steps for each frame... I'd imagine you accomplish this with different color filters in the optical pathway and different intensities of light or constant light and ND filter stacks? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From colcam at aim.com Sun Jul 16 22:39:57 2017 From: colcam at aim.com (colcam at aim.com) Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2017 22:39:57 -0400 Subject: [Konvas] Film grain aliasing In-Reply-To: <11846238-483D-46E3-AC3A-908B794C3F3B@gmail.com> Message-ID: <15d4e6aa281-c0a-1aac@webjasstg-vab17.srv.aolmail.net> Personally, I run for cover and let someone who is younger with more energy try to do it. They had a reel of filters that looked like it was from an oversized Viewmaster. I did a bit of conversion of negative still frame 35 24x36mm frames and it took me several hours per frame to get them done right. Ektachrome/Fujichrome took longer. Agfachrome was unreal, and I could get the frame perfect in looks-- but the digital frame looked nothing like the film. Both of them were outstanding, just different. Kodachrome snapped over easily, but was super, super, super high contrast, just like the original frame. Two and a half or three hours per frame, uh, twenty four frames per second. . . an hour and forty one minutes of image, ignore the text of title and credits, just the image. . . do the math and you might catch on as to why I loved the look of Agfa stock and Kodak 5277 but realized converting it was a nightmare and that we needed to go another way. I did tests on 256fps 4k (okay, each shot was limited to about sixty five seconds due to storage and transfer speeds) and it was so real it enthralled me but the audience hated that realism. I've done some math on a digital interlace high speed system, just need a few million dollars to make the gear and run the test. Anyone got some spare change they don't need, and wants to underwrite it? How big a pile would eight million dollars be if it was standard American pocket change? This is where the internet is strangely wonderful. The average American pocket change assortment is about $44,000.00 a US standard ton. That is about a hundred and eighty two tons of coins. I do have a shovel. . . . -----Original Message----- From: Brandon Esten via Cinema Most of the problems with conversion from film to digital files are centered on the number of colors-- get that wrong, the picture looks lumpy and the colors look fine-- and it shows up in the number of steps in dynamic range. You may have to scan something for each color independently AND then scan for brightness of total combined colors AND wind up with a huge file that cannot be used except to produce 4k masters. Fascinating! This kinda sounds akin to HDR. 17 steps for each frame... I'd imagine you accomplish this with different color filters in the optical pathway and different intensities of light or constant light and ND filter stacks? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: