Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Macgregor and crew, Salt Flats Utah

Why is this thread turning into "assholes on parade"?
 
Andrew Benz said:
Why is this thread turning into "assholes on parade"?
Click to expand...

It's this weird thing that seems to happen in a lot of Macgregor threads (through no fault of his own), I guess it's something that followed us over from DVXuser! He consistently produces some of the best images I've seen from these cameras but there always seems to be a bit of a hubbub.

Anyway - in response to the person that posted the car commercial, I found a few extra scenes here :)

Speaking of which, I hope we'll get to see what Harris Savides can do with a RED soon... Zodiac on the Viper cam was the best-looking digital feature I've seen yet.
 
Shawn Nelson said:
I'm not sure why you are stating your credentials as if I was somehow attacking you, as that was neither my words nor my thoughts. I simply was countering that no one should receive Red's out of turn. If Jim wants to give Macgregor his Red when his number comes up, that's his perogative.
Click to expand...
It's not my tone to give advices to Jim Jannard. I'm just a customer like many others. But I've been here since day one, like you. We've putted our own money, time, beliefs on this project. This is a large one. With many people today. There are choices to make. There has been a lot of discussion about options that shall bring different colours to our workflows, etc. What I'm trying to do is to make a point. Trying to bring others to my cause. 'cause not all here share the same flag. That's acceptable. What's not acceptable (just to me) it's to check out a different meaning to my point. Or even about what's beyond my own backyard.

For that purpose, no matters if we have or not a fair opinion about macgregor's work. He's just a symbol of a group. As well, my credentials... :-) An idea about a camera born on dvxuser.com -- that's what counts to me. I don't want another CineAlta. Just "that one" camera born on dvxuser.com. The macgregor footage doesn't owe anything to any PJ or SS footage. BTW, who could watch «Full Frontal» knows that's possible to find out better footage in each piece of work from Miguel than on the 101 minutes of another Julia Roberts film :wink: Hey, I thought that was mainly shot on 1/3" chip video... :sarcasm:

Although I wouldn't like to customize too much the point focused on these both polyvalent brilliant filmmakers. Both. That's the point. The RED marketing needs to have his marketing based on the famous names. It's understandable. But there's who's giving much better than those box office neons. The same who came from those who have putted THEIR OWN SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT in order to put this project up.
 
Emanuel said:
It's not my tone to give advices to Jim Jannard. I'm just a customer like many others. But I've been here since day one, like you. We've putted our own money, time, beliefs on this project. This is a large one. With many people today. There are choices to make. There has been a lot of discussion about options that shall bring different colours to our workflows, etc. What I'm trying to do is to make a point. Trying to bring others to my cause. 'cause not all here share the same flag. That's acceptable. What's not acceptable (just to me) it's to check out a different meaning to my point. Or even about what's beyond my own backyard.

For that purpose, no matters if we have or not a fair opinion about macgregor's work. He's just a symbol of a group. As well, my credentials... :-) An idea about a camera born on dvxuser.com -- that's what counts to me. I don't want another CineAlta. Just "that one" camera born on dvxuser.com. The macgregor footage doesn't owe anything to any PJ or SS footage. BTW, who could watch «Full Frontal» knows that's possible to find out better footage in each piece of work from Miguel than on the 101 minutes of another Julia Roberts film :wink: Hey, I thought that was mainly shot on 1/3" chip video... :sarcasm:

Although I wouldn't like to customize too much the point focused on these both polyvalent brilliant filmmakers. Both. That's the point. The RED marketing needs to have his marketing based on the famous names. It's understandable. But there's who's giving much better than those box office neons. The same who came from those who have putted THEIR OWN SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT in order to put this project up.
Click to expand...

Then it sounds like we have no disagreement, we are of the same perspective. Are we cool brother? I'd love to meet you sometime.
 
Hi guys.
Some new footage from today:


image2.jpg


http://www.macgregor.autoecstasy.com/engagement/A018_C002_070928_D.mov

This is a quicktime untouched, just as it was recorded. No contrast added, no exposure adjustutaments. Pure as it comes.
We are using Zeiss superspeeds T1.3. Very soft lenses. I dont like them too much, but they are light and cheap.
320 ISO in this environement is crazy. I am using two ND filters (1,2 + 0.9) and still i have too much light. It is insane. RED 1 should come with built in ND filters. Strugling with two NDs at the same time causes relfexions, more time to set up the shots, dust inside... Basically i dont understand why not going that way (built in NDs), as most cameras these days.

Dinamic range seems good. All the information is kept in the histogram. And i dont have to make any compromises.
 
Strange there are no built in ND's...

I am DL'ing your new clip now!
 
Great clip! And I think I understand the story now...
 
Brandon Rice said:
Strange there are no built in ND's...

I am DL'ing your new clip now!
Click to expand...

I think Red thought through it and decided not to, for simplicity (and thus robustness).
 
The built-in ND idea has been discussed before, I think the RED reasoning was that not making them built-in (1) gave you more options for different lens mounts and (2) was just that much simpler to design and build. If you do design in an ND wheel behind the lens it affects the optical path so you always need x thickness of glass there even if it's clear. That gives you two more surfaces for stray light reflections, etc.

I think you can get single ND filters as dense as you want. Good to keep in mind when preparing for any outdoors shots.

Judging by the sharp clear salt flakes flying at the end of the clip, I'm guessing you used a faster shutter speed than 1/48 ?

The plot line here is starting to creep me out, but I'll try to avoid commenting on non-camera issues.
 
Wrong.
Cameras should take any path to make work/life easier. That is why digital is replacing film.
Film cameras cant take NDs wheels for other reasons.
But most important, with film cameras you can choose film stock. I could be shooting this shortfilm in 64D.
However with the RED camera i MUST pick 320 iso.
I´d rather prefer to have a NDs wheel (if you dont want any NDs or glass in your image turn it to clear) than handling two NDs together plus a polarizer all together. ;D
There are no ND 2.7 that i know.
 
But wouldn't an ND wheel behind the lens create havoc with the PL mount and backfocus issues?

Besides making it more difficult, if not impossible, to properly change out the mount to Nikon or Canon
 
macgregor said:
Strugling with two NDs at the same time causes relfexions.
Click to expand...

I understand that pain. Panavision has a couple of older 4x5.6 MB's that have one cavity that holds 2 filter holders that hold the filters right tight beside each other. It helps a lot with reducing reflections. Another tip and you probably already know this one but I will suggest it anyway. Make sure you use the darkest ND furthest from the lens so it reflects the most right off the bat. Thing is with a 1.2 and .9 that will not help as much. Your stuff looks great though so your definately doing a bunch right already.
 
Hi shawn,
It is time to sleep.You are spending toooo much time on the computer.
babu
 
babubu said:
Hi shawn,
It is time to sleep.You are spending toooo much time on the computer.
babu
Click to expand...


If I said something stupid, then correct me and state plainly the issue.
 
"There are no ND 2.7 that i know"

if there is a demand then somebody will build it ... or was that build it and they will buy it ???

you could always use 2 polarizer together and have a varible ND to almost total no light goes thru ( the 2 filters ) ....
 
Shawn Nelson said:
But wouldn't an ND wheel behind the lens create havoc with the PL mount and backfocus issues?

Besides making it more difficult, if not impossible, to properly change out the mount to Nikon or Canon
Click to expand...

You have a good point there Shawn... wonder how that could be solved, aside from external ND filters.
 
Another bonus I would see of having behind the lens filters would be that if they sat in a small filter holder that slid in front of the sensor glass and was fairly sealed less dust would be able to get on the sensor glass. This would be great because it would mean much less cleaning of the sensor glass and if one of the body filters got scratched when cleaning it there would be no big deal to just replace it in the filter holder.

Overall I would see a slide in body filter cavity being great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top