Question about Matte Boxes

1. Why do we use matte boxes? What are their purposes?

To block light, hold filters and look sexy

2. Why are some larger or some smaller?

Why are some cameras big and why are some cameras small ?

3. Why are some more expensive than others?

Why is a Porsche more expensive than a Honda ?

4. What is the purpose of the addition of the "french flag"?

Pour bloquer la lumière

Any help would be appreciated.

The search function is your friend. I encourage you to use it
 
John_Hudson said:
Why is a Porsche more expensive than a Honda ?
Click to expand...

that isn't exactly a sufficient answer. it's much more obvious exactly what the differences between a porsche and an econo-car honda are. when it comes to matte boxes, the differences are obviously much less visible/common/known. they block light out - but a piece of cardboard can, also. so why are some so ridiculously expensive?
 
I read an article recently about the DP's on 24 trying out the HVX and ? as a test to see if the images held up. The results were interesting, the resounding points I took away were two (one I wont discuss as its for another thread), but the other was a comment from Keifer Sutherland, which was that the camera was too small and he felt that he needed the larger camera so he could see clearer the window to which he was acting (along those lines), so its interesting that the actors perception plays an important role in this and I would suggest the use of a matte box would have made him more comfortable in giving his performance. Very important point I thought.
 
Why is a Porsche more expensive than a Honda ?

====="insufficient answer" is understating it for sure.

some of us really don't know these things and are looking for helpful answers, not arrogance on a screen. dude.bro.

can someone please answer the question, why are some so ridiculously expensive?

thanks:Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)
 
Last edited:
You think that's arrogant ?

Have you no sense of humor? None whatsoever ?

What do you mean why are they so expensive ?


Supply, demand, materials, durability, function, stages, rotating stages, brandname, reputation, size .....


Why is a Porsche more expensive than a Honda ?

Oh, I don't know. A Porsche is known to be a world class perfomaning racing automobile made from the best parts under a finely tuned design by the best engineers under the famous coat of arms only Porsche brings while Honda is known of for making practical economy cars for the affordable class ?

No ?


-

Okay

They block light, they can hold filters, they have stages for each filter, some stages rotate for Grads and Pol's. Some MB's can clip onto lens while some require Rods to mount on. Some MB's are made by ubercool brand name companies like Chrosziel while some are from lesser known names like Cavision. Some MB's are made from industrial aircraft metals while some are simply molded plastic. Some are ginormous 4 stages at 6.6" x 6.6" while others are merely clip on 3" x 3" 's made of a plastic rubber.


Why are some items more expensive than others ? Since when is everything the same price for the same product ? Are all products and brands the same ?


Dude. Bro.


that isn't exactly a sufficient answer. it's much more obvious exactly what the differences between a porsche and an econo-car honda are. when it comes to matte boxes, the differences are obviously much less visible/common/known. they block light out - but a piece of cardboard can, also. so why are some so ridiculously expensive?
Click to expand...

It's kind of obvious isn't it ? I mean, if you think about it ?
 
John,

Your bro link doesn't seem to be working. I've been clicking on it for about twenty minutes now.

e
 
no it's not that obvious john. you've given a somewhat better explanation but still, how can you warrant someone on a budget (99% of us on here) spending $500+ on one of these these when there seems to be no significant difference between them and making one for $15. i can crudely tape/hang a filter from one i make myself. wtf??

and please refrain from further patronizing. maybe you have 5,000 years experience. you probably know a thing or two about all of this. again, beginners/amateurs need help, not insulting.
 
John actually answered these questions, not to mention I remember a discussion thread titled, "Why are Matte Boxes So Expensive"

Humor and easy going attitude are essential in a community this large. Personally I think that that the Porsche and Honda analogy works well.

I have a $200 Panasonic GS9 that I use as a deck. I have a $3500 DVX100A that I use as my camera. I wish I had a $100,000 Varicam with lenses up the ying yang.

What's the difference between these? Porsche and Honda. Makes sense to me...

Lighten up and use the search, it's a friend to the masses.

BTW: John's answer to the French Flag thing is the funniest thing I've read all day!

-Jeremy
 
Thanks Yank (My future NC brethren) Someone get's it.

-

Man, if you cannot have a sense of humor you just wont make it here nor in this business I imagine

Try not and be hypersenitive guys.

-

You want knowledge ? You'll get it. If you don't like the foolin go over to dvinfo.net
 
um, john.. i hope you're not directing that at me. i'm not sensitive in the least. i can care less how you present an answer, as long as it's answered. i just didnt think the original was sufficient. to be honest, it looks like you're the guy who's getting completely on the defensive.

while your second reply might discuss the marketing reasons that some matteboxes are insanely overpriced, i still can't find one legitimate reason as to how it's warranted (beyond using space-age materials [omg 0% light bounce!] for no other purpose then overblowing the price). but i suppose that's more of a critique of the industry then anything.

and yes - i can think. i can easily understand the differences between a $80 piece of crap lens with a $1600 L series canon. any fool can see why a digital8 camcorder pales in comparison to an XL2. i'm sorry, but matteboxe subtleties are not that well known.
 
ncje said:
I read an article recently about the DP's on 24 trying out the HVX and ? as a test to see if the images held up. The results were interesting, the resounding points I took away were two (one I wont discuss as its for another thread), but the other was a comment from Keifer Sutherland, which was that the camera was too small and he felt that he needed the larger camera so he could see clearer the window to which he was acting (along those lines), so its interesting that the actors perception plays an important role in this and I would suggest the use of a matte box would have made him more comfortable in giving his performance. Very important point I thought.
Click to expand...
Haha. Are you serious? "The screen is too small" Get a monitor. I hate actors. (Even though that's how I make my living) But still. I hate actors.
 
How can it not make sense? I posted a thread that explains everything, why they are expensive...

Let me translate.

If I want to make a new type of paperclip I have to invest time and energy into R&D. From that point I need to manufacture. From that point I need to recoup my investment.

Lets say that you can get a paperclip at $1 (for example). Well my special paperclip cost me $1,000,000 to R&D, manufacture, and advertise. If I project that I am going to sell only 1,000,000 of these and I want a return of 2x on my investment then I am selling these at $2.

Why are my paperclips twice the price of other peoples? Figure that out and you know why matte boxes cost difference amounts, or you could just read the thread that I posted.

-Jeremy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top