Guerilla35, Any Updates??

Status
Not open for further replies.
if i'm following my autofocus assumption, it can mean that macgregor didn't put the g35 adapter on the cam that day. which can perhaps be confirmed by the sharpness of the image from one side of the room to the other. do we have to guess why he forgot his adapter this day? :-)

well, maybe they just get one adapter and shot this one with a second camera .....


l.d.
www.supralumen.com
www.tristefin.com
 
Last edited:
The adapter is definitely on in that shot, you can still see the grain and that spec of dust.

Looks to me like the reason the spec of dust and the grain/vignette in the corner moves is because the OIS was switched on... or the adapter is flexing cos it's not on rails (as seen in the BHS shot)... Did I win Dan? :)
 
ASG said:
The adapter is definitely on in that shot, you can still see the grain and that spec of dust.
Click to expand...

just using some after effects plugins to mimic the look of the rest of the movie, it is not the basics of cinema? :-)
 
Last edited:
Thats right as he said in a post before. "macgregor didn't put the g35 adapter on the cam that day" "forgot it in the car"
 
I have finished wrapping the lenses and gears:love4: yet I have no one to ask for an address:( but you guys are getting there faster than I thought.:)
A few got it right (the "magic word" was spelled:love4: ) but the explanation of the phenomenon is still missing from a complete answer:( .
No further clues from me but here is what I would expect as satisfactory:

>>>> Giving the movie was shoot in such'n'such country, the lights must have been such'n-such.
Now, the movie was shoot using a DVX100A for a ...... intended distribution. That means the camera settings must have been such'n-such. Under those circumstances, this'n-that is not possible, therefore it mush have been THIS (as the only choice left)
If you look at this'n-that you see (or you don't see!) this'n-that. How come? How is it possible to get this'n-that and not get this'n-that? And if this'sthat happens, why doens't it happen here'n-there?
Well, then it must have been THIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiS AND THAaaaaaaaaaaaaT then !
My logic is undeniable:) <<<<<<

or anything similar to the above.

Clear your thoughts of any and all the smoke and mirrors you have come across over the last year:badputer: . Forget what you heard, read or being feed about anything:badputer: , look at the clip and spell out what you SEE.

Those supporting one or another theory (myself included) should be able to duplicate the effect (or indicate how that effect can be duplicated) and provide samples or instruct others (having the means to duplicate the effect) how to achieve it. I will take nobody's words for granted (nor should you take mine). I am just as intrigued as you are (leave my wild guess aside) but this time I am eager hear the answer from you:love4: .
 
I think a contest like this is a great idea Dan...and fun.

Maybe since you're giving away such nice prizes you should start a new Post for this and just for this.

I'm interested to see what the answer is that you're looking for.

I still need to get some of those gorgeous gears from you.

I'm away from my computer off and on this morning, but maybe a modertator will have a way to move some of the posts from this thread to a new thread. Anybody know if this is possible?????

Best,

J.
 
the movie was shot in europe i think. to recreate the daylight in the room they used some fluos.
we have a big depth of field in this shot, and we shouldn't because if the lighting is the same as in the other shoots we should have a very little depth of field in all that distance (considering the 35 adapter).
to have this big depth of view we need to have a little aperture and to compensate we put our shutter speed at a slower speed (1/25 for example) and the flickering appears because of the fluos frequency (well it's an example as i dont know if macgregor was using a pal or ntsc dvx100, i dont know in what country it was shot and i don't know the rules of the scienfest, so maybe it must be delivered in ntsc so he used 1/60 and then had a frequency problem if he was in a european country, ......., but i don't have all the infos).
 
Last edited:
there is a macro shot without the adapter for the one shot maybe even shot on the fx1e
 
Last edited:
insanityfw said:
I'm interested to see what the answer is that you're looking for.
Click to expand...
I am equally interested to hear (other than mine) opinions and comments. I may or may not have "the answer" (I don't know it all) but if the community arrives to a common conclusion on this issue, than THAT must be the answer. This should be fun anyway.
As for the gear,... I can slip you one (outside the contest) as "promotional material".
 
hmi lights for the indoor shoots. You can get the same kind on dof without the adapter by zooming in and wide opon iris like a long lens shot.
 
i don't really see the problem in fact :) just the depth of field (which isn't a problem) and the flickering .....
well ..... wait ..... maybe something in fact
 
Last edited:
dan said:
>>>> Giving the movie was shoot in such'n'such country, the lights must have been such'n-such.
Now, the movie was shoot using a DVX100A for a ...... intended distribution. That means the camera settings must have been such'n-such. Under those circumstances, this'n-that is not possible, therefore it mush have been THIS (as the only choice left)
If you look at this'n-that you see (or you don't see!) this'n-that. How come? How is it possible to get this'n-that and not get this'n-that? And if this'sthat happens, why doens't it happen here'n-there?
Well, then it must have been THIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiS AND THAaaaaaaaaaaaaT then !
My logic is undeniable:) <<<<<<
.
Click to expand...


It was shot in Madrid and Lanzarote both 240V 50Hz power supply, PAL, 25fps. So if it was shot 25p on the DVX why isn't there frame blending on the slomo. Answer the slomo stuff was shot 50i slowed to 50% to split the fields into frames, rendered out progressive. As for the flicker it appears in some of the slomo shots. If the shutter speed wasn't a multiple of 50 then you will get flickering caused by the difference in frequency with fluoro lights, but there's flicker on the outdoor shot as well. The flicker is caused by slowing the 50i to 50% and then doing an interpolate deinterlace. It's a problem I keep running into, it's caused by the camera but not sure how.
 
ASG said:
It was shot in Madrid and Lanzarote both 240V 50Hz power supply, PAL, 25fps. So if it was shot 25p on the DVX why isn't there frame blending on the slomo. Answer the slomo stuff was shot 50i slowed to 50% to split the fields into frames, rendered out progressive. As for the flicker it appears in some of the slomo shots. If the shutter speed wasn't a multiple of 50 then you will get flickering caused by the difference in frequency with fluoro lights, but there's flicker on the outdoor shot as well. The flicker is caused by slowing the 50i to 50% and then doing an interpolate deinterlace. It's a problem I keep running into, it's caused by the camera but not sure how.
Click to expand...

it seems a nice explanation.
 
Last edited:
Should we wait another day or two? should I throw my 2c? (hint only!) or should I ask another question? what would you prefer?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top