‘Star Wars: Episode VII’ Director J.J. Abrams Extols Shooting on Film vs. Digital

SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
edited July 2014 in Nikon DSLR cameras
Jack Roberts
"Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy

Comments

  • haroldpharoldp Posts: 984Member
    He is discussing movie applications.

    There is a world of difference between 70mm wide film and 35mm film.

    Comparing commercial at 4096 x 2160 (at a 1.9:1 aspect ratio) or 8.8 mpx 4K video to 70mm film (approx 65mm X 30mm @ 2.2 aspect ratio) to is a vastly different exercise than comparing 36 mpx 24 X 36mm digital to 24 X 36mm film, the movie 70mm frame is larger than any current digital MF frame (at least horizontally).

    That being said, I am always happy to quote Mr. Ben Franklin ' In matters of taste there can be no dispute'.

    . H
    D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8.
    Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.

  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,244Member
    Yeah, but you can start by taking out all the stupid lens flare out of your films first so that it's actually watchable...
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,493Member
    Yeah, but you can start by taking out all the stupid lens flare out of your films first so that it's actually watchable...
    Not to mention an interesting story line that isn't based on pointless violence.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • DenverShooterDenverShooter Posts: 403Member
    Yeah, but you can start by taking out all the stupid lens flare out of your films first so that it's actually watchable...
    Which I suspect is added in post production digitally. I don't think you can find a film lens that is that bad..

    Denver Shooter

  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    It is well documented that 1) JJ Abrams loves lens flare and 2) 99% of it is added digitally in post

    I'm kinda a flare nut myself, so it doesn't bother me, but I think he try's to find a way to work it into every scene...
  • WestEndBoyWestEndBoy Posts: 1,456Member
    I personally find lens flare esthetically pleasing in certain situations. We should remember that the organic lenses that humans possess have many aberrations. In some situations, a "clean" image with few aberrations, while technically better, does not represent what the eye actually sees and may leave something to be desired.

    This is an area that I would like to explore more in photography, but am not sure how to approach it.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,181Member
    edited August 2014
    I personally find lens flare esthetically pleasing in certain situations. We should remember that the organic lenses that humans possess have many aberrations. In some situations, a "clean" image with few aberrations, while technically better, does not represent what the eye actually sees and may leave something to be desired.

    This is an area that I would like to explore more in photography, but am not sure how to approach it.
    Dont think its possible .. or rather its rather pointless since we all have different eyes and the aberrations are different between people.. furthermore by the time our brain "sees" it its all been PP ! otherwise we all will be seeing a couple of big holes where our blind spots are and who knows what else ... !!

    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,481Moderator
    I personally find lens flare esthetically pleasing in certain situations. We should remember that the organic lenses that humans possess have many aberrations. In some situations, a "clean" image with few aberrations, while technically better, does not represent what the eye actually sees and may leave something to be desired.

    This is an area that I would like to explore more in photography, but am not sure how to approach it.
    That's an interesting thought manhattanboy. Be sure to post when you work it out! :-B

    @heartyfisher: "furthermore by the time our brain "sees" it its all been PP"

    Now that's bonkers! How can we get raw data out of our eyes.... Assuming at least 20/20 vision, are the differences in what we see that different, if so in what way and how much.... Those blind spots will only show if you use only one eye's output.... @-)
    Always learning.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,181Member
    edited August 2014
    We(our brains) probably do "see" very much the same thing bec of all the PP that has happened. to illustrate a bit the amount of "PP" that happens. imagine wearing glasses that inverts what you see so that everything is upside down. you would think that you would be seeing the world permanently upside down with that contraption on. but No what happens is after a while ( a few days ) your vision flips and you perceive everything as before ! if after a few more days if you remove the glasses then guess what? yes, you see everything as upside down with out the contraption on. !! and it will take a while for your vision to flip back !! That is just one experiment ! the are others ! like if you stop the eye from moving you basically go blind. but if you allow the eye to move again you vision goes back to normal immediately. etc etc ..
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,481Moderator
    I won't ask how you found that stuff out hearty.. :)
    Always learning.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,181Member
    edited August 2014
    I won't ask how you found that stuff out hearty.. :)
    Just general interest in weird stuff :-) I am also a zoologist (- well the Uni Degree says I am ;-) ) so I am interested in these kinds of stuff anyway. the world is really very complex in term of raw sensory input. so we have evolved ways to automatically process info. so most of only the essential bits gets presented to our consciousness.

    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 704Member
    edited August 2014
    I'm with Hearty. A lot of my work has to do with trying to make videos look like the actual scene would look to the human eye/mind system in real life. It is surprising how your brain processes the scenes to make what you think you see quite a bit different from the actual information content of the photons entering your eye.
    Post edited by Symphotic on
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
Sign In or Register to comment.