Jump to content


Photo

Widescreen butchery and heresy


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Milo Sekulovich

Milo Sekulovich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 24 July 2009 - 07:43 AM

Greetings all,

I was perusing the widescreen museum and saw this
and couldn't believe my eyes. Now some a-hole decides that
Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur suffer from poor compositions and need re-framing.

http://www.widescree...kfx/default.htm

This supposed technology "fixes" the poor compositions

And it's all explained in an arrogant know it all manner.

Who the hell is behind this???

It's a growing trend-armchair hack film reviewers, curators and 'scholars'
who have never shot a frame and now they know better than David Lean and Freddie Young.

Unbelievable!!

Milo Sekulovich
  • 0

#2 Patrick Neary

Patrick Neary
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, OR

Posted 24 July 2009 - 08:22 AM

"Besides that, there's just too much distracting scenery. " !!!!

(I think it's just a joke.) ;)
  • 0

#3 Patrick A Murray

Patrick A Murray
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 24 July 2009 - 08:23 AM

Greetings all,

I was perusing the widescreen museum and saw this
and couldn't believe my eyes. Now some a-hole decides that
Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur suffer from poor compositions and need re-framing.

http://www.widescree...kfx/default.htm

This supposed technology "fixes" the poor compositions

And it's all explained in an arrogant know it all manner.

Who the hell is behind this???

It's a growing trend-armchair hack film reviewers, curators and 'scholars'
who have never shot a frame and now they know better than David Lean and Freddie Young.

Unbelievable!!

Milo Sekulovich



The site must be a joke. Gene Siskel provides a review of the "new technology" and I can't find anything on the proper museum site or any other information on this technology using a google search of flik fx.

That and the "fix" is always a cluttered mess. I was laughing rather than feeling outraged. If I'm wrong and this turns out to be serious, then I'll be outraged.
  • 0

#4 Patrick A Murray

Patrick A Murray
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 24 July 2009 - 08:25 AM

From the bottom of page 4:

"Roger and I just don't have enough thumbs to properly rate this new DVD release." - Gene Siskel
  • 0

#5 Mike Washlesky

Mike Washlesky
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 194 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Austin,TX

Posted 24 July 2009 - 09:40 AM

From the bottom of page 4:

"Roger and I just don't have enough thumbs to properly rate this new DVD release." - Gene Siskel



Wow. I guess Gene really hates the composition if he is commenting from the grave.
  • 0

#6 Peter Milanov

Peter Milanov
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts
  • Steadicam Operator
  • Stockholm, Sweden

Posted 24 July 2009 - 09:49 AM

Come on Milo, did you really fall for this? :lol:

By the way, the DVD was due on April 1st...
  • 0

#7 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 24 July 2009 - 08:38 PM

and look at the final "fixed" composition on page 4. Lawrence could lick the match out he's so close to it.
  • 0

#8 Patrick Neary

Patrick Neary
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 873 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Portland, OR

Posted 24 July 2009 - 09:06 PM

and look at the final "fixed" composition on page 4. Lawrence could lick the match out he's so close to it.


and his nose is on fire!
  • 0

#9 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 24 July 2009 - 10:29 PM

That website is friggin' hilarious! Milo, you were taken . . .
  • 0

#10 Saul Pincus

Saul Pincus
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 114 posts
  • Director

Posted 25 July 2009 - 12:10 AM

Martin Hart, the website's "curator," has been a frequent participant on the rec.movies.tech newsgroup since the early 90s. He also cracks a sharp wit.
  • 0

#11 Milo Sekulovich

Milo Sekulovich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 25 July 2009 - 12:48 AM

Well, of course I had my doubts as I've never even heard of this ludicrous technology and the fact that
Gene Siskel passed away some time ago. But ridiculous things are being announced all the time, like shooting
major features with still cameras.....

Quite an elaborate "joke" to write and post on one's website. Some people just
have too much time on their hands...

But seriously, I've heard similar criticisms of major motion pictures regarding
framing, acting and so forth by layman film reviewers, 'scholars' and so forth.

Like Coppola said 'Everyone on a movie set thinks they can make the movie better than the director'.
  • 0

#12 A. Whitehouse

A. Whitehouse
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Director
  • Melbourne

Posted 25 July 2009 - 01:04 AM

http://www.engadgeth...ces-for-transf/

It may be a joke but your average layman is still in the dark about formats. Read the newspost above and then read some of the comments below if you want to get really depressed about the attitude of your general consumer.
  • 0

#13 A. Whitehouse

A. Whitehouse
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Director
  • Melbourne

Posted 25 July 2009 - 01:12 AM

Sorry I tried to edit but was to slow. I didnt mean to say you were the layman. Im as disgusted by the idea of reframing classic films as anyone else.
  • 0

#14 Thomas James

Thomas James
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 844 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 25 July 2009 - 01:28 PM

Lately I have been butchering my widescreen films by zooming in which effectively converts them to 16 x 9 so that my entire screen is filled up and I do not lose resolution.
  • 0

#15 Chris Keth

Chris Keth
  • Sustaining Members
  • 4427 posts
  • 1st Assistant Camera
  • Los Angeles

Posted 25 July 2009 - 03:14 PM

Lately I have been butchering my widescreen films by zooming in which effectively converts them to 16 x 9 so that my entire screen is filled up and I do not lose resolution.


As an operator, doesn't it kind of nag at you to be ignoring all the hard work that the DPs and operators of those films put into the composition?
  • 0

#16 Saul Rodgar

Saul Rodgar
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1682 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 25 July 2009 - 04:03 PM

Welcome to the era of armchair DP'ing . . . Quite literally.

Edited by Saul Rodgar, 25 July 2009 - 04:05 PM.

  • 0

#17 Dominic Case

Dominic Case
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1357 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney Australia

Posted 26 July 2009 - 06:56 PM

Lawrence of Arabia and Ben Hur suffer from poor compositions and need re-framing.

This page has been around for about ten years! Yes, it's a joke.

When I first saw it, I forwarded the link to a cinematographer's forum (it was before this one existed I think) and also to a telecine forum. In general, cinematographers either got the joke, or reacted in horror. Most of the telecine folk rushed to ask where they could get the technology. OMG! :o

The worrying news is that exactly this process is now genuinely available - at least for still images. Look at this.
http://www.seamcarving.com/
  • 0

#18 boy yniguez

boy yniguez
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 10 August 2009 - 03:07 AM

This page has been around for about ten years! Yes, it's a joke.

When I first saw it, I forwarded the link to a cinematographer's forum (it was before this one existed I think) and also to a telecine forum. In general, cinematographers either got the joke, or reacted in horror. Most of the telecine folk rushed to ask where they could get the technology. OMG! :o

The worrying news is that exactly this process is now genuinely available - at least for still images. Look at this.
http://www.seamcarving.com/

even time magazine was guilty of this when they had to feature the pyramids of egypt on their cover some years ago. they couldn't fit the two pyramids in a vertical compostion so they they just moved them closer to each other digitally. is it any wonder photographs are no longer usable as evidence in court?
  • 0


Wooden Camera

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Visual Products

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

FJS International, LLC

Tai Audio

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Rig Wheels Passport

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Abel Cine

Aerial Filmworks

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineLab

Paralinx LLC

CineTape

Glidecam

rebotnix Technologies

Metropolis Post

Opal

Metropolis Post

Visual Products

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Paralinx LLC

The Slider

CineLab

rebotnix Technologies

Glidecam

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

Willys Widgets

FJS International, LLC

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Wooden Camera

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks