Yes, we have yet another recordable media option. SanDisk today a bit under the radar released the new Extreme Pro CFexpress Type B memory card in choice locations in Europe. Unfortunately all we have as far as information is in the video that was posted. No official press release was issued. low-latency, high-speed RAW 4K … Continued
The Art of the Cut podcast brings the fantastic conversations that Steve Hullfish has with world renowned editors into your car, living room, editing suite and beyond. In each episode, Steve talks with editors ranging from emerging stars to Oscar and Emmy winners. Hear from the top editors of today about their careers, editing workflows and about their work on some of the biggest films and TV shows of the year.
On this weeks podcast, Steve talks with Gabriel Fleming, ACE about editing the new Lionsgate film “Angel Has Fallen”. Gabriel has a number of large action films under his belt including “Deepwater Horizon” and “Blindspotting”. Gabriel is also know for editing TV shows like “Teen Wolf” and “America’s Next Top Model”. The link to Steve’s full interview with Gabriel about “Angel Has Fallen” is below:
This weeks episode was brought to you by G-Technology and Filmtools.com. G-Technology is a leading brand for professional-grade storage solutions for the media and entertainment industry. Since their inception in 2004, G-Technology has consistently offered reliable, high-performance hard drives! If you are in the market for some new storage make sure to head over to Filmtools.com and check out the hottest product offerings from G-Technology.
The Art of the Cut podcast is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Anchor, Google Podcasts, Breaker, Pocket Casts, Overcast and Radio Public. If you like the podcast, make sure to subscribe on your favorite podcast app and tell a friend!
The post The Art of the Cut Podcast Eps. 11 (w/ Angel Has Fallen Editor Gabriel Fleming, ACE) appeared first on ProVideo Coalition.
USB4 will be a ‘major update’ that builds on the existing USB 3.2 and USB 2.0 architectures. It will be based on Intel Corperation’s Thunderbolt protocol specification and will double ’the maximum aggregate bandwidth of USB and enables multiple simultaneous data and display protocols,’ according to the announcement.
The USB-IF says USB4 is backwards compatible with USB 2.0, USB 3.2 and Thunderbolt 3, and will feature a maximum speed of up to 40Gb/s, twice the current 20Gb/s maximum. Since it will be using the same USB Type-C connection, manufacturers won’t need to alter designs to use the new ports. USB Power Delivery will also be a requirement in USB4 devices.
Despite the specification being finalized, it’ll likely take some time to market. Historically, it’s taken roughly a year from the time the specifications have been released to the time we see it in the first devices, but it’s always possible that precedent could be broken.
Making Money Self Distributing Your Indie Film with Naomi McDougall Jones Today episode is probably one of the most important shows I have released in some time. On the show is filmmaker Naomi McDougall Jones the writer, actress and producer behind the indie film Bite Me, a subversive romantic comedy about a real-life vampire and…
The post IFH 342: Making Money Self Distributing Your Indie Film with Naomi McDougall Jones appeared first on Indie Film Hustle®.
An original idea is worth its weight in gold, but it can be hard to get studios to buy-in. That’s why some homage tactics work so well in selling your ideas. Not sure what I mean? Read on!
It can be so hard to come up with original ideas and explain them to studio executives. Everyone wants to know what your movie is like. What’s the tone, the genre, the style? All these questions get exhausting but are necessary when it comes to creating something special.
Today, I want to teach you an easy brainstorming and explaining technique most Hollywood people use to describe their stories and to try to sell them in the room or on paper.
It’s also something I actively use to brainstorm new ideas as well.
Looks like you’re in for a productive writing day.
Check out the final trailer for Todd Phillips’ Joker and let’s chat after.
Homages as Pitching Prompts
The first thing anyone talks about after seeing that Joker trailer is how much it looks like a mix of Taxi Driver and King of Comedy. I mean, it even has De Niro in it!
Refraction photography is an exciting subject that has been enjoying increasing popularity amongst photographers. You’ve probably seen refraction photos before: where an out-of-focus background appears sharply defined inside a crystal ball or a dew drop for example. In today’s post, we will examine this phenomenon and learn how to take beautiful photos by taking advantage of this effect.
What is Refraction?
Physically speaking, refraction is a very broad term: it describes the process of light passing from one medium into another and the effects this has on its speed and direction. A prism, for example, affects light of different wavelengths differently and splits white light up into the colors of a rainbow. Sunlight shining through a glass of water and casting interesting patterns on a table top would be another example.
So basically, refraction happens around us all the time—wherever there is light, pretty much. Even your camera lenses and the optical coatings applied to them work by the laws of refraction. But the effects become especially interesting when it comes to round and transparent subjects, such as a lens balls or water droplets for example.
How does it work?
Because of their convex lens-like shape, certain subjects refocus the light that passes through them into a sharp projection of their background, just as like a lens would. This phenomenon makes for stunning photographs.
Pretty much anything transparent with solid spherical shape will function as a lens and show this effect.
When it comes to capturing this phenomenon in images, there are a couple of things you should know:
- Lighting the background is more important than lighting the subject. If you use a speedlight, direct it on to the flower, photo, or whatever else you choose as a backdrop—the light will reflect off of it anyway, and this way the projection inside your sphere is going to pop a lot more. If you use ambient light, try combining it with a low power speedlight or even a flashlight that you shine on the background to make it come through better.
- You will most likely have to use Focus Stacking in order to get the outer shape of the orb that you’re using and the refracted image inside of it in focus at the same time.
- Especially if you want to create that effect where the background is blurry but the foreground is super sharp, you will need to open up your lens’ aperture a bit. Another way to increase the blur effect is to move the background even further away from the scene, but be careful to not reveal anything else except what you want to be seen inside the transparent sphere (such as the edges of a photo for example).
There are a variety of subjects that will work for this type of photography. Let’s have a look at some of the best:
- Lens balls and marbles: Glass or crystal balls are especially popular amongst landscape photographers. Fortunately, they can be found in diameters as small as 10mm on eBay. Other glass objects will work too, but add an element of distortion to the equation.
- Water droplets: The naturally strong surface tension of water causes small droplets to take on a spherical shape whenever they can. Generally speaking, waxy or hairy leaves are better at holding perfectly round beads of water.
A good trick to add even more surface tension to your water beads is to mix in some glycerin, which can be found online and in most pharmacies. Mixing it with water will result in a liquid that will yield even better result than pure water.
- Icicles: In the winter time, you can use icicles instead of water drops. They will distort the projection to a certain degree, but they can still work really well for refraction shots (depending on the conditions they froze in). If there are a lot of cracks or air pockets inside of them, they might not work as well.
- Air pockets in ice or water: Air pockets on the wall of a fish tank or inside a sheet of ice make for great refraction images as well.
- Water in oil: Oil in water is a popular subject with macro photographers, but try it the other way round and you will be able to create refraction images in the floating water bubbles. Just be careful when you place the water drops (ideally with a syringe) as they will sink down otherwise. The cool part is that you can have multiple bubbles at different heights this way, which makes for a gradient in sharpness.
- Gel beads: Water absorbent gel beads that are used in flower vases or air fresheners are round and transparent and therefore work too. (see sample photos below)
- Many more that I haven’t thought of yet, so use your imagination!
But enough of the theory! Now that we know what kinds of subjects work, let’s have a look at the practical side. In the following examples, I’ll show you some refraction photos I took and give you insight into their creation.
The image below was shot using a crystal bead from an air freshener. A patch of moss—which I usually keep in a humid plastic container—made for a wonderful stage, and a flower photograph in the background served as a warm and colorful background and as a point of interest inside the bead:
A lens ball serves the same purpose, but is quite a bit larger and easier to keep clean and use outdoors. For the photo below, I used golden glitter paper in the background and shot wide open at f/1.8 to get the bokeh I was after. Since refraction photos generally need to be stacked for best results anyway, I didn’t mind the shallow depth of field.
The next set of photos was created with a flower photograph in the background as well, but executing the shot was little bit more difficult. This is why I created a making of video, where you can watch how I set up the dripping mechanism and built the scene.
A glass with a water and an overhanging cloth inside it functions as a drip feeder. Place a small sauce trey (or something like it) underneath to catch the droplets and make them bounce out of the surface. You will also need a speedlight, ideally at a low power setting, to freeze motion and capture a crisp image.
Of course, this isn’t the only way to take refraction photos using water drops. You can also place beads on a leaf, a flower, or dandelion seeds to create images like these:
Or just use a piece of glass to place your droplets on, such as a UV-filter for example. Here’s a peek behind the scenes of another shot I captured:
It always pays off to think outside the box. In the image below, I used water as a medium again, but instead of a perfect bead I used it in an even more lens-like shape:
I used a feather that I dipped into water to create a thin layer of water in the center of a rolled up cucumber sprout. The forces of surface tension and gravity cause it to be thinner around the edges than in the centre, which made it ideal for another refraction photo.
Last but not least, the shot below shows air pockets inside a water container in which I also immersed a pink daisy.
Obviously flowers aren’t the only backdrop you can use. They are ideal because they are symmetrical and colorful, but anything will work really. Try using a landscape photo, or just a blue sky with a sunburst. Maybe even a planet or an image of our whole galaxy—that would look pretty cool inside a water drop, I bet!
Or something more abstract such as a CD:
Hopefully you’re ready to try this yourself, and have plenty of ideas for your next refraction project! If you’re looking for suitable backdrops to use while you’re experimenting, check out this free gallery of background photos I’ve put together.
About the author: Maximilian Simson is a London-based portrait and event photographer who also shoots fine art and macro photography. To see more of his work, visit his website. This article was also published here, and is being republished with permission.
Hot off the heals of the RODE GO and it’s a compact clip-on style wireless system Saramonic has its own versions too show. The Blink 500. Saramonic has put together six different configurations depending on the type of camera and transmitters needed. One main system is designed with a 3.5mm input in mind and another … Continued
New tutorials recreate the coolest current moments of fantasy pop culture.
Well-crafted VFX can take your production value to a whole new level, but if you’re working on a zero budget, it’d be wise to learn how to do those VFX yourself.
Red Giant came out with a couple of great tutorials that break down the process of making some of TVs best visual effects, including a Red Witch fireball from Game of Thrones and the Mind Flayer from Stranger Things. So, if you’re ready to get down with some pyrotechnic flair and Godzilla-scale fury, check out the videos below.
Keep in mind though, you’ll need some Red Giant tools to follow along.
Stranger Things: Making the Mind Flayer
The Stranger Things tutorial, hosted by the always-hilarious Seth Worley, will walk you through the process of creating your own Mind Flayer. Be warned, though…this tut flies by. The steps aren’t exactly complicated but prepare yourself to backtrack a YouTube playhead. A bunch.
Finding a good and yet affordable workflow and backup system is a tough task for most of us. Being not overly technical, it took me a decade to get to a point where my images felt safe.
Two films at Sundance in three years, and almost no budget to speak of. Here’s how writer-director-actor Justin Chon did it.
In this episode of the No Film School Podcast, we sit down with writer-director-actor Justin Chon, whose latest film Ms. Purple hits theaters this week.
Back in 2016-2017, Justin ran a crowdfunding campaign, shot his low-budget DIY film Gook, and got into Sundance, where Gook won the NEXT Audience Award. After that, everyone told him not to make another DIY film. But he did it anyway. And he got into Sundance 2019 with his next film, Ms. Purple, by employing some of the same guerrilla tactics: shooting without permits, not accepting no for an answer, and working without name actors. Listen to the podcast above, and check out the trailer for Ms. Purple here:
We’ve also covered Justin before here on NFS:
Sandra Adair, ACE, has a lengthy list of awards, starting with an ACE Eddie nomination for editing School of Rock (2004), and including an ACE Eddie win and an Oscar nomination for Boyhood (2014).
Starting work as an assistant editor in the mid-70s, she graduated to the editor’s chair and also worked on features such as Dazed and Confused (1993), Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation (1994), SubUrbia (1996), Bad News Bears (2005), and A Scanner Darkly (2006), and many others. She has also edited numerous documentaries. That documentary experience came in handy in editing Where’d You Go, Bernadette? as you will see in this interview.
HULLFISH: So good to talk to you. I loved the movie last night.
ADAIR: Oh I’m so happy to hear that.
HULLFISH: I thoroughly enjoyed it. Tell me a little bit about the structure of the movie. I figured most of it was probably done in the writing but did the structure change at all from script to screen through post?
ADAIR: In post the structure did change somewhat in that the original cut was almost three hours long, so there was a lot of material that came out of the film and a lot of things that moved within the film. There was a lot of experimentation that happened in that period of post. For instance, probably the most time spent editing was on the documentary. Initially, the two docs that ran 15 or 20 minutes each and they each had many iterations.
At one point, the documentary had an entire sequence about Bernadette’s early career and her involvement in building the Getty Museum and the first part of the doc was delving deeply into her process of found objects and incorporating found objects into her architecture. It became just too much. So we whittled it down over and over again and at one point we tried opening the film with the documentary — feeling that if we got off on the foot of the audience understanding that she was a professional, well-regarded architect from the very beginning that it would inform everything that came after. But originally — and in the script form — the film started with Bernadette being missing and the scene where her daughter says, “You can’t always know a person but it doesn’t hurt to try.”
A lot of things did shift. A lot of things moved around and we decided that rather than starting the film with the documentary we would just pull it forward from where it had been in the shooting script so that we would get to the documentary as soon as the architecture student recognized her at the library. Originally, the first part of the documentary was going to come a lot later in the film
There’s a lot that happens in a film when you have to take an hour out so that whittling process reveals more opportunity than you think it’s going to. First, it feels very daunting, like, “How in the hell are we ever going to pull this off?” I always liken it to getting a good haircut. Once you cut one part of your hair, if you don’t cut the other part you see, Oh wow! That part really looks misshapen and out of control, so it’s a process. You have to make it all the way around the entire head.
HULLFISH: The movie starts out where you don’t really understand who Bernadette is. She’s just kind of this quirky character until much later in the film when you learn that she’s this genius architect. I thought was a wonderful revelation. I loved that structure.
ADAIR: It’s a fine line to be able to string an audience along long enough to receive the revelation later in the film. So part of the challenge for me was to keep Bernadette as likable as she could be within the confines of who she actually is and was. You discover more and more about Bernadette as the film goes on and things are revealed about her bit by bit. Some very important background clues about Bernadette are revealed in the cafe sequence with Laurence Fishburne’s character. These clues are more fully explained in the second part of the documentary but before we get to that second doc there are small clues that she’s had this interesting past and her surroundings — her house and the incredible design detail that’s in that house — you know she’s eccentric and thoughtful and intellectual and also a mom.
HULLFISH: Are you saying that at some point you really considered putting the documentary at the top?
ADAIR: Yeah we did for a minute. It didn’t last long. We give it away. Rick (director Richard Linklater) and the script always had the film starting in Antartica and then flashing back to all the events that led her to the moment of being on that still water.
We were really in love with that drone shot of the dark black water with the kayaks kind of floating into frame. And we really loved that as an opening shot and wanted to use it. And we did pull the documentary close enough to the front that we felt like we got there soon enough
HULLFISH: Did you feel when you were trying to edit that being in the perspective of Bernadette was critical or did that inform you in any way? How does perspective inform your editing?
ADAIR: She’s the whole movie really. She and her relationship with her husband and her increasing neurosis and obsession with Seattle and all of that. The film is about a very conflicted woman who has been at the very top of her game and then has this ridiculously horrible neighbor — sort of a cartoon figure type person — destroy one of her finest creations — the thing that kind of put her on the map and the bitterness and resentment and wanting to run away from that environment that she had been so successful in L.A. It drives everything about Bernadette. There’s no escaping being in Bernadette’s point of view for the whole film. She’s the entire sun of the whole movie.
HULLFISH: Did it inform choosing coverage to try to be in her perspective or no?
ADAIR: A little bit. I would say yes. Cate’s performance is flawless in so many ways in that she delivered a huge range for us to select from particularly in the cafe scene. That is a really long scene. I don’t know what it ended up being in the final film, but it was at least twice that in the original cut.
HULLFISH: To explain to the people that are listening, that cafe scene would be where she’s talking to the Laurence Fishburne character and you’re also intercutting with the husband’s conversation with the psychologist?
ADAIR: Yes, exactly. So she’s talking to Laurence Fishburne in a cafe. His character, Paul Jellinek, is an old colleague of her’s from her past LA architecture days. She hasn’t seen him in a very very long time. The scenes in the cafe were designed to be intercut with scenes between Bernadette’s husband, Elgie, and a psychologist. Elgie is meeting with this psychologist about the condition of his wife’s life — he’s very confused by Bernadette and worried about her. In Bernadette’s conversation with Jellinek, she is slowly revealing to him what’s been going on with her for the last 20 years.
And so these two conversations are intercut and in the process of intercutting those two, you find out so much about Bernadette. You know her quirkiness, her psychological anxiety, and almost agoraphobia, and Elgie is revealing to the psychologist his concern for Bernadette, his love for Bernadette, and some of her past foibles. We also find out what attracted him to Bernardette in the first place and their early relationship. The way the scenes were designed, each component — each part of the intercut — the camera is moving in a way that makes a very fluid kind of conversation between the two people in the cafe and the two people in Elgie’s office.
As we started whittling that down — because it was extremely long — the camera movements became a little bit less fluid and a little bit less the way they were choreographed. And in the end, it really doesn’t matter. The camera’s moving wherever it’s moving and it still seems to work and I tried not to let that be a barrier for me because it was my goal and my job to tell the parts of the story that needed to be told and withhold the pieces that didn’t necessarily move our perspective of their predicament forward. Some of the stories and some of the components didn’t necessarily drive you toward learning more about Bernadette and their relationship. Anyway, it was challenging because it’s a tightrope walk. You don’t want to damage story. You don’t want to damage character, but you do want it to feel like it’s got a purpose, without too much meandering, and that it’s revealing more information with each intercut.
What is interesting about this series of intercut scenes is that the juxtaposition of these two conversations, Elgie’s and Bernadette’s, told from their individual perspectives, draws a more complete yet complex picture of how they see ‘reality.’ You come to understand that though they’ve been together through all kinds of marital experiences, they really do interpret almost everything from their own separate perspectives. The scenes set up how Bernadette, frustrated, conflicted and misunderstood ends up being who she is, and how Elgie worried and trying to make sense of things, sees things completely differently, with the help of the psychologist, of course. This difference in ‘reality’ becomes the crux of all that goes awry and why Bernadette ends up escaping.
There’s a section in the intercut sequence where you find out that after Bernadette leaves L.A. and goes to Seattle to settle with her husband, she has a series of miscarriages. It’s devastating for her. And yet what comes out of it is the birth of her daughter Bee who is sort of the center of Bernadette’s universe right now. It’s a well-thought-out, very complex series of scenes that required a lot of editing and rearranging.
The thing about Laurence Fishburne. He is an incredible actor. His ability to tune in to Bernadette and to actually actively listen… every time I would want to find a piece to cut to him he was always engaged, participating in the conversation even though he really didn’t say very much at all until the very end of the scene.
HULLFISH: That’s wonderful to get that. How do you approach a scene when you’re doing something like that? Do you pull selects? Are you just writing notes when you see a beautiful reaction shot?
ADAIR: No. I pull reactions shots as I need them — as I want them. And then I search for the perfect piece for that particular in and out that I need. Rick always shoots these long conversations with cups and cigarettes and dishes and drinks and forks and knives.
HULLFISH: I know where this discussion is going.
ADAIR: “Can you ever shoot a scene where there are no props involved?”
HULLFISH: And why does that matter, Sandra? 🙂
ADAIR: It’s challenging. I never let it dictate what I have to do, but you do pray that the actors have a little bit of mindfulness about what they’re doing with their hands and their arms and their props and their head position and all that. It just helps you do your job better. It does weigh in when you’re cutting away from a medium shot to another medium shot and if somebody’s holding a cup in one shot and not in the other, it’s a big deterrent from using that particular piece of film.
It’s just a little part of the job and part of finessing and finessing and finessing — finding the right pieces that work with another. So, that’s why I don’t take notes on reaction shots — “Oh this is the perfect reaction shot” — because you never know what you’re going to encounter at that exact frame where you’re going to want to cut. Then you have to find the exact right piece for that out point to be able to come in and out. And so I just wait until I need something and then I do what I call “go fishing.”
HULLFISH: And you go fishing straight into the bins — looking at individual clips, not to a select reel?
ADAIR: Correct. That’s correct. I go back to the original dailies all the time. I do use selects for some things. But I really rely on locators. Rick shoots series, so he doesn’t cut the camera. And so sometimes there are multiple takes within one take and he’ll have actors go over the same section of a scene over and over again and it’s connected to the end of a full take. So a lot of times I just have to rely on locators with notes rather than selects. It’s really hard for me to get in the groove of things when there’s a ‘string out’ of selects. I know that some editors do like to assemble all the takes of one line and put them on a timeline: here are all of the takes of one line from all the different angles and all the different takes, and then you watch all that and you pull the best performance. I do that sometimes. But it’s very hard to get into the rhythm when it’s presented to me that way. I’d much rather watch the performance as it came out of the actor’s mouth in real-time.
HULLFISH: Yeah I completely understand. You talked about the range of performances you were given. As you were going through the process of editing the film did you find that you needed a different temperature or a different tone for a performance than you would go look for it.
ADAIR: Yes. Yes, definitely. The first thing they shot was that cafe scene with Laurence Fishburne and Cate. It was several days of that, and since it was early on in the shoot, Cate gave us a huge range from A to Z of the temperature of those performances. And it was wonderful because as the scene progressed I was able to have her be just totally friendly and warm and excited to see her friend at the very beginning and then as their conversation gets more and more detailed you get more of a sense of her obsession with Seattle and her anxiety about her daughter and her panic attacks about the destroyed house in LA. There’s a measured calculation of how much more manic she gets as the scenes progress. Of course she is totally in control of the performance that she gives, but she did give a really nice range, so that when she tells the story about the miscarriages she gets very emotional, she quiets down and there’s a lot of ebb and flow to those scenes in particular and in the way she delivered her performance.
HULLFISH: I was able to get a small piece of that scene from the studio. When you watch that or when you think about that scene or the piece of the scene that I sent you, could you talk to me a little bit about choosing those moments of when to be on and when to be off of an actor when they’re speaking? (This is the video earlier in the article.)
ADAIR: I think when someone is delivering a line and the words fall on another person it gives those words a particular meaning, and when you’re on someone’s face when they’re saying the words there’s a different way of receiving the information as an audience. A lot of those reaction shots were used as a bit of a punctuation. A little bit of a pause and a respite from what’s being said and a reason to just pause to let something settle in or sink in. And that’s generally how I like to use reaction shots. It also keeps the characters connected. Even if it’s a monologue — if you have another person at the table — there’s someone there receiving that dialogue and either being judgmental or not judgmental or just taking it in and/or reacting. It keeps people connected.
HULLFISH: Another technical question about editing is: there’s a big intervention scene in the movie that’s probably the launch into act three?
HULLFISH: There are a lot of people in the scene and the blocking changes throughout the scene. How were you able to keep the eye-lines right or what were the difficulties of cutting that very complicated scene?
ADAIR: I didn’t really have any eye-line problems. Rick rehearses the scenes so that they’re fine-tuned, so I generally don’t run into eye-line problems. I work moment by moment, just finding the right piece for each moment — keeping the connection between the actors and letting people interact and relate to each other as they would naturally. There’s a certain natural flow to a scene like that where one person is saying something the other people in the room must react to, one way or another. The scene is very well blocked, very well choreographed. Most of the people in that scene are seated and Bernadette is the one who’s moving, so the camera tracks her eye-line.
That scene was cut down, also. There was more interaction between Soo-Lin and Elgie early on before Bernadette arrives. That whole first part of the scene was much longer as they’re waiting for Bernadette to arrive. We got Soo-Lin and the FBI agent out of the room a lot sooner than they were originally. So that scene was cut down, but the main thing that I really wanted to achieve in that scene was the fact that Elgie and the psychologist are living in an entirely different reality than Bernadette. The complexity of the story is that Bernadette’s reality is not that she’s ‘off her rocker.’ She’s not crazy. She’s conflicted. She’s confused. She’s anxious. She’s very, very misunderstood. And what happens with her husband — in his effort to understand and help — he gets off on this totally weird wavelength. Their marriage has been falling apart for a long time and it culminates in this intervention that is totally unnecessary.
There’s one moment when they look at each other and her eyes filled with tears when she finally understands where he’s at and what he’s doing and he looks at her and has tears in his eyes and he’s realizing also that he’s come to this very difficult point and he’s hurting her, he loves her, but is at a complete loss about how to deal with her. It’s a very intense moment. They’re both incredibly conflicted and their relationship is very lost at that moment. So the goal for me always is — yeah, there’s blocking, there are eye-lines, there’s continuity, there’s all this stuff — but what really matters is the connection between the people and the story.
HULLFISH: Right. Which is hard to do sometimes when you have to cut out so much of the scene.
HULLFISH: And that’s also tricky with the actors’ performances because if they are building to a certain place in their performance and you’re trying to cut out half of that journey, that can be tricky. Did that happen in that scene?
ADAIR: No because we did preserve the intent and purpose of the scene. We didn’t cut out anything that was absolutely necessary to those character points and those story points. That all remained intact, and the performances were already there and we heighten them or shorten them, but we didn’t really take out anything vitally important. This is the challenge of shortening a film!
HULLFISH: Well, I really appreciate all of your time. I could talk to you forever. Thank you so much for talking to me about this movie. I really enjoyed it and it just felt like it was cut like butter.
ADAIR: Oh thank you very much. That’s wonderful to hear coming from you.
HULLFISH: What are you going off to cut now? Are you on to a new project?
ADAIR: Yes. I’m finishing up one documentary and I’m getting started on another documentary. I live in Austin, so there are really interesting filmmakers here that are doing other things rather than big Hollywood films and I’m able to work on these more regional and important little docs while Rick is writing and doing other things.
HULLFISH: Can I ask you one more question since you brought up the fact that you cut documentaries?
ADAIR: Of course.
HULLFISH: There is a documentary — or I guess there were originally two in this movie. Did you put on your documentary film-maker hat when you were editing the documentary? Did you say, “I’m going to cut this differently than the rest of the film?”
ADAIR: Oh yes. Definitely. Definitely. And as I said earlier they were extremely lengthy and went into huge amounts of detail. For example, the conflict between Bernadette and her neighbor, Nigel Mills Murray, had a lot of detail removed. As neighbors, they shared a driveway and there were a number of incidents between Bernadette and Nigel that created a feud. So there were a lot of reasons why he wanted to destroy Bernadette’s house.
We finally realized that people are going to understand the feud — with or without all of that detail. For purposes of slimming down the film, we had to remove a lot of it. In the first part of the documentary, there was a lot more about her process of finding objects and using them in her architecture. That documentary is cut like a documentary. We had so much archival footage and stills and all kinds of material that you would normally be using in a documentary. We used a different composer to do the music for the doc.
HULLFISH: Oh interesting!
ADAIR: We didn’t want the doc music to sound anything like what the score sounds like. We really did it up! The art department created all those sketches of the 20 Mile House and they created the Bieber bifocal interior. The art department in Pittsburgh wove together all those bifocal frames.
HULLFISH: I hope the documentaries are going to be able to be seen in their full length on a DVD sometime.
ADAIR: Oh that would be good, wouldn’t it? I’m not sure exactly what was pulled for the DVD, but I wouldn’t doubt it.
HULLFISH: Thank you so much for your time today and good luck with the rest of your editing today.
ADAIR: Thank you very much. Good to talk to you, Steve.
HULLFISH: Good to talk to you, too.
The first 50 interviews in the series provided the material for the book, “Art of the Cut: Conversations with Film and TV Editors.” This is a unique book that breaks down interviews with many of the world’s best editors and organizes it into a virtual roundtable discussion centering on the topics editors care about. It is a powerful tool for experienced and aspiring editors alike. Cinemontage and CinemaEditor magazine both gave it rave reviews. No other book provides the breadth of opinion and experience. Combined, the editors featured in the book have edited for over 1,000 years on many of the most iconic, critically acclaimed and biggest box office hits in the history of cinema.
The post ART OF THE CUT with Oscar nominee, Sandra Adair, ACE appeared first on ProVideo Coalition.
Well, this is a little embarrassing. Argentinian travel influencer Tupi Saravia is being called out online after some eagle-eyed fans noticed that several of her images feature the exact same clouds… despite being taken in different parts of the globe. Oops…
The gaff was first pointed out by Twitter User @santilishi, before being amplified by social media industry commentator Matt Navarra. Navarra tweeted a four-photo collage that seems to show the exact same sky in every shot, despite three of the photos being tagged as taken in Indonesia, Italy and Thailand. The rest of the image confirms these locations, but the clouds in the background look identical:
This travel ‘influencer’ spookily has the same clouds in every photo. 😲🤔😆 pic.twitter.com/uYzXhTiRJp
— Matt Navarra (@MattNavarra) August 28, 2019
And it’s not just those four photos. Navarra quickly found and tweeted two more:
And here… pic.twitter.com/tIZf4sq60s
— Matt Navarra (@MattNavarra) August 28, 2019
And here too… pic.twitter.com/LqBdgZgeu7
— Matt Navarra (@MattNavarra) August 28, 2019
If it seem like the same exact sky is following her around form country to country, that’s because it sort of is… via an app.
The fact is, Saravia has never tried to hide the fact that she edits her images, including sky replacement. As she told BuzzFeed, she has been openly using the Enlight Quickshot app to swap out skies and enhance photos for a long time. But that hasn’t stopped the Internet from having a field day with the repeated use of the same sky. While some users came to her defense, basically just saying that this wasn’t a big deal, others took a more humorous route:
It’s actually the cloud’s IG account
— Agustin Serrate (@AguSerrate) August 28, 2019
She’s able to influence consumers and weather patterns
— Josh Belzman (starman for hire) (@JoshEdits) August 28, 2019
Not her mistake. Clouds should stop stalking her.
— Heerahee (@Heerahee) August 28, 2019
“Everywhere you go, you always take the weather with you” 🎵
— Jenks (@jenks_88) August 29, 2019
As several Twitter users have pointed out, this isn’t that big of a deal, since sky replacement is hardly a “harmful” type of photo manipulation. She’s still traveling to gorgeous places and taking pretty pictures… her only mistake is dropping in the same clouds into every image where the sky was blown out. We’ve seen much worse forms of manipulation in the interest of product placement.
That said, it does continue to drive home the message we saw from another influencer just a few weeks ago: social media isn’t reality; Instagram isn’t real.
During the past decade, the world economy has experienced steady, gradual expansion. But what goes up must come down, and the question photographers are wise to consider is: “how will the next recession affect me?”
Back in July, photographer Patrick Seguin took advantage of his CPS membership to test out one of the most beastly lenses Canon has released in recent memory: the Canon RF 28-70mm f/2 L USM. In the video above, he pits this lens against the tried and true EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM to see just how much better the new RF lens performs.
Canon hasn’t been bashful about sharing the advantages of the wider, shallower RF mount found on its new full-frame mirrorless EOS R and EOS RP. The shorter flange distance should allow them to design high-performance lenses that outclass their EF line in a big way, as the brand explains in this promotional video. But a promotional video is one thing, and a real-world comparison is quite another. So Seguin decided to review the RF lens, and then compare it to the EF 24-70 f/2.8 for good measure, during a shoot for a magazine client of his.
You can check out the video to see side-by-side sample images starting at the 5:55 mark, but the results can be summed up in a few points.
- When shooting the 28-70mm lens wide-open at f/2, Seguin captured sharper images “time-after-time,” even when compared with the sharpest sample he managed to get using the EF lens.
- When both lenses are stopped down to f/2.8, the difference becomes even more drastic, with Seguin capturing “a lot more detail” through the RF glass.
- The RF lens does a better job of focusing on the EOS R, compared to the EF lens using Canon’s own adapter.
- All three of the above points hold true throughout the zoom range, but the difference is less pronounced at 70mm.
Of course, the more straight-forward comparison here would be between the brand new Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM and the EF version, but this 28-70mm lens review and comparison does reveal just how much performance Canon can squeeze out of their new RF Mount glass. Now that the RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM is out, we’d expect Seguin to put it through its paces soon.
Check out the full shootout and review up top to see many more sample shots of both lenses in action. And if you like the comparison, check out Seguin’s nascent YouTube channel, or head over to his website and Instagram.
FUJIFILM has launched the new FUJINON LA16x8BRM 2/3” Professional 4K lens designed specifically for the Blackmagic URSA Broadcast camera. The LA16x8BRM is compact and lightweight and provides the Blackmagic URSA with 4K and HD resolution. The lens only weighs 1.6kg thanks in part due to its unique rear focus mechanism design. It also features a … Continued
The post New FUJINON LA16x8BRM lens designed for the URSA Mini Pro Broadcast Camera appeared first on Newsshooter.
A free new camera app for iOS called Emojivision allows you to capture images composed entirely of emoji. The app was created by Gabriel O’Flaherty-Chan, according to TechCrunch, which reports that Emojivision uses computational photography to break an image down into its core color palette, then rebuilds it using similarly colored emoji in near-real-time.
The app can be used to take any image, as with the native camera app, and also to apply the emoji filters to existing images located in the phone’s camera roll. The app is free, but enthusiastic users can pay $2.79 USD to get additional emoji packs. For developers, the Emojivision project is located with technical details on GitHub.
Earlier this year, the CompactFlash Association unveiled the new CFexpress 2.0 specification that’ll be available in three form factors: Type A, Type B and Type C. A number of manufacturers revealed plans to offer these next-generation cards and it now appears SanDisk is one of the first off the line with its new SanDisk Extreme Pro CFexpress 2.0 Type B card, which is currently for sale in various European markets.
As we previously reported, the CFexpress 2.0 Type B card features the same dimensions as the existing XQD card, bringing with it a Gen3, 2 lane interface and a maximum theoretical speed of 2,000MB/s. According to SanDisk, its new Extreme Pro CFexpress Type B card gets close to that limit with a read speed of 1700MB/s and a write speed up to 1400MB/s.
SanDisk says this model can capture ‘raw 4K video with sustainable, low-latency performance,’ and it can be used with the data recovery software RescuePRO Deluxe. The model has appeared for sale in 64GB, 128GB, 256GB and 512GB capacities on Amazon for several European markets, including the UK, for £174.99 to £691.99. It’s unclear when the card will arrive for sale in the US.