"300" review

Tom Charity has written another good review, this one of 300.
Like I said, the film looks amazing, and I love that. But I should have suspected something like Tom says here: that the film is more or less a boring violence-fest. And has a pretty fascistic war-hawk world view.
The film is based on the comic book "300" by Frank Miller. I think that Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns is the best superhero comic ever written. But what he has written since that (20 years ago) has left me lukewarm. It seems to lack the complexity and subtlety that Dark Knight had. Too bad, since he has had more freedom than almost anybody in the comics field. It is not the only evidence that too much freedom can be an enemy to the artist.

Anonymous commented...
"concerning artistic freedom:
"It is not the only evidence that too much freedom can be an enemy to the artist"
I've heard simular from other artists I admire (Brian Eno being one) - It may be something I akin to what I refer to as the "temperture factor" > too much towards any extreme can be harmful. That is too little freedom can be just as much an enemy to the artist. However, I can't help but wonder if artists could handle freedom better if they recognized such as a limitation in and of itself. Perhaps in doing so then the outcome would be something easier for audiences to relate to...."

I'm sure you're right.

And "too much freedom" is only a problem for psychological reasons. Ultimately there is no such thing, of course.

"Red" digital cinema camera

George Lucas has been on the forefront of using digital video. The last two Star Wars films were shot digitally. And it saves a lot in film cost, and gains in flexibility. Still, the cameras were bulky, and they needed cables to big hard disks to handle the data output. Unwieldy. Also the details in the highlights were a problem. Film has a softer, more rounded look. Notice the difference in the look of "West Wing", shot on film, and "Friends", shot on video.

But things move fast in the digital world, as I never stop pointing out or marveling at. (I am not sure whether to pity or envy the kids growing up now, for whom this is not a marvel.) And several mature digital solutions are coming out now for digital cinema. Not just "HD video", we are talking pictures at least as big and sharp as what you see in the cinema. And apparently they have the dynamic range (contrast) problems solved in the past couple of years.

One interesting product is the "Red" digital cinema camera.
Site | video | video | video | video
(The videos all seem to be pretty old (but still informative). The camera should be about ready to ship now, it seems.)

Several things are remarkable about it:
1) The price: $17.500 for the camera. Amazingly cheap for a cinema camera, digital or otherwise.
2) The design, very flexible.
3) The high-end sensor.
4) It's a small, "rogue" company.

Apparently they were not satisfied with the sensors they could buy, so they had to get one made specially! This is astounding. Not even Nikon makes their own sensors. I can't figure out how they fund this, and how they move it along this fast.

When they speak of "4K", they mean a resolution of 4,096 pixels on the horisontal... that's about as much as my Canon 5D still camera! That's totally shocking for a video camera. With a really good lens (and cinema lenses are top flight), the level of detail this can pick up is amazing. You should see the prints I made yesterday from pictures taken with my 100mm fixed-focal-length lens.

Probably I will never use such a camera myself. But I have an affinity for high-end or extraordinary products. And I like this company and how they push for a really wonderful and even affordable camera for the future of cinema. The savings in the camera and even more in not having to buy film and processing are immense, and will mean a continued revolution in independent film making. It's probably now possible to make a Hollywood-quality film for, I don't know, one-fifth of the price of just five years ago. (OK, that's a guesstimate, but the change is huge.)

Tree, shadows, Vault, Curls

Early in the morning today it was a beautiful light outside, so I went outside to snap a few. The same lens, Canon 100mm F:2.0, which made those soft background with the birches, can also deliver what must be the sharpest pictures I have ever made. Not in and off itself of any artistic importance, but it feels good to do. A hobby thing, like hi-fi. Of course if nice pictures can manifest too, hurrah.

You should see the 35cm x 50cm (13" x 19") print of the tree picture. Technically (tones and sharpness) it's way beyond anything I ever did back in the 35mm/darkroom days. And that's due to digital technology, not what I have learned still, I think, because I was about as good as anybody I knew. (Here is an unedited file.)

Not to mention that making a print in a darkroom, especially such a large one, is time consuming, hard work, and very messy. (And that's even just for B/W. Color was way harder.)


Update: below is an alternative version of the tree picture, edited by Blerim Racaj, who I blogged recently. It's darker, warm-toned, and cropped to remove the sky. All things I could easily have gone with. (The print I made of the picture is actually warm-toned and a little darker (prints are often darker).) I tried cropping it, but decided that the bit of sky added dimension to it. What do you think?


I just compared to the print, and the tones are *exactly* like this! Funny. And I have to admit it looks better.
Re the cropping, I'm in a period where I don't tend to as much for the abstract as I used to. You never know, I may go back.

ACIM videos

More on the Power Of Source blog.

Free online video documentary about A Course In Miracles.

Update: sadly the video has been removed. But you can still probably find it via Search on YouTube.

Cafe Philos

I was alerted to Cafe Philos blog because they have a review of my commercial site, but it turns out that's not the only good thing about it. It's thoughtful and positive.

Nikon D40x review

Nikon D40x review
It is the same camera as the D40, only with slightly higher resolution and speed.
And it is true what the review says, it is amazingly light and compact with the kit lens. So this is countering my own bitching earlier.

The digital camera development is astounding. In 2000, the Canon D30 was introduced. It was a revolution in high quality for a low price... and yet it was four times the price of this camera, was near twice as big, and had one third the resolution! Holy cow.

Alex said...
I haven't touched my SLR since September. I had a fews days out this week and put 9 print films and 3 slide films through it. Total cost of film and processing at about $12 each is almost $150. 10 days like that and I can by a Nixon D80 and lens! Add that to the list...

You said it. That's something easy to forget in the equation.

Imagine what professional photographers can use in film! A pro can easily shoot twenty films in a day or more.

Also for Hollywood and small film makers, it's a revolution. Film cost in cinema is astronomical. And digital cinema cameras are just now maturing. (For instance red.com, pointed out by ttl.)

Bob Carlos Clarke is dead, alas

I never cease to be amazed at just how f**ked up some people manage to become.

Terry said...
You not crazy if you commit suicide. Many people no longer want to live. Sad, but true.
My grandfather use to tell them that once you find everything uninteresting it's time to die, and no, he wasn't mental, just a tired old man.

Gen said...
Suicide can be the only logical way out of immense problems. Thus it is seen as a relief by the suffering person, not as a crime or whatever.

Oh, I agree. I did not intend to imply otherwise. I was talking about his life, not his death. And also the way he did it: throwing himself in front of a train. It's highly messy, traumatizes others needlessly. And what if you survive!

Open letter to John Travolta

Dear Mr. Travolta,

I remember one fine afternoon in 1977 in Denmark, I met one of my schoolmates in town, and she was bearing a newly purchased poster, rolled up. I asked what it was, and she said with a big, happy, and yet mischievous smile: "it's Travolta." I asked: "what's a travolta?"

Well, we all learned quickly. Here is my suggestion: how about another movie with some dancing in it. I am not suggesting a musical. Too expensive, and they're usually not that interesting. (OK, I did like Grease. But I'm not about to see Chicago, and Moulin Rouge was weird at best.) But how about a small movie?

It should be possible to secure funding for a small movie (especially now, with cinema quality digital video). Just for instance you, Uma Thurman, a small town, a love story, some humor (please), and a bit of dancing. I'd see it.

A little bit of the right dancing has so much power. Examples: The short dancing contest scene in Pulp Fiction (Ooh, did you see the tribute on Gilmore Girls? Wonderful). Or the brief moments of dancing on stairs and mezzanine in The Breakfast Club. Or the relatively few dances in Footloose. Or even the brief dance in Michael.

You said it yourself in an interview: "People go nuts when I dance."

Wild Hogs

I'm looking forward to Wild Hogs.
William Macy and John T. in a comedy, can't be bad.

Only in March 2007

I try to keep this site generally separate from my commercial site (you know, the one with all the girls). But since many readers here are also fans of that site, and it has a ten-year anniversary this month, I have decided to set up a special offer for my readers. If you go here and ignore the posted prices but go on to Sign Up, you will find a pricing option of $9.95 per month with no bigger upfront fee. Enjoy.

Optimism/pessimism

We stay in the same vein with an essay contest winner.
(It seems happynews.com is like goodnewsnetwork, but it has a bigger output. You may recall I've been saying that I'd keep more informed when a news outlet appeared which was not relentlessly depressing. I'll give this one a shot.)

Pulp Friction

"I would not waste my life in friction when it could be turned into momentum."
-- Frances Willard

I like that quote. One of the best decisions I've made in this life is to minimize conflict. For a while there I was worried that I was what that Danish call "conflict shy", a subtler word for coward. But I don't think so. I just think I felt instinctively that conflict, while occasionally (rarely) and temporarily necessary, is almost never constructive or productive. Creation and communication are productive. Conflict just locks up energy which could be used constructively.
-----
Update: Rather apropos, I'm just reading about one of my favorite composers, Sinead O'connor. While we can't truly adjudicate what goes on in somebody else's lives, it is a fact that she now sadly has retired from music (before she was forty), and that she must have been much worn down by the intensive attacks she suffered because she was so busy fighting the English, the American, and the Catholic Church. While those, like any group on Earth, have their flaws, they are not the "real enemy" (an expression she used about the church). There is no "real enemy", that's the big trick of the universe. "We have met the enemy and he is us", to quote a famous opossum. So all we have to do is stop being it. Easier said than done, but worthwhile.