Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Please, support PV!
It allows to keep PV going, with more focus towards AI, but keeping be one of the few truly independent places.
Shot on What?
  • shianshian

    http://shotonwhat.com

    Now you can find out what cameras, what lenses, etc were used to shoot certain films, also if they were strictly DI, or transferred to film for their final master/negative.

    Very interesting to see what lenses were used on certain films. I wish they had more details, such as which camera used which lenses when listing the cameras.

  • 12 Replies sorted by
  • shianshian

    I have become an even bigger fan of Zeiss Ultra Primes as a result.

    http://shotonwhat.com/prometheus-2012.html

    crap movie, but looked amazing.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    Hmmm, I wonder how reliable the information is and where they're getting it. Outside an ACM feature article there doesn't tend to be a lot of external reference on the actual focal lengths selected from an available product range.

    The Fincher articles tend to go into this sort of detail but, sadly, a lot of others you might just read a reference to the family of lenses or a specific lens that was selected for a special purpose.

    If it's even half as detailed as the Internet Movie Gun Database it'll still be really interesting.

    edit: hmmm, yeah, they're just getting started. Looks like their initial database is pulled right from IMDB.

  • WhiteRabbitWhiteRabbit

    @shian, thanks for that. I had looked at this website a while ago, not followed it very often when seeking information.

    This probably a given, for cross reference anyway, one may also consider looking at IMDB and scroll down to 'Technical Specs' > 'full technical specs' and often find various information. For example, Prometheus:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1446714/technical

    Sorry if IMDB 'Technical Specs' is already known to all, just adding to options to consider to perhaps augment a search for what is often limited technical information.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    It looks like they're at least starting their database by taking the "full technical specs" and presenting that up front rather than cast+crew and making you go digging. So, if nothing else, it's a faster way to get at that information than going directly to IMDB. Well, some of them, I was able to stump it with movies that don't exist in their database (ie. Flatliners).

    Looks like they allow folks to submit new information a bit easier than IMDB's unforgiving, user-hostile interface. There's that. It's still dependent on individual participation though. I was hoping they were somehow hooked into a new, non-IMDB database somewhere. Still, it appears to be faster to get to what you want if you want to jump right into the tech specs.

  • shianshian

    Probably the most interesting to me are the Final delivery and film stock categories - so if you see a certain grain you like, you at least have a starting point to use for recreating it.

    And as I suspected, most of the really good looking movies that were shot digitally all have a film negative delivery master which would take the digital edge off the DI. Transferring it to film would soften the image, and add a nice grain to it.

  • brudneybrudney

    Nice find shian, thanks!

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    @shian the information provided only really implies that a film negative delivery master was made but that doesn't mean that it was used for anything but traditional release prints. D-Cinema releases could very well be made straight from the DI or some full-digital post DI medium.

    Digital from digital is the most practical way to go for sure. I'm not saying they don't re-scan a film-out for digital delivery...I'd just like to hear that conversation with a producer.

    Disney used to do this, back in the dark days of Eisner running the company, for PIXAR releases, individually dust-busting and enhancing both widescreen and pan-n-scan releases, but they almost went out of business for doing things the wrong way in spite of their amazing financial enertia smoothing over decades of terrible executive management decisions.

  • GravitateMediaGroupGravitateMediaGroup

    @shian you thought promethius was a crap movie? being that i'm 99.9% sure there is a sequal in the making, shouldn't you wait to see how it pans out? I loved it it and the idea, it DID however feel like the screenplay or something in the process was rushed and the ideas could have been expanded a bit more.

  • Greek_m43Greek_m43

    @Shian A lot of Prometheus was shot on zoom rather than the primes.

  • shianshian

    http://www.the-editing-room.com/prometheus.html off topic, but encapsulates my feelings on the movie.

  • BurnetRhoadesBurnetRhoades

    @Shian yeah, I'm with you there. The script and the characters were not up to scratch, even if the story concepts from At the Mountains of Madness were way cool. As an overall movie though only the AVP flicks are likely worse in the entire franchise.

    It was beautiful though. That's the thing with Ridley. He's got to have a good script to work with, otherwise he'll make the most beautiful bad movie you've ever seen, told in a masterful visual way that few directors, living or dead, are capable.

  • AriaAria

    @shian, thanx for posting this website. I've been wanting something like this for a while now. I always try to learn more about what a movie was shot on but it's often been difficult to get all the info.

    By the way I actually loved much of Prometheus even tho I did think they missed the mark on several of the plot lines and the ending. As you said the look of the film was awesome IMO.

Add a Comment