text:
Wednesday in Dublin is the "favorite day of the week" for eight special-needs adults— and their exercise coaches. What began as an offer from one Dublin special-ed teacher to a local gym owner has gelled into a mutually beneficial — and heartwarming — arrangement at Fitness 2000.
Every Wednesday morning, special-ed students from Dublin's Transition program spend 30 minutes cleaning machines and equipment at the fitness club on Village Parkway. In exchange, they are treated to one hour of personalized training from Show Up Fitness exercise interns, all working toward personal-fitness certifications. "They love it," said Bree LeMoine, educator for the Dublin Transition program. "It's the students' favorite day of the week."
Transition, a Dublin Unified School District program, launched in August 2011, teaches special-education students, from 18 to 22 years old, such living skills as travel, financial responsibility, diet, exercise and employment. Transition's LeMoine was not looking for a freebie when she approached Fitness 2000 owner Pinky Patel seeking exercise resources for her class — hence, the trade offer to clean equipment. "We wanted to show (the students) that you need to work," LeMoine said. "We did not want to do this for nothing."
And to Patel for sealing the arrangement and weekly use of her center's facilities, LeMoine is grateful. "If we didn't have her, none of this would be happening," she said.
The individual coaches are "trainers in training" from Dublin-based Show Up Fitness, all working toward certification with the National Personal Training Institute. Chris Hitchko, the owner of Show Up, an occasional Patch blogger and a certified trainer himself, said working with the special-needs class is a boon for his trainers-to-be. "It's a good teaching mechanism," Hitchko said. "It teaches them you can work with any body type. It teaches patience."
The trainers run Transition students through traditional circuits of weights, balance balls, bench presses and stationary bicycles to boost balance, coordination, flexibility and cardio fitness, he said. LeMoine said her students, whose disabilities include autism and physical and intellectual impairments, keenly anticipate Wednesdays at the gym — apparently a feeling that's mutual. As Hitchko said of his trainers-in-training: "It's their favorite day, too."
Click HERE for the original article on patch by Susan C. Schena – Writer for DublinPatch.com


text:
Bigger is better and VistaVision
Thomas Gleeson
Thankyou for your considered response to the discussion of larger than S35 sensors and the "...increased "dimensionality" or "roundness" or "perspective" due to the larger frame size itself."
I totally agree with your observation in regards to the Panavision Videos https://vimeo.com/167045645 and Dan Sasaki's references to the benefits of magnification without explaining what he means with this term. I have initiated a conversation with Panavision and hopefully we can get a clear definition of the terminology.
I am surprised that only Art has engaged in this discussion. For a over a century cinematographers have been limited to the 35mm format and its many variations and for many shooters smaller than 35mm has been their fate. Since the 1920s people have pushed into larger formats but they have always been so expensive that only the largest Studio "Tent Pole" films have had access. With both Sony and Red delivering VistaVision capable cameras Large Sensor cinematography is becoming available to huge number of cinematographers. Defining the aesthetic qualities of Large Sensor cinematography seems an important task and surprisingly allusive.
Do people think I am deluded and large sensor shooting will go the way of the 3D rig?
Stuart Brereton
I think one issue here is that these are completely subjective terms, referring to qualities that some people will not see as important, and other people will not see at all. If you choose focal lengths that match the FOV between s35mm and FF, and then shoot them both at apertures that match the DoF, at that point are 'dimensionality', or 'roundness' sufficient reasons to choose FF over s35? Given that you'll almost certainly be sacrificing your favorite choice of cinema lens, and probably your favorite choice of camera to do so, is shooting 'large' format worth it?
Stuart Brereton
Michael Brennan
I have not found any of the explanations, tests or opinions on this subject, definitive.
Is roundness effect being discussed, partly a function/effect of the diameter of the front element as much as anything else?
The "ants eye" perspective and the un-roundness ;) offered by a small lens diameter of 10mm is the opposite effect to the roundness effect under discussion?
Mike Brennan
The contents of this email are confidential
On 2 Dec 2017, at 4:29 pm, lensboy235@... wrote:
Thomas Gleeson
Stuart Brereton quote " think one issue here is that these are completely subjective terms, referring to qualities that some people will not see as important, and other people will not see at all. If you choose focal lengths that match the FOV between s35mm and FF, and then shoot them both at apertures that match the DoF, at that point are 'dimensionality', or 'roundness' sufficient reasons to choose FF over s35?"
These are good questions and I am attempting to qualify the changing aesthetic as the format size changes. This has proved strangely allusive. I am certainly not suggesting that one format is better and saying VistaVision is better than S35 as this is like saying Rasberry jam is better than Strawberry jam*. Although what is certain is that the ability to choose formatts to suit your project or even the shot is more power to cinematographers. With Arri offering the Arri65, Sony the Venice, Red the Monstro, Panavision the DXL, Cooke the S7's and Leica the Thalia's etc we will not need be forced to far from our familiar tools.
I would still love to see if someone can clearly enunciate just how larger formatts see and represent the world differently? I have started a conversation with Red and Panavision who have at least attempted this on their Panalab site.
Tom Gleeson
Sydney DOP
*Clearly Strawberry jam is the best
Mark Kenfield
toggle quoted message. . .
I think this is a really interesting area at the moment, and one that certainly deserves some more rigorous discussion than it's had to date.
Everyone seems to accept that 'bigger is better', but I agree, I don't think the actual aesthetic qualities that people are referring to, have been well enough defined to actually mean anything.
There is obviously a clear distinction between the magnification properties of anamorphic glass and spherical glass (as Dan explained pretty clearly I think, in the video that lenboy235 linked to). However, I think the issue becomes much murkier when we start to compare different sizes of spherical formats.
Obviously there are very noticeable jumps in resolving power, the appearance of grain/noise, and the optical separation provided by a shallower depth of field, as we step up from 8mm, to S16mm, to S35mm formats. But once we reach S35mm (and especially with the incredibly noise-free digital sensors we enjoy nowadays), the jump upwards to Vistavision and even 5-perf 65mm/Alexa65, really does become harder to discern at conventional viewing distances.
Add to this the fact that circle of confusion and screen viewing angles are constantly left out of these discussions (when they are so utterly fundamental to the perceptual differences rendered by these different-sized formats) and it becomes pretty clear why the whole issue has become as vague as the terms used to describe it ("roundness", "natural perspective", "dimensionality" etc.)
I think Steve Yedlin did a fantastic job of breaking a lot of this down in his "Display Prep" and "Resolution" Demos (found here: www.yedlin.net/BoringFilmTechStuff_Index.html ), and anyone who hasn't sat through them yet, I'd strongly urge to take a look.
Using a depth of field and angle of view calculator (www.pointsinfocus.com has the best one going), we can see precisely the focal length and aperture setting required to match lenses between the different formats.
So if we take a 25mm f/1.4 lens on a digital S35mm sensor as a reference point, we would need a 38mm f/2.1 lens on a Vistavision sensor, or a 53mm f/3.0 lens on the Alexa 65 to match both the angle of view and depth of field between them.
Now you'd need an Alexa 65 to test this, as it can do all three formats on the same sensor (So Brett and Sean at Arri Australia, hit me up if you want to get this done!), but I suspect that if we did, and then projected the results all on the same screen, we'd find that (assuming we have nice, neutral, distortion free lenses) there would be no overly apparent optical differences in perspective or compression. And instead, the differences would lie in resolved image detail, and the relative size of the grain/noise in the image (which would get progressively smaller and less noticeable, with each step up in sensor size).
That's the theory at least (from what little I understand of spherical optics).
Now the part that interests me most, is if you rated the Alexa 65 you were using for this test at 200 or 400 ISO (ISO levels at which the regular S35mm Alexa sensor, of which the Alexa 65 is made up of three, becomes practically noiseless); and you were sitting in the middle of a regular movie theatre, seeing the images projected at 4k, but, because you're sitting in the middle of the theatre, where circle of confusion and your viewing angle to the screen, puts you right on the edge of being able to discern the difference in detail between a 2k and 4k image. Are you going to be able to tell the difference between a noiseless S35mm 25mm @ f/1.4 image, an even more noiseless 38mm f/2.1 Vistavision image, and a 53mm f/3.0 Alexa 65 image (which would probably appear noiseless even if you didn't rate it at the lower ISO)?
By sitting in the middle of the theatre (a good reference point for the 'average' viewer) your ability to discern the higher resolution of the Vistavision and Alexa 65 images is limited by the resolving power of your eyes, and once the smaller S35mm format is rendered perceptually noiseless by the lower ISO, your ability to perceive that difference between the formats is limited too.
So at that point, with all of the obvious perceptual differences minimised, is anyone going to be able to pick the differences between the images? And how significantly would things change if you then viewed the same images again from the middle of an IMAX theatre (where the circle of confusion/angle of view equation is changed completely)? I'd love to find out!
Mark Kenfield
On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 09:34 pm, Thomas Gleeson wrote:
Thankyou for your considered response to the discussion of larger than S35 sensors and the "...increased "dimensionality" or "roundness" or "perspective" due to the larger frame size itself."
Thomas Gleeson
Don't worry I have already hit up Arri and Panavision. In Australia a Arri65 is presently Unicorn poop and the DXL not much better. Sony will have a Venice at ACS HQ Sydney next Thursday and we will have a Monstro Vistavision to test with the ACS Technical Committee over the coming weeks.
There are several issues that need to be teased out over large sensors. One of the drivers of early large film formats was technical with major improvements in picture quality with better grain and resilience to the lossy analogue printing processes. I would also concur Mark that the huge improvements in first film stock grain then sensor noise means we really don't need larger sensors for their marginal technical improvements. Its also not just about the pixel count or resolution as we have reached pixel densities that need not increase. Note that the 65mm Arri and Sony Venice are 6K and Red 8K so these cameras are really not pushing the pixel race.
The "difference" is a lens/geometry/perspective/DOF thing. Firstly the perspective is not determined by lenses and formats but by the position of the camera and geography of the subject and world photographed. Larger Formats do allow us to work closer using any given focal length due to their larger angle of view. These longer focal lengths naturally bring their DOF characteristics with them.
Say you had a Monstro camera shooting a MS of a subject in a room you shoot a shot using the S35 format with a zoom lens set to 24mm then switch the camera to VistaVision. We could then zoom into a 35mm focal length to match the AOV and have exactly the same picture except the DOF would decrease. Now stop down around two stops and the two images are identical.
Now do the same test but instead of zooming in to match the shot we stay on a 24mm but move forward to match the MS on the subject. We match the MS but now the perspective on the background has changed as we have a wider AOV and we have moved forward. The Subject and background relationship has changed as the subject has grown larger in relationship to the background. The other effect in moving forward is we are focusing closer to keep the focus on the subject allowing for greater focus separation as DOF decreases. This is where the magic may lie?
In my research looking at Big Sensor cinematography I keep coming across compelling images that jus look so different that I am compelled to dig deeper although my ignorance of optical physics does not help.
Tom Gleeson
Sydney DOP
Paul Curtis
In an end to end imaging chain there are numerous factors that affect the image. Some of these have a big contribution and others a small one. I think we all have a habit of looking at the minutiae due to the nature of what we do. I know i'm guilty.
For me the single biggest effect of a larger sensor is simply focal length vs DOF, that's what 99% of people will see and feel. I think that the other contributions and differences are really only discernible to folk like us, who are looking for them.
It's also a case of physical lens design too. On a large sensor the capability to make a wide lens with shallow DOF is much easier than on a smaller sensor. So we have a wide aesthetic now with clear separation. Just like medium format. So physics and practicality of manufacturing plays a part in this too.
All other aspects - noise, resolution and so on are valid, but i don't think an audience is really going to pick up on that like we do, but there will be some subconscious effects, that's true.
It's like the Red 8K image, anyone working with it can see that it shows the limitations of most lenses, if you pixel peep, but step back then there is a smoothness which yields an image i feel that's very organic - i'm sure the same is true for other similar resolution cameras. Where as with HD res, it's a bit easier to 'see' and 'feel' the pixels and aliasing.
My 2c
Paul Curtis, VFX & Post | Canterbury, UK
George Palmer
Just rewatched the Vistavision "How the West Was Won". The story of this truly magnificent film is largely fullfilled by legendary performers portraying the stories of ordinary people framed, dwarfed by mind boggling breathtaking awesome natural (not synthetic, CGI) American West settings. Typical of places like the Great Australian Outback, or the mountains of Switzerland, or the Gobi desert. Hence the ability to frame performers prominently and yet fully retain the awsome grandeur of awesome natural settings. Set on the streets or in the buildings of NYC, or Chicago, or Sydney (vs. for instance the Great Outback) would we see any discernible (to the viewer!) benefits of Vistavision or these ultra large formats?
To me the point and the highest and best (only useful?) purpose of these formats is to portray the stories that capture the pedestrian stories and struggles of ordinary people against the sometimes overwhelmingly challenging yet visually awesome world around them. Question is how many movies have you seen lately whose stories/scripts merit that treatment? And if we were to simply justify the use of and deploy the large format tool on the basis of technical merit or to force a visual effect that most times would only fit the story line (e.g. a drug dealer in NYC or in Colombia), would we in fact be fousting a visual perspective inappropriately for the sake of the effect alone?
IMHO aside from the cost and staging implications that may have restricted the use of Vistavision in its day, there were also not that many movies that have actually merited that treatment. If you really want to test that theory, spend some time watching classic films on TCM, then ask yourself how many would have justified or benefitted from the use of large format cameras.
George Palmer
On the WNY Tundra with no spectacular vistas in sight
George Palmer
George Palmer
Sorry a typo in the post: "And if we were to simply justify the use of and deploy the large format tool on the basis of technical merit or to force a visual effect that most times would only fit the story line (e.g. a drug dealer in NYC or in Colombia),"
I meant to say "that most times would NOT fit the story line or setting"
GEORGE Palmer
Composing text one fingered on a phone is tough on the WNY tundra
George Palmer
Scott Dorsey
What drove large format film systems was primarily the huge sizes of screens
and the desire to get a sense of complete envelopment in the theatre.
These days, far too few films are shown even on 25-foot screens in multiplexes
let alone actual big screens. People are watching them on their cellphones
where they can hardly see a damn thing.
The magic isn't in shallow DOF. Shallow fields can be a good thing and can
give a certain look that is great. But when you shoot for a big screen with
a large format medium, you compose completely differently. It's not just
that you don't have to fill the frame with faces.... it's that you can now
have a face way out in the distance in the tiny corner of the frame and the
viewer can see every detail in it.
Next time someplace near you runs Lawrence of Arabia or 2001 on 70mm, go see
it. It's a totally different experience, because of the size of the screen,
the fact that the screen fills up almost your whole vision, and the film is
composed for that.
(Some people may argue that what really sold large format projection was
decent multichannel sound, and that was a big factor. Lots of stuff shot
on 35mm was blown up to 70mm for distribution because 70mm mag sound was
so much better... but the films shot and composed for the format are
Hell, go watch The World, The Flesh, and the Devil. It's just in ordinary
Cinemascope and it's composed for a movie palace.
Stuart Brereton
On Dec 2, 2017, at 1:49 AM, Thomas Gleeson <lensboy235@...> wrote:By moving the camera you are adding another variable to the test, and all it's really demonstrating is that a wide angle close up looks different to a long lens close up. The question here is whether there is any perceptual difference between s35 and FF given matching FoV and DoF. With film as an origination format, grain would be a giveaway, but would the same happen with digital sensors? As Mark points out, modern 4k sensors already out resolve what the eye can see at normal viewing distances.
I'm looking forward to seeing some side by side tests to show how difference a larger sensor actually makes, and how much of it is just "mine's bigger than yours".
Stuart Brereton
John Brawley
Tom, I'm not sure I'd define not shooting on larger formats than 35mm as a limitation, it perhaps belies your own preferences for larger formats?
Cinema seems to have done OK for a century or so mostly getting by with this smaller and smaller formats.
I have always enjoyed photography and have used many formats.
I like the convenience of the small formats like 135 and heretically, I also love the mFT format too.
But I also still today shoot medium format digital and film alongside those formats. It drives my assistants nuts to have to carry all these cameras around but I love using them for different purposes.
There's something very special about shooting the Leica S (where the Thalia lenses came from) outdoors for semi formal portraits and the Leica M when you want a camera on hand while you're operating is hard to beat and a Mamiya 7 is great for candid landscapes.
I think of larger formats as yet another extension to our tool set. Just like there is no one camera that does it all, I don't believe there's one format that does it all. It comes back to story right? I saw Sully at the cinema before knowing it was shot almost entirely Alexa 65 and I have to say, it didn't stand out to me as being the right choice for that film. I didn't even pick that it was Alexa 65 till I read about it later.
I'm surprised more aren't exploring Nolen / Pfister approach on The Dark Knight, mixing not only formats but changing aspect ratios mid narrative. I thought it worked very well for the work, as it also did with films like Mommy where they shot 1:1 with a single wonderful moment where it changes to 1.85 when a central character literarily pulls the frame wider in shot. There's also a nice change midway in Hunger Games 2. The Grand Budapest Hotel does it with three different aspect ratios, all driven from story.
Aspect ratio to me has a greater affect on visual phsycology because it drives shot composition and staging, rather than the visual aretefacts of image / format size and the optical requirements of meeting these differing sizes.
John Brawley
Atlanta Georgia
What we have to remember is that in spite of the magnificent acceleration of innovation in digital capture systems, the high end glass industry has a completely different rate of novelty and breakthroughs. The fact the ARRI has launched an 8 perf 65mm digital sensor less than a decade after their S35 digital sensor is insanity.
We we are in unprecedented territory when it comes to the speed of innovation in terms of sensors, codecs, HDR capture, light sensitivity, all the things which really excites and drives the enthusiasm for embracing digital cinema. What we have to remember is that not all aspects of capture can catch up at the same rate. If I'm not mistaken this was the thinking behind Deakins staying away from the Alexa 65. What's the point of a state of the art, shiny new 8perf 65 digital sensor if you still have to use 60 year old glass?
Also, there are significant aesthetic differences between 5perf 65, 8perf 65 and S35 and FF sizes. 8K VV from Red and the sensor in the DXL is much more similar to S35 than the Alexa 65 6K is to the Red 5perf 65 sensor.
The Alexa 65 sensor is at least 10 years ahead of its time (and glass technology). My guess is that people will slowly start upgrading their systems to accommodate FF (already well under way) and eventually VV 5perf and Arri's 8perf 65. But I'm afraid the availability of these new technologies confuses people and gets them impatient to try them even though they do not yet tick all the boxes so to speak, and then they're disappointed or confused by the results though they don't account for the fact that they have to pair the cameras with inferior lenses and accessories.
Leica and Cooke delivering modern FF high end glass is super encouraging indeed for those of us who have been waiting for this large format revival. Panavision has a whole host of vintage glass for VV and the Primo 70s can cover a 5K crop to the Alexa 65 sensor. But we're certainly years (and millions of dollars ha!) removed from a Master Prime or Summilux calibre modern glass covering 8perf 65. There's only so much you can do with the physics of light.
Sergio Montiel
Art Adams
>I think one issue here is that these are completely subjective terms, referring to qualities that some people will not see as important, and other people will not see at all.
If someone else sees something that I don't, the first thing I do is ask them to help me see it.
If we don't understand each other's subjective descriptions, then we should ask each other what we mean by them such that we can learn from each other.
Surely I'm not the only curious person on this list.
>If you choose focal lengths that match the FOV between s35mm and FF, and then shoot them both at apertures that match the DoF, at that point are 'dimensionality', or 'roundness' sufficient reasons to choose FF over s35?
Well, I guess that's an artistic decision. And we, as cinematographers, are paid to make those—many times a day.
It's fascinating to me that a background can seem more three dimensional by compressing depth, pulling it forward and reducing distortion. I then feel its actual shape because it's not artificially pushed into the distance, where any differences in depth are minimized.
If backgrounds feel more real because they're a bit closer and possess a lot more detail, I'd gladly add that option to my artistic toolbox. It would also be nice to put a person in front of that and not see them look as if they've exploded from within.
As for my "favorite choice of camera," that's whichever will help me make the most appropriate pictures for the project. If a project looks best in a large format, and someone will pay for that, then a large format camera will be my favorite camera for that project.
Maybe I don't have access to all the lenses I want because they haven't yet been made. So what? Artificial constraints are one of the best ways to generate creativity.
Of course, maybe S35 is "good enough." There was a time when NTSC was good enough. Before that, Tri-X was good enough. Before that, tintypes were good enough. Before that, oil painting, wood carving and chiseling runes into stone blocks were good enough. Maybe scribes should have stuck with papyrus instead of moving to paper, because what's the point in giving up your favorite inks?
"Good enough" has never been a good enough reason for artistry to stagnant.
Art Adams
>There is obviously a clear distinction between the magnification properties of anamorphic glass and spherical glass (as Dan explained pretty clearly I think, in the video that lenboy235 linked to).
This is interesting. I looked for that effect in the anamorphic footage they presented and I didn't see it. I did see a lot of distortion, but I didn't see any difference in background magnification between the spherical lens tests and the anamorphic tests. How and where are you seeing it?
I wonder if that's true. I haven't done a good comparison. I thought the VistaVision vs. Technoscope comparisons were interesting, but I've noticed that the "roundness" effect tends to be more pronounced in formats with taller aspect ratios. There's a video on that same page of a guard walking through a prison checking on prisoners that has a very distinctive large format look but it's less pronounced than the VistaVision reference.
Then again, I took a look at some Lawrence of Arabia footage on Youtube and I could still feel that large format presence. It's the "epic" look that I remember from my youth that I could never quite put my finger on.
The difference in perspective vs. angle of view is visible regardless of the format. A shot that has the angle of view of a 25mm S35 lens but has no distortion and a closer, richer background should be a pretty obvious difference to us as cinematographers. Is everyone going to notice? Not consciously. But most people don't consciously notice lighting either, but we still do it.
You can see the differences in depth compression in the Panavision video. Look at the "person in front of the Xmas lights" clips and compare spherical S35 to spherical large format. The background looks to be half the distance away in the large format clips.
What you seem to be saying is that larger sensor cameras could be rated faster, which would compensate somewhat for their reduced depth of field.
You also seem to be making a case against, say, projecting 35mm film vs. 70mm film. Or viewing a 35mm print made from 70mm film. In either case, I think we'd all agree there'd be a noticeable difference. In order to display true 4K resolution you'd need to capture a minimum of 5K anyway.
And before anyone points me to Steve Yedlin's video again, yes, I know that resolution alone doesn't make a huge difference in every situation. But there is a valid argument that vastly increased resolution does result in much smoother images with more subtle transitions. The best example I've seen of that is here:
Will everyone notice? No. Are we in the business of making images that appeal to the lowest common denominator in every instance? No.
I don't understand why people keep saying this. THERE IS NO WAY TO ELIMINATE OBVIOUS PERCEPTUAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN S35 AND LARGE FORMAT PHOTOGRAPHY. When you have to use a 50mm lens to capture an image in large format with the same angle of view as a 25mm lens in S35, you're going to see perceptual differences—because the 25mm is still a 25mm lens, and a 50mm lens is still a 50mm lens, and they have very different characteristics when it comes to depth representation.
Art Adams
>If I'm not mistaken this was the thinking behind Deakins staying away from the Alexa 65. What's the point of a state of the art, shiny new 8perf 65 digital sensor if you still have to use 60 year old glass?
I've been using 60-year-old glass for my S35 work with great success. And there are people saying that old glass works really well in large format because it exaggerates the amazing tonal transitions that the higher resolution large format sensors naturally create.
Deakins loves Master Primes because they are crazy sharp and perfect. I don't. I'm not Deakins, but there are plenty of other cinematographers who are not Deakins and have different preferences to his. I don't think his opinion represents enough people in the industry that glass manufacturers should commence layoffs.
But I'm afraid the availability of these new technologies confuses people and gets them impatient to try them even though they do not yet tick all the boxes so to speak, and then they're disappointed or confused by the results though they don't account for the fact that they have to pair the cameras with inferior lenses and accessories.
So... echoes of RED in 2007? We survived that, and it only gave us more and better tools in the long run.
But we're certainly years (and millions of dollars ha!) removed from a Master Prime or Summilux calibre modern glass covering 8perf 65. There's only so much you can do with the physics of light.
If you have to give up half your paint brushes to work with a larger canvas, then maybe that's a decision you make when the opportunity comes along to work with a larger canvas. It doesn't mean that larger canvases are bad.
I used to think I was becoming old and curmudgeonly, but actually I'm feeling pretty good at the moment.
Stuart Brereton
You're not. I am very curious to see side by side tests, but my curiosity is tempered by a certain amount of healthy skepticism.
This argument makes no sense. With the exception of NTSC television, none of those mediums was used with the intention of faithfully recreating reality. As a case can be made that Digital cinema cameras are now at a point where we cannot perceive the incremental improvements, it's fair to say that perhaps good enough is just that. To quote a certain Vulcan scientist, "A difference which makes no difference, is no difference."
"I don't understand why people keep saying this. THERE IS NO WAY TO ELIMINATE OBVIOUS PERCEPTUAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN S35 AND LARGE FORMAT PHOTOGRAPHY. When you have to use a 50mm lens to capture an image in large format with the same angle of view as a 25mm lens in S35, you're going to see perceptual differences—because the 25mm is still a 25mm lens, and a 50mm lens is still a 50mm lens, and they have very different characteristics when it comes to depth representation."
I believe that this is one of the points in contention. Do they in fact have different characteristics when FoV and DoF are matched? Some say yes, some say no. If these characteristics are demonstrable, then great, but if they're just a matter of opinion, then the move towards larger sensors starts to look like something driven more by marketing than necessity.
Stuart Brereton
Luis Gomes
Well? Having short depth of field on wide angle lenses is surely interesting.
As I always had laughed when my director says "blur now" on a 24 mm
Free day end.
Xmas concerts
Everyday from now. Till I vomit
Freelancer video Professional.
George Palmer
"If these characteristics are demonstrable, then great, but if they're just a matter of opinion, then the move towards larger sensors starts to look like something driven more by marketing than necessity." Amen! The emperor's new clothes weren't visible, new or clothes. But his marketing skills sure were. Not saying this is exactly the case here, but if not quantifiable......maybe....
George Palmer
Quantifiable WNY Tundra Currmudgeon
George Palmer
Stuart Brereton
Here's a quick, and not very scientific test I shot. The first frame is from a Canon 6D Full Frame camera. 50mm lens @f4. The second is from a Fujifilm APS-C camera. 35mm @f2.5. According to my FoV calc, the actual equivalent should have been a 31mm lens, but they don't exist… The images have been corrected to balance exposure, and resized to a web friendly resolution. The slight difference in framing is due to the tripod mounting thread being in different places on the cameras.
I am genuinely interested to hear thoughts on the differences in perspective and 'dimensionality', or lack thereof.
Stuart Brereton
George Palmer
OBTW, though this probably belongs in CML Glass ( like much of this thread ) some have alluded (and lamented?) on the 60 yr old technology embodied even in our modern lenses. Hate to be a realist, but beyond incremental improvements in glass formulations, grinding and polishing techniques, and ever diminishing worldwide rare earth coating resources, glass is glass. AND you get what you pay for; cheaper is never better.
BUT we are obligated as professionals to constantly be self reminded that film and that "60 year old "lens technology IS the benchmark by which we have quantified the eagerly sought after phantasmic 6K-8K Film resolutions. And if sidebar off the record comments matter, my conversations with friends over the years at a WNY film manufacturer lead me to believe that few folks anywhere ever actually saw quantifiable true projected "plus" 6K film resolutions because of commercial projection lens technology. Lens technologist friends however assure me that aside from minor coating tweaks, the film (and yes even TV) lenses produced in the last 30-35 years have been easily at least 4K-6K capable.
Perhaps the combination of pixel rich (6K-8K) digitally captured imagery and laser scanning have or will remedy part of the projection part, but our cameras will still most likely continue, going forward, to be using glass lenses for photon capture.
George Palmer
Art Adams
>As a case can be made that Digital cinema cameras are now at a point where we cannot perceive the incremental improvements, it's fair to say that perhaps good enough is just that. To quote a certain Vulcan scientist, "A difference which makes no difference, is no difference."
Which cameras? HD cameras? 4K cameras? 8K cameras?
I can see those differences. And while they might be subtle to some, they are still useful. There are plenty of other subtleties that we employ in our work that are less subtle than sensor size.
Since when do we try to talk people out of letting us use better tools for imaging?
Yes. I guess the part of my last email where I pointed out that the Panavision videos show this in the comparison between spherical S35 and spherical 70mm didn't make it through. (It's in part 1.)
Art Adams
In the second image, the background camera appears noticeably farther away to me. I measured it, and indeed it's smaller.
The super soft background doesn't help much in this kind of comparison as the differences become harder to judge.
George Palmer
A small correction to my previous lens technology post "aside from minor coating tweaks, the film (and yes even TV) lenses produced in the last 30-35 years have been easily at least 4K-6K capable." Should read "(and yes SOME even TV) lenses"
George Palmer
George Palmer
Stuart Brereton
it's not. There's no difference that I can see.
I don't have a dog in this fight, and truthfully, I would love there to be some aesthetic difference, but I just don't see it.
Stuart Brereton
Merritt Mullen
On Dec 2, 2017, at 5:41 AM, George Palmer <drvid@...> wrote:Just to make a correction -- "How the West Was Won" was shot in Cinerama, which consisted of three 6-perf 35mm frames (captured with three 27mm lenses). It was not a particularly shallow focus image because of this, though it was very high in resolution. You might be thinking of "The Searchers", which was shot in VistaVision.
I agree with Stuart and my own tests show this, if you shoot with a 50mm lens on an S35 sensor and a 75mm lens on a VistaVision sensor, and you match distance to subject and match depth of field by stopping down the 75mm by 1.5-stops, you get rather similar images.
But since people often use the same shooting stops whether they work in S35 or larger, they generally get a shallower-focus look with the larger formats. Besides that depth of field difference, and any increase in resolution that a larger format might have, the unique characteristics of the optics that some large formats lenses have due to design or age will also add to the look. With large format film, there was also a difference due to the reduced grain size.
David Mullen, ASC
Los Angeles
Stuart Brereton
To explore this further, I'm thinking of doing another test. I have a 6x7 camera here, and looking at PCam FoV calc tells me that an APS-C 35mm and 50mm will exactly match the Vertical FoV of the 6x7 127mm and 180mm lenses. If there are differences in perspective and compression, they should be plainly visible between two such different sized formats. 6x7 is more than double the size of the Arri 65 sensor. I'll try to compare FF as well.
Stuart Brereton
Jessica Gallant
There are too many variables in the image. I would suggest doing the next test with a simple solidtoggle quoted message. . .
colored sphere against a neutral background.
Since one of the descriptives is "roundness", let's see if the sphere is perceived as slightly rounder
in FF than in S35mm. Post both photos side by side, but don't say which is which, then ask which
sphere appears rounder than the other. Options would be 1. sphere A appears rounder, 2. sphere
B appears rounder, or 3. both spheres appear to be equally round.
My guess is the most likely outcome will be that the FF sphere will be perceived as slightly rounder
then the S35mm sphere by a small majority of test subjects. This result would indicate further testing
is necessary to determine why a sphere appears rounder in FF than S35mm.
Next most likely is an even split between spheres A and B, or no difference between A and B. This
result would indicate that other factors are involved, such as viewer expectations or perhaps an easier
to obtain shallower depth of field which would be the next variable I'd want to test.
I doubt anyone would perceive the S35mm sphere as rounder.
Jessica Gallant
Director of Photography | Los Angeles | CA
cell: 818-645-2787
email: jessicajgallant@...
Skype: jessicajgallant
On Dec 2, 2017, at 7:31 PM, Stuart Brereton <ssbrereton17@...> wrote:
Stuart Brereton
On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:14 PM, Jessica Gallant <jessicajgallant@...> wrote:What do you mean by too many variables? The two shots were taken from the same position, with matched FoV and DoF. The subject matter is exactly the same in both images. The purpose of the test was to see if there was any discernible difference in perspective and field compression. i couldn't see any, but others may differ.
I think you are taking the 'roundness' thing too literally. In The context it was being used in was not to describe the physical shape of things, but rather an intangible sense of 'dimensionality'.
Stuart Brereton
Can't believe I just typed "an intangible sense of 'dimensionality'."
Steve Oakley
thanks for redoing this. there was a similar test shoot on petapixel a month or two ago showing the same results.toggle quoted message. . .
there is one difference, the FF sensor's bokeh starts a little sooner and a little more intensely a few inches behind plane of focus. however the lens itself could easily cause this so that too might be a non-issue. likewise the FF has slightly softer blur of the BG causing something of a softer contrast.
all very subtle and generally not noticeable to the average viewer. all into the 95+% no difference category.
that said, 4K reduced to 1080 generally tends to make for more contrasty / smoother edges image thats discernible regardless of distance. hence canon's use of a 4K sensor in the C300 down sampled to 1080. worked out for them pretty well and people still really like the image from that camera.
having seen 8K projected @ 8K, its amazing if you need to deliver WALL sized images that will be viewed reasonably close. the detail can be amazing and leave you asking for a little more res. thats a very specific and ideal viewing situation.
back in the real world I really get the sense that 4K as a deliverable shot with a really good 4K-6K camera will suffice. Why ? well because our eyes aren't getting updated with higher res ! and 8K sensor sampling to 4K-6K may well be good enough because its all our eyes, in **average** viewing environments and situations will ever need or use. most of us have eyes good enough to see the difference between 4k & 1080, but not all. So while there is some arguement to be made about cleaner edges, cleaner transitions on significant changes of contrast, I'd much rather process that down in camera to a managable size rather than deal with all the extra data thru the rest of the process.
Thomas Gleeson
I agree with Stuart there should be little difference. If the two cameras with different sized sensors had matched nodal points (in the same position) and the AOV was matched with the focal length I would not expect there to be any difference in the geometry of the two shots. Geometry or dare I use that word "Perspective" is determined by the cameras physical position in relation to the subject and background. Changing the focal length of the lens does not flatten or exaggerate the perspective as that is locked in by the geography. Check out Steve Yedlin's great paper at http://www.yedlin.net/170504.html#AoV
Conceptually this can be a struggle to understand as we use long lenses to compress an image but of course this "compression" only works for objects far way but a long lens allows us to "zoom" into and single out these far away objects. What each focal length does is bring with it its DOF and by going with a longer focal length lens the larger format camera would have more focus separation. Stuart has stopped down to match the DOF but its one clear point of difference is that larger formats allow focus separation on wider AOV shoots. This is a biggie as the perceived 3D nature of a wide shot is greatly enhanced with some focus separation. Check out another of the fabulous Panalab videos particularly the Hateful Eight Camera tests https://vimeo.com/167052302
Are the DP's of just recent big format productions such as the Revenant, Doctor Strange, Ghost in the Shell, Dunkirk, Spectre, Rogue One, Allegiant, Assassins Creed, The Hateful Eight, Murder on the Orient Express and Guardians of the Galaxy 2 helmed by DP's such as Emmanuel Lubezki, Bob Richardson, Phedon Papamichael, Hoyte Van Hoytema, and Greig Fraser just drinking the cool aid? Maybe but I suspect there is more?
I have initiated this conversation from a genuine position of naivety. I largely avoided using the 5D Canon camera as it was such a poor tool but its Full frame images intrigued me. I watch films such as the Revenant and I see a unique image and it galls me I can't fully articulate what makes them so interesting.
John I did not mean to suggest that the 35MM has been a limitation only as an industry we have not had many economically practical choices to go larger and its certainly not my proposition that large formats are going to take over. I agree with your statement " larger formats as yet another extension to our tool set." Yes I am showing a personal preference for larger formats as I grew up with 16mm then 2/3" cameras and it was a revelation moving to the larger 35mm. Even using those silly adaptors that allowed you to shoot 35mm lenses projected on to a ground glass using a B4 2/3" camera could capture a powerful "essence" of 35mm on video. What the hell was the name for them?
As of next week via the ACS we have full access to a Red Monstro and limited access to Sony's Venice camera for testing so suggestions for tests to demonstrate principles or photographic effects are very welcome.
Tom Gleeson
Sydney DOP
Art Adams
Panavision seems to have pulled the videos I referenced from their DXL/Panalab web pages. They do speak of large format photography's reduced perspective distortion here, on page 8:
As best I can tell, the "roundness" happens in some backgrounds because depth is compressed enough in wide shots that textures and shapes are more easily discerned, whereas in S35 a wide lens exaggerates distances and effectively flattens backgrounds.
I grabbed some stills from the missing videos. The VistaVision still below illustrates the "roundness" effect very well, as the lens is clearly somewhat wide but the background is close enough that I can feel the different degrees of depth.
I don't think this is the greatest comparison. The VistaVision image has a tremendous amount of subtlety due to the hazy sky. lower contrast, and large negative. The Technoscope image doesn't have much subtlety, and is much more contrasty, although that probably worked better in a lower-res format. Still, the background in the VistaVision image feels like it has more depth, even though the Technoscope image looks to have been shot with a wider lens.
This "roundness" seems to work better in tall frames. I've seen it in the 5D and I see it above. It's somewhat present in my go-to references—David Lean films—but there's something about a taller frame that exaggerates this effect.
Stuart Brereton
On Dec 2, 2017, at 10:42 PM, Thomas Gleeson <lensboy235@...> wrote:I'm not convinced that they do. This admittedly crude, test shows very little difference in focus separation between the formats, and what there is could easily be attributed to variables in lens design, and actual aperture, as opposed to indicated.
Are the DP's of just recent big format productions such as the Revenant, Doctor Strange, Ghost in the Shell, Dunkirk, Spectre, Rogue One, Allegiant, Assassins Creed, The Hateful Eight, Murder on the Orient Express and Guardians of the Galaxy 2 helmed by DP's such as Emmanuel Lubezki, Bob Richardson, Phedon Papamichael, Hoyte Van Hoytema, and Greig Fraser just drinking the cool aid? Maybe but I suspect there is more?I think it's a mistake to include film originated movies, as no-one is denying that having a larger neg is a benefit when shooting with film. It's whether 'large' format digital origination is a benefit is the question here.
Stuart Brereton
Stuart Brereton
On Dec 2, 2017, at 10:55 PM, Art Adams <art.cml.only@...> wrote:It's very difficult to tell anything from those small frames. I'd expect an 8 perf Vistavision frame to have greater amount of subtlety compared to a 2 perf Techniscope image, which, after all, is not that much bigger than s16. As both frames are of different scenes, it's comparing apples to oranges.
Stuart Brereton
Stuart Brereton
That article is misleading, and sounds very much as if it was written by marketing people, rather than people who knew what they were talking about.
For example:
"One way to pose the problem is to ask: which lens is used for a wide shot? Master director Alfred Hitchcock shot most often with a 50mm. Master photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson shot all of his larger-format photographs with a 50mm. The late Gordon Willis, ASC, favored the 40mm."
This statement seems to suggest that Hitchcock used a 50mm for wide shots, which is not the case. It then makes an equivalency with Cartier Bresson also using a 50mm, even though he was shooting FF 35mm, where the FoV would be different. And what exactly are 'larger format photographs'?
Or this:
"Let's assume that the central Field of View of human vision has an angle of about 45 degrees, with Perspective corresponding to roughly a 40mm lens. To get the same Field of View in Super 35 you need to shoot with a 27mm lens, or thereabouts, but then the perspective will feel a little exaggerated. To get a similar Field of View with a Dragon 6K, you would shoot with a 35mm, which is closer to 40mm and would yield a less exaggerated, more natural perspective."
A 40mm lens corresponds to human FoV only when attached to a s35 camera. Put one on a 6x7, and it's very wide, put one on a 2/3" camera and it's telephoto. This whole article is littered with factual inaccuracies. It may have come from Panavision, but it certainly wasn't written by anyone who understood the subject.
Stuart Brereton
Geoff Boyle
I definitely prefer the lower image, the smaller sensor…toggle quoted message. . .
This has triggered off a really horrible thought pattern for me.
I've got to test this.
As I'm getting close to testing the Venice and it's a camera that has "standard" frame sizes ie 3 perf, 4 per and FF, I need to shoot some tests with lenses that have matching fields of view.
This is the only camera that I can do this on easily and there is only one manufacturer that makes S35, anamorphic and FF lenses as far as I know.
So, Venice with Cooke S4, St and anamorphic…
Paging Richard Lewis, Peter Crithary and Les Zellan...
Geoff Boyle
EU Based
+31 (0) 637 155 076
I am totally convinced that there is no rounding effect between formats and that all differences are being caused by the geometrical parameters/differences/errors associated with specific lenses.
However if you are going to test again, allow me to suggest that you use a sphere like this:
In this way the distances between meridians and parallels will be measurable.
All you need is to place two spheres in different distances.
I would also suggest that you allign the nodal points and that the foreground sphere is not too close because this would make the size of the front element matter (big front elements MAY show excessive roundness in objests placed too close - could one of the attending lens experts verify this please?)
Best Regards
Argyris Theos, gsc
DoP, Athens Greece
skype: Argyris Theos
Michael Brennan
Not to labour the point:)
With a subject at 5ft, the 162mm diameter front element of a Optimo 24-290, "looks around" more than the same focal length of a Prime with a 50mm diameter front optic.
This is an extreme example as most tests don't mix primes and zooms.
Mike Brennan
Thomas Gleeson
Can you repost your image as I cannot see it within my email client. Maybe another format? I would be happy to include it in my testing. Presently the plan is to use the Monstro camera and window it to S35 and then switch to VistaVision for comparison. Hopefully we will have a set of Leica Thalia's to use. The thinking is to use the same camera/glass combination as to remove variables just leaving the sensor size.
Stuart Brereton wrote "I'm not convinced that they do. This admittedly crude, test shows very little difference in focus separation between the formats, and what there is could easily be attributed to variables in lens design, and actual aperture, as opposed to indicated."
Stuart I am confused by this did you not say the Full Frame camera had a 50mm lens @f4 and the APS-C camera 35mm lens @f2.5 Clearly the Full Frame camera had more focus separation? Am I misinterpreting?
Stuart Brereton wrote "I think it's a mistake to include film originated movies, as no-one is denying that having a larger neg is a benefit when shooting with film. It's whether 'large' format digital origination is a benefit is the question here."
I will qualify I was not a party in any of the discussions that took place on any of these films but I would question wether any film originated project is concerned enough about grain to move to a Large format. This certainly was the case in the past with older grainier stocks and lossy generational printing but modern Vision 3 stocks going straight to a scan? If your willing to shoot with deeper stops required for a reasonable DOF on 65mm you may as well just shoot 200T or even 100T or 50D on S35. I have no doubt some productions shoot big format 'cause they can and they have the budget but is there more? I don't know if there is so I am arguing with no one but I would love to get a clear understanding. So if you have thoughts on tests to prove or disprove or just to illustrate or even illuminate throw them the way of the ACS and we try out best to make it happen.
Tom Gleeson
Sydney Based DOP
Martyn James Bull
toggle quoted message. . .
At the foot of all email messages is the link to the whole conversation on the groups.io website. Use that and you can see all the images properly in a web browser if having difficulty with email.
On 3 Dec 2017, at 10:57, Thomas Gleeson <lensboy235@...> wrote:
Martyn James Bull
Oxfordshire, UK
+44 7528 522137
Scott Dorsey
By "looking round" are you talking about subtle barrel distortion here?
Scott Dorsey
Kludge Audio
Williamsburg, VA.
toggle quoted message. . .
Hello Tom,
One such sphere can be seen here
It is just a sphere like earth with meridians and parallels but without the continents.
The idea is that the relative distances between "meridian & parallel crossing points" changes in relation to the exhibited roundness.
Argyris Theos, gsc
DoP, Athens Greece,
Skype Argyris.Theos
via iPhone
3 Δεκ 2017, 12:57 μ.μ., ο/η "Thomas Gleeson" <lensboy235@...> έγραψε:
Michael Brennan
The contents of this email are confidential
On 3 Dec 2017, at 11:38 pm, Scott Dorsey <kludge@...> wrote:No, I'm referring to the effect that others describe as roundness of the subject.
Could also call it 3 dimensionality of the subject.
For instance a mid shot where the face, in the fore to aft plane, appears to have more depth, or more shape, "rounded".
At least that is my interpretation of what others are seeing:)
It is the difference of using a small probe lens versus a lens with a front element that is physically, far larger in diameter.
Most noticeable when a subject is close to the lens.
A Forced perspective (?) is the end result, the by-product is the subject appears less round.
I'm not aware of a technical term in common use that describes the optical physics.
Put another way, the ants-eye perspective is achieved by using a probe, endoscope or pinhole size lens.
It's obvious when shooting miniatures and I suggest that it could be very, very subtly in play with every lens test where the subject is within a certain distance (a few meters) from camera and shot with lenses with different size front elements.
Could this be the cause of the very minor difference in roundness described by others? Therefore, not directly related to the size of the sensor?
Could also have a false memory of this effect:)
In any event, lacking the technical vocabulary to express it!
Mike Brennan
Scotttoggle quoted message. . .
No he means something totally different
take a zoom with a big front element, add lots of diopters, zoom in (aka no "wide lens distortion") and shoot macro. The closer an object the weirdest it appears. This is caused by the fact that the front element is bigger than the object itself. So the far right of the lens sees a little bit "behind" the object, just as does the far left of the lens. This is the "looking around" and it exists even if we are not shooting macro, but in standard shooting it is so subtle, almost invisible.
Think about it, it is rational.
Argyris Theos, gsc
DoP, Athens Greece,
Skype Argyris.Theos
via iPhone
3 Δεκ 2017, 2:38 μ.μ., ο/η "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@...> έγραψε:
By "looking round" are you talking about subtle barrel distortion here?
Stuart Brereton
Sorry Tom,
I think I misunderstood what you were saying. Yes, a larger format will have less DoF at the same stop as a s35 imager. It's roughly 1 1/3 stops difference between s35mm and FF.
Stuart Brereton
Art Adams
I wanted to try this very thing on a Venice recently, but the one that showed up in San Francisco was not ready for full frame prime time. I'm told it's returning in January, when it should be full frame capable.
The test should be very simple:
Frame two people, one in a medium shot and one medium wide or wide.
Put two C-stands just inside the edges of the frame, on either side.
Run through each frame size variation without moving the camera, keeping the C-stands at the same positions at the edges of the frame, preferably resizing with a zoom. (I think there's only one zoom that might be able to do this, the new Angenieux 25-250.)
Jessica Gallant
(The following is super nerdy and outside the realm of traditional cinematography. Feel free to disregard ittoggle quoted message. . .
unless you like esoteric discussions.)
I have an undergraduate degree in perceptual & physiological psychology and this is the kind of research
I was both trained to do and did on a limited level.
Ideally, in any experiment or test, you'd remove all the variables from the test except for one. Roundness
is something that's been mentioned by more than one person plus it's a variable that can be easily tested.
You don't want any other variables in the test (unless you're testing one variable's effect on another variable
which is getting way ahead of ourselves here), so placing the object in limbo or with a neutral background
eliminates the effect of depth of field and the size of the background.
There are a lot of other ways you can test this, but this particular way jumped out at me, maybe because
I perceived the lens on the camera in the FF shot as looking ever so slightly less flat and rounder than the
same lens on the same camera in the S35mm shot.
I suspect there is something akin to a optical illusion going on here in as much as the brain actively constructs
reality (in this case, what we're seeing) based on limited information, subtle cues, input from other senses, and
expectations based on previous information.
Optical illusions generally occur when the brain is given ambiguious or misleading information (the famous
Ames illusion where the room constructed so that perspective is misleading so people of the same size appear
to be different sizes) and misconstructs reality based in misleading depth cues…
… or is asked to process information in a way different than it was intended to be processed such as the Hollow
Face illusion the inability to see an inverted face is hardwired into the brain
BTW, I'm not saying FF looking "rounder" than S35mm qualifies as an optical illusion. However, I do suspect there
may be the same or similar mechanism of action occurring. The FF image may contain some subtle cues absent
or minimized in the S35mm image, and the brain can use these subtle cues to construct a more three dimensional
Jessica Gallant
Director of Photography | Los Angeles | CA
cell: 818-645-2787
email: jessicajgallant@...
Skype: jessicajgallant
On Dec 2, 2017, at 8:25 PM, Stuart Bremerton <ssbrereton17@...> wrote:
Art Adams
>The FF image may contain some subtle cues absent or minimized in the S35mm image, and the brain can use these subtle cues to construct a more three dimensional image.
Two things:
I think you're on to something. And...
I think I was wrong—mislead by the missing Panavision videos.
Stuart and David, I think you're absolutely right: for two lenses with the same angle of view, perspective should match between the two. Perspective is, after all, a characteristic of angle of view combined with distance to subject. If the angle of view is the same, and the distance to the subject is the same, the only thing that should be different is depth of field.
I think one of the things that threw me was this image from Panavision's lens video, part 1:
The assumption here is that the lenses used are the same angle of view, but they likely aren't. For one thing, the spherical shot has a plant in it, and the patterns in the background lights are different. The charts are also different, which implies that the spherical test was shot at a different time. They don't say what format they used for the anamorphic test, and there are multiple options for 2:1 in PCam, so I compared the angle of view between an Alexa in 4:3 2.39:1 anamorphic mode to the Panavision DXL in spherical 8K mode, both with 50mm lenses:
A 50mm on both cameras would see roughly the same angle of view, and yet the spherical large format image above looks to be shot on a lens of twice the focal length, given that the light strands appear to be half the distance apart and twice as soft.
So... that's a bit deceptive, especially as Panavision didn't document (or at least communicate) the lens, format and distance choices for any of those shots.
That, combined with the statement about the next frame—that the larger format, in combination with the increased magnification of the longer focal length lens, brought the background closer— threw me:
I'm not sure how wide a lens this is. It doesn't look very wide. Still, it has a certain something that feels beyond the reach of S35. It might have to do with the shallow depth of field. Whatever it is, it feels almost like a painting out of the Hudson River or Luminous schools.
Lastly, the comparison between VistaVision and Technoscope was deceptive as the sense of increased dimensionally has a lot to do with the taller VistaVision frame, which no one will ever shoot on a DXL as 1.5:1 is a dead aspect ratio in everything but stills.
Still, there is something going on with the larger sensor size that affects dimensionality. I don't think it's so much "roundness" as it is the fact that the perspective characteristics of wide angle shots on longer lenses feels more natural, and that in turn makes close objects feel more real—because they are actually "rounder" based on slight distance-to-subject distortion rather than unrealistic S35 wide angle distortion. I pulled some frames from Lawrence of Arabia, found on Youtube so the quality is not so great, that show some of this characteristic in spite of the small image size and strong video compression:
This is clearly a fairly wide lens, possibly along the lines of a 25mm in 35mm film (so possibly a 50mm lens combined with 65mm film) and, while the angle of view is wider than normal, there's very little distortion on Peter O'Tooles' face. It does feel "rounder" to me simply because there is some distortion, but not so much that it feels unreal.
Here's a comparison to a classic close-but-wide Spielberg 27mm closeup:
This is a great looking closeup, but the distortion is really noticeable. Still, this frame has the desired emotional effect, possibly because of the abstraction caused by the distortion.
Depth of field plays a role as well. I recently shot some talking heads for a corporate project on an Epic Dragon, in 6K, on a 100mm Ultra Prime at 8' or so, which resulted in a closeup a little wider than this. We shot at T2, and just the face and eyes were in focus. (We were using an Interrotron so the person was looking directly at the camera.) The effect was stunning: because their face and eyes were sharp, but nothing else was, it felt as if their faces were literally pushing out of the screen.
The shot above doesn't have the "roundness" feel to me. The lens choice feels like it's on the longer side.
Once again, clearly a wide angle shot but not much distortion. The guy on the far left looks like he's pincushioning a bit, but I think that's a combination of stance and overeating along with maybe a light touch of lens distortion. Otherwise, this is a remarkably "flat" image with wide angle perspective, which I think is part of the large format magic. I feel like the guy in the foreground exhibits some of that large format "roundness."
This is a longer lens than the others, but it still feels like it's a wider-than-"normal" perspective lens. The foreground face does feel "round" to me due to a combination of the wide angle of the lens combined with the flatness of a longer focal length, resulting in less distortion. The lack of distortion seems to tell my brain that this is a more realistic image than if I saw obvious close-but-wide distortion on, say, a 40mm lens on an S35 sensor at the same distance. Presumably the large format lens would be in the 75mm range when paired with 65mm film.
What's wonderful about these Lawrence of Arabia frames is that they are stunningly composed, with judicious use of forced perspective, but without unrealistic distortion. Because of this, every shot feels to me as if it is a painting.
To sum up, I think Panavision missed the mark on their videos in a few ways:
-They oversold the dimensionality of large format imaging by making an unfair comparison between two completely different formats with widely varying image characteristics (contrast and aspect ratio being the biggest offenders)
-They made statements about lens magnification in regard to perspective that don't appear to be accurate or, at the very least, aren't clear and/or well illustrated, and
-The spherical and anamorphic comparisons weren't done in a scientific manner that disclosed all the relevant information, such that we knew what we were looking at.
I get that this stuff is hard. It's really difficult to articulate things that fall into the artistic realm rather than the technical realm. I also get that not everyone knows how to do scientific comparisons. But... I'm surprised that a company like Panavision put these videos out. I certainly made some incorrect assumptions based on information in these videos.
If someone from Panavision would like my input in revising these videos, please do get in touch.
Meanwhile, I think the following video, which is still on the Panalab website, does a great job of showing this "wide but not distorted" feel that I equate with epic 65mm filmmaking:
Adam Wilt
Art says,
I would add one thing: change the f-stop to match depth of field between the two shots: about 1.3 stops different, as Stuart says. The Depth of Field Equivalents calculator at http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm can be handy for both lens and f-stop values.
Adam Wilt
technical services: consulting / coding / camerawork
Vancouver WA USA (no, not that Vancouver, the other one)
This is clearly a fairly wide lens, possibly along the lines of a 25mm in 35mm film (so possibly a 50mm lens combined with 65mm film) and, while the angle of view is wider than normal
Here's a comparison to a classic close-but-wide Spielberg 27mm closeup
No it is not
It is shot with a field of view equivalent to a 50mm in Academy 35mm film. This is obvious, despite the visual cues that make people think this is a wide shot.
Addfitionally Peter O'Tool carries much brighter make up and he is lit with Brutes. What you confuses you most is that you can see the "bounce from below" board in his eyes. This gives a bit of dimensionality
I think I will slide back to anoninimity now.
Argyris Theos, gsc
tel. +30 6944 725 315
skype: Argyris.Theos

subset: commoncrawl


text:
You are looking for new professional challenges and development opportunities? Then you have come to the right place.
With our experienced team of dedicated experts we support our clients in daily challenges in their SAP projects and during operation.
Our clients are companies from different industries, i.e. logistics, medical, chemical, trade and industry, and who we are working for nationwide and internationally.
What you may expect:
- an attractive salary based on your education, your skills and experience
- flat hierarchies
- excellent training opportunities
- working independently in interesting projects
- a very good and casual working atmosphere
- the opportunity to work from your home office
What we expect:
- successful completion of studies or professional qualification in the IT field
- SAP experience / ABAP
- programming skills
- good English language skills
- structured and team oriented work activities
- self-motivation and willingness to learn
Did we spark your interest? If so, we look forward to receiving your application. Please feel free to submit your unsolicited application as well.


text:
Utilizzo dei cookies
Il sito utilizza cookie proprietari per le proprie funzionalità. Continuando la navigazione accetti il loro utilizzo.
Ulteriori informazioni
"Gasperoni Designer Creations"
has specialised in woodworking for over 30 years, boasting raw materials of exceptional quality and partnerships with various internationally renowned architects and designers.
The production processes are performed using cutting edge equipment, by operators with more than thirty years of experience, thus resulting in an industry-leading production system.
The success of each project is owed to the company's ongoing synergies with its suppliers and the masterful guidance of expert consultants, who help the customers make choices that are best suited to the styles and the characteristics of every context.
The company offers designing and manufacturing of medium or high quality
sofas and armchairs
tables and chairs
furnishings for private homes, offices and businesses.
Each design can be viewed in 3D rendering beforehand in order to allow the customer to evaluate the final results. Once design and materials have been chosen, the project is forwarded to the production department, where a computerised system handles the cutting and boring of the individual panels. Once this phase has been completed, skilled carpenters assemble the final product paying attention to the slightest details. The assembled product is then lacquered and finished in the water wash spray booth. Lastly, a team of experts installs the product for the customer.
Thanks to its custom design and fine production processes, the company meets the needs of both private homes and businesses. Among its products, the company offers: modern, classic and glass interior staircases with either self-supporting or masonry structures;
refined furnishing elements designed by architects, such as wood veneer ceiling lamps which create a warm atmosphere;
unique decorative pictures made of wooden structures and assembled by highly-skilled employees;
a wide range of elegant, sophisticated hardwood flooring, both unfinished and pre-finished, which provides excellent thermal insulation.
"Gasperoni designer creations" also offers a vast assortment of fixtures, fasteners and accessories.
Every interior design project, whether for a private home or business, is executed with the utmost professionalism and attention to detail, using the best excellent raw materials and a customised the design that's best suited to the customer's style


text:
- Home
- News
- Sports
- Opinion
- Obituaries
- Features
- Special Sections
- Classifieds
- Public Notices
I owe taxpayers an apology, but I'm really not that sorry.
A couple of months ago I donated the cost of an insert into The Anderson News Extra (the version of this paper that shows up in mailboxes each Monday) to the fiscal court as a means of supporting its burgeoning recycling efforts.
The insert featured information about how homeowners can access the recycling program, including having items picked up.
If you currently subscribe or have subscribed in the past to the The Anderson News, then simply find your account number on your mailing label and enter it below.
Click the question mark below to see where your account ID appears on your mailing label.
|ZIP Code:


text:
Name:· (Edwin) Yee Jing Hao
Currently studying:· Diploma Mass Communication at: SEGi College Subang Jaya
Why you chose Worthy Book as your internship site?· Because it's related to my course.
Which area is your internship focused on?· Sales.
What are your responsibilities?· To find client and join the channel.
Favourite part of the job?· Meeting clients.
What have you learnt so far?· I learn on how to deal with client.
Which vouchers have you used so far? Any favourite merchants or outlets?· myBurgerlab, Eggette Lab, Carl's Jr., Kim Gary and Capricciosa.
· My favourite merchant is myBurgerlab as their burger is up to standard, unlike other burger joint.
Trivial:· Edwin likes to create theme songs for people and bugs them all day. For instance, Ayu's theme song.


text:
Let's keep this thread clean, if it starts turning into a shitstorm I'm closing this.
Let's start:
she was srs
Let's start:
"Condoms go on after sex right?"
she was srs
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
sum41rox wrote:Was she a blonde?
debbie wrote:sum41rox wrote:Was she a blonde?
Unfortunately, yes... Girls like that just fuel the stereotype. *sigh*
LOL! That is sadly not the first time I've heard that kind of story. I always think to myself, can't they make the connection that maybe, just maybe, the anti-virus blocks it for a good reason?
Pagan wrote:The absolute fucking worst is when people find out I'm from South Africa.
Some of them just cannot and will not accept that I am not black.
"But Africans HAVE to be black! Are you a small percent black or something?"
I always end up having to "name one country in Africa that isn't predominantly black", to which I say "Egypt".
Then there are idiots that 1) don't know that Africa is a continent and not a country and 2) don't know that South Africa is a country and not a group of countries at the bottom of Africa.
After I win those battles, I finally have to try and convince people that I can be Greek and South African at the same time. Such a struggle. The worst is at airports where my grandma and uncle and shit will be kept longer than usual because the people there can't understand why white people have an African passport. It's ridiculous.
Pagan wrote:
Thank you thank you. I was born in South Africa actually =O I'm from Johannesburg.
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum


text:
Prayers to My King (His Princess) - Hardback
Reward Points: 0
Availability: 1
Prayers to My King is a beautiful gift book created to help women connect intimately with their God. Where the first book in the His Princess™ series reminded us that we are loved intimately and unconditionally by our King, this second book helps us express our deepest thoughts, desires, fears and failures by emulating King David in the Psalms and crying out to God through prayer. Christian women will gain a personal, dynamic prayer life.
You want to feel God's presence… embrace His promises… cry out to Him…
…but don't know how!
From your heart's deepest cry to life's joyful praises, nothing is off limits to Him. Go confidently now before His throne as you claim these powerful prayers as your own.
He hears every word. He's waiting to hear from you.
If from there you will seek the Lord your God,
you will find Him if you seek Him with
all your heart and soul and life.
Deuteronomy 4:29, AMP
Write a reviewYour Name:
Your Review: Note: HTML is not translated!
Rating: Bad Good
Enter the code in the box below:


text:
- lfgellonAsked on April 19, 2017 at 01:24 AM
Is there any plans to integrate DRIP?
- IanAnswered on April 19, 2017 at 01:39 AM
You can integrate DRIP with Jotform by using 3rd party utility called Zapier https://zapier.com/zapbook/drip/jotform/
Let me escalate the request to the development team as a feature request for this integration. However, there is no definite timeline to when this feature can be implemented. But once we have updates, we'll inform you right away.


text:
Lack little time so we can enjoy an exclusive reinterpretation for PS4 of Shadow of the Beast, a game that is not often remembered as much as it deserves.
Those who have still present to this great classic of 1989, do not forget a hard cartridge gnaw, those who seem to have been created solely for a purpose: to forge nerves and patience of steel with a difficulty level that could eventually destroy health more mentally painted. Continue reading Shadow of the beast


text:
Enterprise Mobile DevelopmentBack to Our Services
App designs for any mobile device require a fundamentally new computing model that recognizes the unique capabilities of the device, the mobility demands of their users, and the special restrictions for provisioning apps properly and cost effectively.
All of this requires the development and management of more sophisticated and broad based mobile strategies that seek to deliver functionally complex and rich applications. In order to build these mobile strategies, some considerations may include:
- What development architecture is needed?
- Will users be restricted to the device or will a BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) policy be adopted?
- How will you determine what software goes to your users, and how will you get it there?
- What will happen if the device is lost, stolen, or the person leaves?
- Which device platforms to use?
OFS Technologies can help you with all this and more. We develop mobile applications for iPhone, Android, Blackberry or Windows devices using the latest in mobile, cross-platform tools such as Rhodes, Appcelerator, and Phone Gap , as well as native languages such as Objective C and Java. Once a platform (s) is selected, our team can quickly produce a proof of concept app that shows your management what is possible and then move quickly into a true, production-quality deliverable.
If you would like a quote for our enterprise mobile development solution or if you have any queries that need clarification, you can contact us and we'll get back to you with the right solution.


text:
6Jacob and all the people with him came to Luz (that is, Bethel) in the land of Canaan.
7There he built an altar, and he called the place El Bethel, because it was there that God revealed himself to him when he was fleeing from his brother.
8Now Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, died and was buried under the oak outside Bethel. So it was named Allon Bakuth.
9After Jacob returned from Paddan Aram, God appeared to him again and blessed him.
10God said to him, "Your name is Jacob, but you will no
longer be called Jacob; your name will be Israel. " So he
named him Israel.
11And God said to him, "I am God Almighty; be fruitful and
increase in number. A nation and a community of nations will come from you, and kings will be among your descendants.
12The land I gave to Abraham and Isaac I also give to you,
and I will give this land to your descendants after you."
13Then God went up from him at the place where he had talked with him.
14Jacob set up a stone pillar at the place where God had talked with him, and he poured out a drink offering on it; he also poured oil on it.
15Jacob called the place where God had talked with him
He will bless you, God is for you and not against you,
he is leading your victory team.


text:
It's actually true – we are what we eat!
We are the vibrations of the foods that we have ingested.
Our entire bodies are made up of what we eat, drink and inhale.
Each cell of our body replaces itself by using the food that we supply it as fuel.
If you want to attract good things into your life, you want your energy to vibe as high as it can.
Like attracts like, and your vibe is like a magnet that attracts more of the same.
Just as we are made up on vibrating molecules, so are the foods that we eat. Eating foods with a low vibration will lower ours immediately after eating it. You may feel slower, sluggish, and even foggy in the head. We don't want that right? No way!
Here are my top 3 foods that I recommend cutting out of your diet when you are trying to raise your vibration.
I did this over the last year and it really upped my energy levels, and allowed me to vibe higher. I can put out more goodness into the world, because I am now only putting good foods into my body.
Top 3 foods that lower your energy vibration
1 – Meat.
I'm talking about the meat that has come from animals that have suffered during their lives, and/or the end of their lives. Although the soul of the animal has long left its body, the imprint of the suffering is still very much within the meat. It is the same for eggs. If the eggs have been laid by a chicken that was caged, they will contain the vibrations of the suffering animal. I'm not saying you have to be a vegan to have a high energy vibration, but be aware of where the meat has come from. Is it free range meat, or has the animal been caged and stressed for most of it's life?
2 – White sugar.
Many people think sugar increases our energy and therefore we vibe higher when we include sugar in our diets. But this just isn't true, sugar actually feeds the bad gut bacteria in our guts, allowing bacteria to multiply. This has been proven to slow down the body and provide the perfect environment for illness to thrive.
3 – Processed foods.
These are the foods that have been through a factory process, and have synthetic additives in them, like colourings, flavours, preservatives, and flavour enhancers. These foods are foreign to out bodies, they don't know how to digest them, therefore it causes our body to slow, and occasionally to store these additives as toxins, until the body knows how to process them. This can cause illness, fatigue, depression and an carry of other symptoms. As a mum of a son who recovered from a severe anxiety disorder through clean diet, I have seen first hand the effects of artificial additives. You can read more in my book 'The Chemical Generation'
Foods that help us to vibe high are fresh, raw, and organically grown foods. Leafy greens, fermented foods, fruits, and vegetables.
We are all individuals and somethings will slow you down more than others, can you think of something you eat that makes you feel a bit 'yuck' after doing so? For me it's also gluten, eggs and dairy. Please share below, i'd love to know.
Happy, healthy eating.
Jamie x
P.S This is how I boosted my energy levels after fighting chronic fatigue for almost 6 months – 4 WAYS TO HAVE MORE ENERGY


text: Kaveh tells us about bibliomancy which he explains as "divination by books" and shares his own poetry writing routine. He likes to enrich his own internal dictionary, which is finite, by reading from different poetry books and choosing words that strike him or catch his eye. He builds on such a list until he feels he has reached the moment where his own poetry comes to inhabit the page.


text:
Customer Service
- Shipping & Delivery
- Privacy & Security
- Returns & Replacements
- Ordering
- Payment, Pricing & Promotions
- Viewing Orders
- Updating Account Information
- Shipping & Delivery
Most photos are digitally printed to order, and ship within two workdays.
Photos with dimensions of 11 x 14 inches or smaller are shipped flat, with a four-ply archival backing board. Larger photos are rolled and shipped in tubes.
Shipping charges are $5.00 per order, no matter how much you buy, for orders shipped to the U.S. or Canada. For orders shipped to all other countries, shipping charges are $10.00 per order.
We generally ship USPS priority mail for all orders in the U.S. We ship by USPS 1st Class Mail for orders to Canada or other countries.
- Privacy Policy
Old Oregon will not sell or share any of your personal information with any other company. We will only use your email and/or phone to contact you about your order. We may email you about new offerings or special pricing, but you will always have the ability to opt out of these emails.
- Returns & Replacements
All Old Oregon photos are sold with an unconditional money-back guarantee. If for any reason our prints do not meet your expectations, you may return them for a full refund.
To qualify for the full refund, you must return the photos in unused condition in the original packing within 30 days of your purchase. You are responsible for the return shipping costs, unless we shipped you the wrong items, in which case we will pay for the shipping.
- Ordering
- In addition to our online ordering system, you may place your order by phone by calling us at 503-504-5423. If you have questions, you may also reach us through the Contact Form available through the Contact Us link at the bottom of every page.
- Payment, Pricing & Promotions
- We accept payment through credit cards (Visa, MasterCard, Discover, American Express) and PayPal.
- Viewing Orders
- To view your orders or order history simply log in to www.oldoregonphotos.com.
- Updating Account Information
- To update your account information, simply log in.


text:
ca. 4000 BC On the banks of the Euphrates River in an area that will become known as Iraq, archeological exploration finds the site of an oil seep known locally as #147;the fountains of pitch,#148; where asphalt is quarried for use as mortar between building stones. Asphalt is also used as a waterproofing agent for baths, pottery and boats. The term #147;petroleum#148; comes from #147;petros#148; (Greek for stone or rock) and #147;oleum#148; (Latin for oil). An ancient term for petroleum is #147;rock oil.#148; 347 AD Oil wells are drilled in China up to 800 feet [240 m] deep using bits attached to bamboo poles. 1594 Oil wells are hand dug at Baku, Persia, up to 115 feet [35 metres] deep. 1815 ...Read full article »
ASTM International Standards Worldwide — Volkswagen Atlantic
Leadership Adventure Travel Trade Association — Volkswagen Atlantic
President "To dare is to lose one's footing momentarily. Not to dare is to lose oneself." Soren Kierkegaard Shannon's personal and professional background is well suited for the adventure travel industry. He has adventured in numerous places around the world enjoying diverse cultural and active experiences. He brings a special passion to this industry borne of experience and a desire to see adventure travel act as a driver for environmental protection, poverty alleviation and the protection of threatened cultures. His 20+ years of business experience, connections, marketing insight, environmental science, vision and passion for adventure travel have prepared him well to serve and ...Read full article »
New Limits on Terrorism Insurance ComingKiplinger — Volkswagen Atlantic
New Limits on Terrorism Insurance Coming Congress will extend the terrorism risk insurance program late in 2014, but with terms that won't be as favorable to insurers as the existing act, which expires on Dec. 31. Don't be surprised if the next extension is for three years instead of five and if the program kicks in after damages well above $100 million… the limit now. The program helps protect insurers from being wiped out by claims in the wake of a major terrorist attack. It was put in place after Sept. 11, 2001. Hockey's Popularity Grows at All Levels Though baseball and football vie for the top spot among American sports… Hockey is coming on strong. Increasing fan interest ...Read full article »
Ocean Facts — Volkswagen Atlantic
Interesting Ocean Facts Area: about 140 million square miles (362 million sq km), or nearly 71% of the Earth's surface. Average Depth: 12,200 feet (3,720 m). Deepest point: 36,198 feet (11,033 m) in the Mariana Trench in the western Pacific. Mountains: The ocean ridges form a great mountain range, almost 40,000 miles (64,000 km) long, that weaves its way through all the major oceans. It is the largest single feature on Earth. 48 more facts about our oceans. The oceans occupy nearly 71% of our planet's surface More than 97% of all our planet's water is contained in the ocean The average depth of the ocean is more than 2.5 miles The oceans provide 99 percent of the ...Read full article »
Heap of the Week 1984 Volkswagen Jetta GLi German Cars For Sale Blog — Volkswagen Atlantic
Heap of the Week: 1984 Volkswagen Jetta GLi So few remain around these days that it's easy to forget that in 1984 Volkswagen introduced the hot 4-door Jetta, the GLi. Like the GTi brethren, these featured an upgraded 1.8 inline-4 mated to a close ratio 5-speed transmission, as well as upgraded brakes and a few external changes to set them apart from the run-of-the-mill Jettas. Not many were produced, and again like the GTi few remain around in good shape; in fact, I can think of only one that I've seen in the past decade. Like me, the owner is a high performance driving enthusiast and we've been trucking our old Volkswagen/Audi products out to BMW HPDEs for years. Despite neither of us ...Read full article »
QNX Powers World's Most Advanced Connected Car Concept with NextGeneration… — Volkswagen Atlantic
QNX Powers World's Most Advanced Connected Car Concept with Next-Generation Infotainment Platform News at a Glance. QNX CAR application platform provides software foundation for new LTE Connected Car concept from ng Connect Program. LTE Connected Car concept demonstrates potential for automobiles to become first-class citizens of the Cloud, with access to on-demand movies, Internet radio, dynamically updateable navigation, and other wireless broadband services. QNX CAR application platform provides all of the system software and infotainment applications in the Connected Car, from user interfaces to streaming media players. OTTAWA, November 4, 2009 — QNX Software Systems. a Harman International ...Read full article »
VW Bus T3 Atlantic Westfalia Vanagon How To Make & Do Everything! — Volkswagen Atlantic
VW Bus T3 Atlantic Westfalia Vanagon What do you think about this video? John Carraway: @ChrisAvatar. That's water-cooled I presume. I haven't seen any Vanagon 4WD's or any of Tatra 4WD's on YouTube. V So: @mikosoft Love your user name. You don't by chance work for the evil empire 🙂 ChrisAvatar: @JBC814 If you want so see 4WD Vanagons. Please write this seach Words on youtube: VW T3 syncro 4WD = syncro. ChrisAvatar: @JBC814 Itis a 1990 VW Vanagon / Westfalia Atlantic with 1,6 Turbo Diesel Engine. John Carraway: Waterboxer? What year? Totally awesome. Mittelfranke: Blitzsauberer T3 Man merkt der hats gut. Möcht auch gern mal wieder einen *gg* nach 10 ...Read full article »
Lymph Node Removal — Volkswagen Atlantic
Contact Us Hosting a Sale has Never Been Easier Give Pink this May! Should I Be Screened For Breast Cancer? Our Research Fellowship Funding Lymph Node Removal Page Content Breast cancer surgery may include the removal of lymph nodes for further examination in a lab. This procedure is done to see if the cancer has spread (metastasized) beyond the breast. Examination of the lymph nodes is important because the presence or absence of cancer in the lymph nodes helps your oncologist understand how your disease might progress. The information gained from the lymph nodes helps you and your health care team make informed decisions about your treatment plan. There are two procedures that ...Read full article »
VW goes green Times Free Press — Volkswagen Atlantic
VW goes green Volkswagen, adding weight to its slogan of "green city, green plant, green car," will seek LEED status for its Chattanooga assembly plant. The site would be the South's first auto assembly plant and only the second nationally to gain the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design badge, according to the U.S. Green Building Council. "LEED is green, and green is part of our image," said Dieter Schleifer, manager of plant infrastructure for VW's Chattanooga operations. Tobias Schmedding, the plant's assistant manager for environment, said the local plant will be VW's greenest assembly plant worldwide. "We chose the most efficient equipment and the most environmentally ...Read full article »
Our Team Atlantic Motorcar Center Auto Repair Wiscasset & Coastal Maine — Volkswagen Atlantic
Meet Our Team Bruce Owner Owner Bruce Howes has specialized in the service of European automobiles since 1985, first in Buffalo, NY and now at our current four acre service and sales center in coastal Maine. He is a Bosch Trained technician, with extensive experience in BMW, Mercedes and Volvo. A Dale Carnegie graduate, and former volunteer with Junior Achievement, in his spare time Bruce enjoys sailing, nautical history and restoring antique radios. He is also a licensed amateur radio operator, W1UJR, and has extensive background in electronics and computers. Bruce leads a team of highly trained and certified technicians who are readily able to diagnose today's complex vehicle systems! ...Read full article »


text:
Hi friends!
This month has been full of excitement and one of the very most exciting things was the birth of my sweet nephew, William Henry! I got to meet and photograph him just a few days after he was born. My sister-in-law and I had lots of fun scheming up the pictures we wanted to take and I really love how they turned out. Henry was a champ and didn't fuss at all the entire time! I love thinking about these pictures being cherished years down the road. :) Enjoy!


text:
Fusion MX offers free delivery on all products over £200. Simply add all products to your basket to receive this discount.
Rider ID Decals
Customise both name and flag in your choice of colours!
Comes in a set of 10 Stickers. (5 x 120mm wide, 4 x 80mm wide, 1 x 150mm wide)
For fully custom rider ID decals contact us.
Fusion MX offer a UK based 100% Safe Online shopping experience backed with secure servers. Simply make your selections with the product drop down boxes (if applicable) and click Add to Cart button. Then follow our secure checkout process or click continue shopping to add more products to your shopping cart. Once processed you will receive an order number and a confirmation email will be sent to you. When your product is dispatched you will receive another email to let you know your goods are on the way.


text:
Price: $153,111
City: Progreso
State: Yucatan
City: Progreso
State: Yucatan
Square meters: 672
Additional Features:
Lot Only, Ocean View, Pool
Progreso commercial venue!Completely walled property with an electric gate on Calle 27.
21 x 32 meter lot. Swimming pool and service building with kitchen. Room to expand.
Great for a restaurant or special events.
Offered at $153,111 USD
This property is priced directly from a local owner. Our company lists homes without additional markups.
This home must be purchased in Mexican Pesos with a direct transfer. The price is $2,756,000 pesos.
Approx $153,111 US at the time of this listing based on 18 pesos to the dollar. This price will vary with the value of the US Dollar.
Emiliano Gomez
In Mexico: 999.998.1855
From the US or Canada: 941-227-2202
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
This chunky cabbage soup is loaded with healthy, flavorful vegetables. A hearty mixture of cabbage, tomatoes, celery, carrots, and green pepper makes this thick soup more like a stew. The fragrant aroma from the fried onions, garlic, celery and green peppers can get your mouth watering.
Fresh oregano is used to flavor and garnish the soup, but a drizzle of sour cream would make a stunning garnish too. This chunky cabbage soup is very satisfying when paired with our oregano onion soda bread. It's the perfect soup to serve on a cloudy, rainy day.
There's enough broth to make it a good consistency, but there's lots of substance to fill your tummy. It's not only healthy, but satisfying too.
Chunky Cabbage Soup
- Prep Time: 45 minutes
- Cook Time: 1 hour
- Total Time: 1 hour 45 minutes
This chunky cabbage soup is a hearty, satisfying mixture of green cabbage, tomatoes, carrots, garlic, green pepper, and other healthy vegetables.
- 1 medium yellow onion, finely chopped
- 2 stalks of celery, finely chopped
- 2 garlic cloves, minced
- 1/2 medium green pepper, finely chopped
- 1 Tbsp. olive oil
- 1 can of diced tomatoes, 28 oz.
- 2 cups of carrots, finely chopped
- 5 cups of cabbage, cut in 1/2 inch slices
- 1 can of tomato paste, 6 oz.
- 5 chicken or vegetable bouillon cubes
- 4 cups of filtered water
- 1 tsp of salt
- 1/2 tsp of pepper
- 1/2 tsp of dried basil
- 3 Tbsp of fresh oregano, or 1/2 tsp of dried
- Finely chop the onion, green pepper and celery or put in a food processor.
- Mince the garlic cloves.
- In a large dutch oven, fry the onion, celery, garlic, and green pepper in olive oil over medium high heat until cooked.
- Add the rest of the ingredients.
- Cover the pot, and bring to a boil.
- Simmer for 1-2 hours so everything is well cooked and the flavors can meld.
I used chicken stock for this recipe.


text: L'Wren Scott reveals her Spring-Summer collection's show which was inspired by 16th century Japan, the art of dressing during Momoyama period. My personal favorites from the show are kimono sleeve dress and pantsuit with wisteria embroidery. Well, I personally find these looks elegant, beautiful and really wearable (for special occasions though), just look at those bow-belted waists, that makes your silhouette feminine and eye-catching. You can wear these gorgeous creations at special events or business lunches. Those billowing kimonos in red and black lace takes us to Japan. Everything looks so polished and sparkling, thanks to bright colors of the dresses. Every piece is glamor, fitted and structured.


text:
You will be shocked after reading about this Tremendous Bus which can drive over the traffic.
Everybody wants to avoid an extraordinary jam to save their invaluable time.
A Beijing company has unveiled especially futuristic designs for a pollution-eliminating, this tremendous bus capable of gliding over the horrible jams for which China has become popular.
Passengers Carry; This tremendous bus can carry upto 1400 passengers, by which a large amount of passengers can save their priceless time.
Dimension (approx)– 60 meters long and 8 meters wide.
Speed- Upto 60 KM (37 Miles) Per Hour.
Massive Advantage; This amazing bus can save lots of road space and it is far reasonable as compare to subway train system and requires comparatively less construction or maintenance cost and one more biggest advantage of this amazing bus is its short construction life cycle; only 1 year to build 40 km.
Size- It can replace about 40 traditional buses.
Technology Used- This Straddling Bus is fully powered by Electricity and Solar Energy which will reduce a huge amount pollution.


text:
Our DRS is the new CRS.
Today's Central Reservation System is now a Distributed Reservation System. The Above Property Distributed Reservation System module is a revolutionary technological breakthrough for the hospitality industry. Today's legacy central reservation systems are constrained by managing one data store in one physical location. Above Property has developed a multi-datacenter solution that manages single image inventory across the globe with sub-second speed. The scale and speed of this foundational module allows business rules to be executed with every transaction. Operating in a fully distributed cloud environment, the Above Property Distributed Reservation System module can integrate with existing systems as well as take advantage of the full suite of complementary modules within the Above Property Travel Platform.
DRS Key Features
- The Fastest DRS on the planet
- Leverages cloud technology
- Real-time analytics, metrics, and feedback
- Makes user interface device agnostic
- Works with existing systems