News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

OGquaker

Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @05:23AM (#16841956)
When your getting the thing done, So what? John Ford would just tear pages out of the script to make the bean-counters go away.

See, this guy loved this bacon, but the store ran out. So he found a wrapper and drove out to find the farmer. No one was around. Wandering, he finely came up on the farmer holding a pig up into an apple tree. "My God, how much time does that take!" "Whats time to a pig?"

Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @05:08AM (#16841927)
50% of the time; Film records the image when stationary in the camera. Almost all movie cameras use half the time replacing the last film 'frame' with a new one: '180degrees' of the shutter cycle. Thus, if you film a Dolphin jumping, he is recorded as a broken series of blurred stills ('trails'). A 48th of a second is missing during frame replacement, a 48th of a second is recorded, but his movement smears the image. Humans see this flicker, so film projectors break each cycle into 3 flickers....

Sorry, to many words.......... Take your five year old to see the film 'Gandhi', the flicker and strobeing is unbearable.

Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @04:24AM (#16841834)
'Film' is used at 24 frames every second in the theater, 112 feet every minute. 99% of movies are recorded at that speed. 2001 & Star-Wars space shots were filmed one frame per second, Star-Wars assembled all the things in the scene later. 2001 did not have computer motor control, so Kubrick did everything N times for each thing in the final scene, within the camera. Planet; run by 10 times with 10 fresh rolls of film, then add stars with 9 of the SAME rolls, then foreground object (surface of Moon or hotel) 8 times, then spaceship 7 times, until all are recorded on the remaining single roll of film. No-One can look at the result until the film is developed (souped) so the only way to test for success is to develop one roll with each new added thing. Any thing wrong and you do it 10 times all again......at one inch of film per second. Thus is why the Star-Wars teaser on Christmas of 1976 had No space shots; the droids jumping ship was mica dust and were dropped from a forklift, the spinning Empire destroyer was a cut-out Polaroid taped to a plastic star field contraption.
Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @01:56AM (#16841453)
In Film, the image is only recorded 50% of the time. In my 50 years of experience, no one in Hollywood knows that. Well, not no one:)
Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @01:47AM (#16841433)
like the French, with their little enameled fly in the white of the urinal, in the movie theater you would not notice, watching the small Pan-Am aircraft rolling as it approached. Passengers would not feel the roll and be thanking the baby Elvis.
Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @01:03AM (#16841316)
''Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out'' Real painfully; No object passes the limb of a planet; 10 identical film takes with his Selson motor camera track, soup one take. Good? Add one more thing (against black) 9 takes, soup one take. Good? Add another object to the shot, 8 takes, soup one take. Good? Add star field, 7 takes, soup one take. Good? Add matt box holdout and new plastic ship, 6 takes, soup one take. Good? No? Start over. All in 2.6 inch wide raw film stock, one frame per second.
Re:Kubrick found what he wanted by trying things out on Sunday April 15, 2018 @12:46AM (#16841272)
Hardware Geeks like me were enthralled. MGM was lost. Charles Lippincott reverted the sales pitch to an inference that a really good LSD experience would come with your movie ticket, and 2001 took off. George Lucas hired Charley when he missed the Christmas 1976 release date, paid him by selling all the T-shirt rights for 100K. Like 'The Stunt Man', 'One From The Heart', 'The Last of the Mobile Hot Shots', 'Angel and the Badman' et al, sometimes fans have to pry the good stuff from the grey suits.

Do Not lick your ticket.

P.S. I didn't get to read the WSJ screed, i'm outside their club:(

Re:Why Tesla is having a harder time than SpaceX on Sunday April 15, 2018 @12:05AM (#16841141)
Aversion to risk. A $billion+ gift each year from Uncle Sam to 'maintain' a launch capability and 'free' pads from Harris-Vandenberg and PAFB kept Boeing/Lockheed in the game without risking 'Investors' deposits. For that $billion and cost+ launches, US gets an average of one Delta launch a year and a few 60year-old Atlas cost+ launches with filthy thyroid killing strap-ons. Since actually RISKING 'Investors' deposits with un-tested hardware is 'fiducially irresponsible' for any 'Public Corporation', unless DOD or NASA covers ALL costs, the US space game stopped at Reagan. ATK-Orbital are cleaning out the back stockroom, P&W-Rocketdine just walked away.