The Digital Video Information Network - View Single Post - Dion Beebe and Miami Vice Movie (Specifically Depth of field)

Hugh DiMauro · July 27th, 2006, 08:45 AM

Hey Comrades!

A common disappointment among us 1/3" CCD users is our inability to easily achieve shallow depth of field when emulating the "film look". Even 1/2" and 2/3" cameras are challenged in the same way.

This month's issue of American Cinematographer highlights ASC member Dion Beebe and his digital camera work on the "Miami Vice" movie, premiering this Friday. He used Thomson Grass Valley Vipers, Sony CineAlta T950 CCD Block Adapters and Sony Cine Alta F900s. Let me share a quote:

"We also decided that there were attributes of HD technology we liked and wanted to exploit, like the increased depth of field. Because of the cameras' chip size (2/3"), they have excessive depth of field that we decided not to fight, but rather utilize."

Even the big boys now go with increased depth of field. There should not be a stigma attached to wide depth of field. It all depends upon what your story calls for.

July 27th, 2006, 08:45 AM	#1
Hugh DiMauro Trustee Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Somewhere in the Negev Posts: 1,185	Dion Beebe and Miami Vice Movie (Specifically Depth of field) Hey Comrades! A common disappointment among us 1/3" CCD users is our inability to easily achieve shallow depth of field when emulating the "film look". Even 1/2" and 2/3" cameras are challenged in the same way. This month's issue of American Cinematographer highlights ASC member Dion Beebe and his digital camera work on the "Miami Vice" movie, premiering this Friday. He used Thomson Grass Valley Vipers, Sony CineAlta T950 CCD Block Adapters and Sony Cine Alta F900s. Let me share a quote: "We also decided that there were attributes of HD technology we liked and wanted to exploit, like the increased depth of field. Because of the cameras' chip size (2/3"), they have excessive depth of field that we decided not to fight, but rather utilize." Even the big boys now go with increased depth of field. There should not be a stigma attached to wide depth of field. It all depends upon what your story calls for. __________________ Interesting, if true. And interesting anyway.