Talk:Genesis (camera)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Genesis (camera) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Film: Filmmaking

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force.
	This article needs an image (preferably free) related to the subject, such as a picture of the set or a film poster. Please ensure that non-free content guidelines are properly observed.

Is it ironic?[edit]

Is it ironic that an article on a camera has no images?! 76.168.54.150 (talk) 23:24, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidate this page with the Genesis page on the Movie Making Manual?[edit]

So, the Wiki community has two pages on the Panavision Genesis. There's this on on WikiPedia and this Genesis page on the Movie Making Manual WikiBook. Should we consolidate the two? In theory, the page on the Movie Making Manual would be differentiated from this wikipedia article by the Movie Making Manual's focus on practical aspects of the camera. What do you think? Should we consolidate the two? Dan aka jack 07:38, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

X-Men 3: The Last Stand[edit]

According to the imdb, X-Men 3 was shot using a Genesis. Can anyone verify this? If so, it can be used in the main article? RossyG 17:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope not digital, not genesis. it was shot on Panaflex cameras on film in Vancouver BC

Before the Devil Knows You're Dead[edit]

Shot on the Genesis, 2007, by Sidney Lumet. 207.12.38.254 (talk) 03:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Source?Kraftlos (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Apostrophe? ;-) – Kieran T ^(talk) 22:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

huh? --Kraftlos (talk) 22:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Technical Issues[edit]

This ought to be a fascinating article (especially to Canon 5D II owners!), but it's disappointingly thin. There are also some minor technical points that need addressing.

The problem with a three-chip prism system is not so much that the prism bangs into the rear of the lens, but rather that there isn't enough separation between the prism and the back of a wide-angle lens. ("Long" lenses, and zoom lenses designed with a long "back focus" would probably not have this problem.)

There's also the issue of what "true" 35mm depth of field is. The "standard" would, of course, be Academy Ratio films shot on conventional 35mm film. One of the perceived advantages of shooting a larger sensor is the loss of depth of field, which (assuming regular 4:3 movies have "too much") should give increased control.

There are also the aesthetic issues of whether 15Mp is "enough" for theatrical projection, whether such films can or should be directly transferred to DVD/BD, etc. WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 19:55, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Filmography list of films[edit]

The list of films is too long (in my opinion). RJFJR (talk) 17:31, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the progression of use needs a list of films to both illustrate the relative popularity of the Genesis and more importantly the types of films and cinematographic styles it has been successful in, this length seems appropriate to me as long as it doesn't grow dramatically --Anuoldman (talk) 16:19, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Miscalculation ?[edit]

How can 1920x1080 be only about 2/3 the resolution of a 2k film scan, which is cca 2048x1152 ? Comparing width, it's 93%, and 87.9% area ... the 2/3 figure (66.7%) is a way out! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.56.136.93 (talk) 20:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Genesis (camera). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

360 mount?[edit]

Dutch ead is not "360 mount". Dutch mount rolls the camera in line with shooting direction. 360 mount is used to shoot everything around the camera. Toke0 (talk) 12:50, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]