Stanley Kubrick

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,220
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
I found this interesting.
It never really occurred to me that a Director would own so many lenses.....or that they would own any at all.
I understand why you might want to, but i suppose i just figured that either The Cinematographer would be a Lens Junky, or you would simply rent whatever lens you might want during the filming of the movie.

 

Kino

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
7,723
Location
Orange, Virginia
Format
Multi Format
Kubrick started as a still photographer and worked for Life magazine. He had G.A.S. too...
 

lantau

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Messages
826
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
Didn't he have custom lenses made for at least one specific scene in Barry Lyndon? You cannot rent that. And if wasn't good for anything else it would be a nice collectible for him.
 

abruzzi

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2018
Messages
3,030
Location
New Mexico, USA
Format
Large Format
NASA has some ƒ.7 (thats point seven) lenses made by Zeiss. Kubrick bought a couple and had them converted to work on the cinema cameras he used. That was used to shoot the candlelit scenes from Barry Lyndon.
 

Nokton48

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
2,981
Format
Multi Format
Actually he had to butcher two priceless front projection BNC cinema cameras to fit the F.7 NASA satellite lens. Rendering a UBER value camera inoperable for any other task. But he could film in candle light.
 
Last edited:

lantau

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Messages
826
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
abruzzi said:
NASA has some ƒ.7 (thats point seven) lenses made by Zeiss. Kubrick bought a couple and had them converted to work on the cinema cameras he used. That was used to shoot the candlelit scenes from Barry Lyndon.
Click to expand...

Nokton48 said:
Actually he had to butcher two priceless front projection BNC cinema cameras to fit the F.7 NASA satellite lens. Rendering a UBER value camera inoperable for any other task. But he could film in candle light.
Click to expand...

Thanks Guys, that was insightful! I have a Stanely Kubrick Bluray box set. I should check if there is a special about it in there.
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,642
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
He and Weegee were friends. Think of the conversations!
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,642
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format

trendland

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
3,398
Format
Medium Format
lantau said:
Didn't he have custom lenses made for at least one specific scene in Barry Lyndon? You cannot rent that. And if wasn't good for anything else it would be a nice collectible for him.
Click to expand...
abruzzi said:
NASA has some ƒ.7 (thats point seven) lenses made by Zeiss. Kubrick bought a couple and had them converted to work on the cinema cameras he used. That was used to shoot the candlelit scenes from Barry Lyndon.
Click to expand...
"Barry Lyndon" was from real nice photography for sure! No question about!
But I can't feel good with that Film from the story...!
Beside SFX in 2001, outstanding framing in Shining (beginning steadycam aera, symmetrical compositions, unusual outstanding perspectives) the photographic aesthetics of Kubrick films
today is a bit oldfashioned. Altough is has set standart in mentioned examples, it is exeeded meanwhile.
One example is Terence Malik ! His D.O.P. Emmanuel Lubetzky has set a modern standart in
"Tree of Live" also " The Revenant" are with such phantastic photography Stanley Kubrick would have dreamed of in 1969 for 2001/ Barry Lyndon 1976 ?(I can't remember precise just from remind)

By the way the Steadycam in Shining was real imperfect. Today you would come into serious trouble witch such kind of moves. But the time Kubrick established it - it was nearly brand New and his operator could have only had 1/2 year to try the new system.

What stands for Kubrick for ever like the two murdered girls in Shining "Overlook Hotel" :
( and "ever" and "ever" and "ever") is the epic genius (storrytelling) and " vision" of Stanley Kubrick what is still modern nowadays.
The fact that he was a "nerd" from collecting lenses is new for me. But I can imagine that
obsession just if you remember the making off from Shining (Kubrick was omnipresent on the set with his viewfinder)!


Some of his "candlelight" lenses :

with regards
 

Nokton48

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
2,981
Format
Multi Format
I think he was such an incredible force. I have every one of his films on DVD. I think my favorite is "PATHS OF GLORY".



 
Last edited:

macfred

Subscriber
Joined
Nov 6, 2014
Messages
3,839
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format

DREW WILEY

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
13,871
Format
8x10 Format
Yep. All that zippy hybrid stuff leaves me cold. I never go to theaters cause they're too loud, it's a good place to catch the flu, and they gravitate toward teenage action flicks. I'm not against digi animation or simulation per se, but just find it too often a substitute for good camera work and serious acting. Nothing on the horizon is going to upstage good ole (if even a bit unsharp) true Technicolor for hue impact, or the ole b&w classics like On the Waterfront for lighting and camera wisdom. Barry Lyndon is an all-around classic, one of the best films ever. The pixel peepers should take a lesson from it.
 

Alan Edward Klein

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
9,376
Location
New Jersey formerly NYC
Format
Multi Format
"The Revenant" was shot with a hand-held digital video camera without any artificial lighting.
 

Kino

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
7,723
Location
Orange, Virginia
Format
Multi Format
Nokton48 said:
I think he was such an incredible force. I have every one of his films on DVD. I think my favorite is "PATHS OF GLORY".


Click to expand...

Do you have "Fear and Desire"? We obtained the camera original negative (the video in the link is wrong; the element was the camera original neg) from Puerto Rico and I timed/graded the first prints from it in 1997 or 1998 before it was restored. The film was shot on mixed short ends of nitrate and safety film stock. Unfortunately, the negative had deteriorated on just about every splice and caused flashes at each splice. Only later in the early 2000's was it digitally restored to it's current state.

 

Nokton48

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
2,981
Format
Multi Format
Yes I have a copy of "FEAR AND DESIRE". Not his best work. But interesting. Yes


The documentary of his life, narrated by Tom Cruise, is excellent. Have that, too.
 

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 16, 2004
Messages
11,895
Location
Coquitlam,BC Canada
Format
Multi Format
macfred said:
Great!
--
For the famous pie-fight scene his Rolleiflex was sealed into an underwater case ...
Click to expand...

I've been dying to see footage of this scene. I wish they had kept it in. This footage has to be somewhere.
 

bushpig

Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
320
Location
Escaped Bake
Format
Medium Format
Andrew O'Neill said:
I've been dying to see footage of this scene. I wish they had kept it in. This footage has to be somewhere.
Click to expand...
Kubrick didn't usually keep stuff, if I'm not mistaken. If it didn't make it to the final cut, it was usually destroyed. This is why there's almost zero deleted scenes or outtakes available for his films.

I believe he destroyed most props and sets as well.
 
OP
OP

CMoore

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
6,220
Location
USA CA
Format
35mm
You are correct. That round shuttle, that lands on the moon, that is about the only survivor. MGM stored the Props/Models for many years, and then dumped them... per Kubrick's request.
This is a great watch..... it is a 5-6 part series i believe.


 

trendland

Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2012
Messages
3,398
Format
Medium Format
Alan Edward Klein said:
"The Revenant" was shot with a hand-held digital video camera without any artificial lighting.
Click to expand...
Yes - buy the way I just did not saw the Revenant! But what I saw from a preview was exiting.
Concerning the color (blue sky, dark green of trees, a.s.o) it seams to me to look like Kodachrome!
(in parts very saturated - but also (not comparable with Kodachrome) with pale colors : a so called
mixed color management. Sure it was digital - but nothing to say against if it is looking nice at last.

What I will not say is that Kubrick with his films had bad photogtaphy. It is the oposite of that for sure. But there is also today a real good photography in films ( not in every case oft course but "sometimes".)
And Terence Malik is one of that directors today, who astablished a modern look (with his new D.O.P. I mentioned) by the way he changed "John Toll" who was responcible for "The thin red line"


Toll isn't involved in Terence Malik films any longer.

What makes Kubrick unforgettable in concern of photography in films ?
To me the visual effects in 2001 (wrong color photography) , the SFX in 2001, AND the moving camera in Shining (steadycam) beside the absolute symetric framing in many many shots of shining! One may feel that symetry is overdriven but the last issue concerning conception of Stanley Kubrick :
"EVERY SINGLE SHOT IN HIS MOVIES SEAMS TO BE ABSOLUTE MOTIVATED"
we of course miss such total motivation in films today !

Exeption (to me ) : Terence Malik :

If you "WANT" to see this : there is a lot. (of course this is "just" interpretation)
A cuote to the New Color Photography of the late 60th for example.
There are some better shots wich will make it more clear - but sorry I can't find it such quick as
I want! Shots from the lower middle class residential area of Malik's protagonists.
Like this there :

(C) Joe Maloney
(just if you want to see this) but seriously I am quite sure Malik has intended - because there is much much more - and you will wonder about if you remember the visual effects of Kubrick in 2001:




Do you perhaps remember Kubricks Epilog ?

Malik did it with dinosauriers:




But he ended not in space like Kubrick - he came back to his lower middle class protagonist :



end of part one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…