TV Technology Re-purposed the DV Magazine cover story on Rejouer. It is better than the original DV Magazine piece because it has the first paragraph, and now makes sense when you read it. I think that Jon Silberg will be much happier with the re-print. I didn’t comment on the specific inaccuracies of the article the first time, but as the story starts off comprehensible this time I’ll fix what I’m guessing an editor changed.
Years ago I also wrote for some trade publications, and I know exactly what that’s like to have your sentences and quotes combined and condensed. It can be frustrating when you don’t get to check for accuracy after an editor has had at it, and before the stories are sent to press.
Original verison from TV Technology and DV Magazine
The format of the Lumix provides “four times the image area of a 2/3-inch sensor,” Friedman notes. “This allowed for our standard [35 mm cinematography] wide-angle lenses to really have an even more extreme wide-angle look, and it also meant that depth of field was closer to what people expect from a motion picture than it is using a 2/3-inch HD camera.”
I believe this is bunched up from two different parts of the interview, and it was all shoved together to save space. At one point I was explaining why you can’t just put PL mount lenses on a B4 mount camera with a simple mechanical adapter (actually you can, but you wouldn’t want to) — I also was explaining the difference between 2/3″ sensors and 4/3 sensors. The wide-angle lens portion got shoe-horned in, and jumbled about. To make sense it should read:
[The format of the Lumix is a single CMOS sensor without an optical prism and is] “four times the image area of a 2/3-inch sensor,” Friedman notes. “And it also meant that depth of field was closer to what people expect from a motion picture than it is using a 2/3-inch HD camera.” [For several parts of the movie we used this crazy near-fisheye 8mm lens,] “this allowed for our an even more extreme wide-angle look and”, “This allowed for our standard wide-angle lenses” [to not seem as wide.]
Hope this helps make sense now. If anyone else would like to interview me- don’t forget I’ll make myself available for fact checking before going to press.