The iPhone 4 has a fixed f/2.8 aperture and a relatively large 3.85mm lens (which seems to be approximately the equivalent of 35mm on a crop sensor or 56mm on a FF). It has an automatic, variable shutter speed between 1/15 and 1/10000; an automatic ISO of around 80-1000; and the sensor is 1/3.2″ and has some new backside illumination tech to capture more photons (although, in low light, it’s still noisy as heck). Oh, and it records 1280×720 footage at 30fps (just like the original 5D Mark II firmware, it’s 30, not 29.97). The bitrate is about 10 mbps (not bad) and the audio is a low mono 66 kbps at 44.1 kHz. Here’s a good article with more comparisons and statistics, if you’re interested.

To adjust the exposure (and focus at the same time) you just tap an object in the frame. It’s pretty handy, I sometimes wish our 7D had a feature like this. You can focus in video mode, even during recording (it pulls focus way too fast to do any racking, though). The auto exposure and focus sometimes kicks in during recording automatically if too much changes in the scene (annoying).

Here’s a quick test I did with Lainey playing with her cat, Hemlock (who used to be so small). Shot and edited completely on my iPhone in the iMovie app:

Day 2, I wanted to really test the quality and see how far I could push the phone so I went out on my own and shot a little Bokake*. I failed. I realized because the rolling shutter is so apparent, you absolutely have to have good stabilization. Any sort of movement that is too rapid causes distortion and it just looks awful. You also need to pay attention to what is going on in a scene. Again, if you move too quickly, the auto shutter and ISO and focus will kick in and you’ll notice it. Day 3, I borrowed my sister. I put on my rollerblades and had her push me at walking speed. Static shots work the best, but eventually I got the hang of it and was able to get some decent moving shots (note the basketball backboard POV shot in the video below). These shots are graded. I figure if I’m to be putting this to the test, I would use it like a normal camera and go through the whole process, CC and grading included. One thing that really helped was conforming the iPhone footage to 24p. 30 fps looks ugly to me, so pretty much anything I shoot on my phone will always be conformed. It’s really subtle slow-motion and definitely helps smooth out the movements a bit.

Please watch in 720p, fullscreen if possible.

So, do I believe this is a viable filmmaking tool? No. I think without at least some real control over exposure, you would have to make some huge compromises in the way you tell your story. But that isn’t to say the iPhone is useless in filmmaking. Having such decent quality in your pocket will make it that much easier to frame up shots, scout locations, and even document the process. It’s a great little camera.

Finally, since I had my iPhone connected to my 7D (mostly for added weight), I recorded both at the same time for fun. Please please please take note that I was mainly focusing on the iPhone and didn’t really check the exposure or even the focus in some shots on the 7D so don’t take this comparison to heart. It wasn’t my intention to shoot video with the 7D at the same time, but here it is anyway:

Peter: It isn't for everyone, but this is too unique of an experience to pass up.

More than just a well-behaved "comic book movie," this is a beautiful, go-for-broke experience. Aspects inherently limited, yet hinted at, in the graphic novel, are enhanced in the film with terrific grace--music, choreography, precise editing. Yes, the movie could not possibly be as dense as the source material, but what we have here is a fair trade.

How about that title sequence? Was there ever a moment in the movies where they got it so right? It is safe to assume that, for expository reasons, it was hard coded into the shooting script. This is the most lovingly conceived title sequence I have ever seen in a recent movie; maybe in any movie. The only one I can recall with such fondness is "Once Upon a Time in the West."

Your old road is rapidly agin' / Please get out of the new one / If you can't lend your hand...

That it is purely an invention of the movie, inspired by the comics, is a testament to Snyder's ambitions: he is not content with transplanting a comic book as if it were a cadaver brought to life, ala Rodriguez's "Sin City"--which was more a nod to comics than to movies; and Nolan's "The Dark Knight" was more a nod to movies than to comics. Dissatisfied with the unreal backdrops of Sin City and his own Thermopylae, and abandoning the realness of Chicago's Gotham, Snyder constructs a New York that resides somewhere in the purgatory of our dreams. It inhabits a look both noirish and nostalgic.

Slanted journalism is as brutal as an unfair fight.

The plot, with its flashbacks and allusions, can rub off as emotionally impenetrable. This is not a problem of the movie. "Watchmen" is a true revisionist fable that operates on the abstract level of fantasy. This world reveals itself through layers; it can be excused if individual scenes don't add up to much. That it sidesteps a twisty, literal plot for traditional narrative drive, like its opposite twin "The Dark Knight," is not an oversight. This is a mosaic. If Eisner was correct that comics force the viewer to participate, and that film is merely observational, then "Watchmen" bridges the gap: it is possible to relish each shot contextually. There is, for example, a joy in the movie's set design that captures a history and mood that dialog alone would make redundant.

Consider the ambush in the alley and it's juxtaposition to the television interview. Each punch, each bone-breaking karate chop, is, through skillful editing, delivered alongside nasty verbal attacks in the interview, which is itself a cleverly disguised ambush. This is a visual irony, a sequence lifted faithfully from the comics. In movie form, it returns to its home of Soviet film theory. The swiftness of the cross-cutting between two unrelated events elevates it into montage: without the play-by-play visual ironies, the point would be lost. Snyder handles this translation faithfully, while seemingly improving upon it; a fact the movie gets little credit for.

For those who like to watch: notice the carefully arranged picture on the right. We're so in the 80s.

"Watchmen" is at its most fascinating (and alienating) when it chooses to meditate on its plot rather than telling it. Is this a flaw, as others have complained? Consider the opening shot, which establishes its "point" within a single sweep of motion: it starts out in the gutter with an extreme close-up of the smiley face, then pulls out and up to the top of a skyrise suite, with a detective looking down. That he has a bald spot is a detail perhaps unbeknown to him, but a detail that we clearly see from our (higher up) perspective. Observing the crime scene, his partner mutters, "I think this is way bigger than any of us," and the shot belittles them by zooming out to a panorama of the city. Later on, a god-like character of certainly the highest perspective, remarks that human life is overrated next to the enormity of the universe.

This kind of narrative ambiguity will not go over well with an audience expecting a blockbuster plot with the engine of a hummingbird. Many will feel detached by the film's assault of imagery over cohesion. I suspect the movie, like the novel, contains more ideas than drama. Is this a defect? I can recall Kubrick's response to critics when pressed about the "point" of one of his films, a certain science fiction piece: "It's either obvious or impossible to explain. It's not a message I ever intend to convey in words."

And on and on. The graphic novel, thus the movie, is sequentially constructed as an elaborate visual pun. That it carries itself, elegantly, from beginning to end with hidden meanings and secret symbols is merely a way to enrich the experience. There is a story, a mood, a kind of visceral joy embedded in the movie's DNA that will be overlooked. It is not an intellectual requirement to read the film in this manner; no less is it a requirement to enjoy Macbeth as an indictment on absolute power. Oh, it could exist at face value. "Macbeth is just about this dude who goes crazy, that's all. It was okay. Not enough explosions."

But who'd wanna go and do that?

Adobe Soundbooth has come a long way since its early stages in beta (back when it was free), and we found that this CS4 upgrade, on top of giving the interface a tabbed makeover, adds plenty of useful features that edge it closer to being a fully featured pro audio suite.

For now, it's all remarkably easy to use, with enough presets for newcomers, yet also deep enough for those who want to get their hands dirty.

Adobe After Effects hasn't really gone through any major changes, but there are a few upgrades that might make it worth while.

As for Encore, you'll definitely want to upgrade if you need to keep up to date with all the new forms of media distribution.

Download trial of After Effects CS4

This video review of Premiere CS4 attempts to inform the newbies along with the initiated. Unless, of course, you're interested in trying Premiere Pro yourself.

So what did we think of the new Adobe Premiere Pro CS4? It certainly is an improvement over CS3, but not in all the ways you might think; and that may not be a bad thing, either. A few enhancements and additions make this product even friendlier across two major platforms, an issue Take Zer0 was looking to resolve until CS4 came along.

Adobe Photoshop CS4 has undergone some major updates. Not only is it faster, but with all its new features, editing photos has never been easier. In this review, we'll cover just a few of this software's new abilities.

Want to try the new Photoshop? Download a free trial

Sean: This isn't a movie about a sex addict, this is a touching movie in the ranks of Harold and Maude.
Peter: Vulgar, disgusting, but it will put a smile on your face.

So, Choke turned out to be quite a little surprise for both of us. If you've seen it already, let us know what you thought, too!

Peter: It's not a dramatic, classic Coen brothers' film, but you should still check it out.
Sean: It's not Fargo and it's different from The Big Lebowski, though I loved it and definitely recommend it.

Is this the last, good movie of the summer? Check out our review of Burn and let us know what you thought about the movie in the comments.

With Take Zer0 Version Two just around the corner we thought we'd post a review of something many of you would be interested in. Introducing the Paintedsheep camera dolly. It's cost-effective, works well, and you'll have to watch the video to see why you need one...

Where can I get one? PaintedSheepDolly.com

Deshaker? http://www.guthspot.se/video/deshaker

VirtualDub? http://www.virtualdub.org/

Sean... Not even its decent action sequences or special effects could make up for how poor everything else was.

Peter's still in France, so we headed to the theater after work without him. After seeing the movie, I'm sure he wouldn't have been disappointed to miss it.

Peter... An old fashioned thriller that sticks to the basics and works.
Sean... As a non X-Files fan, I was surprised; I really enjoyed this.

We got off work, sat in traffic for over an hour, and saw The X-Files 2 at Grauman's Chinese Theater in LA; which is, apparently, "the most famous theater in the world." We'll look into that.

Peter... Payoff after payoff for two straight hours with mind blowing set pieces.
Sean... Incredible performances. I've never seen a character like The Joker.

How eager were we to see this movie? We caught a midnight screening in L.A. and wrapped up this review at six o'clock in the morning. As always, it's unscripted and improvised. Stay tuned for next week's review!

Peter... Underwhelming, but worth it for the characters.
Sean.... Cool; better than the original.
Neil..... Too much fluff that distracts, but worth seeing.

Fresh off a nine-to-five shift, we went and saw Hellboy II. Neil, our friend and "boss," tagged along as guest reviewer. As always, our reviews are unscripted and improvised, and shot at least an hour after the theater.

Oh! And at 12:00am on Friday we'll go see The Dark Knight on an IMAX screen in L.A. Care to join us? Click here to purchase tickets (before they're sold out!).

This time we decided to make it a double feature. We also decided to double the people. Joining us are friends Lainey and Joseph. As usual, we're here to give our opinions mere moments after we saw the movie(s), improvised and unscripted, all in the deserted parking lot of a nearby grocery store. Enjoy!

We had just gotten off work and went to see The Happening. Is it a career nadir for M. Knight Shyamalan, or is it a boon to his future? How good will this movie look on his resume? Or how about we drop the pretentiousness and put it in plain speak: is it a good movie?

And here's a video on 'Frozen Grand Central' by Improv Everywhere. Yep, gotta love those guys.

Best Picture: "There Will Be Blood" Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis for "There Will Be Blood" Winner! Best Actress: Marion Cotillard for "La Vie en rose" Winner! Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem for "No Country for Old Men" Winner! Best Supporting Actress: Cate Blanchett for "I'm Not There" Best Director: Paul Thomas Anderson for "There Will Be Blood" Best Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody for "Juno" Winner! Best Adapted Screenplay: Paul Thomas Anderson for "There Will Be Blood" Best Cinematography: Roger Deakins for "No Country for Old Men" Best Editing: Christopher Rouse for "The Bourne Ultimatum" Winner!

Best Picture: "No Country for Old Men" Winner! Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis for "There Will Be Blood" Winner! Best Actress: Julie Christie for "Away From Her" Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem for "No Country for Old Men" Winner! Best Supporting Actress: Amy Ryan for "Gone Baby Gone" Best Director: Joel, Ethan Cohen for "No Country for Old Men" Winner! Best Original Screenplay: Diablo Cody for "Juno" Winner! Best Adapted Screenplay: Joel, Ethan Cohen for "No Country for Old Men" Winner! Best Cinematography: Seamus McGarvey for "Atonement" Best Editing: Christopher Rouse for "The Bourne Ultimatum" Winner!

This weekend we saw the much-hyped Cloverfield.

For some trivia, the title (something we wondered about) comes from the name of the street where the Bad Robot production company resides. And if you're wondering what camera they used, the majority was shot with the HD version of the camera we shoot our episodes with. However, for the shots that required a lot of CG, they brought out the Viper and a Sony CineAlta.

Also, if you haven't seen it already, you be the judge. And here's the TED talk with J.J. Abrams that we mentioned.

Five years since "Punch-Drunk Love," Paul Thomas Anderson has returned with a loose adaptation of Upton Sinclair's book, Oil!, and proves that his vision is just as insane as his material. If his Adam Sandler dramedy went under the radar, then "There Will Be Blood" is a grandiose thunderclap to all the critics and Academy voters; a tour-de-force to be reckoned with. Regardless of those who preach its perfection, or to those who say it lacks the operatic drama imposed by its otherwise meticulous staging, it does prove one thing: the idea of the auteur is alive and well.

Despite criticisms, this film is too easily recommended. Everything it accomplishes, it does in spades, and stars and stripes, and all the colors of the rainbow.

Welcome to Take Zer0's very first movie review; that is if you exclude our ramblings in past episode segments. It's a little sloppy, but we'll iron out the kinks with each movie we review. They're shot the moment we walk out of the theater, and so our thoughts and opinions are completely fresh and uncontaminated... assuming that has anything at all to do with a quality review.

We like to think it does.