Subforums
16,731 topics in this forum
-
- 5.7k replies
- 1.2m views
-
- 1.7k replies
- 353.4k views
-
- 0 replies
- 7.1k views
-
- 7 replies
- 274 views
-
- 20 replies
- 676 views
-
- 8 replies
- 162 views
-
- 13 replies
- 196 views
-
- 125 replies
- 3.1k views
-
- 1.1k replies
- 126.5k views
-
- 4 replies
- 246 views
-
- 14 replies
- 3k views
-
- 25 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 409 views
-
- 100 replies
- 10.9k views
-
- 331 replies
- 74.5k views
-
- 2 replies
- 289 views
-
- 55 replies
- 3k views
-
- 13 replies
- 462 views
-
- 41 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 39 replies
- 15.8k views
-
- 443 replies
- 32.5k views
-
- 39 replies
- 6.6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 3 replies
- 612 views
-
- 235 replies
- 16.2k views
-
- 1 reply
- 334 views
-
- 53 replies
- 4.9k views
-
- 17 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 30 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 16 replies
- 2.4k views
-
- 18 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 78 replies
- 14.4k views
-
- 17 replies
- 5.3k views
-
- 19 replies
- 2.7k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.6k views
-
- 473 replies
- 125.1k views
-
- 55 replies
- 10k views
-
- 2 replies
- 564 views
-
- 0 replies
- 289 views
-
- 19 replies
- 1k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics16.7k
-
Total Posts338.2k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
Maybe Canon are thinking that they'll keep their exclusivity on the super-sharp super-expensive lenses, but let the third-parties develop lower cost less technically perfect lenses? It would make sense and make the system a lot more accessible and attract a lot of new customers that wouldn't want to spend top dollar on pristine lenses. Their success on the EF line and how ubiquitous it was must have been a critical factor in their earnings over the decades, so making RF a new default standard is very much in their interests. You might be right about the split between FF and APS-C lenses though - that's still a strategy in a similar direction. -
This might be a blessing-in-disguise, as a lot of cameras actually lose the last few seconds of footage before you hit stop. So it might be compensating for that and making sure no clips are cut short.
-
It's worth pointing out that the thermals might be the dominant factor here, considering that laptops will throttle down on their performance in order to manage overheating, so a few extra fans in the laptop can make more difference than which model of CPU / GPU you buy!
-
Ha! Look at Tiffen putting all their info on there for a lens shade!! Talk about padding your part. How funny! Could the lens be a 15-150mm T3.1?
-
I understand that a person can look at a larger quantity of footage and notice similarities and themes, but there are still a great number of un-accounted-for variables that can always bite you in the ass if you were to actually get that camera. The general look that cameras have online is likely to be the default look, partly because most people don't know the first thing about colour grading and mostly because the people who are posting videos and specifying the model number of the camera are likely in the shallow end of the skills pool, so to speak. The exception is cinematographers doing camera tests, but these have their own issues. The challenge comes in when you try and change the image in post. Try to add a bit more contrast and you might find that the image doesn't keep the things you liked about the look. In fact, the nicer the image looks SOOC or with the default LUT on it, the more fragile the image might be because the more pushed it will be. The most flexible images are the most neutral, and our brain doesn't like neutral images, it wants ones with the right herbs and spices already added. There really is no substitute for actually shooting with the camera the way that you shoot, in the situations you shoot in, and then grade it the way you grade it, trying to get the look you want, with your level of skill. TBH, most of the videos I see that have the name of the camera in them, that are graded with a "look", actually look pretty awful and amateurish to me. Either this is their lack of skill as colourist to not be able to get the look they wanted, or they did get the look they wanted and the look is just awful, but it's not a promising picture either way. I wonder how many of them are using colour management. If a camera is a 10-bit LOG with decent bitrate then the camera is one CST away from being almost indistinguishable from any other camera. Skin tones are a challenge of course, but when well-shot on capable equipment these are pretty straight-forward. There's a few principles I think are at play here: What I hear from high-level colourists is that if a project is well shot on capable equipment (without a "we'll fix it in post" mindset) then you can get your colour management setup, put a look in place, and 80% of the shots just fall into place. Then the time can be spent refining the overall look, adding a specific look to certain scenes (night scenes, dream sequences, etc), fixing any problem shots, and then you'd do a fine-tune pass on all shots with very minor adjustments. If it's not well shot to get it mostly right in-camera then you're in all sorts of trouble for post. If the client is inexperienced and doesn't know what they want, or they want something that is very different to how they shot the project. It's very easy to see colour grading make big changes (e.g. shooting day for night) or see the amazing VFX work done by Hollywood etc, and assume that anyone with a grading panel and calibrated reference monitor can do anything with any footage. If the client is a diva, or is somehow mentally unbalanced. Film-making is difficult enough to make almost anyone mentally unbalanced by the time they get to post-production and they're sitting with the colourist and every mistake done at any point on the project is becoming clearly visible on the huge TV in their studio. Throwing a fit at this point is perhaps a predictable human reaction! One colourist I heard interviewed said that when they were colour grading rap videos in the 80's they had to tell one client who had about 20 people in the colour grading suite that the strippers, cocaine, and machine guns had to go back into the limo otherwise they wouldn't be able to colour grade the project. Of course, none of this is the fault of the camera. I'd even theorise that the brand of camera might be a predictor of how much the colour grading process was setup to fail - if people shot something on a Sony rather than a Canon you might find they're more likely to be a clueless and self-entitled influencer etc. God help the colourists that are going to face a barrage of projects over the next few years shot on the FX3 where the person thinks the colourist can duplicate The Creator in post for a few thousand dollars! Also, the stronger the look you apply in post, the more those small colour science differences get lost in the wash. It's also worth asking, do you think the colourists on reddit are the ones who are fully-booked with more professional clients who have realistic expectations, or the ones out there dealing with the stressed masses and going online to learn and vent? My experience on the colourist forums is that the most experienced folks burn out from answering the same questions over and over again, and arguing with people who don't want to learn or put in the work, so the people who are there are mostly those early in their journeys. Only you can know this, because what you love will be different to what anyone else loves. But don't ask random strangers online, actually try it.... https://sonycine.com/testfootage/ https://zsyst.com/sony-4k-camera-page/sony-f55-sample-footage-downloadable-samples/ 🙂
-
