Subforums
17,123 topics in this forum
-
- 529 replies
- 190.5k views
-
- 27 replies
- 12.2k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.5m views
-
- 2 replies
- 11.3k views
-
- 22 replies
- 5.6k views
-
- 9 replies
- 429 views
-
- 40 replies
- 5.4k views
-
- 10 replies
- 382 views
-
- 235 replies
- 91.4k views
-
- 103 replies
- 35.1k views
-
- 4 replies
- 306 views
-
- 74 replies
- 24.5k views
-
- 85 replies
- 31.6k views
-
- 668 replies
- 203.5k views
-
- 45 replies
- 12.7k views
-
- 2 replies
- 905 views
-
- 1 reply
- 964 views
-
- 1 reply
- 882 views
-
- 43 replies
- 15.2k views
-
- 4 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 12 replies
- 5k views
-
- 2 replies
- 1.7k views
-
- 14 replies
- 4.6k views
-
- 48 replies
- 14.2k views
-
- 23 replies
- 11.9k views
-
- 13 replies
- 14.2k views
-
- 6 replies
- 4.4k views
-
- 17 replies
- 4.3k views
-
- 16 replies
- 2.6k views
-
- 75 replies
- 19.3k views
-
- 13 replies
- 5.4k views
-
- 511 replies
- 175k views
-
Anyone with a Panasonic S5 II or S9 interested in testing my in-cam ARRI compatible LOG C3 profile? 1 2
- 35 replies
- 16.4k views
-
- 9 replies
- 2.1k views
-
- 29 replies
- 8k views
-
- 83 replies
- 28.2k views
-
- 1 reply
- 1.2k views
-
- 8 replies
- 4.7k views
-
- 8 replies
- 3.4k views
-
- 429 replies
- 132k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.1k
-
Total Posts348.7k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
Well I have only had the chance to test the official Arri Log vs Phantom's version (that I have been using for the last 2 seasons) and can't beat what I already have. Been through a load of the official Arri conversion LUT's and all of mine, bought or created and IMO, Phantom beats them all. So either I am doing something wrong or the Phantom LUT is pretty bloody good! As the saying goes, "if it ain't broke..." And I'm too busy to explore further so all I can say is LUMIX users, try Phantom LUT's if intensive colour grading is not your thing! -
By Robert Patts · Posted
Jump Desktop Connect is my app of choice for remote editing. -
I brought these images into Resolve and had a play, as well as some others I shot but haven't posted. It seems that the squeeze factor might be slightly more than 1.25x in some shots. I de-squeezed by just scaling around 0.75-0.8 vertically, and scaled the shots in post to match framing and got 1.388 on one and 1.276 on another. So even applying a large pinch of salt as it wasn't locked off, the squeeze factor seems to be variable. I wonder if this is distance related as perhaps the adapter moves the lens plane forward so that optically the position the camera sees from is moved forward a touch, as this would explain why the squeeze factor seemed to be more than advertised. It seems it's also a skill to get it rotated exactly vertically (although the adapter itself is easy to use in this regard). -
It certainly is, thanks for doing that. Much appreciated. -
I just remembered that the 17mm F1.4 has a strange filter thread size I don't have an adapter for, so I went with the Voigtlander 17.5mm instead, plus I also did the Voigtlander 42.5mm as well. I took stills on the GX85 so you can see the full sensor readout, and the SOOC images below are the actual images from the SD card and 7.9MB each so pixel pee to your hearts content if desired. I even remembered to set the taking lens to infinity and focus with the adapter! Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, no adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 17.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, de-squeezed (0.8x vertical size adjustment): Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, no adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, SOOC: Voigtlander 42.5mm at F2.8, with Sirui 1.25x adapter, de-squeezed (0.8x vertical size adjustment): Hopefully that's useful. I took a shot of something round last week and pulled it into Resolve and rotated it 90 degrees and lined it up at 50% opacity to test the squeeze factor, which turned out to be just under 1.25x, but I suspect this might change depending on the focus distance. I don't know if it might also change with the taking lens, but I'm probably not going to do extensive testing on all my lenses. Also, for my purposes, it's meant to be a controlled degradation so nailing the squeeze factor for all focus distances isn't a high priority. Let me know if you want any other tests, some of these are pretty quick to do.
-
