Jump to content

Subforums

  1. The EOSHD YouTube Channel   (23,422 visits to this link)

    Follow Andrew Reid on YouTube

17,297 topics in this forum

    • 1.2k replies
    • 471.6k views
  1. Lenses 1 2 3 4 289

    • 5.8k replies
    • 1.9m views
    • 9.1k replies
    • 2.7m views
    • 0 replies
    • 1.7k views
    • 700 replies
    • 311.2k views
  2. Panasonic GH6 1 2 3 4 88

    • 1.8k replies
    • 764.9k views
    • 5 replies
    • 101 views
    • 19 replies
    • 351 views
    • 40 replies
    • 1.9k views
    • 19 replies
    • 12.7k views
    • 563 replies
    • 264.8k views
    • 4 replies
    • 3.1k views
  3. new camera purchase 1 2 3 4 5

    • 97 replies
    • 77k views
    • 24 replies
    • 1.5k views
    • 9 replies
    • 1.2k views
    • 11 replies
    • 1.5k views
    • 1 reply
    • 419 views
    • 14 replies
    • 8.7k views
    • 58 replies
    • 5.3k views
    • 49 replies
    • 3.5k views
    • 14 replies
    • 7.3k views
    • 2 replies
    • 339 views
    • 0 replies
    • 317 views
    • 11 replies
    • 2k views
    • 20 replies
    • 1.7k views
  4. Blazar anamorphics

    • 2 replies
    • 2.6k views
    • 82 replies
    • 9k views
  5. DJI Pocket 3? 1 2 3 4 7

    • 127 replies
    • 62.2k views
    • 121 replies
    • 66.1k views
    • 0 replies
    • 476 views
    • 0 replies
    • 545 views
    • 0 replies
    • 542 views
    • 5 replies
    • 1k views
    • 314 replies
    • 151.6k views
  6. Documentarians?

    • 12 replies
    • 6k views
    • 30 replies
    • 34.2k views
    • 1 reply
    • 514 views
    • 8 replies
    • 13.8k views
  7. Music you love... 1 2 3

    • 45 replies
    • 13.4k views
    • 13 replies
    • 984 views
  • Popular Contributors

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      17.3k
    • Total Posts
      351.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      34,682
    • Most Online
      19,591

    Newest Member
    FormalDressShops
    Joined
  • Posts

    • I think @kye’s point still stands, and maybe it becomes even clearer once you move away from the usual zooms vs primes argument. It always comes down to how much convenience a zoom actually buys you, especially when time becomes critical. On a controlled set, changing lenses can break rhythm, slow down the crew, cost minutes, and sometimes cost the shot. In uncontrolled environments, it can be even more decisive, because you may simply not have the time, the space, or the chance to change lenses before the moment is gone. So yes, a zoom can solve a very practical problem: time, reaction and continuity. That should not be underestimated. If the situation is changing in front of you, the practical convenience of a zoom can become creatively important too. But I don’t think this cancels the OP’s deeper point. There is also another kind of convenience in truly understanding a given focal length. It teaches you where to stand, how close to be, how to move, how much space to leave, and how the scene changes once your own position changes. A zoom may save the moment, but understanding focal lengths changes how you read the moment in the first place. And this is also why I have never had any patience for the 2x, 3x, 5x terminology. I always prefer the actual focal length value, because that tells me something real about the relationship between camera, subject and space. “2x” may be convenient marketing language, but “35mm”, “50mm” or “85mm” immediately tells you much more about how the image is likely to feel and how you may need to position yourself. Leonel Vieira is a good recent example of this. This June, while shooting the making-of on A NOITE, I was close to that very particular relationship he has with focal lengths, especially his liking for 75mm and 100mm lenses, focal lengths he has often favoured and used there. That is not just a technical preference. It affects distance, performance, compression, the way actors are observed, and the emotional space between camera and subject. With those lenses, the focal length becomes part of the staging itself, not just a number attached to the lens.
    • Exactly. What you call availablism is central here. But with Wong Kar-wai it never feels merely opportunistic. The available does not remain simply available. It becomes emotional architecture. Pre-handover Hong Kong gave him the lights, the colours, the cramped spaces, the corridors, the streets, the reflections and the limitations. But the art is in turning those given elements into mood, memory and desire. That is the difference between just using a location and allowing the location to become part of the film’s inner life. In that sense, the uncontrolled city is not only a background. It becomes a collaborator. Wong Kar-wai does not simply take what is there. He finds what is hidden inside what is there.
    • The gyro control itself is not new, correct. But I don’t think the interesting part here is simply that “gyro control exists”. Of course it does. Larger gimbals, phone apps, remote monitors and systems such as the Ronin 4D have already explored that territory. The question for me is not whether the underlying idea existed before, but whether it becomes useful in a different way once the whole system becomes small enough, fast enough, integrated enough and unobtrusive enough. Many ideas in cinema technology existed before they became truly useful. Stabilised camera movement existed before Steadicam became the right combination of body, balance, operation and image. Small cameras existed before 16mm, and later DV, changed the way filmmakers could move through reality. Remote operation existed before it became practical in the hands of a one or two-person crew. So yes, if we reduce this to “a gyro controlling a gimbal”, then it may sound like nothing new. But if we look at it as a pocket-sized 1-inch 10-bit Log gimbal camera, with several focal lengths, proper monitoring, autonomous operation and a dedicated head-tracking accessory, then the proposition changes. It is not only the control method. It is the form factor plus the image pipeline plus the operating mode. A phone strapped to your head controlling a larger gimbal is one thing. A compact dedicated device that can sit inside a BTS, documentary or walk-around setup, become boring after a while, and follow intention without the operator constantly raising, aiming and correcting the camera is another thing. That is where I think the usefulness may appear. Not necessarily for everyone. Not necessarily for controlled narrative setups. And probably not as a replacement for a skilled operator with a proper camera package. But for small crews, making-of work, observational documentary, rehearsals, production diaries, street work and situations where the act of operating the camera visibly changes the behaviour of the people being filmed, I can absolutely see the value. In that sense, I don’t see it as revolutionary because gyro control is new. I see it as potentially revolutionary because a previously awkward idea may finally be arriving in a form factor where it can become natural, invisible and operationally useful.
    • "Cinema" over the last 130 years would strongly beg to differ in terms of the size of the imaging sensor used.  😉 This one is a best seller, presumably, because it was just recently announced and it's still in preorder state (with a free PL adapter!).  I'm tracking it, though, as it's in the "less squeeze, but with oval aperture" that I find somewhat interesting, as shooting true 2x anamorphic feels generally unwieldy. I'll point out that even in a distortion-free 28mm lens, shooting a close-up tends to be unflattering due to perspective.  The reason longer focal lengths tend to be seen as more flattering is because the relative distance from the nearest part of the face (probably the nose) and the rest of the face (especially the eyes) is much larger.  If I am standing 12" from a subject with a nose 1" long, the nose will seem much larger in comparison than if I am standing 48-72" from the same subject.  This can be observed simply by holding the hand about 11" from the face and moving it back 1".  The difference in size is noticeable - and it is for the nose in a portrait as well. There's an additional part of this which will get you chased out of a number of forums for heresy - if you are shooting at sufficiently high resolution, you can take a couple of steps back with your 28mm lens and then just digitally reframe/zoom in on the subject and get functionally the same result as putting on a slightly longer lens at the same aperture value (give or take variances in lens character, etc).  If you're shooting at 8K to deliver in 4K, it can be a pretty big couple of steps.  This is basically turning a prime lens into a zoom lens. This sort of thing is specifically why I love having a 180mm macro lens - it lets me do extrame c-u of an actor's eye or eyes without getting the entire camera package right up in their grill.  No matte box, though.  I ain't professional enough to use a matte box. Controlled sets can also be places where using a Zoom lens becomes more attractive, as swapping lenses can take 3-5 minutes. - Detach FF gears - Remove support - Unmount first lens - Mount second lens - Attach support - Attach FF gears - If using electronic FF, run calibration - Potentially, if on a fancier set than I'm usually on, inform whoever is doing script notes of the change If shooting under any sort of time constraints, everybody will start to hate you after a little while if doing this frequently. This sort of thing is why I've begun using a Canon C80 with autofocus stills lenses for timed film competitions.  I did one with the RF 24-105/2.8 on loan from CPS (worked great, beautiful lens, maybe someday when the price is more reasonable, I'll buy one) and another with my own 24-70/2.8L II and 24-70/4L IS and swapped in the 85/1.4L IS for some close-ups and the 180/3.5L for some extreme close-ups.  It's been working really, really well.  On the last set, when someone got annoyed that I was swapping lenses again for some reason, they timed me - total time for a lens swap was about 1 minute 15 seconds (no lens supports, no FF gears).
    • For me, I'm still not seeing that as especially useful or revolutionary. It's been possible for a long time, probably 10+ years, to do gyro control of larger gimbals (usually through the phone app, but I think I had or saw at least one with an external gyroscope controller in the past).  It never took off much and I never saw anybody strap a phone to their head to remotely control their gimbal.  I'm not sure if gyro controls are in DJI MIMO, but if they are, it's already basically possible with the Pocket 3. I've found gyro control to be somewhat useful with the Ronin 4D (including with the flex unit).  On one shoot, I was getting too tired to carry the camera anymore so the grips started carrying it around while I controlled the frame from the gyro on the high bright remote monitor.  It worked...  OK.  It'd be better if we'd practiced it beforehand, probably.  For me, it's more "parlor trick" than "genuinely useful tool" in most cases.
×
×
  • Create New...