Subforums
16,726 topics in this forum
-
- 5.7k replies
- 1.2m views
-
- 1.7k replies
- 348.1k views
-
- 0 replies
- 7k views
-
- 1k replies
- 123.6k views
-
- 60 replies
- 989 views
-
- 8 replies
- 98 views
-
- 329 replies
- 72.6k views
-
- 443 replies
- 31.3k views
-
- 39 replies
- 6k views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 17 replies
- 383 views
-
- 40 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 3 replies
- 443 views
-
- 0 replies
- 84 views
-
- 235 replies
- 15.1k views
-
- 52 replies
- 2.3k views
-
- 1 reply
- 175 views
-
- 13 replies
- 2.7k views
-
- 53 replies
- 4.4k views
-
- 17 replies
- 1.9k views
-
- 30 replies
- 1.5k views
-
- 16 replies
- 2.2k views
-
- 18 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 10 replies
- 906 views
-
- 78 replies
- 13.5k views
-
- 17 replies
- 5k views
-
- 19 replies
- 2.5k views
-
- 12 replies
- 1.3k views
-
- 473 replies
- 124k views
-
- 55 replies
- 9.5k views
-
- 2 replies
- 471 views
-
- 0 replies
- 185 views
-
- 19 replies
- 890 views
-
- 10 replies
- 996 views
-
- 0 replies
- 305 views
-
- 23 replies
- 4.5k views
-
- 13 replies
- 6.1k views
-
- 216 replies
- 23.9k views
-
- 8 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 36 replies
- 4.3k views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics16.7k
-
Total Posts338k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
What situations do you need that level of stabilisation for? In terms of stabilisation, MILCs really have a long way to go (but a lot of potential!) compared to the crazy level of stabilisation that GoPro etc showed was possible. Obviously there are many factors involved, but there's no reason we couldn't get very good stabilisation from MILCs. One thing I do see, however, is that it's possible to have too much stabilisation if the camera is moving in 3D space, because if you stabilise too hard then you get that gimbal effect where the camera is locked onto a direction but is floating around in space like a drone trying to hover. If the stabilisation isn't quite as good and leaves a little shake in the frame then the floating blends in with the shaking and it just looks like hand-holding and doesn't look so odd. -
Instead, people respond to posts that weren't written and proselytize and talk down. It's pretty pathetic. -
Literally a non-controversial, non-trolling, basic question that you can partake in politely or not.
-
Not really, I've asked basic questions for discussion purposes but the elitism and condescension as your post demonstrates is strong here - i'd rather just find a place with more amateur enthusiasts rather than certain folks who think highly of themselves
-
What software are you grading in? and what's your pipeline? I'm in Resolve, so tend to use Colour Space Transforms, which gives a whole other way to look at things because everything is on the table... the ARRI LUTs, Print Film Emulations, etc etc. Lots of discussions about equipment occur here, but it's basically impossible to discuss cameras without doing it in the context that they're for a particular thing. Otherwise you could be talking about how the GH1 is better than the Z8 because it makes a better paperweight, or how an AE-1 is the best camera ever because when you mount it on a pole in your cornfield the sun glints off the mirror and keeps the crows away. Without context there is no basis to discuss anything.
-
