Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 07/20/2017 in all areas

  1. 16 likes
    Wrote up a little guide for people new to this and looking to buy their first recorder. And is the way I see the world of low budget recorders is they're ranked like this (starting from worst/cheapest to best/expensive): Tascam DR22WL / Zoom H1 (I'd suggest skipping right over this tier of recorders! But hey, my first ever short film I did years ago was with a chinese shotgun running straight into a Zoom H1!! :-o Shocking but true... everyone starts somewhere!) Tascam DR60D mk2 (the DR60D mk1, before the mk2 came out, is what I myself started out using for no budget shorts as a budding location sound recordist) Tascam DR70D (the *minimum* I'd recommend for a location sound recordist, even if you're just a student / no budget guy. Although in desperate cases, you could scrape by with getting the DR60Dmk2, but doing the opposite and stretching for an F4 is very worthwhile. Certainly, I could travel back in time I'd just have gone straight for the Zoom F4 from the starts! *Except* the F4 didn't come out until a few years later... you live in a very lucky time with so many wonderful options to choose from!) or Tascam DR680 (these can be found at bargain prices secondhand, which is what I did before I then later on purchased a Zoom F4 once that came out & I spotted an F4 at a good price) Zoom F4 / Zoom F8 / Sound Devices MixPre6 (I skip right over the MixPre3, as the MixPre6 is very similar yet does so so much more at only a relatively small extra cost. Also I regard the three of F4/F8/MixPre6 as all on broadly the same level to each other, just varying slightly from each other in one area or another that ones might have a small lead over the other one. This is the tier where I'd see you're now reaching the semi-pro level) Sound Devices 633 / Zaxcom Maxx / Sanosax SX-R4+ (finally you have now got up to the "industry standard" when it comes to recorders people use for small shoots, especially when mixing from the bag. If you're doing this full time as your job or hiring someone who is, then likely this is what is being used. Either that or similar gear, or even something better above this) And if you considering ones priced above those last three.... you're surely doing this full time as a sound recordist and getting a healthy income from that, so why are you asking us here on Frugal Filmmaker? ha! :-P But yes, tonnes and tonnes more options exist at the higher end as well! Finally, if you're considering something in the budget range within what I just covered, but isn't one of those that I mentioned, then it probably is *not* a good idea to buy if you're intending to be a location sound recordist. Something else only might *maybe* make sense if you've got in mind some other purpose for it, such as perhaps you want to record a band in a studio (which has very different needs / constraints), or you're the rare exception which proves the rule, or you are getting lucky finding some amazingly priced deal which can make an otherwise bad purchase decision then make sense if "the price is right". For instance I didn't include the Roland R88, as I feel it is extremely poor value for money in 2017! However.... there was a time at the end of 2016 when the Roland R88 got a huge price drop because it was being discontinued. Even with that massive price drop, the Roland R88 probably still wasn't a smart purchase vs the Zoom F8, but the big drop in price at least made the R88 a somewhat competitive option worth mentioning in a round up of all the various choices. However, that sale is now long since ended, and the prices I see on eBay for a Roland R88 is even higher than what you used to be able to buy it new from B&H Photo! Clearly those eBay sellers are dreaming. Anyway, that was just one example which might have been applicable but isn't now, so I don't rule out the possibilities of something like that perhaps popping up again in the future especially if you very keenly look around for secondhand deals. But for over 95% of people reading this, that won't be applicable, and just stick to going with one of the main ones I mentioned earlier. http://ironfilm.co.nz/which-sound-recorder-to-buy-a-guide-to-various-indie-priced-sound-recorders-in-2017/
  2. 13 likes
    Clearly, the M31 LUT. It will go down in media history books of the 2010s as a similar abomination of taste as, say, this was the abomination of 1980s video making taste: Oh yeah, to go back to 2010s bad taste, also add - f0.95 Bokeh (where a person's eyes are in focus but the nose is blurred-out); - pointless anamorphic flares; - pointless slider shots; - fake light leak transitions; - people shooting flowers in their backyard in macro shots; - Hans Zimmer symphonic movie scores copied and pasted on the macro shots of the backyard flowers. - 1 minute opening credits for 3 minute YouTube videos that otherwise consists of slider shots of backyard flowers shot with f0.95, anamorphic Bokeh & flares with fake light leak transitions - with everything being graded with the M31 LUT and a lifted Hans Zimmer movie score as the soundtrack.
  3. 11 likes
    It has amazing dynamic range even in Rec.709. It has remarkably low rolling shutter compared to Sony. The 10bit files are amazing in low light with lots of 'depth' and richness to the shadows. It helps that it's so good in low light anyway with very clean ISO 3200. Tons of features, I will write a guide about it but it will take a while. Review coming soon, I know it's been ages but I will get round to it!
  4. 9 likes
    I shot another video with the GH5 and SLR Magic 50mm 2x anamorphic prime. Calling it Chicago II. Here is one frame that is my favorite.
  5. 9 likes
    Schneider ES Cinelux 2x (Custom single focus) | Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm F:1.8 | Sony a6300 Some shots with varyND. Early test, needed to learh how to achieve best result with this setup DIY-body... and few stills at Helios 44-2 F:2 and... ...Carl Zeiss Jena Pancolar 50mm F:1.8
  6. 8 likes
    I decided to shoot a short sequel to my GH4 VLog video "Chicago." Recorded internal at 8 bit on the GH5. Handheld with IBIS. V Log L.
  7. 8 likes
    Required viewing for anyone interested in the subject: Steve Yedlin, DoP of among others "Brick", "Looper" and "Star Wars: The Last Yedi", debunks the myth that more camera pixels equal higher perceivable resolution, with test footage he shot with 35mm & 65mm Alexa, RED, 35mm & IMAX film. Using Nuke, he also demonstrates how the imaging pipeline is a comparatively underrated factor for perceived resolution: http://yedlin.net/ResDemo/ (Best download the two videos and watch them, without scaling, in 1:1 pixel resolution in an external video player - from beginning to end, the full 1 hours and 15 minutes with all slow-paced, detailed explanations.)
  8. 8 likes
    Just shot an ad for a bank using the GH5 and SLR 2x anamorphic 50mm prime. This is pretty much my go-to combo right now outside of the Ursa + Sigma Cines.
  9. 7 likes
    Dude I went full non ai nikkor and I am in love. I sold the 35mm f1.4 ais for the 35mm f2 non ai and I like the rendering a little better...less field curvature but with that 3D pop. The 50mm f2 non ai came in the mail today and the rendering looks way better than the 50mm f1.4 non ai and 50mm 1.8 ais I had. this is with the pana g80 speedbooster xl & 85mm f1.8 non ai & the last shot is the 35mm f2
  10. 7 likes
    Its a bit mind boggling to consider the sort of fanboy cult an alliance between RED and Apple could potentially produce. Its going to be like the moonies merging with the scientologists. Via USB-C
  11. 7 likes
    I decided that poring over the list of what cameras I could use for a Netflix film was distracting me from my other concerns such as what amp Paul McCartney would prefer me to use on his next album and the approved list of colognes to wear on a date with Sofia Vergara.
  12. 6 likes
    Sometimes we need to enhance the detail of a shot: a very soft lens, slightly out of focus, slow motion, post cropping (for story/emotion or after stabilization), and so on. Most are familiar with the sharpen effect and the unsharp masking effect. We can combine both effects, as well as use unsharp masking to create a local contrast enhancement effect as well. Canon 1DX II and Canon 50mm 1.4 at 1.4, 1080p (Filmic Skin picture style): Multi-spectral Detail Enhancement (let's call it MSDE, based on the physics of Acutance) Fine noise grain: adds texture and increases perception of detail (Noise effect: 2%, color, not clipped) High frequency sharpening: in PP CC this is called Sharpen (as a standalone effect) or via Lumetri/Creative/Sharpen (as used here: 93.4) Mid frequency sharpening: Unsharp masking effect with amount 41 and a radius of 5 Low frequency sharpening (Local Contrast Enhancement or LCE): Unsharp masking effect with amount 50 and a radius of 300 While this may be a bit too sharp/detailed for some, it illustrates MSDE, and one can add detail to taste using this technique. Note we didn't use a contrast effect or curves to achieve this look. MSDE can also be use to improve HD to 4K upscales: apply after upscaling. Also a great way to use Canon's soft-ish 1080p along with DPAF (since it's not currently available in any other cameras on the market). The GH5 is the new kid on the block with excellent detail, however Canon still looks more filmic to me and has excellent AF Someday Adobe will GPU accelerate their Unsharp Mask effect (it's a trivially easy effect to code too!), so this can easily run in real-time while editing.
  13. 6 likes
    If you're in a green screen studio, it's perfectly fine. On green screen shoots whatever isn't the person you're filming is cut out anyway, so as long as you put the footage in a 16x9 sequence not a 9x16 you're golden. Only you will know how it was filmed vertical. I'd say go for it, you'll have more flexibility in post too
  14. 6 likes
    believe me i know. I've been doing exactly that for years. i understand the advantages and disadvantages. full frame is fun and I enjoy shooting in it, but in this case, I *want* a super35 (1.5x) sensor digital cinema camera to shoot films with. I want that because that's the standard I'm used to for motion pictures. besides, I don't like using a focal reducer with my vintage lenses because they exacerbate blooming, CA, and soft corners for apertures wider than f/2.8, which negates the advantage of the metabones' extra stop, or more. fortunately, I won't need that extra stop with a native 2500 ISO (providing it's just as clean as 800 which we have yet to see from the EVA1). and last, I have the 5D3/MLRAW option for when I want the full frame look (which I'm also a fan of for the right project). side note: I used to own a good bit of MFT lenses when I was an AF100 and then GH4 owner. always found them a little too small to operate with my big bear paws. the contax zeiss I'm using now look f***ing amazing and suit me better. I appreciate what your saying. just offering a different pov. yes, two actually. and the latest is finally getting a release date for late this year or early next. in talks now with the distributor.
  15. 6 likes
    I've had this kit for nearly a year now, so it's time to review it. Thought I'd share a mini review from some notes I've written down. Intro I've been mostly a Sony shooter since 2012 when the FS700 came out. Got the FS5 as an A-cam all rounder, and soon updated it with the raw update and Inferno. Mostly shoot in Slog2 alongside other Sony alphas like the A6500 and A7SII. Best Bits Electronic ND!! Nice ergonomics. Lots of HFR options. Internal XAVC-L HD holds up really well. Really nice monitor (Inferno) - easy to use and quality screen. Continuous slow motion is useful for longer scenes. 4k 100fps - looks great! Raw images look very thick and tasty. Worst Bits Menus are complicated. Internal 4k is nothing to shout about. White Balance, especially in Slog, never looks right (Colour can either be too cool or greenish yellow. ) Often difficult to grade images (but can get great results). Inferno monitor battery life is very poor. Camera is heavier, bigger and harder to use with the Inferno. Continuous slow motion is very noisy. Raw to ProRes 4k is only incrementally better than the Internal XAVC-L HD. EVF viewfinder seems a bit too small. Perspective The idea behind FS-RAW and the external recorder is very attractive, however some users may end up being disappointed with the experience. This is a very stable and reliable camera setup, however if you like to move fast and have a lot of freedom with your tools, this is likely not the right setup for you. To use the FS-RAW update is expensive, and I've found that if you don't plan to shoot RAW but ProRes instead - the difference isn't worth the extra money. It might be to some for special purposes, however I didn't feel the benefit enough. The A6500 beats the FS5 raw to ProRes ProRes image in 4k. Not so much in 1080p. A lot of us think that the more lucrative the setup, the better our images will be. It's definitely possible. But as our smaller, cheaper camera have limitations - the bigger boys also come with significant limitations too. You need more crew, more hard drives, more muscles, bigger tripods, bigger gimbals, bigger sliders, bigger batteries, and a much bigger wallet. If you're thinking of "upgrading" from your mirrorless, be prepared for a much different experience. For me, I do find purpose in using this setup. For some shoots, there's not a better option. But for the majority - being more compact is definitely more favoured. Here's a video I produced on the FS5 with the Inferno:
  16. 6 likes
    I didn't read your post because its was to long and probably just useless insults. But to the rest, here meanwhile is actually showing and proving exactly my point in the first post. He haven't even read the article from Reuters that writes about a successful outcome for an investor in a profitable company. Instead he goes by NOFS click bait fake news headline that was first started by a hatemonger/blogger that nows squat about pretty much anything. So what we have is a chain where everyone only reads and takes in the fake sidetrack story while at the same time believing that what they say originated from the original source. And we all know this is a global problem in actual news as well. People want to believe the fake version of things rather than reality. We see it in politics, war, you name it. And it is a problem.
  17. 6 likes
    That thing looks like it will vacuum your house and carry a toddler through Disney World. Cool find though.
  18. 6 likes
    I know of one or two DPs who own expensive kits like that. Reds or Alexas. It worked for them, they got work from bundling the camera in with the deal, and they gradually paid the camera off. But the majority of people I know who are working consistently and supporting themselves well don't own any camera except something like a t2i for personal use. Partially because different cameras are better for different shoots, mostly because they're getting hired for their ability and not their gear. Yes, if you're being hired mostly for bundling a cheap rental then that cheap rental will open doors to you... but only with bad shitty clients. So yeah, it will open doors for sure... imo, the wrong ones. Most commercial sets cost $250k/day. Lower end shoots still cost five figures a day. Is saving a few hundred dollars on a camera rental really that important to anyone but the most miserly client? Is the most miserly client the one you want? There is a middle ground of C300 and FS7 ops who work as wet hires for lower rates ($600-$800/day wet hire, maybe a lot more but that seems to be the agreed upon low end) and seem to do REALLY well because they get tons of work for mostly documentary style stuff, tv and web. Usually they can pay off their small camera ($20k investment rather than $200k investment) in the first six months while still making money and after that it's just gravy. Talent helps there but all you need to be able to do is operate competently and reliably. But when it comes to Alexas and Epics... I rarely see owner/ops unless they own their own production company or are independently wealthy or just crazy ambitious. The cost of the crew to support those cameras is thousands of dollars a day, anyway, so most cheap professional clients don't want the hassle. A lot of student films do, though, and if you're in a city with a lot of film schools you can do okay just with that since you can recruit a free crew of film students and still ask a decent rate for yourself. In my experience the most important thing is who you know. You want to know people who are looking for DPs. You also have to be able to do the job reliably. That's about it. I've witnessed a number of DP hiring decisions and it's usually just who's easiest to work with. What camera someone owns almost never matters at all. Having a good reel of course is very helpful. Edit: for narrative specifically I can see having a higher end camera being a strong selling point. For breaking into indie films (where rates are low but passion is high) having a good camera could be a significant factor.
  19. 6 likes
    I skipped on getting the voigtlander glass and went with some non ai nikkor glass on the metabones speedbooster xl 😍
  20. 6 likes
    Red is red, green is green, and blue is blue... but only before they hit the sensor. The color filters on bayer filter arrays are not all alike. They've changed dramatically even in recent years and vary substantially brand-to-brand even now. The original 5D had thicker color filters (in what were also quite different colors) than the current Canon line up does, and many users perceived richer colors from the original 5D on a per-pixel basis when compared with contemporary cameras as a result... at the cost of lower resolution and a worse SNR ratio (worse dynamic range). When I shot film, I remember that Velvia had the narrowest spectral sensitivity curves per layer, and also the best color resolution and perceived saturation subjectively. This stuff varied a lot stock-to-stock. Reversal and color negative looked totally different. Some stocks had better resolution. Some better colors. Some finer grain. Some different white balances. Some were black and white. Some infrared-sensitive. If the sensor doesn't matter and only the math thereafter does, why do different film stocks look so different from each other? Like today's CCD and CMOS sensors, film stocks are just analogue light-sensitive RGB sensors. I can't being to understand the argument that every sensor is entirely the same. It's so easily proved false. Let's go easy on you and forget the big differences between micro-lenses and anti-alasiing filters, which are of course baked in at the RAW level (Red itself has many different low pass filters for the Dragon, each with its own ISO rating and color profile and overall look) and even between Foveon vs. Bayer vs. film vs CCD vs CMOS. Let's stick to just CMOS sensors. Why do the Red, the Red MX, the Dragon, and the Helium, all vary so dramatically in look and technical quality and each requires dramatically different math to produce a raster image if their sensors are all the same? DXOMark has its share of issues, but it's certainly not without reason that they give different sensors different scores in different categories... based not on images, but on RAW sensor output alone. Sure, the internal math and calculations that each camera's JPEG engine or each PC's RAW developer provides helps equalize the image toward a common goal of looking accurate and looking good. But the sensor output varies tremendously camera-to-camera before any code tackles it. Before the ADC even quantizes it, and the ADC is another factor in RAW. Arguably, the RAW data varies more on a per-camera basis than the resultant RGB image does. I'm not a scientist (liberal arts major here, but an inquisitive one) so I'll leave the science to you. But science requires a control group and a variable group and adherence to the scientific method. We don't have access to RAW data (well, maybe with DXOMark, but they haven't rated most video cameras and so far as I know can't read Canon's RAW lite codec) before some level of sensor-specific code turns it into a raster image... so there's no way to even create a reliable control group in camera RAW comparisons because we can't access the RAW data until variable code turns it into an image. So until I read "scientific" proof from you that sensor quality is irrelevant–and I look forward to that news because I can return my current generation dSLR and move back to my Rebel XT without any penalty–I'm going to stick with what I trust most, my eyes. And reason. I encourage others to do the same.
  21. 5 likes
    Just an update on this issue: "Under the terms of the decree, the Manhattan photo, video, audio, and digital imaging retailer has agreed to pay $3,220,000 in back wages and other monetary relief to more than 1,300 affected class members. B&H also agreed to hire a workplace consultant to help correct its employment practices and workplace conduct at its Brooklyn Navy Yard warehouse, as well as its future warehouse in Florence, New Jersey. The company also agreed to provide its managers with annual training on equal opportunity principles and prevention of workplace harassment." https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/ofccp/ofccp20170814 And here is a commentary from a former B&H employee: http://www.thephoblographer.com/2017/08/16/bh-photo-pay-3-2-million-discrimination-lawsuit/
  22. 5 likes
  23. 5 likes
    I recently decided to find out which of the current 1080/120fps capable cameras does it the best. Read the full article
  24. 5 likes
    Yeah, no problem! This is a 30 second teaser. We're saving the actual trailer for much closer to the release date. This film was shot on a GH4, by the way.
  25. 5 likes
    Heres a few lenses tested in stills mode - The Sony Zeiss 55 1.8 is sharp as - where as the Minolta MC 58 1.2 is loose and funky as hell. I need to get the Novoflex Minolta adaptor to iron out some of the issues - most of the funk lies at 1.2 - stopping it down reduces the life out of it - I think at F2 a happy medium can be struck although you loose those blacks which have that nice veiling flare.
  26. 5 likes
    When the NX1 came out Philip Bloom bought it but didn't use it very much as he said the dynamic range was limited. I thought it was a bit limited too, turns out we were both wrong... Here is the effect of Fast Colour Corrector in Premiere changing output levels to 16-235 for NX1 clips recorded in 0-255 RGB range mode. Original file - blown out clouds... And here is an additional 1-2 stops in the highlights from enabling Smart Range + in-camera - I'd put this camera right up there for image quality now... Right near the top of the pile. Both sample images shot with the superb NXL adapter by the way with Canon 50mm F1.2L full frame FOV and DOF. Thanks Luca
  27. 5 likes
    Your best options will be: Foto Meyer - http://www.fotomeyer.de Leistenschneider - https://www.foto-leistenschneider.de/foto/de/wir/filialen/ Calumet - https://www.calumetphoto.de/store/berlin ...and for pro video equipment, Teltec - https://www.teltec.de Best call them in advance. - The big consumer electronic stores Mediamarkt and Saturn (with branches all over the city) might have knock-off batteries, but maybe not for these two camera models. You can check on their websites: http://www.mediamarkt.de http://www.saturn.de (Saturn and Mediamarkt are the same company, so prices are unlikely to differ.) Postscript: Made a quick check for you - none of the photographic stores have the Panasonic battery on stock. But Teltec has this very good third-party battery (Patona is a very trusted third-party battery brand in Germany): https://www.teltec.de/patona-premium-akku-blf19.html?listtype=search&searchparam=BLF19 And the Saturn branch at Europacenter (near Zoologischer Garten station) has a third-party battery for your X-Pro2 in stock: http://www.saturn.de/de/product/_hähnel-hl-f126-für-fuji-np-w126-1538411.html Calumet Berlin has third-party X-Pro2 batteries on stock as well: https://www.calumetphoto.de/product/GPI-Akku-NP-W126/GPINPW126?tracking=|searchterm:http://www.saturn.de/de/product/_hähnel-hl-f126-für-fuji-np-w126-1538411.html&tracking=|searchterm:http://www.saturn.de/de/product/_hähnel-hl-f126-für-fuji-np-w126-1538411.html The original Fuji battery is available at Foto Meyer: http://www.fotomeyer.de/fujifilm-np-w126s-li-ion-akku-67707.html
  28. 5 likes
    Apparently this thread is a place to call out a well liked member for his use of non-PC terms from South Park!! Maybe I should rename EOSHD to No Jokes School.
  29. 5 likes
    "Meanwhile" leave it out. This isn't the place to be language police. It's a place to talk about the subject raised in the top post!
  30. 5 likes
    No, that's not what it's for. Usually on shoots we don't have much time to eat, so what you do is dangle some sausages in front of your mouth so you stay fed. If you're a veggie, you can use carrots instead. Also, the bit at the back is actually a mini microwave, so you can heat up some cofffee for your assistant.
  31. 5 likes
    The way the contrast detect based AF on the GH5 works is by cranking the sensor to frame rates of 240fps, maybe even higher, and very CPU intensive analysing of bokeh and depth of field (DFD mode). So you can't expect AF to be as fast at 24p in video mode as it is in stills mode. What Panasonic need to do is get Dual Pixel AF technology on the sensor. It is the only reliable way of doing good AF for filmmakers. The phase-detect A6500 route is a dead-end, it's just not bomb proof enough. It hardly ever tracks reliably, especially in low light. Meanwhile good old manual focus has resulted in many classic films, so I suggest we stop being so lazy and use that instead
  32. 5 likes
    arriscope are movie lens iscorama is not arriflex and zeiss where pretty crap at anamorphics for years zeiss used moller for making anamorphic projection optics arrii used a famous super talented designer from denmark jan jacobson for ultrascope system using fast zeiss optics ultrascope where designed as movie optics later arri used a couple of folks from zeiss and isco for the arriscope arri is a massive rental house and maker of millions of metal parts plus thousands of cameras they had to work faster than say leica or zeiss. a movie might be starting in 6 months 10 months sometimes 3 months so they had to cut corners because of time issues isco understand bent glass many issues where engineering related but like the todays crummy iomo systems modern rebuilds can transform everything the arri isco glass is designed movie glass vintage used on many cinema releases iscorama maybe amazing and unmatched even today in the sub 10 thousand dollar realm but is was never designed as a proper movie lens. it was used on movies like the battle of britain for crash cams and aerial work but kowa 8z was used on crash cameras on many movies in the 1980s even movies like rambo where he takes on the russians. better blowing up a kowa than a panavision,jdc or technovision 40 thousand dollar optic. iscorama was not used or improved for movie productions because the movie industry is a tight nit thing probably isco did not think to bribe the correct rabbi in hollyweird at this stage panavision dominated arriscope ultascope have expensive 1.4 or 1.7 movie optics inside which are worth money alone. you could use a proskar on a movie today it would not make it a movie lens. iscorama is such an abused term now every turd is iscorama vintage anamorphics suffer from imperfect engineering assemblies and even more so, bad strip down and reassembly over the years arri isco and zeiss the weak link will be arri engineering instead of leaving that to moller or isco arri built assembled themselves. arri camera engineering is superb but you cannot rush without losing something as i said arri had very little experience in anamorphot area even though they made test lens with zeiss isco in the 1950s always sub contract arriscope is rare ish as is ultrascope isco getting a little with all the hipsters dropping them on the floor some of the arriscope ended up in india then faded away rarely rebuilt the glass is good that is what matters. a man wanting an easy life will look for an iscorama or the cheaper options a man with spunk will grab some movie arri optics the new zeiss anamorphics are probably the bigeest leap forward in design since chretien as close to state of the art as it gets today vantage hawk are hiring out sets of fake vintage optics which is the opposite of what zeiss is doing hawk are building in the error from the past and charging serious big bucks for a rental zeiss arriscope is worth a lot more than iscorama i would think a little finger for iscorama a kidney for the arri
  33. 5 likes
    @Márcio Kabke Pinheiro cinelike d is fine in all situations with the GX85. Camera settings: sharpening -5, noise reduction -5, saturation -2. Use a white balance target wherever possible and WB using the camera's built-in custom white balance feature. Get yourself the Leeming LUT. There is no complicated post processing. Just drop the LUT on your footage and tweak.
  34. 5 likes
    * Bitrate of at least 240 Mbps (at 23.98/24 fps) recording So after the '400Mbps' firmware update, 4K 10-bit log GH5 should be good to go!
  35. 5 likes
    @gethin I'm not disagreeing at all with @Orangenz, but is it the GX85 that is holding you back from making that feature film or whatever it is you're working on? Because for two grand, you could get yourself a whole lot of gear: a nice motorized slider, a single handed brushless gimbal stabilizer, a decent microphone, and an HD monitor, as well as some LED lights - equipment that you could use for years to come and which will increase your production value far more than the latest and greatest camera, which you'll probably upgrade in a couple of years down the road anyhow. Out of curiosity, what are the issues you're having with grading footage from the camera you already own?
  36. 5 likes
    The Tascam DR-10CS/DR-10L is even smaller. It only records mono, but I like using it for lavs or shotgun mics which are mono anyway.
  37. 5 likes
    Yeah..... if you're using a Zoom H1, then you're not a production sound recordist. Which is the perspective I'm writing this from. (and from that perspective, *any* of those which I mentioned will make up a very small sized kit indeed! Size truly isn't a concern here, even the biggest and heaviest, the Zoom F8, is still a shockingly tiny sound recorder! Arguably it is too small) If you have a Zoom H1 then you're probably a solo videographer grabbing some ambiance (or using it as a "poor man's wireless lav" in the groom's coat pocket, as I often used my Zoom H1 with a cheap lav mic), or a musician, or a busy executive using it as a note taker, or a journalist, or any of a bunch of other uses than a production sound recordist (still, not a terrible thing to keep around in your bag for in a pinch. I often have a DR22WL or H1 tucked away in my bag). Sorry, again this is totally irrelevant just like the size question. As I'm not discussing microphones, but recorders. Tonnes of indie filmmakers (yes, even amateurs who have no intention about ever making a dime from this) might spend five thousand dollars on their camera kit (heck, just a 5D mk4 plus 2x f2.8 zooms will eat all that up & more! And that is before you count tripods/gimbals/lights/batteries/media/etc). So thus I'll be totally unapologetic in suggesting that just perhaps a person could spend half that on a super ultra basic sound kit? Although yes, if you're someone who has gone ultra low budget and is shooting with a secondhand Panasonic GH2 with some adapted old Nikon lenses, then sure I reckon have your boom op use a Tascam DR60D with Sennheiser ME66/K6 (with Rode WS6) and a Samson C02. That could be an appropriate matching budget level (well... sort of! You're likely still spend way less on sound than on the DoP's kit!), and is why I did mention the Tascam DR60D mk2 as an appropriate starting point for the very budget constrained. For sure, just like how there are still people out there doing little corporate videos with a Canon T2i. Doesn't mean we should be recommending that is a level to aspire to! No, I'm trying to showcase some of the better options (just like why in the camera side of things people talk about say the Panasonic G80 or the URSA Mini Pro, or any of the zillions of others out there!). Bringing a bit more balance back to the discussions :-) Rather than only the focus on cameras. As sound is half the film!
  38. 4 likes
    That place used to be cool. The comments on the page and their facebook have been so toxic lately that there imo is absolutely no point in having any sort of discussion there. There is not one single article, about anything that's not met with nothing but hate. It could be an article about world peace and everyone gets mad and want war. No moderation. At least the articles where decent imo. And then they started to slip, click bait, bad fact checking and so on. The latest example was the success story that Leica has gone so far into the green that the investor that holds a minority share of 45% is ready to make a return and become rich. Some bogus bloggers made up a story about it and that's what NOFS is reporting. Not the original content from a credible news agency. They are actually speculating that a bank selling a share with no money passing through Leica would "save" a very profitable an growing company... sigh. And that's just one example. Normally I don't get to upset but I actually liked NOFS. I thought it was a great blog. But lately.. I don't know. There still is alot good stuff and fascinating articles. Forums have been on a steady decline for a few years. The whole positive video movement is long dead imo. But there at least was the blogs and this forum is still on the up-n-up if you ask me. I don't really know what my point is, just venting. Lately I have accepted that its mostly just the "Ass-Burgers" left online (wrote a blog about that a year or so ago). The pros and artists are out shooting and the rest have moved on to other hobbies. This blog and forum I think is the only place where creativity and art can coexist with the charts people. But its a battle, I see the scene in 300 where they are pushing them out of the passage with their shields. Sorry for the rambling. Like I said, just venting. Stay strong
  39. 4 likes
    Hey guys, I wanted to share this rehousing mod I made recently for my Iscorama 36. It's a replacement for a front piece of old plastic housing, that is made of anodized aluminum and has cine gears, retaining 72mm front filter threads and adding just 50 grams of weight. It took me quite some time to figure out this design and I'm pretty proud of it! It solves some real-world problems like close-focus, enabling you to focus down to 1.1m, but unlike DIY mode it has a hard stop at 1.1m and infinity, and looks way nicer then a grub screw drilled into a hole. I made a little video explaining what it is, since after I posted this on facebook people started asking what it does and what are the specs, and asking how to buy one. https://www.dropbox.com/s/wd1w620ddxnv2je/proxiscope.pdf?dl=0 I have decided to order a small batch of these, and already placed an order at one of the shops that does the first stage of the milling. I will make another video showing a closeup process of swapping the housings, so people can evaluate the effort and see if the price (which will be announced at the same time) is right for them. This is intended as a do-it-at-home kind of mod, but you can also take it to the nearest photo technician and they'd be able to do it for you, it's a simple process that takes 3-5 minutes to perform. I also made a PDF with some specs, you can find it here. https://www.dropbox.com/s/wd1w620ddxnv2je/proxiscope.pdf?dl=0 If you're interested in getting one – shoot me a message and we'll figure it out, there's a little queue forming already
  40. 4 likes
  41. 4 likes
    I hate it when I'm watching a tutorial or how-to and the actual how-to part is behind several minutes of pointless blabbing. 8 min video for something that could be explained in 30 seconds or a paragraph. That's the bane of limitless capture.
  42. 4 likes
    Even if you do think it's over sharpened at -10 (I don't - it looks similar to a Canon JPEG on default sharpness and no photographers are rounding on Canon claiming their photos are 'over sharpened') then it is a rather easy problem to fix. Downscale to 2.8K then upscale to 4K again. And if you want to fix your shooting style to get a less 'sharp' result there are numerous techniques, easiest being - Black Mist Pro on the lens and softer light, more diffusion.
  43. 4 likes
    I've just picked one of these up and its a pretty nifty little thing. Basically its a series of locking bars that you can easily change to be anything from a selfie stick for Vlogging to a top handle to a shoulder mount or even a poor man's low mode stabiliser. As the joints lock in any angle its really flexible in being able to be shaped to what you need it for. Its really useful in the shoulder mount mode actually because you can make the angle of the piece that runs over your shoulder to be really tight so it hooks in firmly. Each piece also has 3 mounting holes so you can attach handles, mics, lights, monitors, cup holders or whatever else rig enthusiasts like to cram on there if thats your thing. Its light, versatile, folds down small enough to fit in a coat pocket and at £38 its not exactly going to break the bank. With something with IBIS like the GX80 I've got it with here, it gives some great additional stabilisation advantage and still keeps you stealth. https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Camera-Photo/Movo-SV1000-Aluminum-Combination-Stabilizer/B012Y7UVB4/ref=sr_1_19?ie=UTF8&qid=1498822792&sr=8-19-spons&keywords=movo&psc=1
  44. 4 likes
    I'd been scouring this godforsaken place for weeks, searching for a shoulder rig for my kitted out G85, when @Fritz Pierre suggested I check out an EasyRig. At B&H, the genuine article runs thousands, but you can find cheaper knockoffs. I found one at a shop here for a touch over $600 USD. It takes all the strain off my arms and back, and the camera just floats in front of me like a butterfly.
  45. 4 likes
    Tip #1: Be grateful to anyone who gives you their time and advice. People help you get somewhere in this industry, not gear or good technique.
  46. 4 likes
    Rent or borrow an Alexa, shoot something great, problem solved? You'll include camera and gear rental costs in higher end gigs.
  47. 4 likes
    I for one don't really care for 4k outside of the relatively clean image it brings you when downscaling to 1080. I think companies like youtube should work on providing better 1080p + compression at higher bitrates vs. pushing for 4K streaming and neglecting everything else. I can see 4k being important for someone who shoots for a theatrical release but for someone like me who shoots for the web and hopefully for a content distribution network like netflix (one day fingers crossed lol) a good 1080 deliverable is what I need
  48. 4 likes
    they unapologetically and unashamedly show that they use RED for their anniversary short film
  49. 4 likes
    Hi guys! New user here from Italy. Next week, after many thoughts, I'm going to have the NX1 and I'm pretty excited. This forum was critical to my final decision and I have to thank you for all the opinions and settings that you've posted through all these years about this amazing camera. I've just found a short movie from Vimeo filmed with the NX1 and I think it looks great (sadly I don't know the author's settings).
  50. 4 likes
    Welll.... that is one way to misinterpret it and put a massive negative spin on the situation! All they're doing is further expanding the range of D750 that they're accepting back. That is *not* the same as a recalling it for the 3rd time. This is extremely generous of Nikon! If only other manufacturers could have as good customer service as Nikon has..... do we ever hear about Sony offering a recall for the overheating a6300? (just to pick out one Sony camera, but really, it could apply to ***ALL*** Sony cameras! They've all had some issues or another with them) Clearly Nikon is being a good corporate citizen here, is head and shoulders above the others. Yet people repay Nikon by ripping into it? Sad. The Nikon D750 still stands strong as arguably the best choice DSLR for stills in its niche (i.e. the $1.5Kish all rounder FF DSLR).