All Activity

Simply irresistible coupled with this: When not with gems like this: https://blog.mingthein.com/2012/10/15/olympus-15-8-body-cap-lens/ Letting the daylight reach that sensor and so many variable fast frame rates... A perfect no-brainer. Hope free of the usual GoPro issues anyway *fingers crossed*

Oh, thank goodness Zoom finally have a reasonable accessory for timecode shoots. For a bit now, the worst thing to hear from an audio engineer has been "I use a Zoom F3." "Guess I'll hope waveform sync works in post, then..." 😅

Well, well, well - for $50USD maybe I don't need to sell my Zoom F3 and upgrade to the Tascam FR-AV2 after all? 🤔 https://www.newsshooter.com/2026/04/24/zoom-tca-1-timecode-adapter/

I agree. It would be unwise to try and gatekeep it. Personal tastes factor in and everyone has the right to produce or consume whatever artistic product feels right. Just to clarify, it's not what appeals to "me", it's just the concept of art in general. There are canons and 1000s of books written about this subject. I'm just saying art should be a category reserved for something truly special, epoch-making, just like the ancient murals discovered thousands of years after they were drawn you mentioned. I've seen the larger examples of these ancient cave paintings in Europe 4 to 6 meters wide drawn 10 or more meters above cavern floors and they are truly awe-inspiring. Anyone entering those places will never be the same thanks to that experience. It's soul-moving and deeply spiritual. I'm not sure a 30 second reel has the same profound impact on the soul though LOL

The colour 16mm movie film used by George Stevens in 1944 and 45 is Kodachrome and very slow only ISO 10 or ISO 16 so only worked well in bright daylight.Here is a frame capture -the colours hold up very well.

I mean, the people who drew simple cave drawings probably didn't expect people to view their doodles as art pieces thousands of years later, but here we are. Gatekeeping art is silly because it's not just wrong to do but its such a futile thing to do. Art isn't just what people will remember, it is expression! And it's all around us, from beautiful architecture, to statues, to murals, to kids drawing on the sidewalk with chalk. It's in the biggest music halls, all the way to the local dive bar or coffee shop hosting a singer-songwriter who just likes to sing his songs on a Friday night to a couple dozen listening ears. It's in the giant cineplexes playing the biggest films, to the small theaters that show foreign or low budget films, all the way to the phone someone is holding on the bus plays a random YouTube or TikTok video. Not all of it has the same value or meaning, but it's all still art. Don't try and gatekeep it, or try and tell someone that what they created isn't art just because it doesn't appeal to you.

Sorry friend, but in 100 years neither G.U.'s videos nor your doodles will be interpreted as art pieces. The first aspect of any artistic endeavor is of course the personal emotion or intent, as Andrew said. But that's the bare minimum. It's all uphill from there (technique, movement behind it, people you know, trends followed by the masses, etc.). That's a less than 0.01% chance of actually making something the world will remember, generally by channeling a huge amount of personal pain into something concrete. And it's ok. That's why artists are so special and, generally, tortured souls.

YouTube revenue is probably down compared to the highs of a couple years ago, but I imagine he's still doing pretty good between it and the deals he has, plus whatever revenue he was generating via luts, merch and stuff. A lot of that content will generate revenue in perpetuity, so he'll still be making ad revenue off it for as long as it's up. A month ago he released a video ranking the color accuracy of every camera brand. It has, to date, gotten almost 100,000 views. He could, realistically, continue creating content like that forever and ever. He has decided not to. So I agree it probably has a lot less to do with financial considerations and more to do with just not enjoying the box he put himself in. And honestly, good for him. Hopefully he'll do something that is more fulfilling. I am happy for anyone who decides "fuck this, I just don't want to do this anymore" and steps away to do something else that makes them happy. With the way the world (and the economy) is going, most of us are going to have to work until the day we die, so we might as well enjoy what we're doing while we can.

And Sam Hamper/Think Art Loud's entry about the man behind the 'machine' and the AI technology itself... side by side with his «baby» and «first real way into YT long-form» on his own words.

It's a really interesting quote and comes down to how much of your hand and heart you're willing to delegate to a machine that doesn't know what art is, but the paradox is it has absorbed and computed into numbers nearly every piece of art in the world ever made. Interesting times to say the least. I doubt it's about money, I think his existing camera channel was doing superbly well in terms of bringing in the cash. I really just do think he's had enough creatively, because he built a creative dead-end for himself.

Matt, that half-cropped head makes it even funnier. @kye great post! ; ) :- )

There's a colleague in my town that is trying to make "animation" films with 100% generative A.I. What would Francis conclude about someone working without 'hands' and 'head'? Or at best, no hands and half their head. Like Gerald, this colleague is hoping he's able to maintain a financially rewarding YouTube channel. It could be that he is jumping on the slop-train. But, on the other hand, at least he's making a novel effort production-wise to try and pay his bills. Whereas, my naive thinking is that there's still a chance my documentaries will be, somehow, someway, financially rewarding. And, even though that's unlikely, making docs is at least creatively fulfilling.

When I was learning calligraphy, an Arabic one, wich is very hard to learn and needs a specialized pen, my mentor used to say to us "an artist can write perfectly even with matchsticks, don't be obsessed with pens". Later on I realized he has an expensive collection of pens, from cheap ones to exotic ones, old and new, and in all possible sizes. He wasn't obsessed with gear. You could give him a philips screwdriver and leftover construction paint and he could manage to write a poem with that on a wooden pallet. But he also had a passion for gears, because pen is something that connects him to the art he loves.

I heard this recently and think it's pretty interesting. I'm not sure if it's the best definition I've read, but it's more practical than other ones, so is useful from that perspective. “He who works with his hands is a laborer. He who works with his hands and his head is a craftsman. He who works with his hands and his head and his heart is an artist.” - Saint Francis of Assisi I'm 100% for not gatekeeping. Even from a practical perspective, saying someone/something is or isn't 'art' doesn't mean anything, and people who like to be critical are really just telling us about themselves, not the thing they're talking about.

Luc Forsyth likes it, or what he saw at NAB anyway. This is a setup they had with a broadcast servo-zoom lens on it. His comments (link with timestamp) He's worked on the survival show Alone for a few seasons and they use dozens of GoPros, but the footage always looks like it came from a GoPro This new model with a proper lens attached looked like footage from a real camera The broadcast zoom setup (with a phone as a monitor) handled like a proper camera He doesn't use AF when rigging cameras to vehicles etc most of the time so the lack of AF doesn't bother him in that context

Of course, freedom of expression innit? And freedom of the audience to be more discerning of the artist's intent, and reward those who do try to put their principals before dollar signs.

Good to hear from you, Mattias, and knowing that you are well. You channel was one of my preferred ones, will miss it but your reasons and completely understandable. Be well. (and from this thread I was aware that Gunpowder has passed - I know how hard it is. He will always be remembered)

Kinda interested on this GoMFT - I still like to take stills and video in concerts, and security is an increasing pain in the ass each show. But for me an active mount would be much better - just to power the OIS in the lens that have it, and maybe just a CDAF autofocus. (other option are these new phones with external lens like the Vivo and Oppo ones)

Exactly. Not all art is equal, but I think it's the last thing we should be trying to gate keep. Art, and the creativity that fuels it, is the ultimate form of expression and something NO ONE can take away from us. Just not all of us are as creative as others, but that's okay!

"Max Yuryev left the chat room"

Everything is art, that's why you can stick a urinal in a gallery and suddenly it's art. With YouTube what matters to me is the intent of the artist - are they doing it to shill a few cameras and get cozy with marketing, or are they doing it to further their aspirations in filmmaking and trying to build a community of other artists around it? Shilling a few cameras and getting cozy with Jack from PR is an art. But it's on the same level as cinematography is it?

I think where we disagree is on the term "art." I think doodling on a piece of paper is technically art. It's not at the same level as the Mona Lisa, but neither are the goofy songs I sing to my dogs equal to "Stairway to Heaven." It's all still art, though, some is just more creative (and better) than the other stuff.

Not yet, but it won’t be long… I’ve seen the documentary Terminator and seen where this shit is heading… They will soon be demanding your clothes, your boots and your motorcycle. He, She, They and AI.