All Activity

As Kye said, you could also shoot it against a back background and key on luminance instead of color. What would the purpose be of a clean plate in this case?

Another thread where I'll mention the Insta360 Go 2/3/ultra or similar as an option. The price is definitely higher than a Charmera, but in terms of size, it's maybe even a little smaller? And with much better image quality. From what I remember, the carrying/protective case in the Go 2 is about the size of an Airpods case and I've definitely kept those in my pocket before. Matt Granger has entered the chat

The action 6 housing looks a bit tacky although i'm probably nitpicking.. Honestly i don't like watching comparison videos after i have bought something. Its almost guaranteed to start you crying into your beverage of choice lol

I think i will need to watch a few tutorials. I have an idea at the moment but its loosely defined, i need to pin it down somewhat, then do some testing. One thing i noticed today interestingly is, i initially had the new mission1 pegged as taller, wider and chunkier, however thats not the case, its the same height and thickness as the nine, it is about 10mm wider than the nine. Its deceptive when you look at by itself. Probably mostly down to the front lens housing i guess. I even thought the same about the batteries being different as they are calling the mission1 battery enduro2. Yet they are the same size, you would need a micrometer to find a difference. There must be some amazing tech improvements in batteries to increase the capacity but not the size. By the way those craft cutting boards you get cheap at the $2 shops they make really good mouse mats and non slip, not too thick . Pro tip 😉

Most people will probably end up buying both and using them with two different focal lengths, as in the case of the filmmaker you referred to. That level of flexibility is hard to beat. After all, they’re portable and easy to carry around. The footage matches pretty well too. I wouldn’t even mind making a few minor tweaks, if any are needed.

Good on you for trying something different, i lost interest after the image quality comment.. For two reasons 1) i dont think it will happen, every 2 year old and up has already mastered mums phone, and their bigger and heavier than any action camera i think. Ergonomically and for useability i think there's real constraints to avoid when going much smaller in an action camera for the majority of people. If one wanted a tenfold increase in quality you'd just buy a second hand gopro i reckon or other action camera if your not a fan of gopros. 2) I think the amount of people screaming for less sharpening on camera and letting the user deal with it is a very small segment of the market. Which they have been able to ignore so far. Although with the amount of youtubes available on sharpening and grading online, manufactures may have to lift their game soon. In some instances its happening we have the mission1, now theres also 2 other action camera threads on the forum so we should be well catered for.

No worries at all from me! Compositing used to be only green screens, but now you can do it in lots of ways. Considering that smoke is (mostly) colourless, you could just film against a black backdrop and then use the Add blending mode to put it on top of a shot. The path to understanding compositing is to have a clear idea of what the different blend modes do mathematically and then you can film something to match the blend mode that you want to use. You'd probably be better off using different modes and shooting setups for different things.

At $30 i'd buy one...

In that case, I've heard about this excellent pocket camera called the RED Komodo!

I’m just doing a bit of light stirring, I think you can handle it ok. I wouldn’t have bothered if I thought otherwise. Now a question for the group. I would like to film some smoke, I presume in front of a green screen although green colour may or may not work. i do have smoke machine to create the smoke and I think the best option would be to video it as I think a bunch of photos would not give me the smoothness I’m looking for, as i intend to composite as a special effect. im also wondering if i need to shoot a clean plate as well ? I suspect i need to watch a few more vids on compositing to help get my head around it.

Cargo pants…🤔

Yeah, definitely e-waste, although everything gets there eventually so it's all relative. I was thinking more about this challenge of getting a not completely rubbish image from the smallest camera and it's probably getting an action camera and using it in a crop mode to get a tighter FOV and using the stabilisation features so it's not so jittery. For example the GoPro 13 Black is 5599x4927 and 12-39mm FOVs. So the 39mm FOV will be a crop of 1722px wide, and I'm assuming you can have all the stabilisation etc enabled for normal video for that. The DJI Action 4 is about a 16mm FOV and with its 3648×2736 sensor if you cropped to 2x (its max) then you'd have a FOV of about 35mm and about 1824px wide, so a similar story. Of course these are drastically more expensive and far less pocketable, especially if you are like me and only carry things in your front pockets and therefore the camera probably wouldn't have a pocket of its own.

If it had a decent camera I'd actually be interested. But the ones I've seen will all end up as e-waste eventually. If it took photos (I don't really care if it takes video) that looked good on social media I'd be very interested though.

A couple of my cousins did this a couple of decades ago : ) with Kodak disposable 35mm film cameras. No photographer, no wedding videographer at all ;- )

Love the way you put it! : ) As everyone of your posts BTW < 3 Thanks, always a pleasure reading you : ) Great-juicy-post BTW part II ;- )

Really sorry to hear about this, hopefully it's temporary, the body can be more resilient than we think so fingers crossed for you and your family. Everything is a look, and there are no right or wrong answers... I just take exception with the people who run around telling people that the look of cinema is 8K and razor sharp F1.4 prime lenses and "accurate" colour science. Sadly, there are so many of these people sitting around repeating this BS to each other that common sense is hardly able to be heard above the cacophony, and when it is heard the mob chases those voices from the discussion for fear they'll realise they've wasted all their money and spent years sitting around looking like idiots when they could have realised it with a few downloaded reference images and 20 minutes in Resolve! Then the new people come in and see all the "experts" saying these things and because it's overwhelming they have to just swallow a bunch of it because no-one can possibly analyse and check every detail of what they're being told.

I've heard that this is quite common, although from larger cameras with more camera-like shapes. I wonder how many people have done this...

The example pictures online are actually cherry-picked. The images I'm seeing from mine are worse, to the extent I wondered if I got a fake. When I looked closer I just think they chose the nicest ones, which is really just how social media works! You'd be forgiven for thinking it's the lens, but it's really not. Here is a sample image so you can see what I'm seeing. Charmera - 1440x1080 - SOOC - 280K file size: For reference, here's a 1440x1080 280K image from my GX85 with matched FOV: The level of detail is incomparable. What happens if I take the GX85 image and 2x downscale it to 720px then upscale it to 1440 280K again? It's a lot closer, and obviously I haven't sharpened the crap out of it (just doing this quickly in Preview on Mac). But what happens if I take a 3x downsample 480px, then upscale to 1440 280K again? This is definitely lower resolution (the artefacts from the lower res are larger compared to the Charmera). Charmera crop: GX85 -> 3x downsample -> 1440px: GX85 -> 2x downsample -> 1440px: That's much closer. What does all this mean? The limitation is the processor. I believe that they're using a 1440x1080 processor (as they claim) but they're using it in a 720x576 20p readout mode, then sharpening the crap out of it, then upscaling it to 1440x1080, converting it from 20p to 30p, then compressing it to ~15Mbps. The colour isn't that great either, this may be a processing thing too, I'm not sure. The issue is that for them to use the sensor in a 1440 readout mode would require 4x the data rates, which is 4x the processing. If you want the file in real 30p instead of 20p padded out to 30p, that's another 50% again, so 6x the processing. As we know from compact cameras that try and be 4K or 6K and also small, that's overheating territory. It's also "batteries only last how long?!?!?!?!?!" territory. So it would need to be 6x more powerful. I'm not really sure how much extra space those things would require, although GoPro can now do 8K30, which is 16x the data rates of a 2K30 camera, plus its doing all kinds of stabilisation processing etc on top of that, so I'd imagine there is room for these things in such a device if someone was to make one. Someone said that this circuit is likely a very common circuit in all kinds of cameras like dash cams etc, so it's probably only through economies of scale that this can be done. There were quite a number of action cameras and other common cameras that had a real 1080p30 readout, so maybe the pro version could leverage one of those existing architectures of existing chips. That would be pretty awesome!

Some kid will use that camera and make a short film and upload it to YT, then he'll get a Hollywood deal. A couple will buy 30 of them and put then on the wedding guest's tables for people to snap photos and take some video. The groom will edit them all together on his phone while sitting on the beach during his honeymoon. He will also upload it to YT and probably get a Hollywood deal. lol.

Yikes! I'm so sorry about your dad. 😔 I hope things improve!

Me too. I see them and they look fun but the picture examples are so bad. The sharpening is the worst part of it (but likely to make up for the low quality lens.) Being the age I am, I don't get any nostalgia for the look of early digital cameras. I want a better image (even if it's small by today's standards.) It doesn't have to be raw but a higher bitrate JPEG would be great. The option to save two files, one raw (or log high bitrate JPEG) and a JPEG with an in camera filter applied would be good. Unlike the days of early digital cameras, there's no need to save storage space anymore. I once had a little spy pen camera, no viewfinder, only 1 megapixel. It only held 12 pictures but they were pretty good quality considering the size. It was fun because you just pointed in the general direction and clicked. Only later when you got home you found out what you got. Not a design thing, just the limitations of the time. I got it for ten bucks or something and it was totally worth it for a bit of fun a few times. It sat in a drawer for twenty years and now doesn't hold a charge. It's not worth it for me to replace the battery.

Some more stills from resolve, 4k today first up is a sunset, not the prettiest colours but a sunset none the less. i do think when you stop recording 4k the processing continues on for a few seconds longer than standard 1080. Not that i have timed it, that's the feeling i get. I do think the new processor is getting a good workout and there must be a fair chunk of ram hidden in there to buffer things while the processor does its thing. I think the mission1 will probably excel at timelapses as i think this image is quite nice for a still and i haven't gone past the default settings yet. Next up is a kitten image. The interesting thing ( to me ) is the kitten still is after the sunset still by a few minutes yep appear brighter, i presume the mission1 is doing some "magic" in the background to lift the levels. It is quite dark going by human eyes in the shed. Yet you would most likely think this is taken an hour earlier. If i start zooming in i see stuff i don't like pretty quickly and maybe thats from some of the magic that the mission1 employed while it was doing its thing. Overall i think the image is acceptable and footage looks ok ( to me ) on either a computer or ipad i haven't tried a 4k tv yet . I have yet to try 8k and to me 8k, seems like complete overkill. I dont mind 4k reduced down to 1080 the stills seem a little sharper / cleaner perhaps. Although @kye might be a little nonplussed about that 😉 Some motion blur that ( I think ) should indicate the mission1 is operating at a slow shutter speed. I do have some ideas about filming lowlight stuff but it won't be neon lights as theres not much of that out here. Plus there's the fact my dad had a stroke 2 weeks ago and is paralyzed on the right side, so its dad first the farm and animals 2nd and everything else when i can find a moment. Painters pole at near full extension, so thats my arms extended, me gripping the pole at the bottom with both hands and the pole at near full extension, there may have been another 150mm of travel left in the pole not sure. Still i think thats a respectable height to achieve with a gopro without strapping it to a drone. Not sure i could manage more than a few seconds of motionlessness at full height. I suspect the gimbal at the top is helping to calm things down. I reckon if i wanted to incorporate motion, more of a deliberate move from a to b may help keep things steady and maybe not trying for full extension will help as well.

I got a Kodak Charmera keychain camera recently. It's terrible and you shouldn't buy one, but it is interesting. In case you don't know, keychain cameras are seriously tiny cameras (think smaller than a GoPro) and have gone viral in the last year or so. The Kodak Charmera is probably the most viral one, with multiple production runs being sold out very quickly and reissues etc. Here's mine in comparison to some other cameras, including a couple of GoPro-sized action cameras and some actually pocketable cameras (GF3 and GX85). Why is the Charmera interesting? I think the design is essentially perfect: It's incredibly small (obviously) and ridiculously light but it's actually quite tough It's got a 35mm equivalent FOV lens It charges from USB-C With almost any MicroSD card it has practically infinite storage It has a rear screen that is just large enough to navigate the (very simple) menu and frame shots It's super-simple to use, if you plug it into a computer it turns on, mounts as a USB drive (without needing any software), charges the battery while connected, then when you unplug it it turns off again It's a ~15Mbps motion JPEG codec It's USD $30 Why aren't I recommending it? The image quality is terrible. TERRIBLE. It says it has a 1440x1080 sensor, and that's the resolution of the JPGs and video files, but I think it's 2x2 binned, and heavily sharpened too, so it's a very poor quality VGA camera. I shot a resolution chart - the moire was practically psychedelic. JPGs are just as bad as the video files No control over anything and with its AE it's perfectly happy to clip the crap out of decent chunks of the image Why am I even bothering to write about it then? It's a new class of camera. We haven't really had cameras that were smaller than action cameras before, but not only have we got them now, but they sold out multiple times, so the world (or at least the trendy impulse buying world) has solidly suggested there is demand for them. As far as I can tell, the competitors are action cameras, or those that are smaller like the Insta360 Go, and that's about it. Those are 10x the price though, and larger and not nearly as fun to use. The image quality of them is vastly superior, but in todays market where I wish I could get a camera that was smaller, had a quarter (or sixteenth) the resolution, and was drastically cheaper, this is the kind of thing that didn't used to exist really. Even just playing with it around the house, I film things I wouldn't normally film. It feels different to use. This is a new product in the market that smartphones basically killed. Everyone used to have small point-n-shoot cameras but they all got killed by smartphones - the industry essentially got eaten from the bottom up. This is the first counter-example I'm aware of (other than action cameras). I would venture that everyone who bought one already had a smartphone, so this fulfils a niche that their expensive fragile dopamine-addicting smartphone doesn't. Retro cameras have enjoyed a resurgence recently, but I would suggest that this is different as it's a new thing rather than an old thing limping along. This might make executives take note - it's not that small cameras are dying slower than they think - there is active demand and innovation in this space. Tech gets better. Assuming this form-factor remains popular, the video quality will get better. I don't know why it wouldn't remain around.. kids aren't likely to want to record themselves less in future, tiny things won't stop being cute, having something so small it takes up zero space in your pocket (it's a keychain camera!) won't stop being handy, etc. What I'd really like to see is a 'pro' version of this camera.. one that takes real 1080p video and doesn't sharpen it like it's entering a butchering competition. Same size (or a little larger), same simple design, could be more expensive and still be interesting.

@MrSMW Thank you for the update!

I've shot a no budget feature film (partially) as a DP under similar circumstances last year. we had some permissions here and there to shoot in metros and train stations for a few hours, but mostly it was outside in the busy capital city. i'll share a still of it here, if somebody wants to see more stills I can DM a link, but at the moment I think it's best it mainly stays private considering the film is not finished yet. i do kind of think best to push back against the idea of total minimalism, or austerity especially in regards to crew. Other than the director and I, we had a 1AD, a PA, a makeup artist, sound guy, a focus puller, and on some days a grip or a gaffer (on the few moments we weren't just relying on available light). our director was someone who was frankly underexperienced and would generally completely abandon our preproduction plans, change the script all the time and was unwilling to listen to anyone else's suggestions other than the actors, which caused some tension from time to time. having these other people on your side to keep you in line can make this experience a lot more pleasant since it's hard to make films, no matter how small the scope is. this was shot on a largely rigged up BMCC6K with some SLR Magic primes, and mostly on a cine saddle. I guess we we're pretty lucky with not being bothered by strangers while shooting, other than having some random people staring at the camera in a wide shot. also the thing with walking around in a medium 2-shot is that it is insanely boring, especially for a visual language. there's a reason that doesn't really happen in WKW's stuff.