Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. newfoundmass

    Davinci Resolve 16

    Has anyone else experienced an influx of Adobe Creative Cloud ads on YouTube lately? Not sure if it's related, but it seemed to happen almost immediately after I started looking up Resolve tutorials. No exaggeration, it's like every other ad for me.
  3. Today
  4. Shut the fuck up. ๐Ÿ™
  5. Man that last shot of the girl is pretty jaw dropping good. That makes a Canon look bad. Super well done as usual. Made my day. That will be etched in my remaining 182 brain cells for awhile lol. ๐Ÿ˜ฌ
  6. Unfortunately a perfect storm is brewing in the Photo, Video business, probably a lot of other businesses also. Like it or not people are just making less and less money every year. The Middle class, at least in the USA Is shrinking to me at an alarming rate. So that means less and less money to pay Pros to shoot both markets. And to top it off an amazing downward cost of pretty amazing photo, video equipment the average person can buy now. And Auto everything on them actually Does work pretty well. I mean other than in low light, or fast movement, it is damn near impossible to take a bad Smartphone picture or video on them. For the average person they are Way good enough for them output wise. Now the new phones are coming with 3 lenses on them. And they soon will have zooms, real zooms. Look at YouTube. It is actually hard to find a video that anyone on there posts that looks even remotely terrible. I think on average most look pretty amazing. It has gotten damn easy to do this stuff. Sure maybe the story line is not the greatest, but a heck of a lot of people have some pretty good sites on there. I sure don't see a Photo or Video career the most stable way to make a living anymore down the road. A person is going to have to be Really, Really good to survive long term and make enough to be the bread winner in it.
  7. Nice job! Skin tones are easy to get right on the E2 and although there may be some noise due to M43 sensor size, I don't feel like it's an issue or limiting my work at all. I also consider getting one of the newer models when they come out, but I'm wondering how much that would really add to my production level. The low light is actually surprisingly good on E2, but I guess we always want better .
  8. I'm in the same age bracket. Great mind think alike ha! Years ago you can make a career just by taking decent SOOC exposure from film. With the invention of DSLR, taking decent SOOC isn't enough. Recent tech even make things even more easier now with eyeAF tracking, and EVF allowing WYSIYG. Now we have animal tracking. Alot of niche of photography are very difficult to make money now as a career that was once a viable career (journalist, magazine photographer). Technology won't replace cream of the crop photographer/videographer with good marketing, but it does enough damage to low and midtier market where most of the clients are. None of the stuff I've seen are that impressive for me to be so naive it can't be imitate or duplicate by sophicate AI software, basic human operator, readily available quality education, and affordable gears.
  9. dbp

    Race to the bottom

    Yep, all of this. It doesn't mean actual robots will film weddings. It means AI will seep into the industry and have a trickle down effect. An accelerated version of what's already happened with cheap hardware and saturated talent. I'm 34, but I've been on forums like these long enough to learn about what the generation prior to mine were able to charge. The rates for basic talking head clips blew my mind! But you could do it, back in the day. And frankly, the quality was trash. A lot of those folks washed out because they could no longer command the same rates as the younger crowd, and they got blown out of the water by people with actual artistic sensibilities. You have to stay ahead of this game, or it will eat you up. And hell yes weddings are formulaic. The videos, the photos, everything. Anyone saying otherwise is full of shit. I've produced enough of em'. I've seen enough from people all over Canada and the US. Slow motion walking through the trees and kissing to some goddamn Tony Anderson song. Seen it, x1000. AI can and will whip those up, and weekend warriors will undercut, and people WILL laugh at the old rates, cause they don't have to pay them. The wedding industry preys on the idea that weddings are expensive, and people should expect to pay alot. Photo/video has benefited from this for years.
  10. Yesterday
  11. dbp

    Race to the bottom

    Naw, there will always be reach families who will pay $5000 because it's peanuts to them. Tons and tons of those couples in Vancouver and by the looks of it, DC as well. You're right about the majority, though. Most won't pay for anything extravagant with their wedding, and if they do, video is routinely the last priority. I worked for a guy who offered DJ, photo, event planning, photobooth, and he said video was always bottom of the bucket. BUT, I've also seen it routinely listed in articles as the thing couples regret not doing the most. The key is, you have to get really goddamn good, and then you can have a pretty comfortable living in the high end market. But that will only happen in a big city with ample rich people. Otherwise, work for peanuts.
  12. I think you are too fixated on having an ACTUAL robot to the filming. We aren't going to need to have robot filming/photography to be disruptive. The disruption will come from both hardware and software. Imagine AI software that allow you to import all the video and images and it will analyze all the scenes, generated multiple draft of final edited video with music, transitions, title. It will be able to copy another videographer's editing style and apply to your videos. This combined with affordable camera and useful features such as DPAF & affordable gimbal will allow any weekend warriors to do videography as a side hustle and undercharge the full timers. If I spend 10 hours shooting and the software will take care the rest, I have no problem charging less. I have work with alot of wedding videographers and have seen alot of the final edit. The videos are very generic and formulaic. I would have no problem doing it myself as a weekend warrior let alone a sophisticated AI software. I would definitely raised the bar even though I mostly shoot stills. I think you are underestimating the combination of human operator and sophisticated AI software able to produce quality works and undercut the competitions. I can definitely see the perfect storm happening when the recession hit and even people with 4 years degree unable to find a job (there alot!), people sick of working for min wage, job loss from automation (automated car, factory worker, job taken away from robot) and so many affordable quality gears (imagine DJI Osmo Pocket Pro version with bigger sensor sub $1000, mic, LED light ), sophisticated AI software that cut significant editing time and plenty of free and premium education out there. The quality will rise significantly while the pricing goes down.
  13. dont be down! screw them! fwiw, i dont know ONE single person who has ever brought up dpreview to me in real life. not one time, ever ๐Ÿ˜‚
  14. Now being interested, I visited dpreview site with great curiosity and without prejudice, and made three main personal, of course ingenious, conclusions: 1) out of web-business matter (about which I have zero competency) you really have full right to stay with smile high above and to be proud on superior look and feel of EOSHD - dpreview is so cluttered with all-over-the-place advertising messages that so obviously eat space for exchanging information and free communication: in comparison to EOSHD, visitor there inevitably has to have feeling of being squeezed in auxiliary rooms (contrary, here, not at least as side-curative effect, members have so clean, reverberating space for intoxicated listening of themselves when easily calling similar enthusiasts as clowns, idiots etc.) Simply, it is hard to stay at Dpreview too long and not to be either bored or afraid of too well-known supermarket claustrophobia 2) being so intrusively obliged to sponsors and so-so trying to find impossible balance between two contradictory, mutually exclusive tasks (serving as unbiased discussion portal under the permanent rafal of persuading ads and enumeration voting) - psychologically it is very hard to owner(s) of dpreview not to hear some inner voices of restless bad-conscience against character of purity of EOSHD, especially if once upon a time you knew each other or started from similar idealistic roots... so 3) I'd say owner(s) of dpreview simply envy you (At least, I'd surely envy if I'm in his/their place, and if I'm not so notorious, hopelessly ignorant clown :)
  15. I never had any problem of rolling shuter with the C300 II even handheld with quite fast movements. PS: I have never used C200 so I can't talk about this camera.
  16. I see no reason to doubt the official 8.3ms claim.. cinema5d even rated it at 6ms: ..theyโ€™re probably a little off but weโ€™re definitely in that ultra low zone it seems which is indeed an extra bonus point for the 300mk2..
  17. Barney at DPReview is obviously fine with depriving his readers with access to more knowledge, to settle a personal dispute. 3 years of the ban now and it is starting to really get me down.
  18. Good luck with the sale. Some really nice stuff there.
  19. I enjoy Chris and Jordan's videos. I think overall they do a good job reviewing cameras, are honest in their reviews, and I've found that when using cameras they've reviewed I come to a lot (but not all) of the same conclusions. I don't really go to DPReview's main site and skip their other YouTube content, but I enjoy Chris and Jordan. There are also, I think, substantially more users there. Which is why Andrew is frustrated; his links being censored there harms his traffic and, frankly, deprives readers access to more knowledge.
  20. Wat do you think about the Sennheiser XSW-D, is the audio quality not the same as sony uwp-d11? Or is there a major difference in audible quality (the uwp-d11 has the advantage of using it for far longer distances, but thats not something I need, maybe batterypower is also a problem, not sure how long these will hold up)
  21. I fail to see ONE shot that could not be done with a Smartphone in your footage. I think you are living in a dream world.
  22. There is a Hell of a lot more Idiots on DPR than there is on here I can tell you that. There are people on there that want to argue just to argue. I only know one person on here that does that, ehh embarrassed lol..
  23. As a sony shooter, I would personally like to thank canon for making such great lenses.
  24. Ya, but your attitude basically was that anyone who did not share your opinion on a subject lacked intelligence and was an idiot. If they pointed out a flaw in your argument, they had "tunnel vision" and were "locked on to one tiny area", and consequently their counter argument could be dismissed as stupid. With that kind of an attitude, what sort of reaction did you expect to get from people? (Oh, I forgot, they were idiots). People don't always agree on things, and sometimes people are wrong, even you. Debate is healthy. Dismissing people as "lacking intelligence" when they engage in it from an opposing point is not.
  25. That's exactly what I'm curious about. The C300 mk II has a 120hz sensor (confirmed by canon) which would equate to 8.3ms of rolling shutter. I don't believe either camera has processing to account for rolling shutter. Usually when I enter a rolling shutter figure for skew correction or motion matching purposes, I go with the official number from the camera manufacturer. I haven't yet match moved C200 footage. With Alexa footage I don't even bother to enter anything it just works fine assuming no rolling shutter. It seems the C200 has 16.7ms of rolling shutter (which would equate to 60hz readout). And I'm wondering if this is consistent between it and the C300 Mk II, since I believe Canon specified 8.3ms, or perhaps they just meant a dual 60hz/120hz readout like the previous generation had. That's all. I can live with 16.7ms of rolling shutter, even if the UMP2 looks pretty awesome, I'm just curious what Ed's findings are and whether this is the correct figure for match moving purposes. (Which I doubt I'll do a lot of with this camera anyway, to be fair, but it could influence my rental choice/recommendations in the future.)
  26. The problem with the XC10 is that it was marketed as a "professional" hybrid, even though it was neither a professional camera (it was really aimed at wannabe consumers) nor a hybrid. This was obvious at the time and pointed out by many commentators. It was basically a camcorder stuffed into a stills like body, and that is just not a good fit. I think Canon had the idea that they would transform their XA/XFA/G line into a DSLR style body because that is what "consumers wanted", not understanding that people used that body style because they were hybrids, not because of the body itself. For pure video shooting (which is what the XC line was for really) the XA/XF/G body style is much more appropriate. I think they have realized the mistake now, and that is why we are seeing new camcorders with that body style instead of variations of the XC, which is what they should have done years ago in the first place. Camcorders may be obsolete in the consumer world but they most certainly are not in the professional world. I am not saying that people don't use the XC cameras, nor that no one likes them (clearly some do), but just that most of the ones sold were because at the time the XC were the only Canon camcorders that had those capabilities at that price range. Now that there are other more traditional options from Canon I suspect that the potential market for the XC line has shrunk even further. It did. It fell off the camera. I imagine that any reviewer would rate that as a negative, it is hard to post a glowing review of something that literally disintegrates and still stay credible. No. The core of DPR is it's forums, which are primarily for consumers using stills cameras. It is one the best sites for that, outside of Canon products (Canon Reviews forums is top dog for Canon stills products). The reviews section is fine in general, a spat with Andrew does not make that different. Obviously stills centric, but that does not make the site irrelevant.
  27. BM UMP2 2k --------- 3.2 ms (official) RX100 V 250 fps ---- 3.8 ms (3.8-3.8) a7R III 1080 S35 --- 6.1 ms (6.6-5.7) BM 4.6K (2K crop)--- 6.3 ms (official) BM UMP2 4k --------- 6.3 ms (official) 1DX II 1080p 60&120- 6.7 ms (6.6-6.7) XT3 1080p 120fps --- 7.4 ms (7.4-7.5) BM UMP2 4.6k ------- 7.6 ms (official) a7R III 1080 FF ---- 7.7 ms (8.7-6.8) p4k HD crop -------- 7.8 ms (official) NX1 1080p ---------- 7.9 ms (7.7-8.0-8.1-7.8) Ursa Mini Pro 2??!! (or a used NX1 ๐Ÿ˜› !!)
  1. Load more activity
EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
EOSHD Pro Color 3.0 for Sony cameras
EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony cameras
EOSHD 5D Mark III 3.5K RAW Shooter's Guide


×
×
  • Create New...