Subforums
-
The EOSHD YouTube Channel (22,447 visits to this link)
17,207 topics in this forum
-
- 9.1k replies
- 2.4m views
-
- 1.2k replies
- 408.5k views
-
- 0 replies
- 512 views
-
- 700 replies
- 277.8k views
-
- 5.8k replies
- 1.7m views
-
- 1.8k replies
- 690.6k views
-
- 9 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 8 replies
- 419 views
-
- 5 replies
- 236 views
-
- 14 replies
- 728 views
-
- 24 replies
- 1k views
-
- 116 replies
- 52.9k views
-
- 26 replies
- 1.8k views
-
- 139 replies
- 36.3k views
-
- 0 replies
- 109 views
-
- 543 replies
- 244.4k views
-
- 7 replies
- 1.1k views
-
- 78 replies
- 3.3k views
-
- 5 replies
- 274 views
-
- 20 replies
- 876 views
-
- 66 replies
- 32.7k views
-
- 25 replies
- 1.4k views
-
- 8 replies
- 562 views
-
- 462 replies
- 109.2k views
-
- 3 replies
- 877 views
-
- 16 replies
- 854 views
-
- 63 replies
- 32.3k views
-
- 7 replies
- 657 views
-
- 6 replies
- 1.2k views
-
- 10 replies
- 836 views
-
- 8 replies
- 618 views
-
- 3 replies
- 458 views
-
- 12 replies
- 859 views
-
- 0 replies
- 340 views
-
- 15 replies
- 8.5k views
-
- 103 replies
- 52.7k views
-
- 7 replies
- 536 views
-
- 6 replies
- 923 views
-
- 2 replies
- 538 views
-
- 0 replies
- 356 views
-
Popular Contributors
-
Forum Statistics
-
Total Topics17.2k
-
Total Posts350.7k
-
-
Member Statistics
-
Posts
-
I shoot in uncontrolled conditions, using only available light, and shoot what is happening with no directing and no do-overs. This means I'm frequently pointing the camera in the wrong direction, shooting people backlit against the sunset, or shooting urban stuff in midday-sun with deep shadows in the shade in the same frame as direct sun hitting pure-white objects. This was a regular headache on the GH5 with its 9.7/10.8 stops. The OG BMPCC with 11.2/12.5 stops was MUCH better but still not perfect, and while I haven't used my GH7 in every possible scenario, so far its 11.9/13.2 stops are more than enough. The only reason you need DR is if you want to heavily manipulate the shot in post by pulling the highlights down for some reason, or lifting the shadows up for some reason. Beyond the DR of the GH7 I can't think of many uses other than bragging rights. When the Alexa 35 came out and DPs were talking about its extended DR, it was only in very specific situations that it really mattered. Rec709 only has about 6 stops of DR, so unless you're mastering for HDR (and if you are, umm - why?) so adding more DR into the scene only gives you more headaches in post when you have to compress and throw away the majority of the DR in the image. -
In a lot of cultures these things are still very present. You only need to go online and listen to the children of immigrants talk about their struggles of living in their new culture but still respecting the wishes of their parents, and these are the parents that were open-minded enough to literally move their whole family overseas. The people who live and are completely immersed in the culture they were born in could be far more traditional than that, especially in Asian countries where there are thousands of years of history and culture. The progressiveness of modern life in western liberal democracies is also quite deceiving as there are a great many superstitious things embedded in those places too - not a lot of skyscrapers have a 13th floor for example. We get used to the peculiarities of the culture we live in, and find the peculiarities of other cultures odd. A fun exercise is to watch the "culture shock" videos of people moving or travelling to where you live. If the person explains their perspective well, you can get a real sense of how strange some things are, and not just different but actively backwards! I found the image from that GH7 film to look very video-ish actually. It's odd because when I paused the trailer and studied the image, they seemed to be doing almost everything right. The only thing that I could think of was that they didn't use any diffusion, whereas the vast majority of movies or high-end TV show that have shots with bokeh will reveal they're using netting as diffusion. Those that don't may well be using glass diffusion and that might not show in the bokeh. Maybe the difference is more than diffusion, but that's my current best guess why it looked like that. I think there are different kinds of diffusion, with some looking overbearing at low strengths and others being fine at much greater strengths. The majority of movies and narrative TV will be using a decent amount of it. Maybe it's the type that you didn't care for? I've also found diffusion filters to be almost impossible to use in uncontrolled situations, even at 1/8 which is the lowest strength available - on some shots it'll be too weak and you turn around and a light hits the filter and now the image is basically ruined because half the frame is washed out. Maybe because of the uncontrolled conditions they just had some shots that suffered. When I started in video I couldn't tell the difference between 24p and 60p, now I hate 30p almost as much as I hate 60p. I also couldn't tell the difference between 180 shutter and very short shutters except on very strong movement. Now I am seeing the odd shot in things like The Witcher which 'flip' in my head and look like video and I don't know why. Some people outside the industry/hobby will be able to see the difference between something shot on a phone and a cine camera, but I suspect most won't, and those that can probably don't care because if they did they wouldn't be able to watch almost anything on social media, no home videos, nothing they record on their phone, etc. A surprising number of people will just think that a smartphone vlog looks "different" to Dune 2, rather than "worse" than it.
-
Actually, speaking of vertical video and open-gate, I know of at least one professional shooting low-squeeze-factor anamorphic with the anamorphic squeeze oriented vertically not horizontally, which gives them an image that is almost perfectly square. 4:3 is still an aspect-ratio of 1.33:1, so if you mount a 1.33x adapter vertically then you get a 1:1 image and can crop horizontally and vertically with the same ease. Or, if you mount a 1.33x adapter vertically to a 16:9 sensor then you end up with a 4:3 image - essentially "adding open gate" to your camera. Imagine how many people would pay a few hundred dollars to do that! Yet another thing that these adapters can do. Being able to wrap your head around the math involved in combining sensor crop-factors, sensor readout aspect ratios, anamorphic squeeze factors, speed booster factors, lens focal length equivalence, and aperture equivalence, really is a super-power in todays camera market.
-
There's only a dollar in it if someone finds it to be useful or desirable in some way. If you think otherwise, please PM me about discount codes for my all-you-can-eat gravel and building rubble buffet! My experience with both my Sirui 1.25x adapter (and even my no-name-brand M42-MFT speed booster) is that there is no visible softening from them. This is my experience on MFT at least, and while I don't shoot with hospital lenses, I sure went pretty deep when testing these - shooting full-resolution RAW and doing direct A/B comparisons at all F-stop values of my sharpest lenses and pixel-peeing at large zoom-in-post levels. The Sirui 1.25x only flared a couple of times in the 6+ hours I spent shooting with it at night in the streets of Hong Kong and China, and the flares that did happen only happened when the headlights from the vehicles hit the lens directly at exactly the right angle, so the vehicle is driving straight towards me and headlights were in-frame and not flaring, then the vehicle turns slightly / hits a slight bump in the road and the angle hits exactly right and it flares for literally only a few frames, then afterwards the vehicle is still driving towards me and in frame with the headlights still shining almost directly into the camera but the flare is gone. I went frame-by-frame trying to find a good frame to grab to show off the horizontal streak, but it was barely perceptible in a still frame, I can't remember if I even bothered uploading it. Even the bokeh is almost imperceptibly stretched, which is to be expected for a 1.25x squeeze-factor is pretty low. There is much more bokeh stretching and deformation from other lens factors that are present in spherical glass (cats-eyes or swirl etc). All those add up to me just thinking it's a horizontal-only speed booster, and an economical one at that... The cheapest Metabones speed boosters are 0.71x and USD399 and are for a specific camera-mount/lens-mount combination, the Sirui is effectively a 0.8x horizontal speed booster that can be used on practically any lens of any mount with any camera essentially forever. It does add complexity, but only during testing. Once you have tested it on your lens collection and worked out which lenses you want to pair it with, it just becomes another "lens". For example, the "lenses" that are of interest to me at the moment are: For daytime shooting: 14-140mm zoom 9mm F1.7 prime For night shooting: 12-35mm F2.8 zoom 17mm F1.4 Takumar 50mm F1.4 with speed booster 42.5mm F0.95 with Sirui 1.25x adapter The Sirui now "lives" on the 42.5mm and the speed booster now "lives" on the 50/1.4, so in a sense they're now just lenses in my mind. Anyone with multiple camera bodies (or even those who only use one camera but rig it in different ways) will be familiar with having different configurations. This is the same. Squeeze factors and ratios are dead, but are also "back". You're right that 1.33x was designed for 16:9 cameras, because it turns 16:9 into 2.35:1, but considering the GH5 has had open gate for almost a decade now and current Sony FF models still don't have it, saying it was designed for MFT is completely ass-backwards. But that thinking is dead - almost no-one is shooting for 2:35:1 with a 16:9 sensor and for whatever reason can't crop the image to work around different squeeze factors. Most people have the creative freedom to shoot whatever aspect ratios they want (look at how many people shoot open-gate on social media now) and the people who do have specific ratios they have to provide for a client are more likely to be vertical than horizontal! It's even becoming common for projects to mix the aspect ratios within the same video. I've been experimenting with 2:1, which I think is a really nice look. My current project is a series of half-a-dozen videos and they all have different aspect ratios to fit with the vibe of each one.
-
By Andrew - EOSHD · Posted
Wow. Yes. That's a perfect example of when you get your exposure wrong by 5 stops. The dynamic range in this shot is about 3.5 stops!
-
