Leaderboard

I'm gonna call both/and here. There are no two types; we are snowflakes. We are all limited in different ways: some in our ability to master technical details, others in composition, in content, others still in understanding what makes a good image on an emotional level. There are simply an incredible number of levers to pull to create a stunning image: lens and camera choice, f/stop, filtration, lighting, subject, location, subject distance and on and on. The process is inherently imperfect and complicated by the huge number of decisions there are to make. What I like about Geoff's talk is that he doesn't choose one or the other. Yes, the talk is called "fuck the numbers," but then he goes on about an 8K scan of a classic film negative and the resolution in the chainmail of a costume in a terrible movie. Understanding the process of image-making is messy. It is a journey. Over time our attempts to master as many of these levers as possible will show on the screen but we will all have strengths and weaknesses.

It seems like the main message here is "If you learn the real skills of cinematography then the quality of your images will far eclipse all the high tech features, megapixels, and technical specs of the modern digital video age." And it's true - great craft and artistry will win out over tech specs. But I also think this is message overlooks some obvious realities about the nature of amateur and hobbyist videography - that tech specs often do increase image quality at relatively low cost. Sure I could spend many months and even years learning great portrait lighting techniques so I can light a interior people shot really well, or I could buy a 50mm f/1.4 lens, slap it on my high-ISO/low-noise full-frame 4K camera, do a basic rule-of-thirds framing with existing ambient lighting, press the touchscreen focus with face detect and boom, I now have a fairly professional looking shot with creamy bokeh and sharp eyes in focus. So sure it could be a much better image if I go much deeper into learning cinematography, beyond basic and overused techniques like point-of-focus shots. But the shortcuts and some of the tech specs that enable them can be very high bang-for-buck for us hobbyists and amateurs. Even more so if you're a vlogger or hobbyist that shoots run-and-gun or only with natural/available light under uncontrolled situations and you don't have the opportunity to do lighting setups or carefully framed shots. I think Boyle's message is still correct and can even inspire us shortcut-happy hobbyists (I am firmly in this category) to go deeper. But it does miss the point for a huge chunk of the videography audience, since few of us have the time or commitment to achieve the level of artistry he's calling for. Technology has enabled us to generate images that make us and our fans/friends happy, often with an investment that matches our commitment or resources. All of us are trying to maximize our return on investment, whether that's in time, money, or stress/difficulty spent learning a technique or tool, and technology has definitely escalated the return on investment ratio.

I don't really post here even though I visit several times a week, so I figured I'd post something I made this winter on the GH5. If you have any questions I'll be happy to answer (I think k the grade is pushed too hard, director's wishes made it go up to 130%. The video

Nah, a hobbyist would have used a slider, drone, and some sort of other unnecessary tool. This is well shot and very intentionally feels candid and on the fly. Any cuts would also ruin the feel they are going for.

Nah, it has at least 5.5 stops! Look in the shadows, there is another half stop hiding there that you didn't count.

Can you: 1) Post a short clip on youtube, and / or 2) Post a short clip to dropbox and share it so we can download and take a look at it? What program are you looking at it? To me, it looks like whatever program you are using is sharpening it very much. @webrunner5 The rolling shutter on the a6300 / a6500 that if it were a whip pan - even in slow motion - the trees would be horizontal instead of vertical. Hey, wait a minute, maybe that's the answer to the rolling shutter problem; shoot in portrait mode and pan...

"Bra Fumbler"

So finally after 5 years, the market leader will catch up with the company that quit the camera market.

Not this stupid binary argument. ZERO... Only content matters, lighting and talent ONE... I must shoot 4K, RAW, RED, 240fps. The guys in the ZERO camp would be fucked if the script called for slow-mo. The guys in the ONE camp do need to use more talent sometimes. And the ZERO camp needs to realise that anamorphic lenses sometimes do their oh-so-wonderful scripts and lighting much more justice than spherical. Always, you need both the talent and the specs, one bit without the other is pointless.

It was one person shooting like 12 musicians moving around in a disorganized manner, in not ideal conditions, while trying to feature every one of them. Ya'll have really high expectations given the circumstances. ? Looking at his portfolio, the guy that shot it has done work for Adidas and ASICS in Germany, as well as music videos, so he seems to be doing pretty good for himself

According to the sales person in JL, it’s actually even better than you imply - you can also open the door AND GET THINGS OUT! Progress.

I saw a fridge in a shop a few weeks ago that had a dark glass door on it that when you tapped it became clear and showed you what was inside. We can't be far off someone doing an electronic variable ND in a square filter format if that sort of tech is finding it's way into consumer products. Without the having to tap it to change the setting though obviously.

How can anyone tell how many stops of DR this camera has or doesn’t have under the shooting circumstances? Between the gazillion reflective surfaces, the white roof, the most annoying cloud coverage for shooting a wide angle with people, and the awesome YouTube compression, I’d say the video turned out fairly well under the circumstances. I didn’t even mention the patterns that dominate the frame at every single turn. And if you look up the shooter’s web site, there is quality work there. If I have to guess what camera was used... the colors look like a Panasonic to me, but I’m unsure to be honest.

I think Art Adams tackled a similar topic in a more thorough, methodical way. https://www.provideocoalition.com/defining-the-cinematic-look/

Canon rumors released some specs on the new G7X III and M5 II. I'm most excited to see what they do with the M5. The M5 is supposed to be a higher end camera from the M50...but the M50 is so so good IMO. If they have 4k with DPAF and no crop...now we're talking. That new sensor paired with the Digic 8 might allow that to happen. My thoughts are maybe at VidCon Canon will release the G7X Mark III. It's the perfect "vlogger" camera and would be a nice splash in the market coming off the trails of the Sony RX100 6. We are going to VidCon next week so I will let you know if anything happens there. Here are the specs from Canon Rumors: EC804 – Canon PowerShot G7 X Mark III 4.2x Zoom 1″ sensor DPAF 4k Video (no DPAF) GPS This camera features a new Canon 1″ sensor EC811 Canon EOS M5 Mark II 28.3MP APS-C mirorless camera 4K@30fps video and DPAF. This camera features a new Canon APS-C sensor http://www.canonrumors.com/are-these-the-next-canon-cameras-to-be-announced-cr1/

Some more rumors and leaks from the last couple of days... Mavic Pro II is pretty imminent - with a press event expected on July 18th. (Probably makes sense given Parrot/Autel releases.) Most likely specs seem... Better battery life, better gimbal, better warning sensors 1/(1.7) sensor 4k/60p Better codec. Variable aperture Higher price (US$1299) (Ositalv is still talking about having more than one model with a higher end 1" as well.)

Yes, hypothetical ones. 5 years late.

For the lazy (like me), to save people a link click:

Found it! Weird that they inverted 2 axis, I wonder how it will work when both products will be released

Honestly really makes me want to rebuy a D750 and shoot in 1080p.

Geoff Boyle is such a man of wisdom. I have seen one of his talks. Just brilliant. ?

cool !

The GF1 had a real following.. I read a few reviews that loved the ergonomics when I was buying my GF3. I think the GF1 had a button combination that worked well for some people, and they're seriously small and solidly built. I'm not sure about the GF1, but my GF3 has a metal body, which was excellent considering I dropped it once and it slightly wrinkled the corner and that was it - a few more mm of damage would have damaged the LCD screen!

Downvote, I never voted at All?? I just thought it looked funny the way you had the bag covering your bag. Hope no women read that! Out of likes. I think Glenn must have signed up for the Navy. Dirty old sailor like me.

Honestly the slr magic anamorphic adapters are shite. The slr magic rangefinder is shite. Im never buying anything from slr magic again.