Leaderboard

Recently came into possession of this nice and functional 35mm 2C-BV ARRIFLEX. Before I eventually sell it I'm considering shooting a 200' roll to notch that experience; just to say "I done done that" 2 whole minutes of footage! What the hell. Ain't cheap, kind of financially stupid to do this sort of undertaking, but maybe ultimately worth the effort, I think? Anyone out there willing and able to offer advice regarding the lens situation with these old things?

Not even in 4K! It's like they've never watched a single YT tutorial on how to make their footage cinematic.

Do I need to use a VPN and a private tab to Google ‘Hardcore Henry’?

I'm back from Guangzhou China, and starting to evaluate the footage, especially my modified Takumar 50mm F1.4 with the custom "insert" made from post-it notes and sticky tape. I managed to get out and shoot with it on a couple of nights. One in Beijing Road and the other in Yong Qing Fang. Some images from Beijing Road... these are all wide open, and lightly graded with Resolve and Film Look Creator. Overall, I'm really liking the aesthetic, which reminds me of mid-budget Hong Kong cinema, which I have a soft spot for. I mostly exposed to protect the highlights and then adjusted exposure in post under the FLC, and the GH7 has just enough DR for this, despite the scenes being quite challenging. The lens has a shallow enough DOF to be able to direct the viewers attention by choosing what is in focus, and the FOV (equivalent to a 71mm F2.0 on FF) is great for these type of scenes where the scenes would mostly overwhelm a wide lens with pure chaos. Some images from Yong Qing Fang.. same as above but with a touch of sharpening. This was a lot darker and I needed to push the ISO to get more levels in some scenes. It was also a lot higher DR, so some shots will be limited in post for how I grade them and I'll probably reach for NR in places. The lens is actually quite sharp in the middle, but the sides are more distortion than I'd like with quite a bit of bokeh distortion and coma from bright sources. The experiment with this "insert" was how strong a look it would be and I think it's probably too strong because the bokeh shapes are too distracting due to the sharp corners. It's distracting on frames with a clear subject (where you want the background to get out of the way) and on other shots its pure chaos and completely negates the idea of directing where the viewer will look. Getting DOF this shallow on MFT isn't easy, so I'll have to think about it more for future trips.

My archive on gh2 patches 1 GOP Intra 'moon' T7 - Top Grading - Best Motion - Best Setting Ever 1-SpanMyBitchUp patch is good quality for spanning with long record times 2-AQuamotion v2 is medium-high quality with decent spanning recording times + 80% slowdown / EX TELE 3 GOP 'Spizz' - Hi-Quality - Pro Motion 3-TerrAQuake is seAQuake but less quality frame sizes for poorer type 10 cards 4-SeAQuake is Very High Quality for hi-end SD cards 6 GOP - Middle Earth 'Nebula' 7 GH2 Flow Motion v2 - 100Mbps Fast Action Performance & Reliability 8 T9-gh4 like 9 12/15 GOP 'DREWnet' T9 - Traditional Long GOP 12 https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/blop84zqvmgob2qiab07v/ACl0mBKWCsMcidxL5qUcqgA?rlkey=3gb5igu910uyw5sipalzlovp2&st=1vsslgjs&dl=0

I'll have a dig and host them here if I find the mother lode

Nikon has a new boss An optics engineer... not an accountant. Wishing him well for the future...

Highly unlikely they'll produce two versions. More than likely you purchase the base kit which is basically a GoPro and then for X dollars more you can purchase the cinema kit which will be a new faceplate that has some type of mount. Probably a weird bayonet or c-mount. From there, they'll sell you adapters to PL, EF, etc... The screen will go away on the cine plate but they may leave an hdmi port for a monitor. Once you unsnap the faceplate, you can unplug the screen which you can reconnect to the hdmi port... or whatever. Either way, interesting camera.

I’m probably biased as both a Nikon Df user and someone who thinks these two are pricks but even so I wasn’t sure that my contempt towards these two could get any bigger but here we are. They even went after the Leica CL. Of course if any of the cameras on their list was released today they would be shilling the shit out of it. Because that’s what they are, paid promoters of newness. No new gear, no pay day. Not exactly overflowing with content about great used alternatives that channel is it ? And that tells you all you need to know about them as a serious resource.

Been using the GH6 with the cheap 7artisans 24mm 1.4. I really like the lens, are there any other 7artisans hidden gems?

Even more amazing they were low budget B-movies with shoot schedules under five weeks !

Part of the reason they could make these film was the introduction of Kodak Eastmann Super XX film after WW2.It was rated at around 160-200 ASA which was over 2 stops faster than film of the 1930s.It also was known for its ability to be pushed (underexposing and overdeveloping)It was regularly pushed one stop to 320AS and sometimes two stops to 640ASA like on Citizen Kane.

100% - I'd assume that this was the best image that an expert with all the other associated equipment was able to get with a decent travel budget and after a decent period of having it. I've always maintained that there are three useful references for a piece of equipment: The best images that anyone is able to create This shows the upper limit of its potential The images that competent reviewers get This shows the type of images that people of moderate skill are able to get in non-ideal conditions The worst images You never get to see these until you get one yourself, but in theory this would show how fragile/flexible the camera is (for example you can expose an Alexa pretty horribly wrong and still get a half-decent image from it, but try that with a camcorder and it's a complete disaster) The promo is only the first category, and the fact there are only a few shots in there is a statement in itself. I think the 15mm is a lot better than people make out, but of course most discourse online is from people who think that a Zeiss Otus is the ideal lens and that Michael Bay doesn't use large enough apertures. To be honest, when reading / listening to most opinions now I am just hearing that the person hasn't been to the cinema for years, hasn't watched any/much classic cinema, and isn't even familiar with the saying "F8 and be there" let alone thinks that it is the cornerstone of almost all the important photography in the history of the field. I was always interested in the 9mm but as I bought the SLR Magic 8mm F4 as one of the first lenses I bought, then upgraded to the Laowa 7.5mm F2 lens later on, the selection of slow wider pancake lenses was never really justified for me. Right, I guess that makes the moon shot even easier then. If you have enough light then almost any camera will look pretty good. Looking at the mount again, there doesn't appear to be any visible mechanism to attach the lens.. I'm wondering if this might be a magnetic mount of some kind, like MagSafe perhaps. If that's true then it might just be a matter of pulling the lens off and snapping another one on. That would certainly fit with the GoPro ethos of it being a fast no-nonsense experience.

For sure, and I'd be excited to give it a try! I was a Kickstarter backer of the Z Cam E1 and I've bought a few Ribcage kits/cameras over the years. I was disappointed by all of them, but I'm still hoping for that magical/usable tiny sensor camera! I have a little bag full of D-mount and C-mount lenses just waiting to go on something! (I still wish there were a way to get a decent/non-laggy video feed from the Insta360 One R/RS series - I have a Ribcage-modded 1" module and the quality is really decent - but focus is hard, given the only options for monitoring are the camera's tiny screen or laggy wifi)

I found an interview with the person who shot the under-water sections of a GoPro promo video (IIRC it was for the Hero 3 or 3+), and the level of effort they put into it was simply incredible. He had a team of about 5, three crew and two cast, and they had a week for production. He was an independent DOP and had done some pre-production as part of his 'pitch' to GoPro to get the gig, but I think they did detailed pre during the week as well as camera tests and lots and lots of shooting. This was only for the underwater shots (the bikini girl diving beneath the waves). If we assume that each of the (maybe half a dozen?) locations each got 5 people for a week, then that's ~7500 hours just to film the 1-2 minute promo video. The level of cherry-picking is extreme - professional DOPs pitching projects, travel to the most exotic locations, testing of all modes with all manner of equipment, everyone in cast and crew are professionals, long shooting days at the best times (golden hour, etc), dozens of hours of footage just to make a short promo. Then people set it to auto, hold the tiny camera in their hand and film their family at the beach with whatever lighting and weather happens to be there at the time and then we wonder why it doesn't look like the promo videos... Having said all that, if GoPro make an interchangeable lens camera with a half-decent bitrate and a colour-managed LOG profile then it might be the tiny camera we've been wanting!

Any takers here?

Well, there's one hell of a metaphor in the "context" of this.

"Tsumura-san confirmed that photographers who compose through viewfinders “strongly request the inclusion of an EVF,” and that Panasonic is considering the balance between compact size and EVF inclusion as they work to “meet the expectations of as many customers as possible.” LOL. GM5 anyone?

Yes, I don’t get it either. You are in the full-frame LUMIX ecosystem and are considering a new camera and on your interest list is the latest options from Nikon and from Sony. You are increasingly tempted to jump ship even though it’s a big move. Which one of the below options do you wish to hear? A: We are working on a new flagship camera that will be launched in the Summer. B: Expanded horizons, creative direction, global market strategies, Operation Epic Bullshit, waffle waffle waffle, blah di blah di blah. I didn’t watch it and haven’t read a single word of it but 100% sure it wasn’t A: A perfect example of how not to retain customers. There is a saying which applies to all business and that is no matter the size, small, medium or large/international, just because you are in business, doesn’t mean you are any good at business. Some companies are more clueless than others…

Hello, I hope everyone is well! Even though I’m not really active on camera forums anymore, I frequently read the EOSHD blog and every now and then the forum, so I saw the thread and thought I would respond. Because it wasn’t ”poof gone”, it was announced on the channel over a year ago and mentioned in the last three videos. Before going into why, super flattered that this thread exist. I mean that. So here are some thoughts on the matter and why I took it down. Hobby vs Work YouTube was never my job, just a hobby. So was video making and photography, in the beginning. When starting the channel I was working as a producer after a couple of years as a radio/TV reporter. So I started the channel to keep my practical skills fresh. And to keep up with the development, which was huge at the time. The DSLR revolution, Blackmagic, cheaper editors etc. Fast forward a couple of years and I started making more videos at work again. At the same time I pretty much lost all interest in doing it as a hobby. And actually canceled the channel. Winston Churchill was definitely right in saying that work and hobbies should not be too similar. But what I had discovered was a passion for still photography, which I had pretty much no experience with. So I started making videos again. That’s why my videos became very repetitive and short. I didn’t care about that part, I just wanted to display my stills work and get feedback, talk to the community, experiment with cameras and develop. After a few years I became a good enough photographer that my new employer noticed and just like that I was shooting stills professionally all the time. And I still do (I work in marketing and PR). It’s a huge bonus in my field and if you are good at it you will never be out of work. So photography also became less and less of a hobby. Instead I found other hobbies. They where things that for example got me out into nature, so photography tagged a long a while, as a secondary activity. But eventually it faded. It was also nice to do things and not share it with people. I know I probably could have a very successful channel by making videos about my current hobbies, and even make some money. But I never really wanted a channel for the sake of a channel. And always had a full time job. The fact is that at no point would I had been able to live of my channel, not even at the peak. Even with sponsors it was never more that a regular salary (in my field and country). But as long as it was a hobby and I was glad to do it, it was a welcome addition to finance camera gear. Time At the same time as my channel started to feel less fun and other hobbies started taking my time, I started a family. So.. you get the idea: full time job + family + 2-3 hobbies = no YouTube. Upkeep So why take it down, why not leave it for the community? I did.. at first. Like some of you pointed out, the YouTube crowd in the photography/video space is generally nice and positive. That is my experience as well. Early on I learned that a good way of keeping the trolls away was to be present. Respond and engage. Trolls are usually idiots or cowards, so they don’t like getting push back. But once I stopped making videos, views and comments obviously went down. But the trolls started coming back. Not so much after me, and I don’t care about that. But agains the community. The people commenting started being nasty towards each other. I felt a responsibility to moderate, which was annoying. That’s when the thought about simply removing it started to grow. It wasn’t an impuls. It was an internal debate that went on for months. And the issue grew much much larger than a couple of trolls. I started thinking about five years ahead, 10 years, 30 years.. This post is already way too long so I won’t go into all of it. But I think you get the idea when I say: Privacy or when the content no longer reflects the creator. Digital minimalism, control over one’s narrative, inactive or outdated content. Risk of misuse of content due to me not checking the terms updates. Closure. So there is a looong ramble :) To keep in spirit of the forum I can charge my current gear for pro work :) For the longest time I used the EOS-R for 75% of all my work and the R5 (rental) for the rest. It wasn’t mine but my employer told me to buy whatever I wanted. Paired it with a 28, 35 and 70-200. 70/30 stills/video. The R5 is peak camera imo. Today is a little different. I started working for a new company about a year ago and again was told to buy what I needed. I would have bought the R5 without hesitation if it wasn’t for the Sigma 35-150/2-2.8.. I just had to have it. So I ordered the Nikon Z6iii. It’s not as good overall as the R5 for me and what I like in a tool camera. But it’s 90% there. And coupled with that lens it’s becomes on par. //MB

Sometimes it feels as if Resolve is a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and as for Adobe... less said the better 🙂 What is missing, I feel, is a quick turnaround NLE for the Mac. My plan is to make a couple of apps: - A Quick NLE, no fuss, no magnetic timeline BS, just works - 8K,4K, ProRes, HEVC support, GPU accelerated, LUT support and a nice built in colour grading tool - A LUT Creator, import a RAW DNG Photo or V-LOG Video, and use colour grading tools to get the perfect look, export this as a Realtime LUT for your Lumix S9 or S1R II, and export as a plain old .cube LUT What features do you think are needed most? Bear in mind we're not throwing the kitchen sink in there like Resolve. My priorities so far are...Apple style UI, quick to use, GPU accelerated, no stuttering, a much more lightweight app than Resolve, Premiere or FCPX which does one thing really well and that's edit really well and without a lot of clutter. Suggestions welcome.

Speed boosting a 45mm f/2.8 lens onto a smaller sensor with a 0.71x converter gives you a 32mm f/2 lens. That's it. If you like the character of the medium format lens, that's great and it's a worthwhile endeavor. But aside from the character unique to that model of lens, it won't look appreciably different from a 32mm f/2 lens that was made to cover the format you're adapting to. That said, I've been thinking about building graflok DOF adapters that I could stick on some of my medium and large format cameras - not because there is an intrinsic medium or large format look, but because I have some really interesting older lenses and when I adapt them to smaller formats, I'm just using the pretty good/well-corrected centers of the image circle and not the cool outer edges where things get interesting/cool/weird. I think a medium format one might be my next project after I finish the M mount for the UC12K (which is looking like it will be tomorrow sometime?). I have a kind of beat up, but otherwise unmarked 6x9cm ground glass handy. It'll at least be good enough for a proof of concept. Most of my 4x5 stuff has either a fresnel (visible lines!) or grids on the GG, but I also have at least one spare 4x5 GG lying around that I could use for a proof of concept. Oh, and now that I think of it, I have an old Seroco 4x5 which has clean GG and I think it's from the 1920's or so - maybe I have a project for tomorrow while I wait for another iteration of my UC12K mount to finish printing (now that I'm near the end and printing the entire part, the prints are taking about 3 1/2 hours each).

I've been told it's a decent camera for indy films.

I watched that video and instantly didn't regret unsubscribing from the PetaPixel YouTube channel. I think I lost 3 IQ points watching the dumb infotainment of two adult humans whining about cameras that someone let them use for free, especially about some of the petty shit they cite as an example. That one Olympus was too big? Who cares? They also make/made smaller cameras if that's what you want. Plus they didn't even get creative when picking "worst designed" cameras - would have been more interesting to go with potentially revolutionary cameras that couldn't live up to the hype - throw out stuff like the Lytro and the Light L16. It'd still be a dumb video, but at least there's some interest in it.

Let's keep the debate goin' ...Can't wait for the next great prompt artist to really bring their vision to the screen. No one prompts as well as that Vogel dude. That guy prompts. Why try to create a golden hour scene when you can just ask for it? Nothing says artistic cinema like a computer deriving and stealing other's hard work. :-| Should we go to an art museum to look at some lesser talent's paint-by-numbers? The creation matters. Now let's do motion pictures. Cinema has always been craft as well as the art. Minimize the craft, minimize the art.

Here you have straight from Mr. Vogel, Mike Vogel, Milady: Love this one BTW... Addressed to all naysayers : X

The Duke and Dorkess of Dividends

Stipended Shills Of Shininess

Haha, "paid promoters of newness."

This guy has made a great tool to make Resolve super easy to use. In his examples he makes pretty great looking grades within seconds, and it's all done inside the EDIT page, using the viewer as a slider canvas. Drag up for more, drag down for less.

Gotta find a retired old dude that's now an aspiring guitarist -- that used to work in production in the 90's and happens to be sitting on a closet full of short ends. Shouldn't be too hard, right?

35mm is daunting, but it's not my first time shooting film. It's been decades, but I've rolled 16mm before. I just think it's funny that I'm so frugal about modern digital gear, yet here I am seriously thinking about spending 200x more money to accomplish ... well, let's be totally honest, nothing of substantial IQ advantage! I mean, I bought a EM10III for $300 a few years ago, and that camera will shoot impressive 4K. I can't even get 1 minute of 35mm film shot and scanned for less than that. I'm very amused at how ridiculous this all is.

As this is a once-in-a-lifetime thing, and you'll likely be overwhelmed with the logistics of using a camera you've never used before + a format you've never used before + a cost per second you've never experienced, my suggestion is to keep it simple and keep it meaningful. My suggestion for lenses.... Go to a rental house and tell them what you're doing and get their recommendations. I'd suggest lenses that are neutral in look, easy to use, reliable, and probably not too heavy / expensive. Perhaps something classic like a set of Zeiss Super Speeds (which were popular for a reason!) etc. My suggestion for shooting..... As this is a never to be repeated thing, I'd suggest shooting people and places and subjects you love. Not only will this be a lower-stress approach, but you'll end up with lots of images that will be relevant for the rest of your life, and perhaps longer for friends and family. Completely secondarily to this, shooting a range of different things will be fun, and it will also be great if you want to nerd out and pixel pee etc, as you'll have a range of different subjects and scenes.

Christopher Doyle what a legend and his movie making skills were virtually self learned/experience.He is able to film with fluid and movement with such heavy lumps of cameras ,goodness knows what this one weighs on his shoulders ! Our modern camera rigs are a dream -I try and keep mine under 2 kgs total.

I watched a great video talking about Christopher Doyles contributions in working with Wong Kar-Wai (I'll post below) and there's a great line in there where Doyle basically says (when comparing his films to Hollywood blockbusters) "I think we have absolutely opposite attitudes to what's film-making. We make the film we can, they buy the film they think they want" (around 5:00 mark) When talking about small budgets and tight timeframes these films are often a lot more like my own travel videos than a Hollywood blockbuster. In my videos I shoot on-location with available lighting and no control over the scene whatsoever. In some ways I am capturing something that is more authentic, because I'm not constructing sets or rigging lighting that might deviate from the actual location, but this also means I have less flexibility to work around the camera etc (where sometimes cheating things makes them look more normal rather than less), and it requires me to capture things in a way that more authentically depicts the location rather than including/excluding things in a way that's not balanced or authentic. Obviously these lower budget films are still working with lighting, (probably) closed sets and production design, but they're not constructing everything from scratch on a soundstage in a warehouse in Burbank. In the video he talks about how because they filmed in real locations the actors were responding to their surroundings in an authentic way, rather than having to pretend they're somewhere that they're actually not: "The environments that the two worked in dictated the movement, emotion, rhythm, and transformation of those locations into an active force within each film. The physical surroundings were always used to shape psychological states. Hong Kong becomes the central site of this transformation." This idea of filming on location and letting the day-to-day (and perhaps moment-to-moment) shooting experience influence the acting and filming reminds me of what Noam Kroll preaches, which (to me) is really the fundamental advantage of the low-budget film. Wong Kar-Wai sometimes wrote the next days scripts the night before, which means they could adapt to how shooting was going and the weather etc. With the technological advances (film getting faster and not needing lighting / 16mm cameras that were light enough to use without a tripod / on-location sound then sync sound / digital) that enabled Italian Neorealism / French New Wave / British New Wave / Dogme 95 it's all about it getting smaller/lighter/cheaper, so taking these advantages and then still doing a full pre-production cycle then rigidly shooting to that in prod is really just throwing away much of the new potential that technological advancement has delivered.

There it is. Great point. One of the best features of modern NLE's

Based on the collaboration between director Anthony Mann and cinematographer John Alton, here are the films they worked on together: T-Men (1947) Raw Deal (1948) He Walked by Night (1948) - Mann directed most of the film but was uncredited Reign of Terror (also known as The Black Book) (1949) Border Incident (1949) Devil's Doorway (1950) The full movie of "He Walked by Night" is on youtube

Well that was awesome.

If so, I'd strongly consider the 50/1.2L or the Sigma 50/1.4 Art. The Sigmas are, generally speaking, too clinical for me, but lots of people like them - it really depends on how clean you wanna go. The 50/1.2L has been around for a long time now. I got mine pretty close to when they released it - it might be old enough to vote, at this point. That's to say that it's been out long enough that you could probably find a copy with clean glass and some external dings for not too much money. Bokeh is completely a matter of taste thing, but I hated the bokeh on the EF 50/1.4. I remember it was ugly/busy enough that even non-photographers noticed it on some photos. Maybe I just had a bad copy? I liked the EF 50/1.8 more, even. There's also Otus, of course, but used prices on them have stayed surprisingly high. I think there was also a Zeiss ZE 50/1.4 which is probably more affordable. I never tried it. It's probably very good. If considering the Sigma f/1.8 zooms, you might want to double-check how the coverage is with the 0.64x SB. I remember the 18-35 had a pretty small image circle - the 50-100 is probably a bit better, being more telephoto.

The difference is not huge. When wide open on very fast lenses, you're more likely to see some speed booster artifacts with the 0.64x. Whether those artifacts are acceptable is personal taste. If the prices weren't similar, I'd just take the cheaper one. I was also surprised to find that the 0.64x covers the slightly small S35 sensor in my Z Cam E2-S6G. Anyway, as far as other brands, I think that Kipon's focal reducers are well-regarded. Otherwise, most of the third-party ones are skippable/don't seem to be too good. FWIW, you can also have your cake and eat it with a focal reducer, if you want. Pentax K, Nikon F, Leica R, Olympus OM, and M42 lenses (including your Takumar) can all be adapted to EF mount. I've also thought about building a recessed M39 adapter since it would be theoretically possible on any camera without a mirror assembly (M39 is 28.8mm and EF is 44mm, but I have several M39 lenses with controls near the front and that are skinny enough that they could just sit further back in the EF mount). Anyway, for EF lenses otherwise, do you know which you're considering?

I'm not sure what "a modern approach" is, but iMovie and Luma Fusion are both pretty straightforward and unbloated from what I remember - and they both run on Mac. I'm not sure if either one has a lut editor, but 3d lut editor has been pretty good for a while now, hasn't it?

Shotcut (a free cross-platform NLE) might give some inspiration -- good clean UI which is intuitive to use if you just keep the dockable panels you really need: https://shotcut.org/

In the interview he says they are not shooting in 17K ( at 3.4 mins) its about the sensor size and focal length and resulting look.

Sure, slow zone focusing lenses are definitely a possibility. I used that exact lens for part of my YouTube review of the Z Cam E2c if I remember right, pushing the compact-ness of the body/setup. It's a potato, but it's alright in the context of "it's a body cap you can use to make photos." You could also go the route of MS Optics-style designs. I have their 21/4.5 triplet and there are most definitely compromises to get it as small as it is, but it's also a really fun lens with better quality than the Olympus cap (and full frame-ish coverage). A design like that one or their 24/4, but stopped down to f/8 could be interesting. Indeed - and I don't think they've said that the images are SOOC. It's hard to know how much editing was done with the moon shot. It's also not out of the question that an auxiliary lens was used to make it more telephoto. This is the importance of waiting until devices are in the hand of real consumers before getting too hyped. There aren't many things that I'll preorder and the number gets smaller every year, getting replaced by the number of things that I'll wait are available used for at least a 20-30% discount. X-M5 for $900? Shrug. X-M5 for $824-874 on mpb? Get bent, mpb. X-M5 for $781 on adorama? Starting to move in the right direction... Yes. And the close-up stuff could, theoretically, be done with some of the nicer existing action cameras with a diopter.

I've seen this before, but usually it's with channels (especially old ones) that have been hit with copyright strikes and such. Mattias's channel take down seems to be voluntary and perhaps political. I simply don't have the hard disk space to save all the videos I really enjoy, but it makes me really sad to say goodbye. It feels like it's the digital equivalent of burning books and erasing history. Personally, I don't think I could do that. Then again, we don't know the exact circumstances. @Mattias Burling, care to respond?

I don’t really agree with “if you can’t beat them, join them” attitude to stuff like this. Being a right wing imbecile is very much on the rise but it doesn’t mean we should just fall into line with it. AI should be used for taking away mundanity like doing the dishes and laundry from our lives to free us up to do the fun and creative stuff not steal that from us. I’ve got admiration for whoever’s work was used to “train” this but only contempt for those who are facilitating and grifting on the blatant theft of original work. Do you not see that these tools that you are espousing will only make that situation immeasurably worse ? This will literally give these people the ability to say “yeah just make that last one again with a slight variation and set in a different location” and churn this shit out even faster and with waaayyyy more profitability than they do now ?