Andrew - EOSHD

So deliver it to your clients with the music of choice for private use, and upload a version with music licensed under Creative Commons for your promotional purposes. Problem solved.

 

You can't just strip a sound track off an edit and replace it with a completely different one... Well you can, so long as you're not basing the entire concept of the video around that crucial song, the timing of the edit, the mood, the meaning, the lyrics, the soundscape and the pacing!

 

:)

These are two video samples from cameralabs regarding GM1 (same sensor and same GX7 video quality) and A6000. These video are recorded quicly and in standard profile in both cameras and both with kit lenses.

 

GM1

>

 

A6000

>

 

The A6000 image in more and more organic and clean with realistic cinema softness and moire free (look the panoramic wheel no alias). Imagine a portrait or neutral style dialed all down in A6000 what can do... A6000 is a step up against  GX7 in terms of video quality, dynamic range and sensor scores.

 

Nah, it really isn't.

 

With all due respect to Cameralabs they're not video guys and thus clearly do not know how to shoot video. The GX7 clip is a write-off car crash of a shot because it is interlaced. 1080i selected by mistake. Oops!

 

Also the focal length for the most part is completely different between the two shots and the depth of field looks like F11 or something, making it very hard to judge the effect of the different sensor sizes, indeed even the difference in overall image quality properly.

 

The GX7 is superior for video. Better codec, less moire, finer noise texture, better high ISO performance in video mode. I've been shooting with the pair of them for about a month now :) See the latest blog post.

 

http://www.eoshd.com/content/12822/best-small-camera-108060p-panasonic-gx7-a6000-review

 

You just can't compare the two Cameralabs shots, but feel free to pick a better example where both cameras are shooting the same shot and both handled optimally.

 

I'm not saying the A6000 cannot shoot nice stuff. It can.

 

I am saying the GX7 is better overall... more detail, better low light, better codec.

NB: Sample videos will come next week

If you want a nice 1080p camera that is packed with features and doesn't cost very much then there's now two really nice options available from Sony and Panasonic.

The A6000 is certainly Sony's best performing mirrorless camera yet for video with an APS-C sized sensor vs the Micro Four Thirds sensor in the GX7.

I've been shooting with both to decide which one to keep.

Read the full article here

Canon somehow started the revolution , and now take a look at the groundbreaking revolutionary new products that canon presented at the last NAB .

 

Yes, I was out of my tree with excitement :)

 

There.

 

Be less annoying. Thank you.

Such a camera would cost all those cameras combined.  :D

 

It really wouldn't :) Just add the GH4's codec to the A7S and you nearly have it ;)

 

By the way I much prefer the GH4, E-M1 and X-T1 ergonomics to the Sony now... Makes my A7R feel so clunky!

Err what are you trying to say in this post Andrew?

 

Do I need to spell it out for you... really? For the guy who doesn't know what the word 'filmic' is in relation to cameras, I better not even bother!

Copyright isn't designed to stifle creativity or prevent artists from creating new work, but that's exactly what it is doing in the case of the Vimeo Copyright Match system. And the big shame is, every time a match is made and the clip deleted or muted, the potential to make money for the rights holder of the song is squandered.

 

The problem is law makers and businessmen are not artists, they don't understand the process or even the very concept. Again they all need to get round the table and thrash out a new world order, otherwise the music business will go bankrupt and the creative scene will die from a lack of inspiration and new talent coming through.

I would offer some of mine but have decided they are copyright.

 

I want 1 million dollars for each one.

 

Sorry about that ;)

Fair Use exists for a reason. Please do look it up...

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

 

Although it originated in the US it applies all over the world including in the UK.

 

The easiest solution to all of this is still to pay the musicians.

 

The current system for doing so is shit.

 

It needs a ground-up rethink and all the recording industry bosses around the table with the major internet companies.

 

Copyright law also needs amending as a lot has changed with the internet age.

What's the ultimate cross-breed camera of 2014? If we take all the strong points of the manufacturers and put them in one camera, what do we get?

• Full frame sensor from the Sony A7S


• 4K internal codec from the Panasonic GH4


• Big EVF from Fuji and their lovely X-T1


• 5 axis in-body stabilisation from Olympus (working for video with any lens)


• Cine lenses by Sigma - their 35mm F1.4 and 50mm F1.4 are that good


• Bundled grading / editing software from Blackmagic - Resolve 11


• Ergonomic styling by Fuji

I'm very sorry but I couldn't think of a single class leading technology that Canon and Nikon have brought to the market in the last few years to complete my dream camera!

Read the full article here

I did no noise reduction or FPN removal at all for Aerogirls yet it is clean.

 

I shot Video Mode, exposed for Video and that's just the way it came out!

Neither. Copyright infringement.

 

You can agree with it or not, but it's the law. Can't blame Vimeo for enforcing it.

 

No actually, it qualifies as Fair Use under copyright law.

 

However the Fair Use system is useless.

 

Say for example a musician is busking and singing a cover version.

 

Nobody tips and they die of starvation... That is non-commercial use of the cover, so Fair Use.

 

As soon as someone tips him, he risks being sued because he lacks the required license.

 

Copyright infringement is one thing... Quality of life quite another.

 

The current system is not fit for purpose and it doesn't protect the earnings of musicians, it decreases them.

 

I am sure the uploader of that Staff Pick would gladly pay for a license for the sound track if they could be granted it with some certainty, quickly and affordably (i.e. within their means).

 

There simply isn't that system in place.

 

----

 

I'm sorry Andy I don't agree it is stealing. Nobody is denying the right of musicians to sell their work. By taking their work and creating something new with it - in this case a rather brilliant video - that is the same as The Beatles being influenced by 50's R&B.

 

New stuff cannot exist if you put legal roadblocks in the way of creating it.

 

Therefore new careers and new businesses cannot exist...

 

It is stupid creatively and stupid economically and something really needs to be done.

 

It is ridiculous we are all ok with listening to such a broad range of commercial music on the radio and on Spotify, where the musicians get rewarded monetarily, and yet there is not a licensing system at Vimeo for the exact same music.

 

I'd much rather listen to music this way (i.e. with the video playing above) than to switch on the radio.

 

Have you listened to the radio recently!? Oh dear.

"Something INCREDIBLE is arriving this week at EOSHD for the Pocket Cinema Camera… It will lighten all our spirits! Be sure to check the blog in the next few days."

Comme on Andrew, spill the beans, it's Sunday !

 

Well since it is arriving this week, and this week being 'the future' I don't have much to spill at the moment. I know what it is, but before I have it in my hands, it would be silly to blog about it wouldn't i!

 

Please do not be angry... I invented this rumor, and also I do not have any contact with Sigma.

 

Please do not do this again on my forum. Thank you.

What about all of the Vimeo "Staff Picks" that use what I assume isn't copyright-cleared music? What will happen to these "Vimeo approved" films? Vimeo may have had these rules in place for a long time but not only have they been lax about enforcing them, it's arguable that they have condoned - even encouraged - the practice. Now those videos will all be handicapped too?

 

 

Theft or inspiration?

Above: my sample showing no fixed pattern noise in low light at ISO 400 on the Production Camera - it's all about the grade

Almost all Blackmagic Production Camera users have experienced fixed pattern noise - a banding effect or grain texture over the image - and they are quite upset at Blackmagic over the issue. But is the fixed pattern noise problem on the Blackmagic Production Camera a case of faulty cameras OR is it a limitation of the spec?

This is a complex issue and every user seems to report something different. However in my own experience with the camera and of looking at the experiences of others I have to say that all units look to perform in the same way. It is a limitation of the spec, not a case of a large number of faulty units being shipped out.

Yet many users - over 200 of them - are now putting pressure on Blackmagic to acknowledge a hardware or quality control 'fault' and to do hardware replacements. Sorry but I just don't think this is right.

It is best to look at how to handle the camera in order to avoid the FPN in the first place...

Read the full article here

According to Photo Rumors, Samsung will launch a flagship APS-C camera for pros at Photokina called the NX1. It is to feature 4K video.

Read the full article here

Now if Vimeo provides the option of paying for a licence fee for sync'ing, say with a minimum flat fee + a percentage cut from tip jar or whatever, that'll make a lot of people happier.

 

This will be a necessary move for Vimeo if they are to keep hold of their users. I won't be on Vimeo unless they improve the system. Already looking at alternatives.

Quirky

its very evident from reading all these posts that people are using other peoples copyrighted work/music for free with out permission - many have mentioned it in this thread .

 

There is a feeling that if you paid for the cd or download you own it and can use it anyhow . Or if its is too complicated to get a syncronisation license - to just use it anyhow .

 

That is why Vimeo and Youtube are having to clamp down as they are finally being pressured by the Music Industry to get their house in order.

And rightly so !

 

 

There is the Fair Use disclaimer though don't forget. Complicated and no guarantee, but some work can use copyrighted material with no permission.

Good news is the latest version works with MLV! (For audio, metadata, etc.)

 

I found it buggy but there's an update being reviewed on the App Store right now which should make it more stable with MLV.

The GH4 has nearly 12 stops of dynamic range in 4K mode and the colour looks like 10bit... The issue is that the camera hasn't been handled right in post or with the in-camera settings for at least 95% of the footage out there so far on the web. There's a range of weird things you need to do to tweak it and you also need to adjust a few curves in post as well.

 

I have only just mastered it myself!

The attitude that other peoples art should be yours to mix and mangle lift up your own work with for free or cheap, on a public platform, is outrageous.

 

Erm that is kind of how art works isn't it? Appropriation, borrowing ideas, images and sounds from others, mixing stuff together to create something new.

 

Also I don't think that 'lifting crap work on the free or cheap' is really the idea most filmmakers on Vimeo have in mind when they mix their cinematography sensitively and thoughtfully with a piece of music that inspired the shots in the first place.

 

Good job The Beatles didn't have to pay licensing fees to the musicians who influenced their sound... they'd have never have made it out the door.

there seems to be a fundamental missunderstand that when you buy a cd or buy a download you ' own it ' as you have paid for it ,

so you can reuse it on your video as you 'paid for it'.

Thats not true - you have paid for the right to listen to the music on your ipod or cd player - thats all

 

You do not own the rights to reuse the music on a  video on youtube or vimeo.

 

You have to pay syncronisation fees to be able to do that legally.

 

Very true.

 

And this is a big opportunity for the music industry to get their house in order.

 

It costs a musician something like 50 quid to licence a famous photo for their album cover. That is a one off fee I believe, not dependant on number of album covers printed? Correct me if I'm wrong, this is second hand knowledge and I haven't researched it myself.

 

The synchronisation fees for music - it is obscure and inaccessible - the system needs to go mass market. To license a famous Radiohead song it should be as easy as going to a website and clicking, paying, then getting a license by email.

 

A system like that needs to be cheap so it goes mass market, it is better than the mass market piracy and copyright infringement that we have now. Imagine all the amateur video producers using this for their many many cat videos :) It would make the record label and artists a nice little earning.

 

It is much better than the current system... which in the eyes of those uploading tracks to their artistic Vimeo clips... is non existant!

 

Of course I agree musicians should be paid. It is so obvious. It goes without saying. I know musicians in Berlin. One of my closest friends here is one. I have seen their money struggles first hand because of the industry implosion and shift in technology. As a content producer myself I have seen the impact piracy has (on my books). I hate that people have come to expect art, music, knowledge - all for free - and expect us to invest money back into quality material. That does not work! I have been both a consumer and an artist, and the perspective is very different, but somewhere there is a system that works for both of us.

 

I'll be damned if the current 'suits' at big companies will find the right one any time soon.

Stuff like this is 100% better and more creative than 99% of what I've heard on The Music Bed and Vimeo Music Store https://kishibashi.bandcamp.com/album/lighght