Andrew Reid

Caleb there's cinematic gold in everything you describe, instead all of that was handled in a hack like way, giving a roughshod treatment and replaced with 3 hours of waffle and CGI. I've lost faith in Jackson as a good filmmaker. The Lord Of The Rings was obviously some kind of fluke.

Yeah I'm not a big fan of motion capture. Again realism is no good, where is the creative leeway? Suspension of disbelief? I don't want to watch a man in a leotard prance about a virtual environment.

We live in a new world order driven by unthinking godless consumerism, where idiots consume massive amounts and vast industries produce shlock for them.   The idiot industries are incredibly powerful and our future cultural direction will mostly be defined by idiocy, mediocrity and stupidity on a grand scale.   If you look at social changes around the world, the big growth industries are related to serving idiots.

So it is a new processor with a software technique to get smoother colour from 8 bit.   It isn't 10 bit at all.   At a time when Panasonic's pro A/V division should be releasing a 4K cinema camera with global shutter that does AVC Ultra and raw, they come along and do this?? Unacceptable stuff really.

Above: Peter Jackson in the camera department of "The Hobbit" Peter Jackson chose to take a controversial step away from the cinema look and shoot The Hobbit at 48p HFR. I've now seen it in glorious 48 frames per second and that isn't the biggest problem. Jackson is shooting The Hobbit like an epic but the material this time is not of epic proportions, and the action sequences are typical popcorn schlock. The Lord Of The Rings was an allegory tale with the horrors of Word War II echoing throughout, an epic heartfelt piece of art with gravitas (and a huge leap in CGI technology at the time the film was shot). The Hobbit is simply 6 chapters of a thin children's book stretched to 3 hours.

The lens is likely changing aperture as you go through the zoom range. Try not to zoom during a shot.

Cheers Shian. Yeah does look like an extremely wide anamorphic in the perfume advert but I liked the distortion, gives it a less flat more unnerving feel. Very happy with the DR on the BMCC, I spend more time in Resolve now than I do on editing the final piece in Premiere!

Yes but there's hardly any difference between the firmware I had and the final one.

  It holds onto the shadows really well too, which sadly Vimeo doesn't.

http://vimeo.com/55559016 If I were stuck on a desert island with only one lens, I'd choose the $20 Helios 44M-2 and anamorphic adapter. OK that is technically two lenses but I'd fire all my other lenses at a brick wall at 200mph if it meant keeping hold of the Isco CentaVision 2x anamorphic.  

I've booked my seats as far back as possible to minimise the stress on my eyes. There's even a break half way through at the screening I'm going to. This is common in Germany but not in England. The Germans are very sensitive and cannot suffer Hobbits for 3 hours solid and neither will I have to, thankfully.   Full report tomorrow!

The whole point of HFR is to see it in the cinema, in 3D.   We know how it looks on the web. Like 60p or 60i.

Very observant Pixelheist. No I don't shoot skateboarding videos for a living! The focus of that day was not really on making Dogtown and Z-boys. Those few hours at the skateboard were organised as a test session of the pre-production GH3 with a feedback session afterwards. I think Simon has done a good job to edit together various shots from around 10 different people in that video. This isn't what he usually does, he is a filmmaker and here's an example of his main work - [url="http://www.humansproject.com"]http://www.humansproject.com[/url]

[url="http://vimeo.com/53642599"]http://vimeo.com/53642599[/url] Last month I was invited by Panasonic to shoot a documentary for a skatepark in Hamburg, as an opportunity to test out the GH3 and offer some feedback on the camera. Here, thanks to Simon Sticker of [url="http://flowmedia.co.uk"]Flow Media[/url], a filmmaker given the unenviable task of editing together the footage, is the finished piece! How does the GH3 compare to it's main rival in the Canon camp for video, the 5D Mark III? Have a look at the next video for some clues.  

Interesting to hear the costume department's thoughts in that video. A lot of creative people on the film, pushing their hardest - and yet still the leap necessary in the costumes and sets wasn't enough to bridge the gap to 48fps 4K in 3D.

Love the style of the Japanese film Tony.   The problem today is extremely simple.   In the film industry there are too many technicians and businessmen and not enough artists.

There seems to be a huge failure in the technology industry to appreciate beauty. Give me the fine grain in a raw file over noise reduction in a JPEG any day. Another example is excess digital processing on TVs. We all know what the dreaded 200hz smoothing mode looks like. These engineers think they are being clever with their crusade against motion blur, grain, noise and softness. They won't stop until everything looks plastic and shit. Well I am voting with my feet. I am only going to buy the cameras which offer me minimal electric tricks and maximum organic image quality, and clinical modern lenses can remain on the shelves as far as I'm concerned.

Nice mod. I did the same to my Isco Centavision and it worked well. The Iscorama 36 I have not tried yet so this info is particularly useful to me.

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/the-hobbit-ian-mckellan-cate-blanchett-the-hobbit.jpg"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/the-hobbit-ian-mckellan-cate-blanchett-the-hobbit.jpg[/img][/url] "Photography is truth. The cinema is truth twenty-four times per second." - Jean Luc Godard "Cinema is the most beautiful fraud in the world." - Jean Luc Godard Cinema used to be an illusion, but now the camera is putting extra pressure on filmmakers to keep up the illusion. Drawing on a conversation I had a few months ago with a VFX supervisor, EOSHD presents the challenges and problems that 4K and 48p (HFR) bring to the film set.

  CG looks much better now. But I still hate the way CG characters move. It is all too linear and placed, too staged. Those swooping keyframed movements on all character animation is so tired now.

Super smooth slow mo looks cinematic yet it is often shown at 30p not 24p. I think Axel has a good point here that somehow 24p adds gravity and weight to actors, and with 48p they just kind of float there lifelessly. 

  This is a good point. The whole point of HFR and 3D is to make the story telling more immersive. If it doesn't and looks worse aesthetically, then serious questions should be asked of the industry's technological direction.   Like the magic trick, art isn't explicitly real, it is allegory and so the camera work should also have hidden meaning and not put everything on display in equal detail whether it is a prop or an actor. Peter Jackson is a great craftsman and story teller but I'm beginning to doubt that he's made a piece of art here.

  I am really torn over this. Cannot figure out if the problem is as you say above - messing with culture - and the shock of it suddenly changing, or if the aesthetic of 24p is fundamental to our human vision in making an immersive cinematic experience.   Nobody in their right mind preferred the look of 60i over 24p in the DV days so why suddenly now is The Hobbit shot this way?

Seriously??

I really hope this is not the case and that beauty has a universal appeal through the generations. I consider the Mona Lisa more beautiful than a TV soap opera for instance.   So I don't agree with your point!