hmcindie

41 minutes ago, gingercat said:

Shooting an aliasing test chart on a computer monitor is likely to create aliasing and moire - especially then showing a tightly cropped portion. A monitor can create all sorts of artefacts because of mismatched refresh rates with the camera. A test with a high quality printed chart is much more reliable. I've looked closely at a number of 4K RAW clips with very fine detail from the Z6 & Ninja V and could not see excessive aliasing.

If your not looking at a zone testplate you will probably not see that much aliasing even if the 4k lineskips like crazy. The Sony a7r line did that at least in the older models in 4k too and no one cares.

Hey guys, here's a little 4 minute short we wound up making in 2018. Shot half in Finland and half in LA, about 95% with the 5dmarkIII in raw. A couple of shots from the Sony a7sII and the rx10ii.

Here's also a weird mix of Behind the scenes stuff to peruse through:

5d mark III & ml RAW. Absolutely astounding for me. Still use it.

Here's a little magical forest battle shot with the 5d mark III in raw, 1080p60 (1920x670 or whatever it is), upscaled to 4k.

I think you might've misunderstood him. 2.39:1 theatres can also show 1.85:1 easily, they are played in the middle of the screen. The curtains just won't go full length.

Hasn't the Tokina 11-16 always been huge with CA? I remember seeing CA on the 7d with that thing.

14 minutes ago, Adam Kuźniar said:

Oh man I hope you never have to shoot with any cinema camera (which the Pocket is) because they all HAVE to be rigged to be used. Damn, that Alexa Mini must be so shit because it doesn't even have a battery slot.

That's user error, not the camera's fault.

Yeah but the difference is you get that crop in resolution and frame rate that the R can't even dream of achieving. 

In general I just feel like you went in with the "pocket sux and lemme prove that" approach and it influenced your experiences. R sounds like a much better choice for your workflow though and I can agree with that.

1. I love the Alexa Mini and the Ursa pro. You don't accidentally hit the iris button like on the BMCC6k. My buddy also kept hitting it just by holding that shitty thing so that also makes it the cameras fault. Sure "user error" but that button doesn't even seem to go down to react to anything. Put some gloves and hit that thing in the winter. You'll get used to it (as you get used to anything) but it was an obvious design error (actually the whole camera seems to be a weird design error, excluding the excellent sensor). Also I don't remember rigging the ursa pro that much and I did handheld with the Alexa mini. Which oddly is easier on the Alexa as the weight gives it a bit more stability.

2. Crop / resolution. Duh. Still it is a huge crop so all that resolution goes to "waste" for closeups when I would really need them for wider ones.

3. I'm not talking about the image yet, it may blow me away as I grade (which it hasn't yet as I'm just looking at everything through the braw plugin in premiere).

I was between buying the EOS R or the BMCC6k. Went with the R because the BMCC sounded like a slog to use (20min batteries, have to be rigged around etc).

Tested it a couple of weeks ago and yesterday managed to shoot with the EOS R and BMCC6k together (a buddy borrowed the BMCC6k, ronin s and an atomos ninja v to fool around). Loving the R, loving the usability, tilting screen, image quality in 4k clog (internal is great, not really appreciating the 10bit output).

BMCC6k was just horrid usability wise, I kept smashing all kinds of buttons just keeping that thing in my hand. Used a lot of 2.8k 120fps and that was a huuuge crop making the 1.7 crop on the R seem like nothing (my 10mm became like a 30mm). Also that screen on the BMCC was surprisingly rubbish and the preloaded LUT for visual aid complete shite.

Will be analysing the footage more closely later but I don't really give a damn about pixel peeping anymore.

Later I'll be editing the 4k clog (8&10bit), braw (6k,2k) and couple of shots 1080p60 from the R all together. Used the 15-35mm f2.8 RF lens on R and that thing on the RONIN S was a wonder to use. It locks on to faces with the 1.4.0 firmware and no sound comes from the lens.

Still loving my old 5d mark III RAW but for shootings where we actually need playback the R will come really handy.

9 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Its cool, but at that price point I could just buy an external Vari ND for all my lenses or at least all I'd use on a given day. I guess these would be less prone to flaring. 

The bigger appeal of internals ND's is being able to turn them off or on without removing anything. This doesn't really solve that. 

That doesn't make any sense. When you need an ND when filming is usually outside in the sun. If you have that ND there you can easily get to that coveted 180 degree shutter. You don't need to remove it until it gets really dark. And after that you will not need to put it back on. Your vari ND will have less quality and just fiddly.

Also if you buy the ND adapter you will most likely have the regular adapter too. Instead of taking out the ND in the adapter, just switch adapters. It takes 10 seconds and is usually done after it gets dark.

At least "User" can just use 24p cams, no need for anything better. Save some space too. 

2 hours ago, Mokara said:

"Mojo" counts for nothing. Personally I find Canon's too big and bulky, I am always half afraid that most of them are going to slip out of my hands. Being built like a tank is great if it falls out of your hand. I prefer cameras that are not always threatening to slip, that way I am more free to get the shot that I want rather than constantly having to be aware of where my fingers are.

If you say stuff like "mojo counts for nothing" then that tells me that you're not talented enough to spot what mojo is. And man, if a Canon is too bulky, you would really hate an Alexa then haha.

"not always threatening to slip". Huh? The little ass Sonys are constantly slipping like greased fishes.

A couple of little ML RAW action scenes done as practice runs:

On 6/25/2019 at 1:55 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

Doesn't the C200 have a lot more Dynamic range?

Not that much more. 

What's the problem? The 5dmarkIII with magic lantern RAW hack has been available for years and it delivers everything except "tack sharpness".

I've been using it so much that upgrading to a better camera has been difficult as not even the C200 offers exactly what the 5dIII with raw does.

2 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

I was taught at college that interlaced footage was invented as a stopgap until they found a way to record digital video as whole frames like film does. Now we all shoot progressive, but since that's most common at this level with a rolling shutter, is it really much better than interlaced?

For example, if you're filming a model and there's also a photographer there, you can clearly see their flashes rolling down the frame, especially so in slow motion shots. I would think that interlacing would handle those situations at least 85% better, which made me wonder; did we really make progress with progressive acquisition on RS sensors? Is global shutter the only 'real' progressive frame? Does it matter?

Rolling or global shutter has nothing to do with interlacing. You can have interlaced material with either, it's just a way of encoding more framerate into the same bandwidth. So 25p -> 50i in PAL. 

Most of the cameras used in the days of interlacing were using global shutter CCD's.

Interlacing would not help in anyway for rolling shutter as the RS is independent of how the frames are encoded and is usually 1/60 atleast.

52 minutes ago, DBounce said:

For me it's more about motion cadence... which I feel looks better on GS.

That goddamn RS wobble is horrific.

You can edit on HDR on any monitor but you can't see HDR except through external monitoring. HDR can (at the moment) only be played back through a blackmagic (or similar) card and HDMI output to an external monitor.

I have the Acer X27 (great monitor with FALD and HDR1000) but there is no way to see HDR through Premiere or Resolve unless played back through an external box. Yay?

A lot of grading is done in grading suites where there is no light and you have a 100k projector system. People sit in that suite for hours on end and they get used to the dark. They all want to have it look good there, no one cares what it looks like once it comes out of the telly. No one will usually bother to tell anyone that "hey, this is too dark on my laptop" as all the important "creative decisions" are done in the suite and everyone is there.

And if they do HDR grading then that will complicate the whole mess.

4 hours ago, Towd said:

In my opinion it is one of the most creatively limiting artifacts in low budget cameras.  Just about everything else can be worked around from limited dynamic range, to depth of field, to iffy "color science".  But when something forces you to shoot in a certain style, it's very limiting creatively. 

I agree but have you noticed how every other camera has it too? Professional cameras still have it and doing a scene like that on a C200 is horrible. Yeah it has half less but it's still visually easy to spot and if do a real bourne style fight scene with any of these cams you will have to change your settings to something that rolls less. So yeah, you could do that with an EOS R but you have to drop the resolution. But you have to drop it with every other cam too, especially FF ones. I shot a lot of that style of shit back in the day with a Canon 7d in 720p. Dropping the resolution is always an option and it works so these scenes are not out of the question.

Hey everybody, what's up here in the world of cameras? Did a little fighty thingy when I had the GH5 for a sec. Threw in some curves, tested the 10bit 4k and the 180fps and and... I think I didn't touch the vlog as the weather was greyish so no need for more dynamic range. Had some kind off a speedbooster on top of it.

I don't even have an opinion on it. It worked? Didn't notice anything weird yet. You could probably happily shoot a film with the GH5 (just get a monitor for it).

On 12/29/2018 at 8:52 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

Nice work! You really nailed the action. Some reactions were a bit slow but overall its really good. Were they both martial artists? How long did that take you to shoot?

Thanks! The woman wasn't a martial artist, we trained her for a couple of hours and then shot. I think the shoot was one day.

On 12/23/2018 at 1:15 AM, shaolin95 said:

Are you kidding????? guess you dont own many cameras. I have owned Sony, Panasonic, Canon and Pentax.

That's just like only four manufacturers. You need to own at least seven and at least three different models from each. And did you say "owned"? So you don't actually own them anymore? Don't be a n00b, you need to get down to business bro! Take out your wallet and go get some new models!

There is this sony fanboy in a finnish facebook forum (man I hate this modern facebook crap) who has been spouting the gospel of Sony for about six years. That's a long ass time. I remember his posts from the times of the Sony Nex-7. Now he is strongly on the A7 bandwagon. The thing is though... he doesn't really shoot anything that looks that great. Neither do I but there is a disconnect when I see postings where somebody gushes about a camera but never shows anything he has shot with it and when he does, it looks like shit. This isn't a Sony thing necessarily but that guy was.

16 hours ago, ade towell said:

yes well done Canon, I can now spend £2300 on a camera that has slightly better RS than the £500, 2.5 year old gold standard for crap RS. All be it with a bigger, closer to m43 crop

So the RS is not an issue with another manufacturer but is an issue when it's a Canon?

Interesting logic. I get it in the sense that your basically spec shooting. I don't get it in the sense that either it is a problem (then it is a problem with every camera that has it) or it is not.

On 11/19/2018 at 8:18 PM, androidlad said:

 

Totally expected this underwhelming result.

So it's still faster than the a6300 by about 20%. Funny. A7sII at 4k is also about 30ms. 

Another little action scene with the 5d raw. A couple of shots from the sony a6300 thrown in there for good measure too. All upscaled to 4k.

I recently did a quick grade on a fast project. They shot it with a red dragon in 6k. I did some prores files from them and then did a quick grade on top of those. One shot was scaled in 140%. Looked good (we were in an HD timeline) but I decided to replace it with the original 6k file. Snapped it right there in the shot, now the scale was something along 30% so instead of scaling HD up, we scaled 6k down. And... it looked almost the same. I switched those two shots back and forth. Almost no difference in sharpness. Funny.