Xiong
-
Posts
142 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Xiong
-
-
I agree with the above comments, im not saying you should never use shallower DOF, heck it helps when your on a budget. But there are these weird techniques I see sometimes where even the subjects face is barely in focus... then again these are just my personal tastes, I do also enjoy shallow DOF, but sometimes I dont see the point of it, its ok to let the viewer's eye wonder in my opinion. To me closeups are perfectly fine for this technique because you're suppose to see the subject and focus on him/her only, Whats weird is when its a shot that doesnt need it at all or when used with run and gun, then there are some that are crazy like shooting 1.4 during a chase sequence.
Im not saying you should never use it, heck i know I will, but its good to know when it has an actual effect to the scene, then being saturated with constant shallow DOF, which can be exhausting at times and can lose its effect when you purposely 'do want to' use it.
To me the the main things that are on my mind when Im shooting is composition, lighting, and what is necessarily to the narrative. To me lighting is so important, its something that I always strive to improve on (probably because im terrible at it haha) because thats usually what gives away the illusion to the audience, in my opinion. It sometimes makes a location feel more like a set then it is a location. -
I agree Andrew ...
Most Hollywood Motion Pictures don't shoot past T3.5 or T2.8 as the dof is so shallow the actors are in and out of focus too much and the Director has to do multiple takes to get a usable pass ,
this takes more time and costs more money.
If you read up on all the great Cinematographers they all tend to offer this opinion .
I just read Cinematographer Freddie Young's Biography (he shot Lawrence of Arabia , Ryan's Daughter, Passage To India, Dr Zhivargo etc etc for Director David Lean)
He states he didn't like shooting past T3.5 for this reason.
Citizen Kane was shot 'Deep Focus' all around T11 - T22 ....everything in focus!! this required a huge amount of light on set just to get this look!!
Intersting quote from Roger Deakins Cinematographer on James Bond 'Skyfall'
from his website forum.( which is a goldmine of infomation have a look)
http://www.rogerdeak...c8709183d62bdd1[b]
Re: Selecting DOF on Close-Up Shots[/b]
by [b]
Roger[/b] » Sat Jun 11, 2011 9:19 am
I have only rarely shot a close up on a 135mm or longer and only then for a particular effect. There is no comparison between shooting one at a T2.0 on a 40mm and at 4.0 or 5.6 on a 135mm. The sense of space and relative distance of viewpoint will be different at any T stop.
As for a standard stop I don't have one. I generally like to shoot a night time close up at a T2.0 and I will most often shoot a day exterior close up at around a 4.0 or a 5.6 but I could also shoot at a 11.0. Every situation and every film is different.
Some really great information here thanks!
I also agree, whats the point of having a set built if your only going to blur that background, or going to far off foreign locales to capture that feel and look in the shot. Shallow DOF is great for indie "because" we dont have that kind of budget though, I wont argue that at all. But sometimes I see short films that use that technique in almost every single shot, even on some higher budget short films. Shallow DOF must be used sparingly for extreme purposes in my opinion (Yes just my opinion, dont get mad :P ).
Same thing with shaky cam, I wont even get into that rant here hahaha!
PS: Lawrence of Arabia is timeless, and is masterfully shot. -
Oooooh this is exciting. We're starting to turn that corner already, If this comes into fruition and Black Magic does pick this up, RED market might be the next target from them. But then again we dont know the price of this sensor or even if Black Magic will jump in, hope they are looking at this though. Im sure the big guys are already looking into this right now, for our sake lets hope it stays within the under 10K market to be able to get this thing running fully without having to need all sorts of components to get this running.
-
Thanks for the comparison Andrew, BMC will be my next camera after the GH2, maybe by them there might even be a BMC MK.2 that'll blow the waters out of the BMC? :)
-
[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1353099403' post='21806']
No I don't think I would. While I realize that LA7200's are about $1200-$1400, but I was hoping SLRMagic would make an entry level anamorphic adaptor for us indy-filmmakers. I would actually much rather have it be a little less sharp and pay a lower price. Maybe we are really talking about two different products: One that is for entry level cheapskates and one that is for those who demand the highest quality? I can totally understand if you had already bought tons of anamorphic lenses and you just want the one that will finally be the best of all of them, that you would pay a premium. However, I don't have deep pockets.
[/quote]
I agree.
As someone that likes the look, Ive never shot with one, so having a entry level for the new guys might be a good thing. Spending 1000+ and not really knowing exactly what your in for can frighten off new comers like myself, even with knowledge, this seems like experience>knowledge. -
For a second there Andrew I thought you were speaking in the 3rd person haha
Great info. -
You say-
[i][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]"I can't have a shot curtailed during a shoot because of an unreliable codec hack."[/font][/color][/i]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I say-[/font][/color]
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]I can't have a shot of a curtain during a shoot because of an unreliable sensor." [/font][/color][i][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif] [/font][/color][/i]
And here we go with sensor sizes haha
I think it'll be fine. -
The GH3 is leaps and bounds above the GH2, I just really wish the GH3 could solve the moire issue... but even though, its a great feet for Panasonic.
-
[quote name='ScreensPro' timestamp='1351964278' post='20969']
all the same things that everyone was absolutly in love with a few years ago are still there, and they have removed aliasing, moire and will soon offer 4:2:2 uncompressed out. They are not as sharp as the GH2/3.... Neither of those holds a candle to the Canon's colour and DR though.
If you are in the budget $10k or below range... expect comprimise. The BMCC has great features, but a small sensor and is not a stunning, professional DSLR... The RED One is a beauty, but a tank of a camera and will require $2k+worth of tripod and many $$$$ of accesories. Comprimises.
[/quote]
I wouldnt knock the BMCC too low on that scale, its does everything you mention here better, except for the 5D's full frame ability's. Sure, shooting in lower light is great, except that alot of natural light is not very pleasing, you'll still need lights or reflectors. To each his own, to me I find the BMCC is very pleasing to me and I dont like the use of extreme DOF unless needed. With RED One body and brain going for around $4K I think alot of people might be going RED soon, even if its slightly used. -
Sounds good, I wont be able to get one in the perceivable future, but good :)
-
[quote name='bwhitz' timestamp='1351214013' post='20325']
[color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]It's a no brainier to any sane individual. The only reason I'm being so aggressive about it, is because supporting terribly spec'ed cameras from canon just creates slower, more stagnation, in the industry. We need to be moving forward, not applauding them for a camera that should have been available 8 year ago. People need to stop this elitist-ego driven "well if you do REAL work, you can afford it" attitude. It's getting real old, and it's an emotional-ego driven argument, not a logical one.[/font][/color]
[/quote]
I agree with this statement whole heartily, well said. -
-
Well seemed like alot of PR statements, not much to take away from it. I congratulate you Andrew on asking the hard questions though, Im sure you kept it neat for him probably knowing he wont really answer your questions straight, but it was worth a try.
Paying that much for basically a software upgrade is not worth it. Those who can afford it can go for it, since you're basically buying the name brand only at this price point. Once again the only plus I see from Canon is the way they handle color, is it worth that much? For me, no. Thats why I've not gotten a t2i or 5D. I dont think it matters what we think anymore to Canon, so I've decided to move on.
Im surprised they even aloud you to interview them haha I imagine at Canon HQ in their break room, theres a dart board with your picture on it ;) -
[quote name='QuickHitRecord' timestamp='1350441188' post='19836']
Take a look, this is a good place to start: [url="http://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic-guide"]http://www.eoshd.com/anamorphic-guide[/url]
But be warned, it's an addiction.
[/quote]
I was temped to pick it up, was waiting to get my GH2 the getting that and the GH2 guide.
Thanks. -
I would love to know more about this shooting style with anamorphic in mind. Whats the benefit from just shooting with OCT-18 over just adding black bars? Resolution? Since Im still in the process on getting started I would love to hear more info on this subject if anyone can tip more or lead me to some really good articles on it.
-
In case you guys havent seen it yet.
Someone uploaded more test footage of the GH3
here: [url="http://www.photographyblog.com/news/panasonic_gh3_videos/"]http://www.photographyblog.com/news/panasonic_gh3_videos/[/url]
From the post he mentions "[color=#000000][font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif][size=3]Note that these are fully representative of the Panasonic GH3’s final video quality when it ships next month."[/size][/font][/color] -
Really hoping moire is fixed, besides that a flatter image would be on my next wish list along with 4-2-2 out, but that has already been confirmed as 4-2-0 :(
-
[quote name='tony wilson' timestamp='1349909062' post='19583']
der black majick man from atlantis or delmonte or aussistrayla said i shud give him cash monies for a camra he called it a cash advance.
6 monts lata he was sad and sed he had a problam wid der glass windows.
den he said how about puttin sum monies down for a new new camra for next year even better dan der old one from dis year dats broken and nobody has got
i go for a bath wid me ducky he exists when i squeeze him he go squeek
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6_d22aMqZs&feature=related[/media]
[/quote]
That hurt my head reading it.. -
Oh man, this is so disappointing, I hate moire. To bad as it was so promising at first. Really hope the GH3 wont disappoint..
-
-
OH! Freakin NICE! haha been waiting for this. Seems like not sleeping paid of this time. Reading now :D
-
I could do with different handles, those remind me of that hasselblad Lunar too much :/
-
Wow, that kinda sucks.. I'd expect at least some different hardware feature :/
-
Great interview Andrew, Thanks!
Canon 1DC Official Pricing
In: Cameras
Posted
Im on the boat of RAW is the future, 8-bit compression will be the past.