Germy1979

I'm convinced that with the proper marketing, moire can become an aesthetic like auto-tune became a "sound" lmao.. Rainbow bricks beeeotch!!

The Canon 1DC has landed in the US officially. 
http://twitter.com/txmedia/status/286861835037196288/photo/1
 

[quote name="Matt" post="23413" time="1355306710"]You could always use it for this! :) [img=[url="http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/3166/lensmug.jpg%5D%5B/quote%5D"]http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/3166/lensmug.jpg][/quote][/url]lol! is that the 24-105? It's funny how misleading the box to this damn thing is. I thought my wife had went above and beyond on Christmas a couple years ago. I saw "L" and thought, "yes sir!" ...Only to fake a smile 10 seconds later.

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.

Grain, anamorphic bokeh, 24/25p, handheld camerawork. All these things actually help me to become involved in the film as a STORY. It's storytelling for God's sake!
 
I don't read an adventure story to a child like I'd read a news article to my colleague. The latter requires formality and stark realism to present it with proper purpose, the former needs to be told a sense of wonder and otherworldliness in order to achieve the goal: magic!
 
All these "unrealistic" artifacts that are part of film tradition serve the same purpose as dry ice lighting and music on a magician's stage: they take us out of the ordinary and into a place where we can almost believe the impossible may well be possible...
 
People appear to be forgetting thousands of years of storytelling culture because of a slightly upgraded silicon chip.

I don't want to judge why I tend to agree with the critics who are having a hard time with it, because I may see it and change my mind.  I'm sure it's something that everyone will have to get used to...  If for the last 100 years we'd all been watching 48fps and suddenly somebody slows it down to 24, we'd probably have the same reaction...  It's different.  You're messing with a key ingredient in a huge part of our culture.
 
When all of this talk about the Hobbit being shot at double the frame rate started going around, the first thing I saw in my head was a Middle Earth home video that just looked cheesy as hell.  Just another ploy to "change" things...which I'm all for innovation, but part of what I think makes 24fps work in cinema is how slow it is.  Really, go up just 6 frames to 30, and it takes on a new character.  Part of the magic of that slow frame rate is the disconnection it creates for the viewer...  They watch films to get "lost" in the story.  I'm trying to develop this into words but it's hard to explain why it just "works." 
 
I'm not saying a great story can't be enjoyed at a higher frame rate.  If immersion is the goal, then it should be fine.  Just seems like everyone is saying it's all drawing attention to itself.  It's a bold scenario to try though...  In Indiana where I am, only ONE theater in the whole state is showing it at 48fps...the other 1,000 or so the usual 24.  Which begs the question, what's the damn point? 

I don't want to judge why I tend to agree with the critics who are having a hard time with it, because I may see it and change my mind.  I'm sure it's something that everyone will have to get used to...  If for the last 100 years we'd all been watching 48fps and suddenly somebody slows it down to 24, we'd probably have the same reaction...  It's different.  You're messing with a key ingredient in a huge part of our culture.
 
When all of this talk about the Hobbit being shot at double the frame rate started going around, the first thing I saw in my head was a Middle Earth home video that just looked cheesy as hell.  Just another ploy to "change" things...which I'm all for innovation, but part of what I think makes 24fps work in cinema is how slow it is.  Really, go up just 6 frames to 30, and it takes on a new character.  Part of the magic of that slow frame rate is the disconnection it creates for the viewer...  They watch films to get "lost" in the story.  I'm trying to develop this into words but it's hard to explain why it just "works." 
 
I'm not saying a great story can't be enjoyed at a higher frame rate.  If immersion is the goal, then it should be fine.  Just seems like everyone is saying it's all drawing attention to itself.  It's a bold scenario to try though...  In Indiana where I am, only ONE theater in the whole state is showing it at 48fps...the other 1,000 or so the usual 24.  Which begs the question, what's the damn point? 

[quote name='filmConvert' timestamp='1354159930' post='22598']
Hey all, apologies in advance for barging in on the conversation, but we just found this list, and wanted to let folks know that we've just released a brand spanking new version of FilmConvert, with all sorts of new camera specific profiles.

In particular, we've now got Technicolor, Flaat, Prolost, and Marvels Cine picture style support for your 5D, as well as full GH2 support with data on all the built in profiles.

We're always on the lookout for feedback from keen filmmakers, so we'd love for you to cruise over to our site, grab a copy, and tell us what you think.

Cheers all!
[/quote]

annnnnd the GH2 profiles look awesome:)

Well that escalated quickly...

I will quote David Lynch... No, I'll do one better then that...
 
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKiIroiCvZ0[/url]

You can't compare the 'ludicrousness' of 11 stops of dynamic range recorded in 8-bit at 50Mbps to 13 stops of dynamic range recorded in 12-bit raw at 1.1Gbps.  Sorry, you just can't.

Hey all, apologies in advance for barging in on the conversation, but we just found this list, and wanted to let folks know that we've just released a brand spanking new version of FilmConvert, with all sorts of new camera specific profiles.

In particular, we've now got Technicolor, Flaat, Prolost, and Marvels Cine picture style support for your 5D, as well as full GH2 support with data on all the built in profiles.

We're always on the lookout for feedback from keen filmmakers, so we'd love for you to cruise over to our site, grab a copy, and tell us what you think.

Cheers all!

They're great rental options for a special shoot though. More than anything I just love the whole philosophy behind the lenses. Whilst the corporations are making everything perfectly sharp, contrasty and clinical these guys are producing artisan cinema lenses with a 'dreamy' wide open look and two coatings, one for a low contrast and higher levels of flare. MUCH NEEDED!!

Gawddamn Canon. There's moire in the damn brownies.

DONE.

Gawddamn Canon. There's moire in the damn brownies.

DONE.

Gawddamn Canon. There's moire in the damn brownies.

DONE.

I don't agree. Highest usable ISO is 3200. What other DSLRs do better for 2012? Only two spring to mind - 5D Mark III and 1D X. Both a LOT more expensive than the GH3. And in low light you need to stop the lens right down on those if you want manageable focus.

Needing more than ISO 1600 or 3200 at F0.95 in low light is rare.

As for tight spaces, I assume you're talking about shooting actors with the camera rammed up their noses. For that you will indeed be better off with a 50mm on a 5D Mark III rather than 50mm on the GH2. Oh I forgot - maybe use a 25mm!??

Here's the thing with moire & aliasing...

ALL cameras have it. Even the 1D C and that is $12,000, and the Blackmagic Cinema Camera.

The 5D Mark II had much worse moire and aliasing than the GH3 and that didn't stop it being used by pros in Hollywood.

It isn't a desirable quality of the image but the way some guys have gone on about it on forums has been ridiculously over the top.

The list of cameras that the GH3 is better than for moire and aliasing is staggeringly long - 5D2, NEX 5N, NEX 5R, NEX 7, A99, D800, D600, 7D, 60D, 600D, 650D, EOS M, 550D, OM-D and nearly every other DSLR on the market.

The 5D3 is soft but when you sharpen in post sometimes you get some aliasing.

The GH2 had slightly less moire & aliasing than the GH3 given the same situation. But it still occasionally flared up. Not so much in the real world but with a very sharp lens with a very narrow band of fine patterns. You may get 1 occurrence out of every 100 shots with it. On the GH3 maybe you'll get 5 occurrences out of a 100. Depends what you're shooting. The 5D2 was doing it on roof tiles and water!! All sorts of stuff.

The GH3 seems to have a lighter anti-aliasing filter, so there's a very slightly wider window of fine patterns that it occurs on.

I hope this puts the GH3's moire into perspective. I know it can be a confusing issue, as it depends on so many different factors whether you get some or not. By the way, it is far less visible on a TV or projector than it is on a computer monitor - which is the least organic and cinematic way to watch video.

[quote name='HurtinMinorKey' timestamp='1353527556' post='22076']
Alexa like? This video looks way worse than what we have seen previously. Was it supposed to be that flat?
[/quote]

Some of the shots do look kind of flat yes. I have a prediction: Now that we are getting cameras with all this dynamic range shot in flat profiles, I bet we will be seeing a lot more flat looking footage. I think there will be a tendency to avoid crushing and burning so much because people will want to show all that latitude that people will leave it more flat then anything else. In some ways I see this as a good thing. Frankly, I'm totally sick to death of the current "Film" look with the over bearing crushed blacks and desaturated orange and blue cast. I'm sure this more subtle grading will eventually even out though and turn into something interesting. We'll have to see what happens though.

I'm sure BM didn't plan to have this delay, having to deal with all these impatient customers, like Toyota didn't plan to recall 7.4 million cars B)

And waiting a bit for such a milestone treat at an unbelievably low price shouldn't be that hard...

[quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1352895269' post='21612']
On the negative note, this also opens the doors to a new era of random cat videos on youtube. Some guys just like shooting doorknobs, corners, porchlights, etc.. Calling it a low light test and seeing how many comments they can get, lol. Like facebook. Vimeo needs a "like" button..
[/quote]

So what? Let people enjoy their hobby.

If they don't shoot their cat with a BMCC they'll do it with a 5D Mark III or their iPhone and put it on Vimeo / YouTube as well. A lot of people enjoy buying high end expensive gear. It's good for the economy. At least the cat video's now will have a great dynamic range (and crappy hdr over the top post processing because of the raw capabilities ;))

By the way, Vimeo has a 'Love' button already.

[quote name='andy lee' timestamp='1352747613' post='21521']


interesting read here on Cronenwerth with the Red One MX with an 80D filter to give more blue so he had more latitude...interesting idea!

[url="http://www.icgmagazine.com/wordpress/2011/12/01/1787/"]http://www.icgmagazi...011/12/01/1787/[/url]
[/quote]

That's pretty awesome....considering if one had four grand laying around, he could own the camera. Accessories are all over the place in the "red stuff for sale" thread at Reduser for great deals. I think the only reason there are still any available on Red is the fact that Redmags are RIDICULOUSLY expensive.

there are some Tiffen Low Contrast filters on ebay now
[url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/TIFFEN-4x4-Low-Contrast-3-Glass-Filter-New-/160901918257?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item2576806e31"]http://www.ebay.co.u...=item2576806e31[/url]

and Schneider too

[url="http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-Schneider-Optics-4x4-Low-Contrast-2-Filter-Low-Con-Tiffen-Filters-/261081152982?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item3cc9a63dd6"]http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/New-Schneider-Optics-4x4-Low-Contrast-2-Filter-Low-Con-Tiffen-Filters-/261081152982?pt=Camera_Filters&hash=item3cc9a63dd6[/url]

Can confirm that the picture profiles have been drastically changed since Photokina. No High Key, Retro, or anything remotely interesting like that. They have gone all 'Canon' in the picture profile department.

I have a 7" lilliput monitor on mine also.. Hooked into hdmi, very reliable and i would say essential.. I have a loupe with a diopter for focusing, but the other 95% of the time, i'm using the lilliput. It does much better than that turd of an LCD attached to the Gh2 when you hit record.. (Doesn't go apeshit "blue-green" when you start recording, lol.) There is still the gamma shift issue, but nothing like the lcd.. i paid $220 for mine.