Neumann Films

24 minutes ago, jcs said:

Interesting end result- kind of reminded me of a CGI scene (as a cool effect). Perhaps too much grain/noise was removed; tried adding some back and tweaked the color a bit. Specular on lip was oversharp/digital, fixed. I dig the super color of the 60's... It's harder to make a super-saturated image look good if the color science is off. This looks decent full size:

Nice grade!  I'm feeling more Sepia tones myself, but this looks damn fine   Most compressed images are pretty bad when you look too closely.  I generally just use the phone and TV test.  If it looks good there...I'm covered.

7 minutes ago, jcs said:

This looked pretty good until I clicked full size- lots of artifacts and loss of detail in the background, blurry then solid edges, like cards, etc. Is this green screen and an artificial background or compression artifacts?

Shallow DOF on a sub-optimal anamorphic lens combined with JPEG compression combined with some motion blur (it's a dolly move) combined with...well all of those things in 8 bit.  That said, in motion and with a lot of film grain to compensate, it looks sharp in the right places and "grainy" in the rest.  We were asked to shoot a second video for Panasonic using these lenses.  Tons of character and but not for those that want really sharp/crisp images.  The edges get really soft (you can see even in the center where it becomes soft).  This is a shot on location though, no green screen.

34 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Lovely image. Can I order a 16X20? ?

Thanks

I actually wish I took some stills with this setup now.  The 6K Photo Mode is fine but pretty compressed.  

Just digging into 6K Photo Mode files.  Shot with the SLR Magic 2x primes (jury is still out on them for me...lot's of character but they are slow and not very sharp wide open, so they get even slower).  No V-LogL is a bummer but it's not a deal breaker.  Pretty good option for anamorphic, IMO.  The fact that they even have it available is pretty neat.

1 hour ago, funkyou86 said:

I am really not a big fan of Pannys marketing department. The "reviewers" were useless, exept @Neumann Films, Luke did a great job. The hype was too big, check the topics and articles before the official announcement. The expectation were high, everybody wanted everything, for nothing.

Thanks, although a 2-3 minute promotional video was the only line item on the contract.  The only thing they paid us for was the "Beyond the Grid" video.  

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

I'm 42. In high school computer classes involved typing and running some DOS program. I think I had my first legal drink before I ever sent an email. I remember the days when I would yell at my brother to get off the phone because I was hoping some girl was going to call... she never did. Lol. Well she probably did but gave up because of the busy signal. Hell I remember when call waiting was the newest technology that I had to explain to my parents when they kept asking why the phone kept beeping at them. Lol. 

Yup, I ran some video games from DOS.  I remember using the internet for the first time to play Dark Forces: Jedi Knight with a friend, he had to call my parents land line and the phone would actually ring, then I would pick up etc, very weird.  Also...we had a shared land line with neighbors at one point and one of those old phones with the dial.  So, we would pick up the phone to call and a neighbor would be using the phone so you had to wait.  I can just see how this would sound to a 20 year old, like a post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi or something!

13 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

Yeah, I'm of an age that knows a history without the information super highway mobile World Wide Web, so I had a life untethered. Maybe I romanticize that nostalgia a bit, but, among other things, I do know what it was like to have a conversation with friends about stuff before an easy answer was in everyone's pocket. 

Yup, I grew up in the country with no cable and we had to chop firewood for heat...lol.  I always find this to be a fascinating discussion though...I think people of our age group are some of the "oldest young people" in history.  We know of a life (pre internet/cell phones) that younger folks can't even comprehend.  

The invention of the automobile and people that experienced life before and after cars probably went though something similar.  

At 33 years old,  I can instantly feel like an "old man" when talking to 20 year old simply by discussing what life was like as a kid for me.  Usually that seems to take a full generation to happen.

10 minutes ago, fuzzynormal said:

Not alone.  It's my favorite procrastination tool, among other cons.  Feel like it often diminishes my quality of life rather than enhances it.

My wife and I recently went on a little vacation and I chose to not bring my phone...it was bliss.  Cleared my head of so many things and just felt...untangled.  I would highly suggest it to anyone that dare try.

I think the point is...make an informed decision, don't just throw your money away on an inferior product.  I mean, we do this with every other purchase, why would a camera be any different?  Sure, it serves a purpose, but it's still your hard earned money and you need that purchase to do very specific things. 

39 minutes ago, Fritz Pierre said:

Well the issue for Panasonic could be and is what they spent on R&D, manufacture and marketing of this product...for a publication like C5D to come along, and label what to me personally is a huge feature in this camera (Vlog) as "unusable) WTF!...motivated possibly as "click bate" as some members have pointed out...maybe that's a part of C5D's business model...but you cannot make your business model dependent, on possibly slandering an extremely anticipated product!...of course Panny lent them the camera????...but still

No way Panasonic lent them the camera, they got their hands on one, but no pre production models were meant for "review".  I was told that multiple times.  IF Panasonic did lend them the camera for review, that almost makes it worse.  

I think the most respectful thing here is to all admit that it's not the cameras or the gear that we come here to read about (well, not exclusively).  I sent Andrew a PM saying that I would read what he wrote regardless of the subject matter, because it's more about his perspective/honesty/wit than it is about the cameras.

So if this side of the industry is causing him to lose passion (which would never require an explanation)...then he should leave it and find where his passions have moved on to.  He could take EOSHD anywhere he wants and as long as it's in the same ballpark, most people would stick around.

10 minutes ago, jonpais said:

@Neumann Films I don't recall anyone who's shot with the GH5 sharing  a great deal of information about the new exposure aids, the vector scope and waveform monitor. Did you find yourself relying on them much during your shooting? If so, could you share any thoughts on your experience with them?

The waveform was a little weird and it took up too much screen space for my liking so I just set Zebras to 95 and went from there.  

Just now, jonpais said:

I suppose V-log is non-refundable though. ?

Actually, I'm pretty sure the version of it currently being used in the pre production cameras is the same one from the GH4.  So it's a profile created for an 8bit image.  Now, I'm not saying the version that will ship with the cameras will be v2 and tailored for 10bit solving any stepping or artifacting.  I noticed some of that in my footage but only where I was doing some crazy grading and color temps were clashing.  That happens on RED cameras too though (and they claim to be 16bit).  So...I dunno.  It's part Log profile that was made for a different camera, part 10bit is still not 16bit, part...unless you're working in 32bit float point and really take your time with a grade...you will still see some of that stuff.

It's probably best to just buy one on Amazon, use it for the 30 day return period, and see for yourself if you like it.  Or just rent it.  So many opinions on it now, that it's almost nauseating. 

At this point you don't know who is paid by who to say what, who just wants views, and who simply doesn't know what they are doing with the camera (although they are a little easier to spot).

I don't want to put anyone down because we honestly fell into all three of those categories at one time or another.   We didn't know a lot about the camera when we made our video.  I wasn't even sure how to turn on Auto Focus...lol.

2 hours ago, jonpais said:

If you squint, you can see his secret weapon in the corner.  

None of the shots from the "launch video" were with the anamorphics...although I really wish we would/could have.

There are plenty of cheap adapters.

3 hours ago, Philip Lipetz said:

The SLR Magic lenses do not have a great reputation with my friends who have used them.  I have not. So they complain that Vedya dropped their plans for an anamorphic set when the GH4 sensor aspect ratio changed.  I really hope the revive those plans. 

I wasn't a huge fan of the Anamorphot adapters but I don't like using adapters so that probably had something to do with it. The primes are pretty good...lots of character but sharp enough in the center even when wide open.  

3 hours ago, Flynn said:

I wish Panasonic would come out with a 2x adapter. They could even slap the Leica label on it and sell it for a premium.

And you would think they have the perfect camera to match those lenses with as it seems they are starting to push anamorphic.

6 minutes ago, Philip Lipetz said:

Lenses, not resolution, are the problem with GH5 Anamorphic 

How so?  PL to M43 adapter, SLR Magic primes, SLR Magic Anamorphot, Letus adapter, countless vintage lenses.  

Plenty of options.

Just toying around with initial tests and compared the recorded frame on the GH5 to an Epic W in 8K...not too far off.  It all comes down to how you process your footage but generally, it seems like it's acceptable to look at the vertical resolution and use that to determine what a good finishing window would be.  For instance, in the Epic W you record 4320 pixels tall in Anamorphic mode and no one has a problem referring to this as 8K Anamorphic.  If you end up scaling down the vertical resolution at all to fit the window, it's generally acceptable to have the horizontal frame scaled up a bit. 

50 minutes ago, jonpais said:

I hear you! It's just that after using Lumix cameras now for the past four years or so, and having had to re-think everything I've been taught to believe from forum members here and at other sites, particularly regarding Photo Style settings, using adapters, LUTs and so on, that I'm starting to question every remark I see online, which I'm not sure is a healthy thing. Then there's the fact that I want to grow as a filmmaker and I'm not at all sure where I'm going with that. As for what kind of information I'd be interested in hearing from you - for example, I often wondered why someone would intentionally underexpose an image two stops; I've never had to underexpose a shot, then bring up the shadows: it seems like a recipe for introducing noise and banding in the image - I see embarrassing examples of this all the time on Vimeo. But listening to Paul Nelson explain how he often shoots athletes in shaded woods, and how he underexposes to retain detail in the sky at sunset, then lifts the shadows in post, and now I understand that there's a time and place for underexposing shots, and at the same time, this obsession with wide dynamic range and low noise. When I was studying French at university, we had to learn French culture as well as language, and we were tested on both. Some students complained that they just wanted to learn the language. But you can't learn one without the other. So, I guess I'd just like to hear more about your experiences a filmmaker, your workflow, how you overcame certain difficulties, anything but specs!

The footage in the Redwoods was tough, it was overcast and it stays so dark in the forest that we had to find areas with clearings just to get enough light to shoot under ISO 1600. Even then, to protect the highlights, we had to use an Aputure LED light.  There wasn't much to "protect" as it was overcast and would just end up being white anyways but...I always try to avoid that obvious clipped look that the Lumix cameras get...very little rolloff.  This camera might be better, I just didn't want to take any chances as we were on a tight schedule.  So I generally held onto the highlights and opted to light where I normally wouldn't light and go heavy on the noise reduction and hope that the 10bit would save it.

Are you talking about that video in particular?  

1 hour ago, jonpais said:

I was watching a review of the Sony a99 Mk II on Max Yuryev's channel last night, where he had sports photographer Paul Nelson as a guest; and one commenter actually complained that Max didn't bookmark the specs or something so he could just get the information he wanted, without all the discussion of Mr. Nelson's career, background, and experience. Yet this was Max's most interesting show ever, and I'm neither a stills shooter nor a sports photographer. I bring this up because I am really as interested in hearing about Mr. Neumann's personal experiences as a director/cinematographer as it relates to the equipment he uses  as I am in the specs of the GH5.

Ha, I'm kinda done talking about the GH5 as well.  What were you wondering, specifically?  

8 hours ago, Axel said:

On Dual-IS:

Seeing the list of lenses which support it, I know I wouldn't use it, except perhaps for the Leica 42,5 mm. The IBIS, working with all lenses, may or may not be very effective.

On AF:

I bet it will be disappointing in the first test, right after unboxing. Multiply face detection, pinpoint, seamless 1-area, multi-area, zone-AF, lowlight-AF asf. with the four custom sets and it's parameters. That's so many settings. I think one has to patiently test them, jonpais wrote something like this. It's not relying on automation anymore, it's programming. And one has to know this stuff by heart - or the AF won't do what you expect it to do.

Yeah, that's partly why I haven't even bothered with AF yet.  Too many options. I did try that focus points the others day and that was pretty cool.  That needs to start making its way into All cameras and lenses.

The shutter angle was there in the GH4, right?  IMO it's the only way to go.  Especially when the shutter speed doesn't have 1/48th, only 1/50th.  Also, no 1/120, only 1/125

I think the increased luminance value options are for the hybrid gamma they are working on.

1 minute ago, Kisaha said:

Whoever believes that a camera that shoots in high iso saves them a proper lighting setup and/or a crew, haven't really understand what is going on.

Photography, is "writing of light", not the lack of it.

There are many situations and many types of productions that don't have the luxury or (more importantly) time to use lights.  Documentary, live events, weddings, news, etc etc.

2 minutes ago, Thpriest said:

Niii! Exactly. I thought the old Sony slogan of "Wolf nipple chips, get them while they're hot! They're lovely!" was a bit close to the bone (don't try to put an a6300 in you shirt pocket after shooting 4k for 15mins...er.. seconds).

 

Hahahah! Well done.