themartist

I would like to give my platform to up and coming musicians around the world to showcase their music through my cinematography to an audience of around 250,000 people per month. This is the EOSHD Music Challenge.
Readers act as DJ - they can pick music from up and coming singers and bands, with suggestions that might suit the mood of my cinematography and future camera tests.
Cinematic music is really important to me but I haven't been satisfied with The Music Bed or similar resources so far.
How does the challenge work?
1. Suggest a band or musician on this thread. They have to be up and coming not signed to a major label or already huge.
2. I investigate and do the contacting of those which I like and credit you for the find!
3. If they agree to let me use their music, they will find a new audience through my blog and hopefully sell some tracks on iTunes from a link on EOSHD. You will be designated as the discoverer of talent and winner of the challenge.
4. You can have fun with this challenge and play DJ - use your taste to select the right standard of music to fit EOSHD and in turn you might discover new music yourself which you really enjoy listening to.
5. My cinematography at EOSHD is purely an artistic endeavour and experimental, non commercial and does not make any money but for all videos featuring unsigned acts I will consider enabling the Vimeo Tip Jar and sharing the proceeds with the musician 50:50!
This is a new idea and it will start off as a trial. If it works then great! If not then we will swap things around until it does, because I am determined to find new music and up and coming artists.
Good soundtracks are really important for filmmakers and I believe in finding new talent. Perhaps you know some artists yourself? Perhaps you are one?

Way too much aggression in this thread.

Way too much aggression in this thread.

A lot of people are creating amazing content. There are more indie movies and documentaries made by people currently, who surely would not have entered the industry 20 years ago. Not fair to say that nobody generates content. A mere search on vimeo will provide many examples of shorts and even features in production.
 
Normally hobbyists are more interested in family clips, holidays etc while the more ambitious do focus on narrative. Storytelling is definitely happening, just maybe not promoted enough in threads. I second the idea to push a concept/ storytelling critique or collaborations section. Merely by critiquing videos or short movies, there can be a lot more insight into tecniques of editing etc.
 
A thread idea could perhaps be for filmmakers to upload unedited footage with the option of users to have a go at editing and adding sound/score for a multitude of approaches. Family video footage could very easily be a horror or a tearjerker depending on execution.

A lot of people are creating amazing content. There are more indie movies and documentaries made by people currently, who surely would not have entered the industry 20 years ago. Not fair to say that nobody generates content. A mere search on vimeo will provide many examples of shorts and even features in production.
 
Normally hobbyists are more interested in family clips, holidays etc while the more ambitious do focus on narrative. Storytelling is definitely happening, just maybe not promoted enough in threads. I second the idea to push a concept/ storytelling critique or collaborations section. Merely by critiquing videos or short movies, there can be a lot more insight into tecniques of editing etc.
 
A thread idea could perhaps be for filmmakers to upload unedited footage with the option of users to have a go at editing and adding sound/score for a multitude of approaches. Family video footage could very easily be a horror or a tearjerker depending on execution.

A while ago EOSHD helped me a lot getting in grip with the technical bits of filmmaking. But since I mastered them I turned my interest to the storytelling bit of filmmaking. A shame we don't get into this stuff over here - I miss it. Also I saw a while ago somebody stating a similar topic where he was stating that 'most of us forget that filmmaking is not about the camera but about your ideas.' This treat got removed (!) for some reasons.
 
Anybody ideas on how we can inspirate eachother on the story telling bit on EOSHD or else next to treads on new cameras and technics?

Jason, I'm not trying to pick on you here... but for a few years now you've posted here on EOSHD, dvxuser, cinema 5d and I don't know where else purely on one subject matter... and that has been an absolutely obsessive compulsive whirlwind of posts on which camera to get and which is most "filmic". This has gone on for years now.
 
You bought the 60D, was too soft.. wanted the GH3, it was too much like "video", bought the 5D, and have made endless posts commenting on how the 5D with raw blows the socks off everything out there. Am I right in saying that you never actually even tried 5d raw? Then you say the GH4 is too much like video and much prefer the 5D image... but you're now wanting to sell the 5D to buy something else? This is absolutely crazy. You're a novice with an ultra expensive toy, who just isn't satisfied with image quality.
 
If you were spending endless hours filming and doing tests and actually using your camera, then at least there would be some reason to the madness. But the only video you've uploaded is a handheld point and shoot clip of the 5D that shows no understanding of filming or photography. You've been too busy obsessing with which is the best camera to get. The truth is that no matter the camera you buy, your videos will look horrible. Why? Because all of your energy is focussed purely on comparison without actually shooting or trying things for yourself. You're just judging the uploads of others.
 
Myself and many others have been very tactful in telling you how to get your "film look", but you insist on believing otherwise. Are your friends not tired of seeing the endless camera comparisons you're showing them. Don't they ever ask to see some work you've done? Stop stating with such confidence how things are, and which camera produces the better image. Start being less opinionated on both cameras and the "hollywood look" as you've referred to it as - and start actually learning some real technique from this forum. You have a great camera. Stop wasting your time, read the manual and start using it already. This forum has a wealth of knowledge that no film school could offer. Use it. And please stop wasting your money on endless camera body upgrades. The A7s won't be perfect either, no camera ever will.
 
I'm sorry if this has come across aggressively, but just look over the last couple of years of posts you've made reiterating the same obsession, without having actually gotten your hands dirty. Please, for your own sake start focussing on something else. ( i.e: focus on shooting rather than which camera is best )

Jason, I'm not trying to pick on you here... but for a few years now you've posted here on EOSHD, dvxuser, cinema 5d and I don't know where else purely on one subject matter... and that has been an absolutely obsessive compulsive whirlwind of posts on which camera to get and which is most "filmic". This has gone on for years now.
 
You bought the 60D, was too soft.. wanted the GH3, it was too much like "video", bought the 5D, and have made endless posts commenting on how the 5D with raw blows the socks off everything out there. Am I right in saying that you never actually even tried 5d raw? Then you say the GH4 is too much like video and much prefer the 5D image... but you're now wanting to sell the 5D to buy something else? This is absolutely crazy. You're a novice with an ultra expensive toy, who just isn't satisfied with image quality.
 
If you were spending endless hours filming and doing tests and actually using your camera, then at least there would be some reason to the madness. But the only video you've uploaded is a handheld point and shoot clip of the 5D that shows no understanding of filming or photography. You've been too busy obsessing with which is the best camera to get. The truth is that no matter the camera you buy, your videos will look horrible. Why? Because all of your energy is focussed purely on comparison without actually shooting or trying things for yourself. You're just judging the uploads of others.
 
Myself and many others have been very tactful in telling you how to get your "film look", but you insist on believing otherwise. Are your friends not tired of seeing the endless camera comparisons you're showing them. Don't they ever ask to see some work you've done? Stop stating with such confidence how things are, and which camera produces the better image. Start being less opinionated on both cameras and the "hollywood look" as you've referred to it as - and start actually learning some real technique from this forum. You have a great camera. Stop wasting your time, read the manual and start using it already. This forum has a wealth of knowledge that no film school could offer. Use it. And please stop wasting your money on endless camera body upgrades. The A7s won't be perfect either, no camera ever will.
 
I'm sorry if this has come across aggressively, but just look over the last couple of years of posts you've made reiterating the same obsession, without having actually gotten your hands dirty. Please, for your own sake start focussing on something else. ( i.e: focus on shooting rather than which camera is best )

Me neither. 4K would be an added bonus. Having the possibility of shooting 4K if by any chance a project/client requires it is a plus, but I'm much more interested in the improved dynamic range, full frame sensor, XAVC-S and clean 6400-12800 ISO -no need to get to 400000 ever, I hope-.

But what is the point of posting all this pro GH4 posts in the A7S topic?
 
Yes, I bought the GH4 myself because for me it's the best value. But maybe other people value the low light capabilities and the full frame sensor of the A7S more. Who are you to judge against them?
 
This is not an A7S vs GH4 topic. It's a topic to show/discuss footage from the A7S. What are you even doing in this topic except for fanboying about the GH4? Why don't you just respect that fact that other people have other priorities and maybe budget isn't a problem for them (and we still don't know the price anyway so discussing about that is pointless).
 
Just cut the GH4 crap. Again, I bought one myself, I think it's perfect. It just doesn't belong in the A7S footage topic.

So true! I coudn't agree more. My concern is not because the videos are useful, but because it seems suspicious that they are not letting any pro -except for Den Lennie- touch a camera...
 
 
 
On the contrary, it seems to me that they were forced to advance the announcement at NAB so that their target audience would decide to hold a little and not rush into buying a GH4. Imagine what could have happened if they still had not announced the A7S? I'm sure many of "their" buyers would already have the GH4

I hope to post some video soon.  The a7 definitely succumbs to video moire.  However, I bought it mostly for photography.  It seemed obvious to me that Sony announced the a7s to take some wind out of Panasonic's sails.  My guess is the camera will come out fall/winter.
 
After a few days, I have not found anything I don't like about the a7.  Being able to set the diopter to my vision and chimp in viewfinder is more useful for me than the d600.  Focus zoom and peaking with manual lenses is extremely useful.  Really, a remarkable camera.  Sony keeps improving their firmware and ergonomics.  
 
However, the Sigma DP1M still takes a better photo than the a7 with a Nikon 24mm.  Most wouldn't see difference though.

Not into the body shape being bigger or a Â£3500 price tag. That would 100% convince me to go with the GH4.

I'm pleased you took my message as I intended it. I didn't want to come across combative at all, thats not my intention.
 
Ive mentioned before that really most Micro 43rd, APSC mirrorless/DSLRs can do the job. Some might be better than others according to the user. Its relative. But I tell you this, I would be delighted to have a 5D. My only problem with it is the size (both for traveling and as it may draw more attention to me in more dangerous countries). But for you, I say get to know your camera like the back of your hand. By the time you've improved, maybe they bring out the Canon 5D mark iiii - in which case you still have your lenses and have learned the system.
 
I disagree on your understanding of and obsession with the filmic look and I think its crazy to chase after a "perfect camera" that you feel will get you closer to that vision rather than focus on your skills. Camera bodies are almost disposable. Invest in lenses, but most of all invest in your own skill set.

themartist, thanks for the tips and corrective feedback...just out of curiosity do you disagree with what i've written?  I also like to engage in conversation despite having expertise or tons of experience, it helps me shape my opinion and build my knowledge, i've learned a lot from shooting on my own but a ton more by posting and reading here.  So I will continue to chime in respectfully, and hope to hear feedback on my commentary directly.

Nope. I hear these "video" comments when discussing cameras so often and they're really bizarrely off base. Please show me a camcorder that shoots your home videos at that resolution. Theres nothing "home video" about the GH4. The type of camcorder home videos you're thinking of have less resolution, more in focus, blown out highlights. Not remotely similar. The extra resolution is amazing. Its not a bad thing, not a video thing. You can always tone down detail through a whole array of techniques, however you cannot add resolution where there wasn't any. Where you see people using stock lenses on autofocus, without tripods or steadicams and without careful compositions - that is the shaky ugly home video you're seeing. It has nothing to do with the GH4 at all.
 
The tests to show off resolution show what is possible, they're not meant to be film-like. If you have an aerial shot of dolphins in a clear ocean you want that resolution. If you need to greenscreen, you need that resolution. Too much resolution? You simply soften in post. Its that simple, resolution is awesome and the Gh4 is amazing. The reason a focus on people hasn't been used in these tests is because character shots are normally shot wide open, which doesn't get to emphasize the resolution as well as bricks, trees and scenery does. 
 
Is the GH4 better than the 5D with raw? They're really close. Each have pro's and cons according to your workflow and depend perhaps on which lenses you own. Your 5DMK3 is a powerhouse. Seriously, time to put that bad boy to work. Have you tried ML raw yet? I know you mentioned before that you were hesitant to try it, but its worthwhile knowing if you can handle the extra hassle for the extra DR. At the end of the day editing is a huge part as well. The biggest advantage the 5D has over the GH4 is full frame, thats about it... but to me thats a big one. I direct commercials and do documentary work. If I was to be given a gift of a choice between the 5D and the GH4 - It would be a tough decision. I travel a lot, so a compact kit is important to me... but so is full frame, low light and top end stills. Decisions, decisions. I don't need a new camera immediately so I might wait for the A7s to decide. But if I owned a 5D, I wouldn't be pondering whether I made a good purchase or not.
 
You on the other hand, have mentioned that you're a school teacher and you've just bought the 5D in order to start doing documentary projects and are still new to both cameras and film. Honestly, you need to forget this obsession about which camera to get and the whole ML raw vs GH4 thing. Its really misdirected, as you have more than enough firepower to win an oscar. Rather buy some interesting lenses, a steadicam, follow focus, anamorphics... stuff like that to play around with. And then upload work for people to critique. Please be careful not to get too carried away at these comparisons at the cost of going out and filming.
 

This will be THE video camera for doing sex tapes :)

@ Christina : shallow DOF is a creative choice, just as deep focus is one.  There is no better or worse.  Both are legitimate options and part of the job of a DOP is to make the right choice for every shot.
 
Following your logic, you might as well argue that shooting everything with deep focus is testament to a lazy DOP who can't make up his mind where he wants the scene to go.  So he lets everything open to the viewer's interpretation.   That would be ludicrous of course.  
 
Shallow or deep focus should always be an artistic choice depending on the scene and what you want to say.  Exactly the same way we use lighting, reflectors, focal length, choose between handheld/steadicam/crane/dolly/tripod, ...  It is one of our tools AND skills as DOP's.  

 

Though I get what you're saying, As per your example, I don't think anyone in there right mind would shoot a sprawling desert landscape with razor thin DOF wide open. You want to see that beautiful location. Those shots required all to be in focus, but many shots don't. Its a matter of both style choice, mood, directing and subject. All these tools need to be used within a narrative... most of the tests we see aren't a part of any storyline, and are more just stylistic tests.

Though I get what you're saying, As per your example, I don't think anyone in there right mind would shoot a sprawling desert landscape with razor thin DOF wide open. You want to see that beautiful location. Those shots required all to be in focus, but many shots don't. Its a matter of both style choice, mood, directing and subject. All these tools need to be used within a narrative... most of the tests we see aren't a part of any storyline, and are more just stylistic tests.

Put any of todays video shooting DLSR's in the hands of a talented professional and you will get the 'filmic' (I hate that word) look. In the hands of someone who doesnt know anything about lighting or grading you will get 'videoish' looking images. I have to disagree with Julian here, a few magic bullet film presets will not make your video look like film. Lighting is the key ingredient and working within you cameras boundaries. Then, grading plays a huge part.
 These days the video look is a trait of the operator/grader and lack of lighting knowledge rather than the camera. The cameras we have today are amazing. Never has the divide between the picture quality of $60,000 camera been so small compared to a $1600 one. Its just that now you have lots of people able to afford these cheaper cameras that don't know how to get the most out of them.
 
Amateurs that need an over sized sensor like that in the 5DIII to help give them what they think is filmic (shallow depth of field) just show how little they really know about film making. Kendy's film on the previous page is a prime example. Shot on a crop sensor, at no point did I think it needed shallower DOF or that it would have benefited from a larger sensor.

One topic that would be great given the recent resurge of "videoish vs filmish" would be taking stills from actual movies and finding out or guessing the lens, aperture, asa, pushing, film,lighting,etc...
 
The next step would be trying to copy the shot (not exactly, just the general set up) with the cameras and lenses you own, and trying to color correct to give it the same density.
 
this blog is a great way to start (the site is a little bit slow)
http://evanerichards.com/

Nope. I hear these "video" comments when discussing cameras so often and they're really bizarrely off base. Please show me a camcorder that shoots your home videos at that resolution. Theres nothing "home video" about the GH4. The type of camcorder home videos you're thinking of have less resolution, more in focus, blown out highlights. Not remotely similar. The extra resolution is amazing. Its not a bad thing, not a video thing. You can always tone down detail through a whole array of techniques, however you cannot add resolution where there wasn't any. Where you see people using stock lenses on autofocus, without tripods or steadicams and without careful compositions - that is the shaky ugly home video you're seeing. It has nothing to do with the GH4 at all.
 
The tests to show off resolution show what is possible, they're not meant to be film-like. If you have an aerial shot of dolphins in a clear ocean you want that resolution. If you need to greenscreen, you need that resolution. Too much resolution? You simply soften in post. Its that simple, resolution is awesome and the Gh4 is amazing. The reason a focus on people hasn't been used in these tests is because character shots are normally shot wide open, which doesn't get to emphasize the resolution as well as bricks, trees and scenery does. 
 
Is the GH4 better than the 5D with raw? They're really close. Each have pro's and cons according to your workflow and depend perhaps on which lenses you own. Your 5DMK3 is a powerhouse. Seriously, time to put that bad boy to work. Have you tried ML raw yet? I know you mentioned before that you were hesitant to try it, but its worthwhile knowing if you can handle the extra hassle for the extra DR. At the end of the day editing is a huge part as well. The biggest advantage the 5D has over the GH4 is full frame, thats about it... but to me thats a big one. I direct commercials and do documentary work. If I was to be given a gift of a choice between the 5D and the GH4 - It would be a tough decision. I travel a lot, so a compact kit is important to me... but so is full frame, low light and top end stills. Decisions, decisions. I don't need a new camera immediately so I might wait for the A7s to decide. But if I owned a 5D, I wouldn't be pondering whether I made a good purchase or not.
 
You on the other hand, have mentioned that you're a school teacher and you've just bought the 5D in order to start doing documentary projects and are still new to both cameras and film. Honestly, you need to forget this obsession about which camera to get and the whole ML raw vs GH4 thing. Its really misdirected, as you have more than enough firepower to win an oscar. Rather buy some interesting lenses, a steadicam, follow focus, anamorphics... stuff like that to play around with. And then upload work for people to critique. Please be careful not to get too carried away at these comparisons at the cost of going out and filming.
 

This guy shoots everything he does with a Rebel T2i and Sigma 30mm, all handheld:
 

 
I need to go make a film ...

Jesus...what's with this word Filmic.