Ernesto Mantaras

Lets look at what Bruno said.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What she meant is that for the price of a C100 you can get a BMCC + essential add-ons + workstation and you end up with superior image quality, which seems to be among the lines of what you were saying yourself.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHAT Bruno is saying and you are backing up is that Andrew misunderstood a basic sentence entirely and then to add to his stupidity he believes the same thing anyway.

 

Really? You want to rubbish the owner of the forum? The question of course is "Why would you do that?"

Each of you backs up each others posts to add credibility to something that is clearly not right.

 

In the end no one will post because their time and energy is trashed, Is that the idea?

 

I was agreeing to the post that you mention (#81). What got you mad may have been the response made right before mine (or at the same time, #83) which I hadn't read and I don't condone. I don't agree with many of the things Bruno said, but I did agree with that #81 response, so why repeat his words if he had said exactly what I thought? I hope you're not answering like this out of the silly comments that were made in the 200mm lens topic (in which I partially agree with you).
I was never disrespectful, and there's nothing wrong with not agreeing with the owner of the forum. Why would there be so? Are we supposed to think all the same? In fact, he encourages that we speak our minds and share opinions and thoughts, as long as we keep it all in good health. I do get annoyed as well when I read such misinformed or simply ill intentioned comments, but it's up to us to keep the peace and do our best to maintain the best of atmospheres in the forum.
The point is to enrich everyone's baggage of knowledge, to learn from one another. It may be hard to not get carried away, but it's in our best interest to keep it friendly like Jon de Zwaan said. This is one of the very few forums where I've found such good vibes (for the most part, perhaps).

By the way, the only time I went around Planet5D I really couldn't stand it, but I had to comment in their own tone. They pulled me down with them, it was incredible.

Hurt minor key asked Andrew why he hadnt flooded us with footage yet.

 

And she also said what Bruno explained, if understood correctly.

Now, I don't think she meant any wrong with the "flood of footage", she's just eager to see more material coming from someone who knows what he's doing.

 

By the way, how do we know HurtMinorKey is a "she"? Not that it can't happen, I just don't know. Is it because "key" is feminine? :P

You thought wrong :)

 

Why can't you shoot handheld on 200mm or even longer? Is it forbidden?

 

If you wanna ignore the couple films I brought up before, then just look at this two random youtube clips and tell me what's so wrong about them.

[url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-pxkFIuM3k"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-pxkFIuM3k[/url]

[url="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSuQ7CHoO4E"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSuQ7CHoO4E[/url]

 

The OP was asking about the non-IS version and on a crop sensor.

No doubt the BMC can resolve much better looking images but before the BMC is production ready it will cost you much more then 3000, people tend to forget that and only stare at the start prize. At 3000 the BMC is basically a shoebox with a screen, but the concept is quite good actually as you can build on top of the camera so it fit's your needs. But like I said, it will cost you and before you know it your at the c100 prize. So, it's not really half the prize.

 

If you need a basic shooting setup you won't spend more than $4000 with an extra battery (perhaps you should buy two to be safe, though it's not an obligation) and two 240gb SSD Sandisk Extreme. Then you could or couldn't buy a monitor, some kind of rig (both of which you might just already have if you're working on this), external audio solution, etc.
 

You need $3500 to reach the cost of a basic C100, and that kind of money can get you a lot of extras if you spend them wisely. Still, you're not forced to do so if you don't have the money (yet). And you can always rent what you're missing, depending on the job.

No I haven't, but that doesn't mean it can't be done, just check out the films I've mentioned and you'll see plenty of shots.

The Canon 70-200 IS is a great lens for video for instance.

Rolling shutter sensors will make these lenses harder to work with, that's for granted, but even that is relative, as the results depend a lot on how far you are from your subject.

It can be done alright. But results are going to be far from acceptable, and that goes besides rolling shutter. I don't know how good your pulse is, but if it will show in a 200mm just imagine shooting with 320mm or 400mm in a crop sensor! Those movies you saw could have used a 200mm, but they certainly didn't shoot with them handheld. There's always a tripod or som other kind of rig, specially if using a telephoto lens!

I have resized Canon footage and gotten rid of moiré for the most part. Resampling hides it in a way. It's quite weird that coming from a 2.5k original and going to 720p it still looks that bad and it's nowhere to be seen again, no matter how little detail is found on other building shots. Maybe that's why it isn't mentioned either.
And I don't care about shipping delays and excuses. Whenever the BMCC comes out will be a lot sooner than any other company offering this level of image quality.

I don't think the answers were negative. They were just informative. And the truth is most of us want (and need, actually) actual creative control over the image, not automatic presets. That's why this is brought up.

But yes, going through them is part of making general reviews. The case'd be different when you're aiming them to a specific public (in our case, or most of our cases, photos don't matter the most, so there's not much of a point in reviewing that aspect of the camera).

Nick was showing the capabilities of this camera from all angles video, I think. But I doubt he'll be using much of these settings, unless it's specifically needed for a certain shoot (very specifically). He's a filmmaker that need to have real control over the image.

By the way, he's the man behind some of the best GH2 patches out there! I bet you don't work with a GH2 if you don't know him.

Of course you can still use most of this glass with the BMCC, but it is an issue nevertheless for some people and in some scenario.

Not to pick a fight here, but i'm sure Aronofsky doesn't shoot on old Nikons or Canon zooms... :D

 

It's alright! I wanted to make things clearer. But about Aronofsky, I'm sure he doesn't shoot (mostly, at least, according to Bruno) on Nikon or Canon glass, but he rents cameras anyway so there's a way to go around it. We think from the investment point of view, whereas these filmmakers work on their craft beyond equipment. It's a tool, and they choose the one that fits the job when the time comes.

Maybe like you said I'm really glad I invested in MFT, but really if I was a Canon or Nikon user I'd be investing on on the few new lenses or gear I'd need to go wider on the BMCC using the money I'd save from not buying a more expensive EF mount option (like a C100, for instance).

 

 

(...) And shooting narrative pieces on lenses wider than a 30mm FOV, honestly, look really stupid. I just don't see the complaints about this camera being anything more than FOD... and an attempt to selfishly protect last years pathetic 8-bit investments (i.e. C300 type cams). If you really want that 90's-music-video fun-house clown-look of 12mm lenses that distort heads and body limbs... then have at it. You're probably not the caliber of director/dp that would make use of 12-bit RAW anyways. (...)

 

That's complete nonsense. I don't know what kind of movies you watch, but you've either not payed attention or have a very limited view on filmmaking. Wider angles have their place, and it's just a matter of using it in the right place to tell your story. Where do you stand to say a filmmaker's not fit to shoot 12-bit RAW if he uses a wide angle lens? Is there a new dogma or something?

i like RED products, but....

 

"RED is more invested in sensor development than ARRI or Sony"?

 

Really, care to share the proof, as ARRI are kicking their ass with current sensors. Sony's F55 has 14 stops with a global shutter....

 

Yes, but only 4 years after RED shook the ground. ARRI and Sony didn't act, they reacted.

Black Swan wasn't shot on the BMCC, i don't understand why you keep bringing that up. 

It's like defending the 7D Aps-c sensor idea by pointing to any good looking Hollywood movie shot on S35 -_- Not to mention it is Film... 

What? The comparison is made on the basis that the BMCC has even shallower DOF than Super16mm film, which is what "Black Swan" was shot on, being DOF (sensor size) one of the complaints of many people. Goes on to make the point that you don't need shallow DOF to make a good movie.
Yet comparing the 7D to a movie shot on Super35 has nothing to do with the aforementioned comparison, because there's no digital equivalent to film in the 7D, unless you're doing stills. Comparing RAW to film isn't the same as comparing 8bit h264 to film.

Hi! I wanted to share with you our new channel (which has actually existed for some time now, but it's only now that we've officially launched it). It's a way for us to work on very short narrative videos every week and get to be a little more known on what we do, and specially sharing the stuff we've made and we'll keep on making.
There's mostly old shorts by now, the majority of them being comedy and a few drama and action oriented, among others. Still, our strength as a group is comedy and these are some of the highlights (all of them feature English subs, so please enable them if you need to):

 

First, the promo for the channel:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfEdp5fH95o"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfEdp5fH95o[/url]

 

Now this is a teaser we made for a contest, and it's a movie that we've been working on in several ways for a long time, but it still remains to be shot (this is a fake teaser, as was requested by this contest). Shot on the HV20!:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG04H-8jjvU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG04H-8jjvU[/url]

 

And finally the only short we've shot on the GH2 so far, a kinda advertising spoof:

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rylbADFc4I"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rylbADFc4I[/url]

 

Oh, and this one is very old, it was mostly improvised and there are several "dead times" and other problems with it, but if you enjoy massacres you'll like it. :P
[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nPnEPV1bGY"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nPnEPV1bGY[/url]

 

If you like what you see, please like, comment and subscribe to find out when we release new short films (every thursday is what we're planning), and if you can please give us a Like on Facebook as well! Down at [url="http://www.facebook.com/DDDproducciones"]http://www.facebook.com/DDDproducciones[/url]

I hope you like this, and please tell me what you think!

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1354113714' post='22527']
Welcome to the forum.

I'm glad you think filmmaking is all about sharpness and image quality. One more person I don't need to pay very much attention to.
[/quote]

I think he was being sarcastic.

Dude, I think I'm becoming a hardcore fan of your work. Really good video.

How about downloading some footage and letting your eyes discern what you are or aren't losing?
I think it's important to trust your judgement and your craft more than specs.

I plan to do a 2nd version with the 2.5K scaled down to 1080p and everything full screen.

That's great. Will be looking forward to that. :)

I'd like to mention that while I enjoyed the comparison and it was good for drawing several conclusions, it took a bit of extra work and was hard to notice many different aspects, because although the 2.5k video does the BMCC justice, I for one don't have that resolution in my monitor (a 23" LG LED 1080p monitor) so I was zooming in and out all the time to really see what the difference was between the cameras (and to see which camera was which!). If I didn't do that I would've watched all the other cameras' videos in a smaller frame and that even made the VG900 look much better.
I know ther'd be some pixel blending in all the 1080p shots, but I think it'd be great to see an alternate version of this comparison with all non-BMCC RAW shots scaled up to fit the 2.5k resolution so we can see the differences more clearly.
Anyways, thanks for the work, Andrew!

I got a chance to use the GH3 too. I did a very limited test, and I didn't see any moire, see the guy's sweater at the end. I'm confused like larrys, in what situations does the moire show up? I guess I won't really know until I have a GH3 in my hands.

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTXo1HLOX6o[/media]

I know YouTube compression will hide it a bit, but that video looks really clean for a 1250ISO video. Also kinda flat (but there's always crushed blacks in the very low end, unlike Canon's Cinestyle), yet it lacks a bit of detail. Perhaps it's about finding a balance in the custom settings.

As for moiré, I watched it twice and didn't find anything, but then again you didn't encounter any difficult textures.
Still, this is getting a bit pointless to me. I want to see a final version of the GH3 head to head against a GH2. I'm tired of looking for ghosts.

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1353025707' post='21725']
What was the solution Charlie?

Separately I'm having issues with Resolve in Windows. Was working fine until a few days ago and now Quicktime decoder exe keeps crashing during sessions. Windows is so reliable isn't it??!?
[/quote]

Ha! As this was happening to me I actually thought about your words on Windows, because I've never had major problems using PCs (that's all I know, never had the luck or interest to use Macs) and facing this issue I said to myself "Andrew was right!". But much to my embarassment, I caused the issue, not Windows.
The problem was at some point when working on the first version of my project I imported an asset from my portable drive (while the project I was working on was in my PC, inside a 2TB RAID 0) and that's where Premiere left it's importing and also it's SAVING dialog at. So when I saved the second version it was saved into the portable drive, instead of my PC (saving is second nature to me, and I use keyboard shortcuts almost exclusively, so I didn't even look).
After encountering this issue of Premiere shutting down I rebooted and my PC has a quirk in which I have to disconnect every USB drive I have connected or it won't start (alright, this is an argument for you to hit PCs! haha). Apparently it always tries to boot from them. I tried to configure the BIOS to prevent this but haven't been succesful. So I just live with it.
Anyways, the drive wasn't connected when I reopened Premiere, so the projects didn't show up in the startup dialog, I connected the portable drive, checked my project folder, everything was gone, made searches on my RAID 0, and tried other stuff. It was only afterwards that I dawned on my that this folder mix up could've happened, so I searched inside the hard drive and there was everything I thought I'd missed.

So... you're free to bash me on my stupidity. But I'm still very relieved for not losing my work!

As for you trouble in Resolve, yeah, sometimes installing the most unrelated stuff can mess up other drivers. Perhaps making a System Recovery back to the day Quicktime worked can help you?

P/S: My real name is Ernesto, not Charlie. This is a username I've been using for more than ten years, it dates back to highschool times when I created a character of that name and I didn't trust the internet enough to give them my real name. :P

Solved!

I just finished running Recuva in Deep Scan mode and it didn't even find them... This is crazy, what the hell could it be???

EDIT: Solved it! That's a relief. So never mind, let the topic die.

This is completely nuts, it never happened to me. I am working on the sound of a short film, a job I got that I have to deliver by monday, but was aiming to finish it by tomorrow. It was all great, I had finished more than half of it, and then Premiere started shutting down everytime I tried to change the volume of a file. I tried several times and then after saving a new copy of the project (there were four in total) I rebooted my PC to see if that made anything.
After the reboot I started Premiere and the last three projects were not listed. So I went to the project folder and saw they weren't there either. I looked for them everywhere but they were nowhere to be found. Rebooted again and nothing changed. I tried saving another copy of the first version (and only one) of the project that I had, then rebooted and it's still here, it hasn't disappered.
This makes no sense.
Actually, I should be clearer, all of the files I created after the first version of the project are gone. That includes the three versions that disappeared and all the WAVs I created. Everything's gone. I'm running Recuva right now to see if I can find them, but this makes no sense and makes me very worried about all of my work! I lost two days if I can't recover from this.
Could this be a virus or something?

Dialing down (or up) the contrast definitely shows significant changes. Not only in the custom mode. I can make a sample video tonight.

I see. I'll check the video modes under creative control. I don't expect it to be usefull, the creative mode is probably everything auto. It's just the fancy filter mode. Don't expect the 'high dynamic' mode to be flat, it will probably be very contrasty/over saturated/hdr-lookalike.

Oh, I didn't know that "Creative Control" was an auto mode. But if dialing down the settings does show significant changes then it's great news, maybe that alone will help in getting a flatter image. I'm looking forward to watching you sample video! :)

I got photostyle with four setting contrast, sharpness, saturation, noise reduction. No creative control or anything.

There is no High Dynamic profile.

These are the picture profiles: standard/vivid/natural/monochrome/scenery/portrait/custom.

This is from the Panasonic press release specifications (http://panasonic.net...5100/index.html):

CREATIVE CONTROL
Still Image:
Expressive / Retro / High Key / Low Key / Sepia / Dynamic Monochrome / Impressive Art / High Dynamic / Cross Process / Toy Effect / Miniature Effect / Soft Focus / Star Filter / One Point Color
Motion Image:
Expressive / Retro / High Key / Low Key / Sepia / Dynamic Monochrome / Impressive Art / High Dynamic / Cross Process / Toy Effect / Miniature Effect / One Point Color

And here's a photo shot using this profile (taken from here: http://www.ephotozin...h3-review-20489):

http://www.magezinep..._1350639960.jpg

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.

Is that so? Damn. They've gone Canon, but there's nothing that remotely resembles Cinestyle?
I thought that the review The Camera Store did was shot using that profile, it looked like that to me (something about the mids; I didn't feel that was due to the overcast day).

There's a i-dynamic or something turned on already.

Yeah, but that's an automatic function that's also present in the GH2, and it lifts the low lights whenever it wants to in situations of high contrast, but it can't be manually controlled.
What I mean is a color proflie. I think it's unde "CREATIVE CONTROL". You can choose between "Expresive", "Retro", "High Key", etc. What I'm interested in particular is the "High Dynamic" setting, which has a gamma curve similar to the "Cinestyle" color profile in the Canon DSLR cameras.
Could you look it up in your camera and shoot a properly exposed video in a similar high contrast situation using that "CREATIVE CONTROL" setting?
I think it'd be of great interest to many of us. Thanks!

Thanks for the link. I really need that.

F5.6 1/125 iso 200 picturestyle: standard, 25p all-i

Against morning sunlight. The video look good, but not sure about DR, I dont have Premier Pro on my home computer to leveling it.

Upload from home is real slow, and my computer batt are dying, aw.

Here's the capture picture from the video, the video it self must wait.

Could you please shoot some footage in the High Dynamic "picture style" or "profile"? I understand that's the most dynamic range you can get from the camera and it'd be nice to see how it performs in a raw video out of the GH3.