jgharding

After some rooting about there's talk of 3 months to delivery if you order now. If you're lucky... I wonder if someone will clone the thing before they even manage to produce it in bulk :o

This looks great! It's the first thing I've seen that actually feels like the way one may shoot an independant movie, instead of a "test" video (yawn). It's great to see something with some darkness and atmosphere coming out of BMCC, as it's more how I'd use it too. It's a shame you can't actually buy them though, unless you bought one forever ago :S That's such a huge problem for them. I can walk a few minutes from where I'm sat and get a 5D, but even if I have the cash to buy one of these BMCCs now, there's absolutely no way to know when it'll arrive! P.S. On subject two: Price, inability to upgrade cheaply and easily, and the irksome idea of throwing important work in with a willful consumer electronics group who arbitrarily discontinue things every five minutes, are what stop me using Apple Macs. Those points and that neverending gamma problem of course! Last PC I built is going strong, I got over twice the power of equivalent MacPro for half the price. Then I stuck 24GB RAM in it and a new GPU all for peanuts. Bonus! I use OSX a lot too though, and it's certainly less convoluted, though I think overall that the number of problems I've experienced has been equal.The OSX problems just look nicer ;)

I was once told this is to with radio-frequency radiation, as the bulbs flicker too fast for that to be the issue. LEDs present their own issues, but talent discomfort isn't one of them, so they can be useful when that's a primary concern.

At Odeon West End between tonight and Thursday. It may run longer, but these dates for sure. I and a group of four more are visiting on the Monday night, apparently it looks absolutely stunning and is worth seeing just for how nice it looks alone! Such a shame I couldn't find Samsara projected in 70mm in the UK though. http://www.odeon.co.uk/fanatic/film_info/s139/London_West_End/m14232/The_Master/

Oh yes i particularly loved the BAJO EL ARCE / Tren de Antilhue video, very nice feel. I see that in order to show of the anamorphic feel and gain the benefit over cropping, you need some depth to the shot and, preferably things at many levels of distance, that seems to really help!

If I'd had the money when the announcement came, I'd've got a Red One, any other choice seems mad. Regardless of paper spec, you've seen Red on the big screen plenty of times. The footage is amazing. It's not that easy to use but hey, look at the footage!!! I've always been jealous of those who could shoot every whim on Red, DSLRs don't come close right now. Now that the Red costs very little, think of second hand prices soon... I love 550D, Sony FS700, C300 but one has to be realistic, the Red One cinema camera produces incredible images in comparison. I've watched lots of great movies shot with Red One, I've only seen some really OK stuff shot with the BMD cam. Is that down to who's shooting with it? Maybe... but so far it's never looked quite as instantly cinema-like as Red footage. A lot of it has looked very camcorder like. And BMD is not out yet. I'd've cancelled on bloody principle by now if i'd ordered one... can you imagine what'll happen if they need to do a factory recall, or you need any servicing when the BMD actually arrives? Confidece is knocked now, lot's of making up to do.

Just found a super low price on one of these, so I'm about to join the club! This has some beautiful shots in it, so epic! Reminds me of one of my favorite movies, Assassination of Jesse James. I noticed a few misaligned shots in it, is it hard to line up in live view? Shot anything else with it recently? JG

I was sitting with people in a flat the other day, and they had a "trumotion" frame interpolating telly. I asked them if they liked it. They said "sometimes it looks nice and smooth and sometimes it makes TV and films look really cheap and low budget." They had definitely bought the hype though. Switching it off with an old movie they were saying "urgh it's all jerky, I like the Trumotion on it's much smoother". I think it only works with thinga that look like computer games. Avatar for example. I've shot a lot of RX100 at 50p, but I always bring it back to 25 because otherwise it looks... like nasty old video...

3rd here for the C300's usability. I've been on FS700 and C300 a lot recently. C300 is the most worry-free camcorder I've ever used. So easy you actually have to check sometimes to make sure you haven't missed something! Nope you haven't, it just works. Always leaves a grin on my face.

[quote name='kirk' timestamp='1351603278' post='20609'] I'm lucky enough to own and live in an old cinema (with a beautiful Bauer 35 mm projector with Möller Cinemascope and all..), and have often projected my GH2 videos in full HD to the 6 meters wide sceen. from our Optoma projector.. looks wonderful I can assure you! No need to upscale. [/quote] I've just started daydreaming because of this... I love cinemas and theaters... what city are you in, if you don't mind me asking?

[url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF5TDiwzudU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LF5TDiwzudU[/url]

I find sometimes it's better than warp stabiliser and sometimes not. It doesn't seem to work with clips that are rate-stretched within the Premiere timeline, which is a ball-ache. Sometimes it totally refuses to detect a clip properly and then works fine. I found the presets in the top right work well, but as soon as you use advanced options things can either be nicer or totally haywire...

I hope this rents cheaply when it's around. Alexa is lovely but costs about 600 pounds a day!!! I managed to get the FS700 for a super cheap 120 pounds a day here in the UK. I hope this is about 250 PD.

Wow thanks for the link! Ah I see, so they just upscale a bit, I'm sure it's fine!

What did i just watch? *sigh*

I suppose they must have used Alexa Plus 4:3, in ArriRAW 4:3 with anamorphics, to get 4K out of Alexa.

We can only judge from what we see though, perhaps popping the raw files on a server for free would be a good plan, then we can eliminate any processing in between as a factor?

[quote name='MaxAperture Films' timestamp='1351265274' post='20374'] You cropped the footage and used image stabilization, this changes the pixel scaling when it is rendered back out in the final comp and causes aliasing artifacts. This was meant as a response to jgharding's freak out, and is what you see on the rims of the glasses in both camera's footage. [/quote] after watching plenty of tests, and that high profile Genesis or whatever it was called, I'm just not impressed... Stabilising [i]is [/i]common practice in real world situations, so if the GH3 looks that much worse than the GH2 when both have been stabilised, well then it looks worse in a real-world situation. I regularly use software scaling, whichever way you look at it, that level of aliasing is bloody awful, and a decent source image (like C300) won't suddenly alias heavily under scaling. The beard is gibbering with jaggies! This kind of test is [i]much [/i]more useful to me than a chart or two tripod shots of waving leaves. Personally, I'm not too fussed about theoretical or "pixel for pixel output quality" cos it's not how I use the cameras. I do however, shoot a lot of handheld shots of people that i then stabilise them, and here the GH3 was kicked soundly by it's predecessor. * On the dynamic range shot the GH3 has cleaner shadows and a greater number of usable stops due to less banding by the looks of it, so it won there. Seems to have the same overall stop range, but smoother transitions within it. But it's a softer, mushier image overall. I'm just not feeling it. I'm sure we could all make a good piece with it in a great controlled environment, granted. But the fact remains: on the evidence so far, the GH3 has more usable dynamic range (cleaner shadows) and less banding, but a poorer image overall. when it comes to detail and certainly aliasing, it loses to its predecessor. I just think it's a shame. I'm not tempted to try it really. I'm quite a nuetral party here, I use hacked 550D, C300, FS700 and RX100 more than anything else, so no vested interest. I don't [i]need[/i] the GH3 to be good in order to sleep at night, for example. I'm just saying what i see...

Edit: I worked out my query.It's real easy. If you have a twitter lemme know and I'll share this solution!

CVP deposit is 600 quid including VAT. That's not a huge deposit, so perhaps we're talking around 10,000 pounds or so. Likely to be more than FS700 I'd've thought, unless they want to pitch it as a different [i]type [/i]of camera, being CineAlta and all, in which case price may fall closer. Also since Sony are partnered with Carl Zeiss, you can bet the new lenses are a set of T2 Carl Zeiss primes along a similar line to the Zeiss CP2s.

Wait til you see it in motion... aliasing doesn't show up in a still in the same way...

I think that the GH3 aliasing could be worse that a 550D at 720p... that's pretty shit TBH

The GH2 takes it. That last shot, where you've matched em up. It's just nicer, there's more detailed, no aliasing on the edge of the glasses or the stubble. The GH3 may hold the highlights better here (it was exposed lower though, so no surprise) but there's more noise and that ALIASING! It's a fizzy, nasty thing in this comparison. Tests of people are the most important, imagine you're trying to get into watching a scene and there's aliasing dancing all over someone's face! It's pretty shocking how bad it is on the mustache, for example, really distracting. What have they done?!

There seems to be a consensus among the companies: separate the still camera and video markets! The DSLR boom was an accident, and they would like to reverse it a little, or at least delay it to make more money. Sony and Canon have both held back video in still cameras so as to create and protect lines of more expensive camcorders. Having used the C300 and FS700 quite a bit recently, both have wonderful, wonderful image quality and are remarkably consistent. The latter is a bit of a pig ergonomically, but the final image is just great, especially considering the bit rate. A similar image is easily possible with the hardware in the still bodies, as we all know, but there are plenty of lies peddled to pretend otherwise. Like the famous "5D MKiii can't have a clean out because of the hardware" shortly followed by "it's coming in a firmware update". Only Nikon competition forced their hand here. It's such a shame they're determined to squeeze every penny out of the old tech rather than innovate. If only the upstarts like BMD could be more reliable in terms of manufacturing, we'd have a challenger. But it's competition that forces innovation, and if you can't actually deliver a product on time, leading to a lack of confidence about support, overall quality assurance and repairs, you aren't competition to people like Canon and Sony, who can churn em out on time, working and in bulk. Hopefully Canon and Sony won't settle into the same symbiotic, practically innovation-less relationship that Canon and Nikon have, where they take baby steps in perfect synchronisation. That'd be a real shame.

Thanks for the help so far, I'll have a play today! The situation is: shooting a debate overseas, the debate will be transcribed while I edit, I'll receive a raw transcription as a text document. If I receive as just a word file I have to do it manually either way, whether making SRT or pasting into titles. However, if I can get the person transcribing to write into a different format, Excel sheet etc, perhaps we can save a huge amount of time? Any thoughts as to what I should ask for?