Xavier Plagaro Mussard

I loved the new film I was far from dissapointed - I was expecting the worse. Its dense non commercial, intelligent and technically excellent too..... I did feel that there was too much detail. I did feel the colours too out of the can..... they were washes over not built in lighting. BUT none of that is nearly as important as my thoughts on the questions I had the BIG METAPHYSICAL Questions I had after watching the original. Such things like - how long do we have - and what do we do in that time - does it make a difference about what we are as long as the feelings to us feel real. These things have lived with me most of my adult life - from seeing the film in my late teens. Those questions have shaped my life. Too pursue - to pounce on life while it is there...... to reach out in the time we have.... to believe in ones emotions. To live with some form of poetry at times - that is emotively based...... Now maybe my multiple sittings of the original has allowed me to distill those thoughts to the point where the message speaks bigger than the plot and vision. I did feel due to the experience of the new film that I was immersed in the world but was so engrossed that those big questions were hard to hear - maybe they werent there..... or maybe i should start rewatching it again. Either way the new film is fukcing impressive - it was never going to fill the boots of the original......... but its one of the best things Ive seen in ages.

No 10bit and oh my god, we're still at a 100Mbps bitrate for 24p/30p 4K?!?!  Goddamn Sony.. throw us a bone for video here.

That guy is God for me! I once found an interview with him, I am in a rush, Google his name! 
You can't make a feature film with that edit style, but for two-three minutes epic videos, it's incredible!!!
 

This is pretty cool: the OFX plugin architecture used by Resolve (and other high-end tools) is relatively simple and clean (unlike Adobe AE/PP, which is a unfortunately a mess (at this point, disaster is perhaps a more accurate description)). Third-party developers can have empathy for Adobe's in-house developers who have to work on the core product: it's no wonder there are so many bugs and development progress is slow. For years I had asked for example HW acceleration examples from Adobe which show a basic plugin which can directly access GPU memory, run GPU code, then store the result in GPU memory. All that was ever provided was a pointer to ancient/obsolete code which used OpenGL, and required copying the video frame from CPU RAM to GPU RAM and back (which makes the whole thing just about worthless). In 5 minutes of googling I found an example OFX plugin which does everything I had asked: processes everything from GPU RAM (no copies to CPU RAM and back), has complete examples for both OpenGL and CUDA, and the overall code is clean and relatively simple. Very cool!
https://github.com/baldavenger/SoftClipV2.1/blob/master/SoftClipPluginV2.1.cpp . https://github.com/baldavenger/SoftClipV2.1.
This is exactly what I'd found for plugin development for AE/PP: https://www.eehelp.com/question/gpu-accelerated-the-development-of-ae-premiere-pro-plugin/ (bold emphasis mine):
This is a joke, and explains why third party plugins for Premiere never ran anywhere near as fast as Adobe's internal plugins/effects.
Premiere and After Effects are at least 10 years past due for a complete rewrite. It's kind of impressive they've kept it clunking along all these years, however they'd be better off (if they haven't already started) doing a from-scratch rewrite, just like Apple did with FCPX. Maybe even switch over to OFX for plugins/extensions. Keep the clunky version of AE/PP around while the new version is beta released and developers port their code over to OFX (unless it's somehow possible to make a compatibility layer and load old plugins (probably not worth it given the ancient convoluted design)).

This is why I don't shoot v log , you get so tweeked up correcting it back to look just normal , them you apply the grade to get the look you want , now you are massively tweeked up , then just say you need to tweek a single colour on a door or wall and next you are now hugely massive tweeked up and you start to break up the image codec ....so I shoot natural profile always , saturation -5 , contrast -5 , and it all works fine for me that way . I always try get it looking good in camera , don't crush the blacks , and I shoot Pannys warmer at 4000k not 3200k , that helps a lot on the skin tones

I heard the HD is so good they shot the Revenant with a G7 hidden in an Alexa 65 body

Don't URSA Mini 4.6K EF owners get a hefty discount on the new camera, bringing it down to something like $3500 so I heard and you get to keep your existing camera.... bargain.
4.6K sensor looks nice, it's a custom design and not off the shelf scientific.
And the old Mini 4.6K is still nice.... Pro is just the same camera with NDs and more buttons!

Hi everyone,
I've opened a new page of free sky images that might come in handy in your projects:
http://soundimage.org/txr-skies/
I also added a bunch of new wood images here:
http://soundimage.org/txr-wood/

I hope some of them are helpful!

All of the original m43 Speed Boosters were replaced by the Ultra model a couple of years ago.  The OM version of the Ultra is a current product:  http://www.metabones.com/products/details/MB_SPOM-m43-BM3

Nothing wrong with shooting an Alexa, but I do think that anyone in film production that truly believes technical superiority offers the best path to creative achievements has some goofy priorities.  I get why aspiring filmmaker folks want to do their best technically, but to prioritize it above the artistic craft is nuts.  It's there to support the thing you're trying to accomplish, not the thing itself.  There's no real way forward in being a filmmaker with that attitude.

The point has been missed a bit.... I'm not suggesting the iphone is a great tool for wedding videos... or that it is a cheap way to do it.
All I'm saying is that the composition, editing, sound etc have made this look really good and something we often lose focus of

Calvin, I would love to test your LUTs, but have none of the cameras you worked on! ;-)

I wish someone would make a resolve/film editor guide to hackintosh that's super super simple to follow and tell you exactly the parts you need.  Tonymac is too complicated for me!

Funny how some of you guys have something to cry about when they're giving you a camera that's doing everything other video cameras are doing at thousands of dollars less. 

Apology to everyone including John Brawley - 
The Ursa Mini 4.6k from reviews is looking amazing .  They seemed to fix the various problems.
I'm going to do a skintone test on thursday with the sony f65 and red epic mx and canon c300 ii.
 

have you guys used the new touchbar? ive spent some time with it and imo it is THE stupidest gimmick. dont get me wrong, a mbp is still a mbp...
touchbar doesnt add any functionality... it just makes me want to TOUCH THE SCREEN. The ACTUAL SCREEN.
its like appl engineers came up with the laziest possible way to have a 'touch screen computer' lmao

My buddy does have some good clients. One success story was when he invested a lot of unpaid private time in second-guessing the 'corporate identity' of the firm who made the announcement. He met the woman responsible for public relation with concepts ready to present. But he was wise enough to make her feel it were her ideas. They accepted his offer (reasonable, but not cheap) without batting an eye. The communication worked from the start (what's the right idiom? They were on the same wavelength?). He had thought out everything in advance, he could control the situation. The client came back several times despite cheaper competitors. If the client feels you are just some guy with a camera you will not be treated with respect. A successful professional must be a prostitute sometimes. The good ones make their sugar daddies think they love them. 

It's troubling for sure but DPR also needs a source of revenue, no one works for free. They have full time people, in depth reviews take time and hosting a website with thousand of visitors cost money.
The question is about the business model and I'll move the subject to us, the readers. We always want things for free but bitch against advertising. Are we not the problem ? How many people here would pay $5 or $10 per month to get access to a sponsor/ads free DPR ? If we are not ready to pay for their independence, we must endure the plague of advertorials and sponsorship. As simple as that.

I see some people - bigfoot, mercer, viet bach, don't understand what's at stake
This isn't me being a communist and bemoaning another site making money from advertising.
Viet Bach, you say "as long as their reviews remain honest"... Well honesty is as much about what you DON'T SAY as what you do.
Read my article, and what it has to say about self-censoring and PR jaunts.
Looking at this purely from a business perspective now, it's bad for business too as readers get sick of it and leave. The watery opinions don't do anyone any good. The sponsored content is only the tip of the iceberg. From a business perspective, in my opinion it is better to to have very high quality premium paid content like books alongside the free articles and standard affiliate links than to compromise the creditability of your entire core business and your reputation with a ton of tacky advertising.
Like if you agree.

Thanks for the support.
If people don't agree with me on this, then I will at some point also cave in and do a run of big advertisements splashed on the site and regular sponsored articles. But if my readers say they're NOT fine with this, I won't. Simple as that. So speak up for the indies... not many advertising-free places left now on the internet.
It wasn't supposed to be this way online.

No doubt everyone's aware of this, but Cooke Optics' YouTube channel is yet another department of the free film school: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Ya9gBlwOhRwtloTn1hvbA

At film school, your professors are usually not actively working in the field.  
So this WanderingDP - interview young up and coming DPs who share unique perspectives and ideas is incredibly valuable.  I learned a ton from the interview with Chayse Irvin, super talented young dp who shot the Lemonade Beyonce film.
 
http://wanderingdp.com/

The Olympus might not be available before Christmas from what I am hearing.
A6500 at least is out now.
I have the G85. That review is coming soon!

Same question here!
Buying a GH4 right now does not make much sense unless you get it really cheap. 
In my opinion the quality of the GX85 and G85 already surpassed the quality of the GH4. 
I would either wait till late spring/summer for the GH5 or buy a G(X) 85 right now.
 

Shoot everything at 1080p. Don't shoot yourself in the foot with 4K. Although I do like shooting ceremonies at 4K for the post crop. 
Canon skin tones are the best. Even a used 70d would be better than Sony IMO. The C100 mk1 and 2 are the best cameras for weddings IMO. I've shot a few recently with C100 mk1 and my 1DC and it's super nice. Here's a teaser I did with 1DC/ C100 combo: 
 
 
You MUST MUST MUST remember that wedding films are CONSUMER PRODUCTS. DONT EVER FORGET THIS. THIS IS 6 years of experience and over 300 weddings shot of experience talking to you. These people aren't professional filmmakers. They aren't producers. They aren't film snobs. All they want is pretty shots of them on their big day. If you shot it all with a t2i and a 50mm 1.8 they would love it because it looks "cinematic". Don't get caught up with the gear when it comes to shooting weddings. That's the biggest waste of time and money. The couples simply don't give a shit. 
I hope you enjoy it. Weddings are a fantastic way to get lots of experience and become a ninja shooter