anax276

Do this:
1. Light the room enough with soft lighting to maintain exposure at ISO1600 at most with reasonable contrast between areas. Don't go higher than that, because you may need to bring down exposure to ISO800 later, if need to, to ensure there is no noise in shadows. Also ensure none of the lights are anywhere near the frame and are super soft. 
2. Fill the room with smoke (the fastest and easiest way is to use a Vape/ eCigarette) and spread the smoke around to make a Very even but thin layer. Ensure that there isn't any moving air once you fix the smoke in the room.
3. Use a strong torchlight and see how glary or contrast the light it. Adjust the smoke and light intensity accordingly.
4. Maintain a cool colour temperature in post, to give it the correct night look. It's shouldn't look warm. Also try and set the lighting similar to the torchlight so that the colours don't dance around.

I say properly lit it and "fake" it, cause if you can figure out and master it you will have some really valuable skills from it.
Go watch some classic movies with night scenes, you can be pretty sure most if not all of them are lit, take elements you like from those and try to figure out how it was done.
You can still get away with pretty low amount of light and small LED even with crappy color will do fine, you are going to have very low saturation at night anyway. a bunch of 1$ light meant for closets for example, be creative.
Forget the 180* rule, if you ever walked around at night any movement will blur very fast, so cranking it as slow at it will go can work for that feel, and save you a stop of light too.
It will also limit some of the "strobing" you will get from bright lights or highlights when panning.
 

Atmosphere (fog or haze) is very often used to give torch lights those volumetric beams, btw.
One more point - the most important aspect of these kinds of lighting setups is the modifiers.  Particularly you will need quite a range of flags to control where your highlights end up, and to protect the rest of the set from stray light.  If you can't get hold of professional ones, you can improvise these with bits of thick cloth or cardboard.  But *IMPORTANT* be aware of fire safety using these materials alongside hot lights.  

Wait. Shooting a dark scene does not necessarily mean crazy high ISO.
You really need to think about what you are exposing for. Do you want to see beams of light, with body shapes looming out of the shadows? Or is it important to see the actors faces, even when they are in the dark parts of the set?
Darkness is suggested by high contrast, not just by making everything dark. So the trick is to get some specks of bright light hitting just the things you want the audience to see.
Also, it's common for dark scenes to be lit slightly higher than intended and then 'crushed' somewhat in post (the shadow values taken down). This allows you to preserve a bit of detail in the shadows without the crazy ISOs you are correctly trying to avoid. 
The problem you will have with this last method is that, as I mentioned before, the real trick is to preserve high contrast, and if you raise the shadows, you also have to raise everything else - in other words, your flashlight and accent lights will then have to be pretty powerful.
Spot metering is your friend.
Do some tests. Grade the tests.
A monitoring LUT might help on set if you are doing a kind of 'day for night' job.

So, let me get this straight...
A forum member (who contributes a lot to this place by the way) makes a cautionary post about having two separate failures of a camera model that many people on here may be looking to buy and the response is to criticise his work ?
Are you trying to suggest he broke these cameras by virtue of taking photographs that you don't particularly like ?
Have I got that right?
That both of these cameras self destructed on the grounds of taste?
Because if you are not suggesting that then you need to accept that your contribution to this particular thread is as irrelevant as it is mean spirited.
 

Panasonic NATIVE LENSES MAKE ALL THE DIFFERENCE!!! - The Panasonic 12-35, 12-60 and 35-100 have worked  really nicely with AF since the previous firmware update - I use them on paid shoots in AF when i have a tricky focus (like a slider / dolly push into an object) - it looks like the latest update is even better.  
I have the Oly 7-14 (I love it's field of view for real estate) and DO NOT use the AF with that (luckily its not a fly by wire focus system) as OLYMPUS and Pana firmware dont seem to communicate that well. Its AF is dodgy as - so I would strongly recommend you try this test with a panasonic lens - I think you will be impressed. 

Of course, I do not disagree with the information, I agree with you, but they should know better messing with a "closed" system's very closed box.
For power users it is not the best option. I am building all my computers since the 90's, I would never do with a platform like this, but anyone "investing" in the system, should know that it is the Apple's way, or no way at all.

This is just another case, in which one should check the facts before reaching a conclusion and believe something someone on a YouTube Channel says...
Obviously, Apple declined to repair the iMac because "Linus Tech" took the iMac apart, damaging it in the process and "typically if a Mac is taken apart by someone other than an authorized technician, we can typically no longer service the Mac." In these cases, Apple understandably cannot take the responsibility that the iMac will work again faultlessly. 
Read the whole story here: http://appleinsider.com/articles/18/04/18/apple-refusing-to-fix-youtubers-imac-pro-claims-low-on-facts-light-on-details
Another case of a YouTuber wanting attention, I would say.

finally a 4k D

(This opinion-post contains strong language)
YouTube and Logan Paul share the same ethical standards: that is to say: none.
Read the full article

Let’s stop speaking all over the web about this joker, that would be a good start.
Now he became even more famous thanks to media and bloggers posting about him, even if it is negative on him like on your article.
Reminds me of US elections.....

Bullshit. 
Laughing at a dead body for views is not a beneficial way to raise awareness of suicide rates, and Logan Paul's vlogs constantly cross outside of the ethical boundaries of documentary filmmaking, so he can't be defended under those terms either. Seen as a journalist, he is lower than a joke. 
Censorship? It's not censorship to reject an entertainer who was violated the trust and morality of the community. If he was a TV star, this would lose him his job. Sponsors etc pulling out isn't censorship... "it' s just business." 

If you use a lot of different application you might want to use Symlink in ur project folders. - since your using FCPX I assume you are on a mac. I don't recall the exact name but I think the software I use was called Symlinker, very easy to setup. It's essentially a folder 'shortcut' that acts as a real folder.
Keep 1 master LUTS folder where you store and organize, and symlink it in every programs LUT directory.

With the new firmware 2.0 update, the Panasonic GH5 becomes the first 5K 10bit H.265 mirrorless camera, and you don't even need an anamorphic lens to join the party.
Read the full article

I see rather the opposite.
On the contrary, I don't see anything from others from same range (when not higher) you can't mimic (or even overcome) on GH5... And that includes Blackmagics.
Show me something that may prove I am wrong ; )
To me, that's also the typical self-confidence attitude that you're able to get it better no matter what 'cause "I am or my camera is the one". A reverse of my neighbour's grass is greener. This is very human, but simply not science.
I'm sorry but I only see subjectivity on GH5 criticism when not to justify why "I am not in the mood or don't want or simply won't buy the camera for whatever reason is" under different circumstances varying from case to case obviously; sorta non-investment excuse or alike. Also because I concur we all need to defend previous investments already done or recently made... Nothing more : ) Well, maybe only food for thought or just my two cents :-)

Firmware 2.0 for the Panasonic GH5 has been officially announced, and will be available for download at the end of September 2017.
I've been testing a pre-production version of this on my camera thanks to Panasonic, to bring you my first impressions of the new features which include:
Professional 400Mbit ALL-I intraframe codec for 10bit 4K 4:2:2
"Open Gate" High Resolution Anamorphic Mode (4992 x 3744)
Hybrid Log Gamma with view assist feature for HDR shooting
New and improved autofocus engine for video
Performance optimisations and bug fixes
Read on to find out what it's like to shoot with...

Hahaha! Very funny!
Does it also come in an ANALmorphic version? ;-)

Hahaha! Very funny!
Does it also come in an ANALmorphic version? ;-)

Hahaha! Very funny!
Does it also come in an ANALmorphic version? ;-)

I wouldn't like to penetrate that market

Or at the very least use protection. What is the concensus on UV filters these days, does the pope approve?

Organic is completely different from cinematic I think. I'm alright with us calling House of Cards cinematic, but organic it is not. "Organic" can be shot poorly, in bad lighting, with insufficient dynamic range and resolution, at f8, on a one inch sensor. the important element would be the camera or grade, maybe a nice grain, proper highlight and shadow rolloff, maybe cadence.. "Cinematic" is the production quality argument, with HDR and high res, good lighting, and apparently doesn't need good colors these days (having just watched Sneaky Pete on Amazon)

I'm a big fan of the A/B test. Meaning put on your favorite scene from your favorite director (Scorsese, Coppola, Spike Lee, whoever)... and then put on the last thing that you've shot. What are the differences?
The low-hanging fruit are things like sensor size and resolution, followed by dynamic range, bit depth, and motion cadence. Then you move on to lenses, lighting, and camera motion. Then there's color-correction. Followed by production design, locations, and costume choices. And, finally, talent. 
The "look" of your project results from a confluence of all of these things. As you start out, almost none of these will be comparable to your favorite films. But you can pick them off one-by-one. Start noticing things. Get better. Over time you'll inch closer to your idols.
Stu Maschwitz, one of the minds behind Red Giant Software, has been writing about getting a film look out of digital tech since the MiniDV era, then designing products to help you achieve it. Lots of insights in his archive.

Apart from the technical aspects that let you MIMIC film (24p, DR, Filmconvert) and make your video a travesty of an extinct medium, I think it's mostly the quality of the recording that helps, the film arts if you will, a.k.a. production value. Don't record the banal reality, make an image bursting with emotion and sensation. rec_2020 describes HFR and true HDR as the new standards. Though considered uncinematic now, these will actually help to enhance a truly great film. Be ahead of time.