mtheory

​The original Fast and Furious was basically a cop show about a guy infiltrating an illegal racing gang and bonding with them in the process, essentially a bad "Pointbreak" with cars, but at least it was a real movie about real people.

Exactly, it's this weird entitlement that I can't figure out. It's like someone is holding a gun to his head to produce Hollywood visuals and he complains how hard it is...as if respect and glory are some human rights being denied to him and should be given automatically instead of being earned with years of hard work. Bizarre.
Its simple...if you don't have skills...if you don't want to have the skills...and if you don't want to get someone on your team who has the skills...then don't worry about expectations, I doubt anyone will expect much from you.

​If you want to make a commercially viable film - of course you have to be held up to the same standards. Have you ever been to a movie and though 'well that looked and sounded like utter sh*t, but hey - they didn't have the same budget, so I guess it's great that they tried'?
Those who spend years honing their craft are able to make professional quality projects on much smaller budgets than you would think. You've chosen  to be a jack of all trades, rather than hone in on one specific skillset - you could do so and be able to compete with the 'big boys' or even develop a network of people who you can call upon to help you with your no/lo budget projects.
Your argument strikes me as being this: I'm a DIY builder. I love to build stuff in my spare time. I particularly like to build chairs that hopefully people will be able to sit on. Here's the thing though - there's builders out there who have done apprenticeships and been working for a very long time and they make these amazing chairs that everyone loves and are perfectly sturdy enough to sit on. Why am I expected to be able to make chairs that are good enough, and sturdy enough, for people to be able to sit on, when I haven't spent years working to be a builder??
​Why would a sound engineer want the ability to change the colour of the film in their software? I'm sure as a Director, the last thing you would want is the dialogue mixer accidentally screwing with the colour of your film, or your colourist accidentally changing the sound mix..
Imagine all the potential issues if everyone had to work from one project file on one piece of software...
​I don't understand - are you saying that software companies should make one 'post software to rule them all' in addition to all their other seperate, job-specific, stand-alone software..?
​Of course it does - the only thing it doesn't necessarily need to be able to do is apply 'funky' looks via some sort of 'filter bank' a la Instagram. AVID actually has quite powerful Colour Correction tools.
 
In terms of being 'lied to' - the problem lies in the fact that companies like Apple, Adobe, Blackmagic - in general they're targetting the consumers who have throwaway cash to spend on what can often be boiled down to essentially a hobby - and so of course they're going to try and wring out as much cash as possible. It's like the gimmicks they use to sell TVs et al. Professionals see right through that because they have a much deeper knowledge and understanding, whereas the consumers who have this as a hobby are continually looking for that something 'better' that's going to make their footage and films look and sound as good as someone who's spent 25 years honing their skills, as quickly and easily as the push of a button.

Why not? Not every surgeon is a millionaire, so a professional colorist might work with expensive hardware at his full-time job at a post company, and cheaper/no-hardware at home for freelance gigs, but he/she will still use SpeedGrade or DaVinci as software because thats where the core skill is.
I think you are overestimating Adobe Dynamic Link....you may edit a short film or a music video with ease on it, but try anything really complex and it becomes unworkable. This is why large projects still use XML and EDL formats, because they work.

Yeah, I just hope the next Indiana Jones isn't about aliens again...

I disagree, - even blockbusters were alot more grounded before, look at the original Jurassic Park for example, - aside from the cloning the dinosaurs the film was strongly grounded in reality..not a single human in that film ever challenged a dinosaur and lived...whereas in the new Jurassic World reboot I fully expect the main character to uppercut the T-Rex at some point...I mean..look at the poster...

...he already tamed the damn Velociraptors. Its just bizarre.

If you do not consider yourself a pro, noone is expecting anything from you. A pro can work in an indie or corporate environment, and will get the job done no matter what tools he/she works with. And if you can't scale up your skills then get someone to help you. Noone owes you anything, man, seriously.

Hi guys just wanted to share my mac pro upgrade DIY style. I wanted to build new power PC for resolve and rendering but i was thinking why spend 4k when i can just upgrade my mac pro with a bit of modification. i have Radeon 5770 for monitors and gtx 770 4gb and 550ti for resolve and premiere and any other application that needs it In few months i will add 6core 3.4 cpu and 32 gb memory and another gtx 770 4gb to replace 550. Some people might say oh no what did you do to mac but i really don't care about look only that it can do the job and its under my table where i don't see it at all. I have power supply powering 770 and have relocated my HD where DVD use to be i have used DVD sata connection to power the HD there is one more sata connection for another HD and on top of that i can run extension sata for another 2 HD from the free bays
 
That is it Thanks

The first 20 minutes on Krypton were amazing. The rest of the movie crashed and burned with Superman landing on Earth.

1. Get a warehouse.
2. Get a logo.
3. Spend the rest on a sales team that will bring clients through the door.

​Would you honestly prefer to shoot 4K with 10 stops over 1080p with 12 stops?

I noticed that most of the China scaremongering is coming from RED fan boys. They should name their next camera "RED Neck".

I noticed that most of the China scaremongering is coming from RED fan boys. They should name their next camera "RED Neck".

I'll give you a reason why someone would order a C300 MII, - if their company is paying for it. Plenty of small TV stations with crews, nevermind the bigger broadcasters.

​I've had to intercut Canon and Alexa footage and it can be shockingly seamless. It's done on a lot of high end shows (Rush, Wolf of Wall Street, Need for Speed, tons of tv and surprisingly it's the Canon on the jib/crane getting the wide and the Alexas picking off coverage... only no one realizes that the shots aren't Alexa). But it sure takes a lot of work and you have to use the Canon either for close ups, low light, or low dynamic range portions of the image or expose more carefully because the Alexa just cleans up in terms of highlight roll off and rolling shutter reduction, though not much else. I'm also ashamed to admit that the best footage I've shot has been on the C100 (and some decent Epic stuff) and some of the worst footage I've shot was on the Alexa. But between the two cameras, the Alexa is SO MUCH better as regards IQ and the ergonomics are a miracle if you're transitioning from 35mm (not from dSLR).
The C300 Mk II sample video does look troublingly awful, though. 
Canon's choice to go 8.7 under and 6.3 over (was it?) really bothers me. I was assuming they'd go for 6.7 under and 8.3 over (the Alexa is 7/7) when I learned about the C300 Mk II well before NAB. I think there will be a lot of C300 Mk II footage that looks so good we assume it's Alexa footage (and fwiw that video doesn't look that great to my eye, so obviously it's all about taste!) and you can redistribute your DR a lot better with a 10 bit codec than an 8 bit one and the "looks" designed to match other cameras will make this thing sell. Canon's roll-off doesn't oversaturate like SLOG2, but it's not quite Alexa.
Blue Ruin was made by a lot of my friends. And I think it looks better than the video you mentioned, which has a cool anamorphic look and not much as regards composition or purpose and the lighting is very "broad strokes." Oddly enough, their mantra was more "camera doesn't matter, look doesn't matter, story matters" and yet it's the best-looking C300 feature I've seen. Really talented group of just awesome people!
I don't think you could shoot Skyfall on a C300, though. Canon is a little plasticky and digital, though the look is excellent overall and the overall ergonomics/workflow make it very attractive at the low-end professional segment. I anticipate the C300 Mk will be the best of the best overall below Alexa (with the Dragon, which is great, cleaning up when you have the light to feed that hungry beast, but not under challenging conditions....), but the Alexa is the gold standard for a reason.
That said, if your work looks worse than the video you've mentioned, and you have the budget to work at that level, camera isn't what's holding you back.
 
 

​If capturing good images is your primary strength, you should indeed be terrified because all tech is making such processes easier for everyone. As I mentioned before, Instagram pretty much killed photoblogging for me. But if art and storytelling are your strength, you have nothing to worry about, - all those well-shot videos on vimeo with nothing to say are just dead fish washing up on the beach...it doesnt diminish the real thing.
Increased technological efficiency has cannibalized tens of millions of jobs in the industrial world and will continue to do so.

I can't wait for the day when these dinosaur corporations get outcompeted by smart hardware startups and we can just design and 3D print our own custom cameras online and get them shipped...you know...choose a sensor, mount, battery, design...click*click*...ship...SHOOT! 

Enough. 

Enough. 

Canon's greatest parting legacy for filmmakers, - popularizing the EF mount on their competitors' raw cinema cameras.  

Canon's greatest parting legacy for filmmakers, - popularizing the EF mount on their competitors' raw cinema cameras.  

This is almost everything you would want in a 4k camera, right now, just amazing specs, except the price.
At almost 16k $ this puts the camera in a different category, at least for me, i shoot weddings and it's impossible to justify this kind of camera for the prices i have.
I might be wrong, but, in the long run this camera might lose it's resale value very very fast, with companies like samsung and panasonic that have nothing to lose ( they have no serious market share in any category, proffesional or consumer), anytime they could launch a little hybrid still/video GH or NX camera that does almost all of what c300 mk2 does and more, like 4k 60p.
I hope i'm wrong and c300 mk2 has a long life, hardly the chance when samsung is serious about this and panasonic keeps pushing for more, right now nx1 is 1300$ body only on B&H.
Still, amazing camera, right now this would be almost everything i would want for what i shoot, if someone here can justify the purchase, do it, it really is a very good camera.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The future is here.