alexcosy
-
Posts
51 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by alexcosy
-
-
Adobe Rant
In: Cameras
37 minutes ago, buggz said:I purchased a Resolve dongle last year, and am slowly learning Davinci for my video work.
I just wish there was an AE alternative, as I always thought that app was very interesting to me.
Good luck to us all.
The AE alternative exists, it's Blackmagic Fusion, on the same model as Resolve, but it's an entirely new software to learn indeed.
-
Casey's new vlog is out, and it still is shot with the GH5 (and looks pretty darn good). Looks like he is sticking to it for now.
-
3 hours ago, terozzz said:
Sorry to shoot your dreams down but i do know for a fact that Casey is using sony a7r II and a6500 now days... Mayby he was testing gh5 that day, but im sure he isnt switching to it anyday soon cos the af isnt at the level hes looking for...
Well, it's no secret, he has been showing that in the Vlogs for a few weeks/months now, explaining why he switched and what his new setup was so....
He maybe trying the GH5 as a possible contender, why not, just to see what the hype is all about. The FACT is the last one is shot (at least in parts) with a GH5, meaning at least possible interest.
5 hours ago, Kubrickian said:Was this a filmmaking or vlogging website? I forget
Good vloggers nowadays are the new filmmakers. Dismissing that is, i think, a mistake when you seen the content and quality some of them can put out every single day.
Storytelling is storytelling.
-
"Color is not great either"
Come on...
Judging colour on such a test chart can never tell you how it does in the real world though. You can say many things, but the colour is clearly NOT bad in every video of it i've seen. Leica pays a lot of attention to that.
-
Film Grain
In: Cameras
On 12/02/2016 at 2:32 AM, ricardo_sousa11 said:Cant get it to work :/
I might be late to the party, but i think it's worth saying.
You can read ProRes on a PC but you cannot render/write ProRes on a PC, not with Premiere, not with Resolve. There's a "kind of" ProRes that's retro engineered (can't remember the brand) but it's not the true/real/official ProRes, ProRes is Mac exclusive (for exports) you'll just lose time trying to get it, and it won't be ProRes anyway. On a PC go for DNx.
-
5 hours ago, andrgl said:
Not to be rude or detract from the conversation, but I never noticed the "character" or colors change when they went Sony.
Shooting on Leica glass for Youtube is just as nonsensical imho. Compression kills whatever IQ advantage you may get.
It's not so much about IQ, it's about the overall rendition, pop, texture, bokeh etc... I'm not at all saying the A7s/II is a bad camera with bad IQ, it's a great camera by all means.
There's an early Jon Olsonn vlog where they go on about gear, and they compare the SL and an A7 Marcus used to have, and they clearly state (and you can witness it as they show comparative footage) that the SL overall rendition is nicer, more appealling to the eye. and it does a great job with skin tones also.That and the Leica glass were a great combo. I just think that when they switched to an A7s + Sony Zoom (and it's a great zoom) the image lacked that extra pop, so it's not about IQ which is still great.
Edit: check out Jon's Vlog 22, 10min00 in, there's the comparison, the combo of SL imagery + Leica 35mm 1.4 Summilux ASPH FLE is just great IMHO.
-
Those Chanel film are clearly (well) graded, and the crushed blacks seem more like an aesthetic choice rather than a technical limitation. For such a film (high end corporate / brand content) they probably recorded 4:2:2 10 bit via HDMI to get the best possible signal, which is another advantage of the SL over Sony, HDMI out is 10 bit, not 8.
- mat33 and webrunner5
-
2
-
11 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:
Unless you need AF for video, which by that I mean the 1D X Mark II is literally the only good choice, then you will be manually focussing. Therefore you are going to be using the same Canon lenses on the Leica SL as you would be on the GH5 with Speed Booster or any number of other standard lens mounts.
The SL lenses are incredibly expensive as I mentioned in the blog post, I am not tempted by any of them unless the used price of the 24-90 comes down to something sane! Having said that they are absolutely on the cutting edge of mirrorless optics.
The coming Summilux 50 SL should be a nice one. For AF you can also put TL lenses natively, i think in 4K they cover the crop, and offer wider option such as the 11-23, or the Summicron-asph 23mm.
-
1 hour ago, UncleBobsPhotography said:
Jon Olsson mostly used the Leica Q, didn't he? The only time I've seen the Leica SL on there was when they had a german photographer visiting.
No they indeed used a SL for a long time, probably about 200/250 vlogs, and the quality the got out of it was indeed extremely good (they used leica glass, be it manual M or SL AF, and it had loads of character). They switched to an A7sII and though it's a very good camera by all means, colour and overall rendition suffered from that change (to me at least), they also got a RED Helium which is a non-sense to me for a Vlog.
Andrew, did they fix the Log problem on a firmware update on the SL, I remember your post on that subject when it got out ? I'm curious to see your results in 10bit 4:2:2, it should be great ! It is a great camera for both Stills and Video.
-
Strong softness in the corners though... I'd love to see them at 5.6 indeed, because wide open is near unusable unless at night like in this video when you really need the light at the cost of degrading the image.
-
Hi everyone,
I know this is not a particularly cinematic lens, but it's a good lens, and i figured stills oriented lenses may still interest some of you.
So, i'm selling my nice Leica Summicron 40mm f2, M mount lens
+ original rubber hood in very good state (rare these days as its rubber)
+ rigid metal hood (which i prefer)
+ filter screw converter: 5.5 to 39mm (this lens has a 39mm filter screw but with a different pitch than usual, the converter restore it to regular 39mm screw, just like other leica lenses).
+ Leica yellow filter
Front and rear caps included.
The lens is in very good state, the body has light traces of use as you could expect from this kind of lens, but all digits are still well painted, no missing paint anywhere and no scratches. The optics a in very good state, no scratches, haze of fungus, coating is still good too. The aperture ring is in perfect order, and the focus ring is smooth, no hardness, aperture blades are oil-free.
It's a very good lenses, on par with it's 35 and 50 brothers. It's a summicron, so very crisp and sharp lens, but very compact (one of the most compact Leica M lens). Don't hesitate to look for reviews online, it's a nice entry into Leica lenses, no compromise on quality but at a nicer price (due to the unusual 40mm focal length). I'm simply selling it to inverst in an other Leica lens, a 50mm which suits me better.
I can send worldwide (fee will vary depending on destination, but it's around 15€ for europe, and 25€ for the rest of the world, including insurance for the lens value).
I'm asking 400€ + shipping. Payment via Paypal preferably.
I can also sell through ebay if you prefer, but the price will be a little higher due to ebay's comission.
More pictures can be provided, don't hesitate to ask.
Thanks a lot, and i hope it can make someone here happy.
-
I'm sorry to say, but i think it's a terrible idea. We know how the consumer operates, people would then only look at the this megapixel count, as they already do with cameras. It's already not a good thing with cameras but it can make sense i guess sometimes, because it can be important. A lens is sooooo much more than its megapixel resolving power. Besides, most people actually don't care enough to really mind if it has a high resolving power or not. Like you said, a lot use the kit lens and they're very happy with it, it's good enough for them and the may not want to spend any more money on it. The few others who know enough about lenses, optic, and photography in general to really be interested in this matter, also know enough to go look for reviews, test, advice, photos on flickr etc...
Plus, people would always ask "how many megapixels does that lens resolve" without know anything else about the lens, only focalizing on this, when everything else about a lens is so interesting and important. And to conclude, i guess MTF charts are there solely for that purpose.- estarkey7, Don Kotlos, leeys and 1 other
-
4
-
Eizo = rip off.
The build of the consumer LGs is indeed flakey, or appears so on the surface.
This one is different. The 4K DCI build is miles better. MILES.
Eizo are not a rip off at all !
At least the CG series are not, if you need to be colour critical (and i mean critical, not "overall ok"), those are some of the best you can get for the money ! Can you elaborate why you don't like them ?
The LG you present seems very cool for a GUI display at best, but the backlight uniformity is atrocious, it really make you wonder abour about gamma and colour accuracy too !
-
OK, I am a still photographer that has been in this game since the 60s.
I was raised in the darkroom and the magical realm that film. chemistry and paper created. I was in love with the whole process as long as I was a hobbyist.
When I became a commercial photographer and photo lab owner I longed for digital imaging. My brother ( a programmer and current head of engineering at a major photographic company) and I would dream of devices that would allow us to create repeatable images that could be printed electronically or transmitted to clients for them to use.
It was a business issue for us. We wanted more time for making great images. Nor did we want to spend hours in the lab beating a negative into submission only to be asked to make 12 more prints exactly the same way.
When I converted my labs to digital processes in 1995 I was delighted by the quality that exceeded conventional chemical processes even then. Cameras were not there yet but scanners, software and printers were. I was able to dramatically grow my business because of quality that was head and shoulders above the performance of analog processes. So much so that even lay persons could easily see the difference.
Today, the digital process has so many advantages objectively over film production that I can scarcely justify the use of film except as an anachronistic exercise much like using wet plate process or gum bichromate.
Film R&D stopped many years ago with only a couple of players in the market making any progress and that was to make their film stocks more compatible with scanners. Digital capture and the workflow solutions are being refined, advanced and pioneered by many companies and individuals around the world. The quality, already better will only extend its lead.
Yes film has a certain quality, it is called obsolescence. You can make digital look like film if you want but why? We are not making Kabuki here with calcified rules and traditions. We are making new imagery with a medium that now allows us higher quality and more flexibility. Many of you weren't alive when we were using film but we were always looking for better tools and techniques and not looking to go back to nitrate film and orthochromatic stock.
Sorry, but the rationalizations I hear for film are all subjective "feel" arguments that seem to mask a fear of learning new tools.
What you say is all true. But does this mean that film should be stpoped altogether. Because that's kind of what the article is saying, and that's what some people here are disagreeing with. Digital is the reality today, no point denying that, but why taking ALL film off the shelf if someone likes it ? That what i don't get, wanting film to be gone for ever for everyone.
Plus, as you are a still photographer. Could you deny the quality there is to medium or large format film ? This doesn't apply to cinema of course, but large format photography is something else, even today with digital, it still can produce something digital cannot replicate. I understand it's very specific, but why would someone want that to be gone...
-
I think it's great. Interesting how younger people romance film as something so incredibly exotic. The step by step mundane nature of film development is treated as if it's some magical alchemy. Funny. I never thought I'd see a video wherein film processing is celebrated so much. Nothing wrong with any of that, it's just amusing as an older guy to see that fresh perspective.
I guess there's a part of magic in film processing indeed. I do process my films at home too, and i remember the first ones, i was anxious but excited to see what would come out, if i missed something or screwed up anything. But more importantly in this video is the fact that not only is he processing film, he is actually rescuing artefacts from the past, and there is some real magic in there. Those films were lost, abandonned, they never went the full length of their purpose. It really is a little part of History he is processing, someone's bits of existence from a time that is no longer. The processing is of course celebrated, but the main celebration is the quasi resurection of those old films. I just find it wonderful.
-
I found this video yesterday and it made me think of this thread. It's kind of related to this subject, especially on the matter of archival and how today's digital footage will hold up in time. And it actually is also wonderful and kinda magical.
Watch it, you're in for a very cool (digital
video about lost, and refound film...- sunyata, Nick Hughes and Xiong
-
3
-
It's written in Filter Meister. Not compatible with recent apps. Must be rewritten. With this app you can export results as look up table - Photoshop .amp file.
I'm on CC too, too bad. I find the Colorneg plugin counter intuitive and complicated... I would be very interested in this one, especially if it can export some sort of LUT ! I actually would pay for if it were proven useful and CC compatible ! I had never heard of it.
-
What shonky productions have you worked on where the youngest, or any inexperienced person was allowed to play with cameras or computers unsupervised? And you are aware that files can be recovered simply and easily since about 1995, unless the same morons who let the teaboy play quake on the production computers also let him take a used card and put it back into a camera and start recording with it.
If your production has the budget to shoot film, then your production has the money to not have the most inexperienced wally on set touching things with delete buttons and the budget to have undelete software, raid harddrives and a full days worth of cards, with a box to put the used cards in that's locked.
Well, i have worked on a fairly large tv show set (french scale) where a young intern was there to just take the cards from the camera operator and bring them to the ingest operator (who was litteraly 30m away, on set), then taking discharged cards back to the camera operator. Not going into details, he mixed up one card which was then formated without being ingested. It was an SxS card used on Pro Sony camera. Formated only one time, believe it or not, even Sony couldn't get the footage back.
So i don't know what productions you have worked, but sometimes shit happens mate...
At some point you have to have interns and let them do things... Otherwise there's just no point in learning anything.
-
"For a filmmaker like this working slowly with the restrictions of celluloid reinforces the technique further. For me, it leaves me cold emotionally."
There's no way this argument stands for a second.
The cinema films have been shot on film for more than a century before digital cinema not only appeared but was the main medium. So you're telling me that during that century, all films were crippled by the fact that celluloid slowed down the directors so much that they had to only resort to technique, thus making emotionally cold movies ? Really ?
Even some documentaries shot on film are wonderful !
Of course digital now is the way to go. It just make sense. But saying it will make a better cinema emotionally, just because it's quicker, is just not a valid argument to me. At all.
-
A lot of the arguments here are valid, and on both sides.
But i cannot understand why one should be happy that film is gone..? Why would giving another choice to DPs be a bad idea ? Why would you not agree with Kodak still making film ?
I'm all for spending the money you save with digital on something else. It's an economic reality, nobody can deny that. But do you really think you'd like Nolan's movies better if they were shot on digital ? Is that all there is to it for you ?
It seemed more like a rant than an analysis. And like someone else said, if you want to shoot digital, the mere fact that film is also available on the shelf changes absolutely nothing to you... what's not to like in having more choice ? I don't get it.
-
Sold guys.
-
Hi guys,
I'm putting for sale an FF58 Dog Schidt Optiks lens, EF mount. The specifics are as follow:- Fixed oval aperture, around f2.8
- Normal amber tint
- Stupid low contrast
- Light grey finish
It's in very very nice condition, really like when i got it around 15 months ago.
I'm selling it because i actually do not have a camera to put it on anymore, i was using it on a 5DmkII but i sold it as i didn't want to shoot a DSLR anymore, and went the analog Leica M6 route instead.I'm asking 100€ euros + shipping (around 12€) for Europe. I'm not reluctant to ship it outside europe too.
It's a very nice lens, very peculiar, and though you can't choose everything like on the DSO site, the settings i chose are, IMO, very nice, and you can get it for less expensive than a new one (mine is like "new" really, i mean like right out of their workshop), and very fast as i ship the day after receiving the paypal transfer, so a few days after, you can have it home, shooting the hell out of it
Here are some pics of it, and some screengrabs, bear in mind that those screen grabs are taken from ungraded 5DmkII video set on a VisionTech picture profile (which is a low contrast low sat profile). So don't pixel peep sharpness or CA, this lens is not about that, and what i shot was really not about that, but all about feeling, and atmosphere.
Ask anything you want, if i can, i will answer.
Thanks, I hope it can make one of you guys happy.
- Julian and Cosimo murgolo
-
2
-
You don't need to transcode in FCPX, that's the point.
But if you get the bad banding in FCPX, or when exporting, as some people seem to have experienced, what's the point ?
Furthermore, IMO you're always better off editing and grading Prores than MJPEG, the fact that your machine / software can take it in real time doesn't mean it's good for it, and that it handles it well in the end.
-
I'm cutting some films right now in FCPX using the 'raw' 4k footage from my Canon 1DC and it's no hassle at all. On slower machines you can just set it to create proxy Prores LT files in the background while you edit. Editing in Resolve!?!
The problem is not the hassle... it's the handling of the signal when transcoding in said Prores...
The Big EOSHD interview: Metabones lens adapters
In: Cameras
Posted
Wow !! Very different indeed ! That N version seems like an excellent piece of optical engineering ! Do not let that one go ! It would be very cool to compare results and differences between the 2 of them !