squig

The A7s isn't all it's cracked up to be in low light, hence my transition to the micro cinema camera sometime before the Replicants run amok in 2019.

I was just watching a clip on vimeo and mid way through it switched back to the lowest resolution. vimeo is FUBAR. <Checks youtube rules for violence, nudity, and profanity>

Hmm. I want something mirrorless to replace the A7s for production stills and behind the scenes footage that won't need a lot of post. What's the rolling shutter like?

What's the dynamic range like?

I was going to post the crowdfunding trailer for my feature on vimeo, but now that I can't choose the playback quality it makes a lot more sense to post it on youtube.

Andrew, where's the banging head on wall emoji?

"In 2007, B&H had to pay $4.3 million to settle a discrimination claim by another group of Hispanic workers with jobs in the firm's Brooklyn Navy Yard warehouse." http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/b-h-photo-discriminated-2-hispanic-employees-lawsuit-article-1.991286 http://heebmagazine.com/b-and-h-camera-lawsuits/31725 http://hyperallergic.com/275052/federal-agency-finds-labor-violations-at-bh-photo-fines-company-32000/ http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/nyregion/19bagels.html?_r=0 Context, eh.

Would you like fries with that?

Good luck with that. It's that kind of arrogance that makes the decision to shop elsewhere a no brainer.

I'm missing the point? Firstly, "cinematic' has to be the dumbest word I've encountered on the filmmaking forums. The dictionary definition is: relating to the cinema, and: having qualities characteristic of films. In the 21st century an increasing number of films are shot digitally; not all those films look like they've been shot on film, some have been shot digitally and attempt to emulate the look of film, others have been shot digitally to deliberately look like video. Some films are shot on film with deep DOF, realistic color, and grain removed in post, and look like they've been shot digitally. So "Cinematic" doesn't have any real specific meaning, it's a misnomer. "Filmic" on the other hand does have meaning because "filmic" means something that looks like/emulates actual film stock. You can choose a camera that produces a "filmic" look to suit your story, or you can choose a camera that produces a "video" look, but if you're a director asking a cinematographer for a "cinematic" look, expect the cinematographer to shake his head and/or laugh. You wouldn't shoot The Walking Dead on a Red Epic because it would take a lot more time and cost a lot more money to get the deliberate lo-fi S16mm look right in post. If I was asked to shoot The Walking Dead digitally I'd shoot it with the Digital Bolex. You choose the camera that best tells the story you want to tell (within your budget), it's as simple as that.

@henryp How many female salespeople do you presently have working in your store?

Camera choice is crucial. Shane Hurlbut doesn't spend weeks testing cameras for the hell of it; neither do I. Imagine The Walking Dead shot on a Red Epic. Sure you could, but why would you want to?

B&H has a well documented history of discriminatory practices.

Word.

Kubrick used wide lenses a lot. If I remember correctly most of Eyes Wide Shut was shot with a 19mm lens. 2x anamorphic lenses create a distorted perspective and many great films have been shot exclusively with them. Victoria was all shot in one take btw. All due to the run and gun nature of the shoot.

It might have been a 25mm Zeiss lens Yeah there's some very jerky shots in 'Victoria'. In situations like that when I want to run and gun and still pull focus I use a Steady Tracker. I still get that fast paced handheld type energy in the shot, but it smooths things out enough to keep the audience from puking on each other. The global shutter in the micro cine will be perfect for that scenario. I've got a Ronin-m, but sometimes it's just too smooth to create the frantic energy I want in a shot.

As I mentioned I'm getting a speed booster for all my Leicas (16, 24, 28, 35, 50, 60, 90, 135) to complement the hyperprime, however you can shoot a whole film with a 35mm equivalent lens; check out the German film 'Victoria' all shot with a 24mm lens on a C300. I checked out the bokeh of the SLR magic and thought it looked really creamy. The Sigma bokeh is very nice too, but I wanted something with a more vintage look to match my 70s era Leicas. Agreed the Sigma is the best compromise.

With a speed booster the micro/pocket has a 1.75x crop. The other option is to go fast and wide with an SLR magic 12mm t/1.6 hyperprime. I've already picked up a hyperprime and I'll get a speed booster for my Leica-r lenses and Iscoramas. The S16 sensor size is a non issue.

I do like the look of the Digital Bolex but it seems to struggle with highlights and a magenta cast. With the right grade I reckon I can get the BMMCC close to that look with more DR.

Hollywood and the Australian government have almost completely destroyed the Australian film industry. The govt pours millions of dollars into subsidizing Hollywood films while Aus filmmakers struggle to fund their projects. Local talent has to emigrate to survive. Australian audiences are weened on Hollywood films, and good Australian films are largely ignored. Countries like France, Germany, Norway, and the UK value their filmmakers and give them the support needed for their local industries to thrive. If the current policy doesn't change soon Aus will be nothing more than just another Hollywood backlot.

Quite 'filmic'. The thing that sets the 1Dc apart from most DSLRs is the motion jpeg codec. Real 24 frames per second, and better color than that interpolated interframe H.264 bastardization. The Nikon D90 was mJPEG too, much nicer cadence than interframe codecs. But right now for me nothing short of a 5DMK3 raw, Alexa, or F35 touches the micro cinema camera for an analog look.

If you try to satisfy an audience you're bound to fail. Engage your audience, and lead them on the journey you want to take them on. And blow their minds while you're at it.

Unfortunately our art has been corporatised and industrialised. I don't need awards to feed my ego, I need them to put food on the table. I make films because I have something I need to say about this insane world, and there's no better way to say it. The most talented artists always question themselves, most of them think their work is shit. Just watch Coppola melt down in 'Hearts of Darkness' (one of my favourite films). I've been in the entertainment business since I started DJing at house parties when I was 16. I put on my first rave at 20, and put out an ARIA award winning album on a major label at 29. I've seen other talented people make it while others crashed and burned. Fear is the number one enemy, procrastination is another. I think fear is what causes the procrastination. Self doubt can be a real killer. I know a guy who trashed the files every time he made a track because he thought his tracks were shit. He's a far more talented composer/producer than me. Because I worked in a record shop and DJ'd for 15 years I developed a sense of what makes a track interesting to people. Like Ed said aesthetic is subjective, but there's certain key elements in music and in film that can make or break either. Tarantino's success comes from many years learning the language of film, same goes for Scorsese. Both of them are masters of nailing a score too. My formula for figuring out if my music/screenplay/film is up to scratch is to compare it to other work in the same genre and determine whether my work hits the same marks. To do that I have to put myself in the shoes of my audience. It's like an out of body experience where you have to try to leave your ego behind and just see whether your work entertains you as an audience (you're gonna have to figure out for yourselves how to chill the fuck out). I'm sure everyone here has some experience entertaining themselves. One thing that really helps is to walk away from your work for a while. If you're working on something all the time you're gonna be too precious and either think it's amazing or a piece of shit. I put my screenplays down for months and then I do a reading purely to entertain myself. It's then a lot easier to make the changes I need to make it interesting enough to play to an audience. The album I produced was 4 years, over 30 tracks, and a mountain of pizza boxes and zip tie bags in the making, and it wasn't until the night we recorded 'The Last Track' that I knew it was good to go. How did I know? When you get that feeling I got that night you'll know. This film I'm planning to shoot this year's been a full-time job for the past 7 years. Persistence and madness are every bit as important as talent. End rant. Now back to the joy of my film site design clusterfuck.

Lulz Best way to work with MLV raw files in post is with MLVFS http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=13152.0

Looks more like a 16mm fisheye on an APS-C sensor than a 1.33x or even a 2x anamorphic.