squig

The NTG-3 has a fairly wide pickup pattern compared to a 416, which is party the reason I bought one, you don't have to be quite as precise booming. I haven't used it indoors but I did try my NTG-1 indoors and it wasn't great. I used an NT-3 instead, quite heavy but it sounded OK. The Audix SCX1-HC is a pretty cool little mic for indoors too, I've got one in my kit. It's small enough to hide too.

Hehe, I've still got my H4n, haven't used it since film school. I know the new Zooms sound way better, but I've got very good ears (I was a record producer in a past life) and I love the sound of Sound Devices. I was doing 16 track digital recording in the 90s and we used to put everything through valves to warm up the harshness of 16 bit. I've been working on this feature for seven years, it's hard to think of anything beyond that.

The D50 is a very good recorder but the weak link is the mini jack. I got a custom cable made for it with a locking jack on the Mixpre-D end, but mini jacks suck arse and I'll never be comfortable with it. The AKG mod was done by Jim Williams, something I came across after a lot of research when I was looking at getting a Schoeps, I was lucky to pick up a pair of them pretty cheap. I don't have a Schoeps to compare the AKG to, but I do have an AKG C 480 and the modded C 460s blow the C 480 away. The C 480 isn't bad at all though.

I wouldn't trade a Sound Devices pre-amp for a Zoom. You're right on the growth aspect; if I can scrape up the extra $ for the 6 I will, but SD resale value is very good so I can always upgrade when I need to. Yeah the RodeLink. The talent's going to be rugged up in winter gear so size isn't really an issue; I'm more concerned with sound quality, and they don't sound too bad to me.

I roll with a Mixpre-D, tracking with a Sony PCM-D50, 2 custom modded (Schoeps-ish sounding) AKG C 460 B with CK 63-ULS caps, and an NTG-3. I'm looking at replacing the Mixpre-D with a Mixpre-3 to free up the PCM-D50 for ambience recording. Also getting a couple of the new Rode lavs.

You should set it to 32bit.

Anyone using After Effects/ACR be aware that Adobe disabled multiprocessing in CC2015. Rendering is way faster in CS6 and CC2014 on my 6 core Mac Pro. CS6 is a bit faster than CC2014. Make sure you have multiprocessing enabled in AE prefs.

8. You won't look like an idiot when you remember to pack your CF cards.

I quit modding for ML after a shit-fight with a fascist mod who got off on trolling noobs (and me). He doesn't appear to be very active these days; it's a much friendlier place without him.

Resolve is way faster than AE/ACR, but ACR produces a nicer image. AE CS6 is way faster than CC2017 (Adobe disabled multiprocessing in CC2015) and it exports to prores. I don't have the full version of Resolve so I can't say whether it's better or worse at removing chroma noise than ACR.

I DGAF about a bit of noise either, I usually add some. Noise on the Mk3 is quite organic up to 1600 ISO. I usually only get rid of the chroma noise in ACR. If I find I have to remove luma noise it's because I've underexposed. The only rule is: do some tests.

With only 11.7 stops at 100 ISO to play with, you have to make a choice between noise and overexposure. Canon DSLRs are really noisy at base ISO, unlike Nikons, which makes ETTR necessary. With limited dynamic range it's hard to avoid blowing some highlights. I DGAF if I blow highlights, it's only skin I'm really concerned about exposing correctly. Magic Lantern raw highlight recovery is pretty good, so don't be afraid to ETTR. Underexposing mids, particularly at high ISO, can get very ugly. Remember to reduce the brightness of your LCD (or ext monitor) when you shoot raw. Mine is set to the 2nd darkest setting. And if you're shooting actors, matt powder is your friend.

I bought my daughter an $80 Nikon; one of her shots was a finalist in a statewide photography competition. I recorded an album on a Mac in my attic and won a national award. Again: It's not the tools, it's what you can do with them. I'd shoot a feature with a D90 if that's all I could afford to shoot it with, and only a few pixel peepers would ever know the difference. 28 Days Later a case in point. If I shot it with a BMMCC even the pixel peepers wouldn't know the difference. There's a bunch of sub $1000 cameras that produce really nice filmic images. I'd love to have a C200, but it's not an absolute necessity. DPAF is a great creative tool, but fingers crossed Magic Lantern will crack digic6 and make raw DPAF a lot more affordable with cameras like the 80D.

I put a 12 terabyte raid 5 in my mac pro 2 years ago and it only cost $1000. A 16TB raid would cost about as much now.

There's this new thing, they call it "tape".

iPad/iPhone monitoring and focus control is dope. https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/cinema-eos-c200-cameras/versatility

The Varicam image is really nice, but the creative potential of DPAF and internal raw for $2k less makes the C200 a better option for film and doc work.

Won't be much change from $10,000 for the C200B in Aus, the C200 is likely to push $13,000. We should start to see raw internal recording on sub $5000 cameras from the big manufacturers in the next year. CFAST is still hella expensive, the new fast SD cards should be able to record raw light. Nikon need to pull their finger out, they won't want to be the last company to do raw; photographers will be all over raw video.

Erm, the derogatory subtext is yours, not mine. I was just having a laugh at all the negative comments. On spec it's purrfecto.

Isn't it just awful. You couldn't shoot cats with it.

I've been thinking about ripping the mirror box out of a 5D MK3 and mounting a speed booster in it.

Until the recent 3/4K developments I always shot 1080p 24p and 720p 60p crop. Now I'm keen to shoot crop 2.8K-4K 24p for a few reasons. I shoot a lot of low-key stuff, the problem with full frame is you have to shoot at around f/5.6 to get good DOF, trouble is to do that you need a shitload of light or you have to crank the ISO. In crop mode I can get good DOF at f/2.8, and lower the ISO to maximise dynamic range. The image is better in crop mode because there's no pixel binning, there was noticeable (to a pixel peeper) aliasing in the old 720p mode. Also the ability to upscale to 4K is good for future proofing my work. I'm thinking about getting a Samyang 16mm or a Sigma 18-35mm to cover the wide end; I've got a Tokina 11-16mm but it hasn't lived up to the mythology. Having said all that, I'm testing lenses in 1080p and 3K modes, the resolution difference isn't huge, and a lot of it is lens MTF. I'm shooting a GAMMA short in Aug/Sep, all this testing is to determine which mode I should shoot it in, it's likely I'll shoot a mixture, crop mode for very dark scenes and establishing shots, and 1080p for close ups and action.

Cool, thanks, I'll check it out. I think ACR has a CA tool too. I'm quite CA phobic, A Clockwork Orange freaks me out.

I've been messing around with the 1.5x Iscorama shooting 4K scope 24p anamorphic (2304x1382 with a 25% upscale). With a 24mm Leica-r it's equal to 40mm full frame. Shot at 3200 ISO with ACR chroma noise reduction. Filmconvert Fuji 8553 LUT.

What do you guesstimate the f-stop is?