Jump to content

tosvus

Members
  • Posts

    370
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    tosvus got a reaction from Shield3 in How I would describe 1dc video quality   
    I'll probably just get depressed if I download the footage (compared to the stuff I can produce), but even the framegrab is very impressive. I have started using the  4k photo mode on the panasonic lx100 a bit, and while it is impressively good as well, it doesn't look as good as this...
  2. Like
    tosvus reacted to Shield3 in How I would describe 1dc video quality   
    Quick link.  I know this is simple home video type stuff, but to me I like the look.
    4k 1dc file, built-in audio.
    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3W9u9cu-URWd2N4LWZzY2NkcXc/view?usp=sharing
     
    4k frame grab...

  3. Like
    tosvus reacted to AaronChicago in Fun new VHS iPhone app   
    Slow zoom and all!
    http://www.engadget.com/2015/08/20/vhs-quality-videos-ios-app/
  4. Like
    tosvus reacted to jcs in Linux everything! Who's Interested?   
    Thanks for the tip on Ardour, it looks decent and so is Reaper (more on the midi/recording side; not quite free but almost). However my working professional colleagues won't give up Protools (and can't really- required for high-end features). If Ardour was as good as or better than Protools they'd drop Protools immediately and start saving money.
    If Libre Office was better than MS Office, the same thing- anyone in business would save money and stop paying MS. That hasn't happened.
    If GIMP was in the same league as Photoshop, all the professionals would save the now monthly fees and stop paying Adobe. That hasn't happened.
    Open source hasn't taken over solely due to FUD? Can you share a double-blind study showing that is a statistically significant hypothesis?
    When I work in Ubuntu, the UI looks like something designed by non-professionals. It works, but it's clunky and was clearly designed by folks with little or no cognitive science background. OSX has issues as well; Windows surprisingly is looking the best these days. As a developer I use them all, and call the best the best based on design and functionality, no agenda or religious attachment; as close to the scientific method as possible. OSX and XCode development tools are far advanced compared to Android Studio (mobile Linux). Android Studio's emulator is so slow it's necessary to use a third party solution (Genymotion, etc.). Linux is great for backend (webservers, etc.) and tools (ffmpeg etc.), OSX and Windows are currently better than Linux for desktop apps. If that changes, I'll stop paying Adobe and switch too. Who wouldn't?
    When debating the merits of open source and free software vs. commercial software, the topic of content piracy comes up frequently. Many folks who are ardent supporters of free software don't believe in paying for any content either, and happily pirate everything. Especially as a software developer and content creator, I believe it's important to pay for software as well as content. Do you believe it's important to pay for content or should that be free too? How do you propose independent software developers and content creators make money to pay for food and shelter? The little guys putting out quality software and content without any bloat?
    The simple answer was if open source software was better than commercial software, everyone would immediately stop buying commercial software and there would only be open source software. This may happen someday, but as of 8/20/15 it's not even close.
  5. Like
    tosvus reacted to kaylee in FORBES70 - critique please   
    right?
    so i finally saw The Master last night and that happens... a lot lol

    have you guys seen this? v interesting photographically speaking
    great work rich  
    love the forbes 70 project!!!! wishing you all the best
  6. Like
    tosvus reacted to nahua in Alternative to Neat Video as their OFX pricing is crazy?   
    Neat Video is great but I have yet to get it working in Resolve.  Crashes on me constantly, v11 or v12beta.  I should have just kept my Premiere Pro one only.  It's just the rendering speed in Resolve is miles faster.  Anyway, save your money if you can.  I'd like to know if there's another alternative too.
  7. Like
    tosvus got a reaction from nahua in Alternative to Neat Video as their OFX pricing is crazy?   
    First of all, I'm sure historically, it was smart to charge (much) more from users that needed the OFX version (i.e. people that paid for resolve and presumably even edit hardware). However, with Resolve Lite now being out, and HitFilm Express (and even Pro which is still reasonably priced) apparently increasing in popularity, I was hoping Neat would do something with their OFX pricing. Alas, they have told me they have no plans to lower the OFX pricing (2.5 times higher than other versions in price..). I am trying Resolve and Hitfilm Express now, so spending 250 on noise reduction isn't very tempting.  My question is two-fold:
    1. Can something almost as good be had for around $100?
    2. If I'm forced to spend $200+ anyway, are there other packages around the same price that match or are better than Neat?
    Thanks! 
  8. Like
    tosvus got a reaction from IronFilm in Best camera $800-900 max for recording church service?   
    Thanks, agreed, but the people helping are very variable skills-wise and sometimes they need set and forget. If I could do it every week myself, it would have been a very good solution!
    An option could also be to use this as an excuse to buy myself a new camera and donate the gh3. Then they could spend the money on a decent lens instead. Need some agreement from the mrs on this one though..
  9. Like
    tosvus reacted to TheRenaissanceMan in RX10 II Dynamic Range   
    That 20MP sensor has a lot more latitude in the shadows than the highlights, so it actually responds fairly well to underexposing (to avoid blown highlights) and bringing it up in post. This is a lot like the D800e, which also has a lot of dynamic range in the shadows. This can be nice for recovering botched exposures, but it requires a fair bit of tonal work to get it looking natural. Also, all that shadow DR on a small sensor means that once you get to ISO 1600 or so, you're losing a ton of that to noise. 

    The newer M4/3 sensors, on the other hand, have a much more pleasing, well-balanced DR distribution. They do pretty well in the highlights with a very nice roll off, but can also be recovered quite well (at low ISOs). I prefer this, because there's less I need to do to make it look good out of the camera. Plus, in low light, I can crush the blacks a little and still have that nice dynamic range in the highlights to keep things looking realistic. 

    I've been shooting the GH3 and the RX10 side by side for a few months now, so I have a ton of experience trying to get them to match well in post. They require VERY different treatment to look their best. Both are quite capable, but if I had to choose, I'd stick with M4/3 in a heartbeat. 

    EDIT: This is all in regards to stills. For video, my findings are similar, which puts the RX10 (even with the XAVC-S codec update) at a distinct disadvantage, because all that shadow DR is heavily compressed and doesn't always respond well to being raised. Compounding the issue is that the most accurate Sony Picture Profile (Deep) is very contrasty and crushes the blacks. Portrait is probably the second best, but it's so oversaturated you can easily clip a color channel, even at -3 saturation. The GH3 in Natural or Standard blows it out of the water for out of the box color and ease of CC/grading. The only points I'd put in the RX10's favor are that lens (an amazing piece of engineering) and the internal ND.
  10. Like
    tosvus reacted to benymypony in Shooting with a 4K pocket camera - the exceptional Panasonic LX100   
    Yes I use it, but I have not yet made a video project with the LX100, only tests.
    For Windows and Mac users, there is the freeware Rocky Mountains Movie Converter.
    It uses FFMPEG with simple interface and it's really fast compared to Adobe Media Encoder, Apple Compressor or others encoding applications.
    Download : http://sourceforge.net/projects/rockymountainsmovieconverter/files/
  11. Like
    tosvus reacted to maxotics in Shooting with a 4K pocket camera - the exceptional Panasonic LX100   
    Found an open-box lx100 so have been playing around.  I'm using a script to downsample all the files to 1080 so i can view/work with them easier.  So for anyone interested in a windows script using ffmpeg.  Copy this "converto1080.bat" script (or whatever batch filename you want to call it ) into a folder with 4K mp4 files.  Run it and it will created 1080 COPIES in mp4_1080 (or whatever you want to call the folder).
    ALSO, if anyone has better ffmpeg paramaters, please post!
    @echo OFF SETLOCAL REM title Converting... REM ***** CONFIG ***** REM like F:\Files2015_Maxotics\Video\ REM fold= curent folder set fold=%~dp0 set ext=*.mp4 REM dest = curent folder + mp4_1080 REM like F:\Files2015_Maxotics\Video\mp4_1080\ REM change to whatever you like... set dest=%~dp0\mp4_1080\ REM ***** END CONFIG ***** :: This makes the target folder ::MD "%fold%" MD "%dest%" REM make sure you have correct path to ffmpeg.exe for %%f in (%fold%%ext%) do "C:\Files2013_VidPhotoSoft\ffmpeg\64bit\bin\ffmpeg.exe" -i %%f -vf scale=1920:1080 -c:v libx264 -crf 10 -preset slow -c:a copy -sn "%dest%%%~nxf" REM if errors, pause so command window doesn't lcose REM pause 
    If I need to just convert one file, I edit this batch file
    echo OFF set fold=%~dp0 set dest=%~dp0\mp4_1080\ set usefile=P1040162.mp4 ::MD "%fold%" MD "%dest%" "C:\Files2013_VidPhotoSoft\ffmpeg\64bit\bin\ffmpeg.exe" -i %usefile% -vf scale=1920:1080 -c:v libx264 -crf 10 -preset slow -c:a copy -sn "%dest%%usefile%" REM pause REM unREM pause to look at output in command window  
  12. Like
    tosvus reacted to benymypony in Shooting with a 4K pocket camera - the exceptional Panasonic LX100   
    Yes, Standard.
    Right now I use Natural with :
    Contrast -5 / Sharpen -5 / Noise reduction -5 / Saturation 0 Highlight 0 / Shadow 0 Almost no noise up to 800 ISO.
    Check this beautiful video by a user with same settings on LX100 : https://vimeo.com/116671977
    You can download the 2.5K version from Vimeo, and the quality is very impressive !
  13. Like
    tosvus reacted to benymypony in Shooting with a 4K pocket camera - the exceptional Panasonic LX100   
    How to use in Adobe After Effects : https://youtu.be/_39GzdjZKmA
    How to use in Adobe Premiere Pro : https://youtu.be/PvjHqNlrCJw
    How to use in Adobe Photoshop : http://is.gd/wX8zqs
    How to use in Final Cut Pro X with LUT Utility plugin : https://youtu.be/xlm-Wqdmu4A
    How to use Magic Bullet LUT Buddy : https://youtu.be/hrSbtqLIamE
    Hope it helps 
  14. Like
    tosvus reacted to TheRenaissanceMan in Best camera $800-900 max for recording church service?   
    A GH3 or G6 with a vintage lens or two could do the trick if the operator can manual focus. 
  15. Like
    tosvus reacted to Mat Mayer in Best camera $800-900 max for recording church service?   
    http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-HC-WX970-Camcorder-Built--Camera/
    4k = future proof
    camcorder = no time limit
    price = $850
    20x optical zoom, easy to use, HDR movie so no exposure expertise needed, interesting sounding twin camera function for close ups of the pastor from phone. No reviews below 4 stars. "Real-Time Broadcasting* — You can live-stream events on USTREAM as they are being recorded in Full-HD resolution."
    Sounds like it should be ideal to me, plus Panasonic is a great video brand.
  16. Like
    tosvus reacted to Inazuma in Best camera $800-900 max for recording church service?   
    Maybe a used D5300 and Tokina 80-200mm f2.8? I got that lens for £250 ($400) on ebay. 
  17. Like
    tosvus reacted to Martin BetterFly in Best camera $800-900 max for recording church service?   
    I think you should take for consideration the recording time limits on those cameras, I have recently downgrated some of my grear back to canon 600d with magic lantern from sony a6000 and a5100 just cause with ML I have auto recording restart option. Maybe you should consider good old camcorder instead of mirrorless or dslr as they are not desiged for long recording times.
  18. Like
    tosvus got a reaction from Jimbo in Interesting Canon interview with Masaya Maedya on C500 future, XC10, mirrorless 4K, future DSLR Log option,   
    Good point but the GH4 seems pretty rock solid, so it reflects badly on Canon if they are not able to do something similar. Heck my LX100 is limited by Panasonic to 15 minutes due to overheat concerns, but at least I have never had an issue shooting for 15 minutes straight, and I usually stop after a few minutes, start up again etc many times. I can handle a birthday party just fine with that camera even
  19. Like
    tosvus reacted to sgreszcz in gx7...still good?   
    ​I have the LX-100 and love it.  It has decent image stability, a nice lens that covers a useful range (24-75mm), great manual controls, and records a nice 4k picture which looks fantastic in 1080p.  I also like the grip and ergonomics of the camera - it feels good in the hand.  I also owned the GX7, which I used with my Panasonic 35-100/2.8 lens, but sold it for a few reasons:
    1) I missed some of the features that the LX-100 has - auto ISO in manual mode, being able to switch the display to monochrome to allow the peaking colour to stand out, quieter mechanical leaf shutter for stills (the GX7 was loud and electronic shutter gave me distorted pictures), full manual controls of shutter, aperture, exposure compensation.
    2) The P35-100/2.8 was giving me a lot of jitter when using the OIS.  I had been thinking of trying another copy of the lens, but in the end I just decided to sell the GX7 and buy an OMD E-M5II for any longer focal length video work (and for stills with P25/1.4, O75/1.8 lenses).
    The LX-100 is a great all-round video and stills camera.  I have a step-up filter ring to 58mm which I use with a set of standard ND (3/6/10 stop) and xume magnetic filter adaptors.  I leave a 3x or 6x on depending on light conditions and use them like a lens cap.  When I went on holiday I fit the LX-100 + a variable ND in a tiny Thinktank Mirrorless Mover 5 case.
    I have the LX-100 set up quite comfortably (for me) right now.  Custom C1 is for stills.  C2 is set up for 4k video, and C3 for 1080p/50fps.  Fn1 for switching between custom modes, Fn2 for switching between monochrome/colour EVF, Fn3 for locking the control buttons.  AF/AE is set for autofocus (which I wish worked during recording when in manual mode!).  To switch to video I just select my C2 setting, switch the shutter dial to 60, the back dial to adjust the shutter to 50, and then Fn3 to lock the settings.  Outdoors I generally leave the aperture dial to A and modify exposure with ND.  Indoors I use Auto-ISO and/or vary the manual aperture dial for proper exposure.
    I'm using picture profile "Natural", -3 Contrast, -5 Sharpening, -2 Noise Reduction, 0 Saturation which seems to be OK to me (I need to do more colour testing though which is hard for me as I'm colour-blind).
    I wish the LX-100 had a tilt EVF/screen as I do miss that on the Gx7 as most of the stuff I shoot is of my kids and it is easier to get low shots.  Regardless, even the small LX-100 EVF is handy for seeing in bright outside light.
    It would be great if they could extend the video recording time on the LX-100, as well as allow you set the minimum shutter speed for iAuto-ISO (for stills).  I'm also not sure why there is no ETC mode for 1080p settings.  Panasonic, in general, should allow AF-S during recording when in manual focus mode.  I used this a lot with my Olympus if I needed to quickly regain or ensure focus.  I prefer a bit of focus hunting (which I can edit out if needed) than out of focus shots.  I also find that sometimes the focus peaking on my LX-100 "disappears" - I still haven't figured out why.  It would be nice if Panasonic offered a way to "fix" the shutter speed (say to 1/50 for 25fps or 1/100 for 50fps) and ignore the manual shutter dial to save an adjustment step with the back dial.  It would also be useful to allow us to use the shutter button to stop/start video as I sometimes "miss" the small back record button.
  20. Like
    tosvus reacted to Brian Caldwell in Metabones Speed Booster ULTRA M43 with AF for Panasonic   
    Hi Julian:
    The 0.71x SB ULTRA is intended as a true general-purpose Speed Booster for m43.  The 0.64x XL is a more specialized item tailored for the GH4 and a few other cameras, particularly for the higher crop factor in 4k.  The ULTRA has incredible optical performance all the way across the field, as you can see from the MTF curves.
    BTW, the Speed Booster XL and all other m43 Speed Boosters for the Canon-EF lens mount can be upgraded to autofocus by means of a firmware download.  So if you like the XL and want autofocus you can have it.
    Brian
  21. Like
    tosvus reacted to Brellivids in Metabones Speed Booster ULTRA M43 with AF for Panasonic   
    Thanks for the all the interesting glass Brian that you have been involved with.
    What would be interesting is working af for birding glass on GH4. Since there is still not proper nature lenses .. such adapter would not need speed boosting. The current competition seems to lack proper af capability for non native lenses. naturally this might not be your field of expertise and some other folks at metabones do the electronics.
    Beeing able to use Tamron 150-600 and Sigma 150-600 with working af for MFT mounts would be sweeet. ( i know it's very niche)
    BTW is there non radioactive way to make such high performance optics? Lanthanum in my understanding is little bit radioactive. Heh perhaps provide small stylished lead lined case for those speedboosters ..
     
  22. Like
    tosvus reacted to Amro Othman in The Canon fight back begins - with a box   
    ​Well obviously they aren't- because they have been through that stage at the beginning of their careers and have access to cameras like ARRI's, RED, etc. But many future Hollywood cinematographers are comparing specs between the GH4 and A7s. 
     
    That demographic of "people who think it would be cool to shoot some video" are getting pretty badly ripped off. This package wouldn't be so bash-worthy if it was priced, say, 30 to 40% lower. Some here are saying "let Canon charge and market their products themselves however they want". Sure, they will- let us also laugh and bash their marketing however we want, too!
     

    What would be far better is if they would buy this exact kit but separately- as already mentioned by Andrew. That way they could save a few hundred dollars for lighting, no?
     

    This is the only thing that I agree with you on. I am trying recently to shoot more and read/ post less. Same goes for music recording. It is plain old laziness combined with actually being busy with other work. But fair point as I believe if people spent half of their forum time shooting and editing there would be a lot more interesting content out there indeed...
  23. Like
    tosvus reacted to AaronChicago in The Canon fight back begins - with a box   
    I never thought I'd see FULL HD printed anywhere in 2015.
  24. Like
    tosvus reacted to Andrew Reid in The Canon fight back begins - with a box   
    ​Erm! Ever heard of satire!?
  25. Like
    tosvus reacted to Julian in The Canon fight back begins - with a box   
    I guess most enthusiasts finally figured out the EOS 700D is crap, so Canon is looking for a new target audience. You can see them pictured on the right of the box. Their dad will pay anyway.
    It's offensive to ask $899,99 for this kit of crap.
×
×
  • Create New...