IronFilm
-
Posts
9,059 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by IronFilm
-
-
I don't like your odds @MrSMW!
38 minutes ago, Evgeniy85 said:but the movie is very long and hard to follow at times.
Benefits from having a physics degree to follow along with it?
-
27 minutes ago, ntblowz said:
Even NZ get hit by the strike
Yeah I've been hearing from both acting friends and on the crew side that work has really slowed down a lot here in Auckland, and it has been quiet.
Haven't noticed that quite so much myself just yet, have been working the last few days, and on another shoot again tomorrow. But also I've been trying to juggle a heavy study load too, thus I'm happy turning down work as I have been sometimes lately.
-
On 7/19/2023 at 9:05 PM, kye said:
If you want to visit the past, I'll buy a G7 and re-sell it to you for USD$999!! 🙂
Nice profit generating process there!
Seems that Panasonic G7 sells for sub $300 these days on ebay
On the topic of Panasonics, was working on a film this weekend being shot on a Panasonic S1H
-
South Park AI anybody?
https://twitter.com/fablesimulation/status/1681352904152850437
https://twitter.com/DrJimFan/status/1682086586593443841
21 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:This is why blockbusters often enlist well-known actors to generate interest
What if we have AI celebrities?
-
-
On 7/13/2023 at 2:47 AM, Snowfun said:
If money isn’t a limiting factor, I’d be tempted to get a Komodo.
For most of us though then money is a limiting factor.
And sub $2K (FX30) vs $6K (Komodo) is a hell of a large difference!
And if I am going to spend $6K, I'd rather get a Sony FX6 instead.
-
-
-
21 hours ago, MrSMW said:
Must dash, I have Aslan and Mr Tumnus coming round for breakfast shortly.
You're working on the new Narnia films?
https://www.indiewire.com/news/breaking-news/greta-gerwig-chronicles-of-narnia-netflix-1234880911/
I was a huge fan of the books as a kid, read all of them multiple times over.
But I'm afraid these new Netflix films will be completely ruining them. Oh well.
20 hours ago, seanzzxx said:For the longest time I was really torn up between having a kit that is able to capture what I consider to be professional quality and something that I actually would WANT to bring with me on a walk or a day out. I carried a little Pocket 4k (GREAT camera) with me, but by the time you rig that out to shoot comfortably with a monitor/filter holder/NDs/mic, you’re still carrying something that takes up most of your bag and it just sucked the fun out of it for me. On a job, no problem, for home video’s it just wasn’t worth it for me. I was really looking for something I could just pull out of a bag pack and shoot.
So then I bought a Canon R6, and honestly that camera’s video quality was such a massive step back from even the Pocket 4k that it just wasn’t worth it for me (esp. dynamic range but also the out of camera colors). Also just awful awful video assist tools on that camera.
The S5 II kinda hits all the marks for me: very small, good enough dynamic range, good colors, good monitoring tools and good AF (better than the R6 in my opinion) on my EF lenses. That last thing (combined with it being newer, so longer firmware support) pushed me over the edge when compared to the S1H by the way. I don’t mind pulling manual focus at all, but if I’m shooting on a 3 inch screen, the AF is really nice to have. Never felt like I could really trust it with the R6 but the S5 II has really really good autofocus.
But no NDs for the S5mk2? How are you dealing with that? Quick clip on magnetic filters?
-
On 7/10/2023 at 12:22 PM, kye said:
I thought that the standard focal lengths were normally designed to be spaced out relatively evenly in increments where you could move the camera closer/further to fine-tune.
Obviously there are variations within that progression, and also variations in lens line-ups (like 28mm, 56/58mm, 90/100mm lenses etc) but that when you see matched sets of cine lenses, those were the main ones.
As "full frame" is what is being discussed, I'm naturally referring to what's commonly normal standard focal lengths for photographer.
Of course for sets of cinema lenses then what is normal is completely different.
On 7/10/2023 at 6:01 PM, MrSMW said:Under 500g, around 750g and no more than 1000 for the big boy.
750gm?? Are you crazy???
My OCD will accept 700gm or 800gm as being acceptable, but 750gm is a totally unacceptable weight for a camera. -
9 hours ago, PannySVHS said:
So what are you going to be heading towards to with your newly approached field of computer science?
Well, a very long time ago I used to work as a software developer, so I thought I'd return back to study it for a bit, get another degree, then perhaps do a semi-shift in my career.
9 hours ago, PannySVHS said:Ex1 and 3 are Gh2 level regarding lowlight, bettering the Panny Hpx 250 by a clearly visible margin, going by the tests I have seen on the web.
It's as good as that? That's nice to know!
Been a very long time since I last shot with a Sony EX1/EX3 (pehaps 7 years), I remember it been ok, but not great.
https://www.eoshd.com/creative-filmmaking/optimising-the-gh2-for-iso-12800-a-video-tutorial/
9 hours ago, PannySVHS said:Back to F3, FZ to M-mount to other mounts is an interesting option if desired mount is not available for direct adaption to FZ.
Whaaaaaaat............. there is FZ to M-mount?? The rangefinder mount??? 😮 This is big news to me!
-
-
On 7/11/2023 at 9:18 AM, backtoit said:
So after researching quite a bit, I've narrowed it down to either the fx3 or the fx30. I have a lucrative career (planning to retire in my early 40s lucrative), so the budget is flexible. This makes me want to just go for the fx3, because I have the money, but I know very little about videography at this point. No experience using RAW or log.. or even know what to do with the footage once I have it. I have done color correcting on my previous videos but very amateur. So basically I'd be learning from the ground up. So the fact that I have very little experience makes me lean more toward the fx30. But a lot of my walking videos are at sunset, so having spectacular low-light performance is important. I've watched a ton of youtube videos on fx30 vs. fx3.. and a lot of the fx30 footage looks amazing..
Compared to what you are used to from all those years ago (or compared to your iPhone) then the the Sony FX30 has spectacularly amazingly jaw dropping incredibly gorgeous low light capabilities!
People who complain about the low light of the FX30 being "bad" are just spoiled brats who 1) don't realize what we had to struggle with just a few years ago 2) have never touched a light in their life 3) have never used a cinema camera before. (which are often rated at a much lower ISO than what a FX30 can do, even though they cost many times more $$$$$)
Also, because you do a lot of filming while walking / hiking, then you'll really appreciate the lower weight of the Super 35 / APS-C lenses vs the heavier weight of the so called "full frame" lenses.
-
On 7/10/2023 at 12:08 PM, kye said:
Indeed I do! But seeing as I live in Australia, I tend to keep local hours 😉
That's why it confused @MrSMWthat someone could be posting from that timezone.
-
1 hour ago, MrSMW said:
Agree.
There have been a lot of boring and conventional focal length lenses in recent years, the; 24/35/50/85, 24-70, 70-200 in full frame.
Yawn 🥱
It is because "24/35/50/85, 24-70, 70-200 in full frame" (and a few others) are the most standardly useful focus lengths.
For someone starting out in photography/videographer then 24-120mm f4 (if Nikon, or 24-105mm otherwise) plus 35mm & 85mm f1.8 primes are the bare minimum kit to get started with.
Then add on 16-35mm f4 , 24-70mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 70-200mm f2.8 and you've got yourself a very complete-ish lens set for a working professional.
1 hour ago, MrSMW said:Back in the 70’s and 80’s we had far more interesting stuff like; 30-70, 40-80, 28-85 (albeit that one being variable aperture yuck) and recently from Tamron; 20-40, 35-150, 70-180 plus those interesting APSC Sigma 18-35, 50-100 f1.8’s.
The reason they had 30-70 , 40-80 , 28-85 is because they didn't yet have the technology to design a standard 24-70mm f2.8 zoom
But many more years have passed since then, and computer aided designs are normal, and we've got mirrorless mounts not DSLR mounts (which allow more to be done with optical designs).
I feel it is time for them to make the next move (to take advantage of better tech and the more shallow mirrorless mount, offer even greater range with the same f-stop such as imagine a 20mm to 100mm f2.8 lens!! 😮 Or offer similar range but even faster, such as a 24-70mm f2 lens
Seems like only Canon has done this so far, with the 28-70mm f2 lens for RF mount.
-
16 hours ago, 92F said:
SoundDevice MixPre 10 II (not really amateur)
It's a prosumer recorder.
16 hours ago, 92F said:If we take that into account, there is no reason not to use 32 bits float...
There are heaps of reasons to not use 32bit.
Such as a desire to not be fired from my job!
32bit is not acceptable from a PSM on normal usual professional shoots.
Imagine if you got hired to do a quick piece to camera for that night's 6 o'clock news, and you gave them 8K red raw 3:1 files, do you think you'd ever be hired by them again? Nope!
You record that in 1080 50Mbs 422 PAL (or whatever is locally expected from you).
It is a far from perfect analogy, but hopefully you get the gist of it.
-
7 hours ago, hojomo said:
maybe a lot more folks would jump if they make it a 16-35 1.8 😉
I'd rather it is 18-50mm even if that meant they made it a little slower f2 lens
We already have a 28-70mm f2 lens for FF, why can't S35 get some love too?
The fact that lens exists make me certain an 18-50mm f2 S35 lens could exist if people are willing to pay a similar cost & weight penalty (because S35 is a smaller sensor, it could likely be even more ambitious, such as 16-60mm f2)
18-35mm is just such a short range, I'd prefer the zoom ranges I suggested above, especially if we can have them overlap a little too:
12-20mm f2
16-60mm f2
50-150mm f2
-
3 hours ago, hojomo said:
Sigma has publicly commented a few months ago that they are wanting to release their version of tele 'trinity' that is special and coming sooner rather than later. I think it will be very similar to Tamron's 70-180 Di III; but they go for a better build at a higher price point than Tamron (still much less than native of course).
I kinda wish Sigma would do an update of their APS-C / S35 zooms too.
As I really like my Sigma 50-150mm f2.8, and while the f1.8 of the Sigma 50-100mm is cool, it doesn't have the extra 50% reach that my older Sigma zoom has.
I'd like to see for S35 (having a little bit of overlap between each zoom, so you don't need to swap and change it up quite so much):
12-20mm f2
16-60mm f2
50-150mm f2
Too much to dream for? Maybe. (but f2.8 versions of all these lenses have already existed for many years)
-
12 hours ago, 92F said:
Ok i am agree whith you, of course it's better to use a sound engineer who monitors perfectly
I mean, you don't even need to be an amazingly perfect audio engineer wizard to get the levels right for a 24bit recording. With only a little bit of experience you can get the gist of it right.
-
2 hours ago, 92F said:
I don't understand ?!
Microphones, wireless, and recorders all have limits. Just because you're recording it in a digital bucket with 12,345,678 bits doesn't mean you can recording unlimitedly loud sources as close as you wish.
If you travelled back in time to 1883 to record the volcanic eruption of Krakatoa, don't expect just because you're using 32bit that the recordings will all go perfectly smoothly (well, ignoring the possibilities of death... which obviously is a far greater worry than your audio recordings!!). Because it was 180dB even at 100 miles away!!
The question was if the sound was already clipped when it reached the recorder, could then the recorder recover it? The answer of course is "no".
This is one of the many reasons why 32bit is so utterly pointless on professional film sets, and why not a single professional recorder on the planet supports 32bit recordings, because there is no demand for it. As we're operating in a 100% wireless environment. (and besides, 24bit is already a massive dynamic range! No professional Sound Mixer should ever be so utterly incompetent that they'd normally screw that up. It's not like in the bad old days when we recorded to 16bit, with weak preamps too, and it was a tricky dicey job to get the levels just right, not too hot and not too low either)
-
Correct. You need to find a mic that can handle that high SPL. Or think more about your mic placement, that would be the easiest/best fix.
This is also true for wireless, you distort that, there is no way to recover it.
-
-
2 minutes ago, kye said:
but I was surprised to discover that ultramarathons are super common.
They are now!!!
But back when I was a serious running (twice a day running training! Every day, all year round) then I think in my city (Auckland, the biggest by far in all of NZ) we only had one ultramarathon each year!
It's only in the last 10-ish-ish years that ultramarathons have seen their massive boom in popularity.
-
19 minutes ago, kye said:
I have seen various snippets over the years of influencers talking about the craft and lots of them have a far more developed sense of things than you'd imagine. Not all of them of course, but definitely a lot of them.
One of the things they're often very aware of is the aesthetic of various types of production. In todays terms, things shot on a phone have a certain look that tends to be viewed as more authentic and less produced. If you're making content that plays better if your viewers think that things are unplanned and 'real' then this aesthetic would help that, and if you want to appear as a professional authoritative source then maybe some nice lighting and shallower DOF would suit better.
As a few examples, Gerald Undone seems more like an authority figure with a nice studio setup rather than shooting on a phone while unboxing things on his floor, Chefs that want to be taken seriously have professional looking kitchens and have nice lighting and cameras, but not everyone wants to look professional.
A bit of searching revealed this channel - a kids show that looks like it's shot on a smartphone.
https://www.youtube.com/@KidsDianaShow/about
BUT, the channel has 112M subs and 93 BILLION views! I have no idea if they do paid content but the YT ad revenue alone would probably buy them an Alexa. I suspect part of their allure is that the content sort-of looks like it was made by the kids themselves. Maybe it is, and maybe there's an entire production team, but the aesthetic is deliberate.Back at the start of the covid era I worked on a major tv advertising campaign, bankrolled by the govt with oodles of cash to raise awareness about covid, with a top notch tv advertising agency running the show, with top flight director / DoP / etc, skilled crew of a 1st AC (and all the other ACs) and a Gaffer (with all their LX Assists) and full size lighting truck, and an Art Department, video village, etc etc... oh, and me of course! 😉 Doing sound.
Of course an ARRI Alexa was used.
But how they did they shoot it? With as much emphasis on "natural looking" lighting (even if there were a dozen lights used in the process of crafting that look!), and in absolutely every single case the talent (big name famous celebrities/personalities/sportspeople) would always be "holding the camera" (of course it's impossible for them to hold this big heavy ARRI! So they'd just have their hand on the edge of the mattebox, and both the talent and Camera Op would be carefully timing their movements to stay in sync with each other, this might take a few goes).
Why was this done? To make the videos look as "authentic" as possible, like they're just causally filming something themselves to be sharing personally with you the viewer.
Don't panic about AI - it's just a tool
In: Cameras
Posted
You need to have scanned them before they died! (ideally, before they even became infamous)
Yes, Netflix has a TONNE of customer data, they know what appeals to each market segments, and can make films targeted to that market segment even better than Hollywood can.
That's why you feel "the script was generated using a particular algorithm", because Netflix is intentionally commissioning and buying films in particular niches.
But what if AI Generated Films takes this to the next level? Not just the next level, but a 100x more levels up??
With films being made not just for a particular market segment, but an even smaller micro niche within that market segment? Or even... films specifically made and targeted for you?? (why not? If the costs of making films drops from $1M per film, for even the cheapest of cheap low budget Netflix fare, to merely 1c per film, then this is what will happen)