dafreaking

Drop a tennis ball into a football sock and then spin it as fast as you can in a circle above your head. Make sure nobody you like is standing nearby. That circle is your film. The ball is Content, the sock is Form. They need each other. One is not any more necessary than the other. They are the two essential ingredients of any artistic endeavour. The ‘art’ is in the spinning. If you can get the tension between the sock and ball right, you’ll knock ‘em out.
 
I really like EOSHD. Andrew knows his stuff and his reviews, if sometimes a little opinionated for my taste, are rarely boring. The thing I like most though is that his blog and forum cater to quite an exiting group of people. Low/no-budget filmmakers and videographers are living in exciting times - we all know this. I assume (perhaps wrongly?) that in one way or another the majority of you see yourself as artists who either don’t have access to enough money to make the films you'd like to, or who simply want to make films entirely on your own terms. I’m not just talking about wannabe Hollywood auteurs. I’m talking about anyone who is excited by the fact that good filmmaking equipment, allowing real cinematic creativity, is available to almost anyone now (even the new dad who thinks his kids are so great they deserve Dante Spinotti on them 24/7).
 
Of course EOSHD is a gear-orientated site, and gear is only one side of the filmmaking coin. On the other side the gear is in your hands and you have to actually create something good with it. That’s what this post is about. It isn’t about form vs content - that’s what’s called a false dichotomy (my title was a lie). This post is about our need to put the amazingly powerful tools we have in our hands to good use.
 
I’ve seen it on this forum many times now - posts asking if there’s a site like EOSHD for the creative side of filmmaking. I’ve wished for the same myself. If you know of one, please point me toward it. In the meantime I decided to set up a forum. It’s not my forum - I don’t know anywhere near enough about filmmaking for it to be that. It’s just a forum. If you guys have a use for it, it may start small and then grow.
If not, I’ve lost twenty dollars on a domain name and an evening in front of my Mac. I can live with that.  :)
 
Please have a look: www.creativcrit.com
 
GET STUCK IN, have some fun, maybe start a topic or two ... Everyone is welcome. On the homepage there are two boxes - ‘Group Crit’ and ‘Study Group’. The Group Crit is the place to discuss anything related to your own filmmaking. The Study Group is the place to discuss the work of established artists and experts (not just in film!).
 
By the way, in case anyone is troubled by visions of mutiny etc., this thread has the blessing of EOSHD. Creativcrit is intended as a complimentary site, not a competitor.
 
Thanks very much, Matt.
 
 
P.S. I’m very keen that the forum works democratically, so please leave ANY thoughts, ideas, criticisms, misgivings, suggestions, etc. below.

Shows I shouldn't talk about things I know nothing about! I've never seen one IRL. Having googled a few images of people holding them I can see you're right. 
 
Surely the C100 is going to have to drop in price quite soon ...

Andrew your response has nothing to do with what I was saying. I wasn't criticising any cliche'd hipster desire to look retro etc. 
 
I was saying that it is very common, when discussing digital cinema online, for a certain contingent to be very interested in comparing how this-or-that digital camera looks compared to film.
 
As I said, cinema has a history and the vast majority of that history is Super 35mm. Cinema is also a language that the audience 'reads' and if filmmakers want to stray from what an audience has come to understand, they have to be careful. It can deteriorate the 4th wall. 
 
I wasn't saying everyone here is nuts about Film Convert and whisker-thin DOF.
 
 
I know stirring-it in the forums is good for your page hits, but if you have to do it please be a bit more subtle about it. 

When you reviewed the D5200, you tested it alongside the 5d mk3 and posted some comparison video that impressed me at the time. If I remember correctly, your opinion was that they were almost on a par for image quality. I've now tested the D5200 and D5300 alongside each other and the improvement in the D5300's low light capability is quite obvious to me, so I wouldn't be surprised if it surpasses the 5D mk3 with original firmware. Of course the 5D mk3 has a greater feature set and all that, but I'm just talking about image quality.

Awesome! Anyone else have a feeling that this was done (price cut) due to the announcement of the GH4?

Seconded. If this with the speedbooster can give performance like or a stop lower than the 5D mk3 (non RAW) I'll buy TWO!