Aussie Ash

The problem with an NTG2 is that it is not very sensitive, so you will need to increase gain on the Zoom H6, which will increase background sounds. It will work better than on a Zoom H4n, because the impedance on that unit was only 2k iirc (H6 is like 6K maybe?, so you won't lose as much volume from your mic source b/c of a poor impedance ratio). Also, I don't know the specs,  but I assume the H6 will provide better phantom power than the H4n. 
 
The main thing is getting your mic close to the talent. If you have a mic attached to a dslr, then your screwed. No matter how much money you spend you will be screwed. If you are a one man show, then go with a lavaliere. A $100 lav will sound better than a $1,000 mic attached to a DSLR. If you need a shotgun, I'd get an MKE 600.

Test audience aside,  it's surprising it got past the director, editor and producer . I can only assume it was blindness caused by editing such an enormous amount of footage as mentioned above.  imagine what the actual rough cut was like, probably 7hrs long :P
 
I don't mean to poop on the film entirely though, it's a must see and one of the most interesting films so far this year..

Nothing's going to be superior to lavaliere mics.  The best microphone in the world will sound lousy if it's not placed correctly.  If the camera is far away from the subject, don't expect great sound.
 
Physics.  You can't deny it. 
 
Booms and Lavs exist for good reason.
 
Since you're on a budget, I suggest getting a nice long pole, a smart PA to hold it, and putting the best 200 euro mic at the end of it.
 
Also, a decent (self) education on how to record audio and WHY sound does what it does ... it's such a good investment, don't overlook that part.

Interesting, this may have had something to do with it.
 
I was so impressed and affected by a lot of elements of it,  it was original and like an accessible art film.
 
but the edit was like a bloated rough cut, like nails on a blackboard after a while. Every shot lingering two, three, four times as long as necessary. I'm not a low attention span blockbuster viewer either, I predominately watch older films and art films so I am all for lingering moments, but if its every shot it just gets grating. People were squirming all through the second half in the cinema I was in.
 
I hope some day a leaner version of the film gets cut as it could be a classic.

Glad to try to help you. It would be easier if you uploaded a clip of the messed up audio and the same clip from the shotgun mic -that way we could see which one is easier to fix, removing the hiss or boosting the shotgun-. In the past I've used programs as Izotope to fix problems that were a real challenge, so who knows...
 
Small tip: always monitor the recording device. Any other monitoring on any stage of the sound "chain" is useless since you don't know what's actually being recorded. Could it have been cable noise/connector noise from the Beachtek to the A99?
 
If you post a Wetransfer link or a Google Drive link for example, I'll try my best...

If it's a consistent whine there should be a straightforward solution. Most noise reduction program's allow you to take a sample that includes only the background noise (it doesn't need to be that long) and it will take it right out. 
 
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/noisereduction
 
^ this is overpriced but you should be able to find the older versions for free on the internets (if you are on PC).  They are just as good.  Also, A version of it may come bundled free with SoundForge which is now available on MAC. SoundForge is fucking awesome, btw.  Adobe Audition (which you get with creative cloud) also has a version of noise reduction that uses the same technique
 
http://www.sonycreativesoftware.com/easy_noise-nuking_with_sound_forge_9
 
^ This describes the process. 
 
Either way it will probably take some finagling.  But i've used Sony Noise reduction and SoundForge to save takes for lead vocals that sounded like absolute crap because of terrible background noise.  If you want to upload the audio (or small portion of it) i'd be willing to take a crack at it. 

Hi everyone,
 
I've got a new site up and running to try to help indie filmmakers, students, and anyone who needs original royalty free production music for their youtube videos, student films, games, presentations, home videos, etc. The cost of licensing music today is truly outragous, so I'm trying to do what I can to help people express their ideas and visions.
 
www.soundimage.org
 
Any feedback, suggestions, etc., are welcome (and greatly appreciated!)
 
Thanks,
Eric
 
 
 
 

wide open, an 80mm f2.8 medium format lens will transmit more light onto a full frame sensor than a full frame lens of the same aperture/focal length.  almost all full frame lenses show vignette wide open on full frame, but the vignette on the medium format image circle is cropped away when used on full frame so the illumination is more uniform.
 
in the centre of the frame you will see exactly the same exposure, but the edges will be different by a stop or more.
 
Edge image quality will also be worlds apart - the medium format lenses delivering better quality due to being used within their sweet spot.
 
I use Hasselblad and Schneider medium format lenses on the sony A7R because I often like to position the subject at the edge of the frame, while keeping the lens wide open.  Only with the medium format lenses do you get really good results at 36mpx at the edges when the lens is wide open.
 
regarding iscorama use on medium format, you'll only see light loss and related issues from step rings if you use them on medium format sensors.  the crop factor negates any adverse effects.
 
finally, As i have said a few times, medium format lenses only tend to deliver 'creative' looking images when on big sensors/film surfaces.  when on smaller sensors you loose the aesthetic benefits such as that awesome wide fov and shallow dof obtained by a longer lens delivering wider fov due to the bigger imaging area (80mm on medium format = 50mm on full frame).   
 
The main argument against using medium format lenses is that some will say they are not as capable at delivering a fine enough resolution in 'line pairs/mm'. - due to not being designed to compress all the information into such a small area.  I know for a fact that my schneiders out perform my hasselblads drastically in terms of resolution when used on full frame, 36mpx.  Once on medium format imaging areas this difference is less noticable.
 
 
It is worth reading up on lens talk in the view camera / bellows type technical camera user forums since this subject is easier to discuss in the domain of 8x10" frames!   Schneider make a range of 'digitar' view camera lenses which aim to address this issue by delivering way more line pairs per millimeter than typicakl view camera lenses - which would suggest there milage in this discussion.

I had Simon Westland of BlackMagic Design go over the URSA and Studio cameras. Just a guess here, but I wouldn't be surprised if they put that 1" 4K chip into a sucessor of the Pocket camera. Perhaps it wont be that long until it happens.
 

Yes censored.
 
So I'll mention this on here instead...
 
A few years ago when I was starting EOSHD, I was banned from the DVXUser forum due to disagreements with some members and some of the moderating team. There was a bit of an element of a personality clash.
 
At the time I was also running some articles strongly critical of Red and their delays / price / spec changes with the Scarlet.
 
Landmine Media who run DVXUser actually went to Jim Jannard's legal department and together they sued me for $70,000.
 
Sued for forum posts and my own opinion at EOSHD.
 
In order to drop the case, Jim Jannard's lawyer said I would have to sign a non-disparagement agreement which I duly signed and faxed over under pressure of a very stressful court battle which I couldn't afford to defend myself over. I simply wanted a quiet life.
 
There's always been a very vocal anti-EOSHD group of users at DVX, BMCC and Personal-View. In recent months it has become borderline harassment.
 
I've been caused no end of stress from this and it is beginning to really get to me, personally and privately.
 
I hope this helps to give some perspective as to my strong feelings towards the BMCUser taunts.

I am not so negativ about the success of this camera. Yesterday I was the whole day walking back and forth between the Pana, Sony, AJA and BMD cameras at the NAB show. To get to play with one of the Sonys or the GH4 it wasn't that a long waiting line. But wow, at AJA and especially at BMD it was crazy. Everybody has to see and play with this cam. From the people around me I often could hear them serious wanting to buy one of these big boys.

So just because it is maybe not made for most member here does not mean anything. Yesterday night I had a look at the Redusers forum and they like the URSA a lot.

This week I have to decide if I order the A7s, GH4, URSA or even Cion (the only PL mount is holding me back).

Ok, now I have to walk across the street to the NAB show again. Maybe today I will change my opinion.

People buy cameras for what they can do.  At the level this is priced at, where people have been buying cameras, they haven't been buying cameras almost universally bad, with respect to form factor, but they do it because there have been pretty much no alternative.
 
The DSLR form factor is hideous for anything but taking snippy-snap pictures.  They became useful for more than that despite their terrible design with respect to motion pictures.  They spawned new products designed to work around the faults of using a square peg in a round hole.  The previous BMD cameras were no worse in this respect and better in others but definitely no worse.  
 
Now we're back on the right track.  That flip out screen will be very useful for low-angle, minimally rigged, top handle shooting.  For steadicam.  For in the field review.  Folded up and used with an EVF in a proper shoulder mount configuration, the same as you would have to do for any other camera, and it's an amazing and useful "gimme".  Let's also not forget the HDMI, sensor-less configuration paired with another camera.  
 
It serves multiple functions, or you can fold it away when rigged.  The equally impressive looking Aja CION is $3K more and you have no way at all to use the camera without already having or purchasing an EVF.  Unlike other cameras you don't have to ignore the fact of a mildly useful screen now partially blocked by a battery plate or some dinky little eyepiece now just hanging out like some vestigial limb, both of which will or would have never given you as much use as you'll get out of that 10" screen.

Looks like Blackmagic brought these guys aboard...
 
 

I don't understand the incredible backlash here.  No offense intended, but this piece reads like Andrew did in fact get fired from a job due to not changing the battery or media in a BMCC on time.
 
Blackmagic gets 10x the criticism it derseves and about 1/4 the praise.  Yes, they should have addressed their firmware issues before launching 2 new cameras at NAB.  Yes, their customers are fair to expect support first for their cameras.
 
But put it into perspective people.  You can shoot incredible digital cinema with the three cameras they already had out.  Whether the lack of in-camera card formatting or lack of time code, etc. are flaws that are so big to render the cameras not worth your money/time/etc.-- that's for you to decide.
 
But I can handle the unaddreseds firmware issues in order to get the stunning imaging these cameras provide.  If Blackmagic didn't offer these cameras, how much would you have to pay to get similar quality imaging out of another camera today, or a year ago?
 
Also, if it wasn't for Blackmagic's innovation, I don't think we'd be seeing Sony, Panasonic and others making the moves they are right now.  Their cameras and video cameras would liekly be crippled and less capable.  That's how those compannies make money-- not by taking big risks (like the a7s) that potentially kills off their big money makers (like the FS-100, FS-700, etc.).
 
Quotes like:
 
"Their existing Cinema and Pocket Camera user base is lost. It’s over."
 
"[BM] completely turns its back on [its] existing indie filmmaking user base."
 
"[The] trend is to go smaller and lighter. This goes in complete opposite direction."  (BM has done nothing but buck the trend with their cameras.)
 
"It smacks of greed to go after the production market before you have even satisfied the indie crowd."  (Greed? Just take a look at the Sony/Canon/Nikon financials as well as their business practices-- you might change your mind.)
 
These quotes are not just someone's rather venomous opinion- but they do harm to the very companies and interests we should be looking out for as artists/hobbyists/filmmakers who desire immense quality at a relatively tiny price.
 
Just chill y'all.  Blackmagic shoud've adressed the firmware issues first, but don't overlook the incredible thech they're trying to bring us at very low prices (or declare their effort failed and futile).  Nor should you be taking for granted the innovation they are driving.  (In other words, stop throwing the babay out with the bathwater.)
 
 
T

Ursa's an interesting proposition. It's size doesn't bother me for most productions I work (episodic, commercials, features and docs). It's back heavy so it'll balance on my shoulder nicely. But they should've recessed the bottom more to accommodate a low profile/low CG shoulder pad (see Amira). I do think the 10" screen will come in handy for evaluating a 4k image. But if they're targeting studio style production, they should have made it swappable to the left or right side. The last thing I need is an AC breathing down my back. If a cameraman were behind the design, it'd be EVF on operator's side and large monitor on the "dumb" side. Now AC/Director would have a nice big screen while the operator can zone out alone with an EVF.
 
Also on the shoulder I wouldn't be using a 10" screen three inches from my face, instead an EVF. But for most productions, I find the 10" screen would come in handy. It's one less piece of gack to be dangling from some kind of arm or rigging. The shoots I work, we're flinging cameras around on incredibly packed schedules and monitor mounts eventually come out of adjustment, waste time and add to frustration. 
 
I do find the swappable chip a smart consideration for future proofing, given that there will be a better chip in less than two years. They took a page from Red handbook. Also, the ability to go HDMI with another camera could have advantages for shooting in cramped quarters (car mounts, elevators, closets, etc) - a more budget friendly approach than Alexa M.
 
Regarding the gripes about size, when you put everything on a camera you need to operate in a pro environment you either end up with something the size of an Alexa, F55 or a rigged out frankencam or rigged out Epic. The all in one approach is simple and fast to set up. I started in film many years back and while I don't miss it, I do miss the simplicity of some of the better designs (Aaton, why have you forsaken us?).
 
At 6500.00 you can't bitch too hard. And I love anyone that takes a broadside at RED. It's biggest limitation to large productions adopting it is the 12 stop dynamic range and middling sensitivity. I recently did a spot on the 4k BMC and while I loved the over all color imagery, its highlight limitations (especially against skies and windows) made me wishing I had an Arri chip. I actually prefer aspects of the BMCPC over the BMC 4k image. Highlight clipping is the difference between doubling the output on your lighting package or walking lights way too close to bring up the fill or gelling windows. It's the main reason why despite the rental price, most indies in NYC seem to be shooting Alexa (and perhaps Dragon later). It saves you money and time elsewhere. On the budget end, the extra DR is what has me still loving the 5D3 hack and not so much the images of the GH4 (Panasonic rep on Zacuto interview pegs it at about 11 stops and change). 
 
In all I was hoping for someone to introduce a mini camera (GH4 or Pocket cam size), with a log style LUT, 13 + DR, large sensor and Pro rez. Hopefully the Chinese are listening.

spec wise it ticks all the boxes
super 35mm size sensor 4k and global shutter in a usable body form like an Alexa -
what more do you want
Blackmagic have listened to all the feedback off their other 3 cameras
 
indie film makers will jump all over this - superb!!

People make real films with Arri Alexas and Red Epics
this has a similar form factor and very good specs so I do really think indie film makers will jump all over this
 
is it is very very cheap !
Black Magic have seen what people want and designed a great product that film makers will want -
 
This camera is aimed quite squarely at film makers - I want one!!

I wouldn't move to the GH4 or the A7s.  The GH4 looks like video.  There is nothing in the price range that looks like the BMCC 2.5k...NOTHING.  The faults drive me up a wall but the image is unmatched.  It's funny to read so much belly aching coming from people who ostensibly have shot on lesser cams image wise (start from dvx all the way up to the 5dIII), and just as many work arounds and growing pains.  Straight comedy.

Looks amazing if it lives up to the hype and comes in at that price. Low ISO looks on par with CX00, but should be even better in theory.... FF compatible with EF-mount lenses... wow.
 
SLOG 2 is a big deal if it is on par with the F5. Sony F3 began with very poor footage, low DR, SLOG pushed it up to 12+ stops... F5 reaches an easy 13+ stops of DR in SLOG 2. Given that the Epic manages 12 and just barely... that's a big deal if this can deliver. (Most Canon dSLRs in cinestyle come in around 9-10 stops with poor tonality, imo.) SLOG 2 underexposes then pushes... means muddy shadows and lower end mids (it's not Log C by any means) but if it is on par with what the F5 does then that that separates this from every other dSLR-type camera other than the 1DC and puts it in production camera territory, which the codec seems built for, too. Promise of gobs of highlight detail missing from everything else and a codec/gamma curve that's built to intercut with whatever.
 
I'm sure the images in stills and video far outstrip my C100 and 5d Mark III but Canon's shoddy products always lure me in over Sony/Black Magic/Red/Panasonic/everyone else's glorious tech demos. This looks amazing for the price, though, and highly useable. 

As a child, Batman, Jurassic Park and Terminator 2 were the first movies that made me want to make movies (even though I didn't know what that really required and meant when I was that young). But the first films that motivated me to make a movie were Scream and Halloween. I was way too young to watch them, but, nevertheless, I did, and they changed me. There was something so visceral about the horror in Scream (the satire was lost on me when I was 10) and Halloween was the first time I became aware of the camera, with that great steadicam cinematography (in 4:3 on VHS, no less. seeing it on DVD in widescreen years later was an even bigger revelation). At age 12, I finally made my first movie (on Hi8): a parody of slasher movies. Of course, in high school, the first movie that made me realize I could be a filmmaker was El Mariachi. My Hi8 movies looked like crap, I thought making real movies was too expensive and impossible, so I had thought about just being a novelist, even though my heart was really in film. With that out of the way, the films that really influenced me artistically...
 
2003-2004 were huge years for me. My sophomore and junior years in high school. Earlier that year (2003), Silence of the Lambs opened my eyes to the possibility of genre. It was technically a horror movie and a detective film in a drama's clothes. I think this was the first really artful film I saw, where I was more aware of the craft: the direction, writing, acting, cinematography, editing. I was aware of all of those things before, but this was the first film where I could see how they all worked together as a whole. And I realized film could be something beautiful, even with ugly subject matter. Speaking of which...
 
The summer of 2003 was huge. It started with Taxi Driver. That film knocked me out. It didn't have a conventional plot to speak of. It was more episodic. It was crazy. It was gritty. De Niro, whom I had known better for Meet The Parents at that time, was incredible. THAT was acting. His monotone voice-over, his charmingly psychotic smile, his lack of emotion during the graphic shoot-out. And of course, Scorsese. The slow motion, the overhead tracking shot a the end, the heavily processed footage of the streets, from inside of the taxi. It felt surreal. And the script; the things Bickle said in the voice-over really got under my skin.
 
Later that summer, in one weekend, I saw Rushmore, Ghost World and The Graduate. The Graduate I didn't really appreciate until I was older. I liked it, but it didn't fully click at the time. But , Rushmore was sort of a teenage version of The Graduate. I noticed the influence The Graduate had over Rushmore immediately, but I connected more to Rushmore. I was even the same age as Max Fischer when I watched it. Wes Anderson's filmmaker was so striking and bold. The tracking shots, the sharp, deep-focus widescreen, the colors, the wardrobe, song choices, title cards, curtains with the seasons, just...everything. Much like Taxi Driver, it existed in it's own slightly unreal world.
 
Ghost World I watched three times in a row, in one sitting. Like Rushmore and The Graduate, it was very melancholy, but also, in my opinion, then and now, the funniest of the three dramadies I watched that weekend. The dialogue was so real and so sharp. The filmmaking was pretty anonymous, but the storytelling, tone and mood were part of a clear vision. It felt so real, and as a teenage boy trying to navigate the secret world of teenage girls, it felt like a real window. I knew girls like Enid and Rebecca. I was surprised that the film was written and directed by men. I also had a huge crush on Enid. Not Thora Birch, but the character of Enid. Ghost World is still my favorite film of all time.
 
Later that summer, and into the fall, I saw Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs, Jackie Brown, and Kill Bill Vol. 1, which had just come out in theaters. Tarantino was practically all I thought about for a year. I read everything I could about him. I read all of his screenplays, and obsessively re-watched everything. I was an addict. I wanted to keep re-experiencing the high of watching Tarantino's films for the first time. Much like Wes Anderson and Martin Scorsese, the filmmaking was mind-blowing. It was bold, brazen, different. The structure and storytelling choices were unlike anything else I had seen. And that dialogue... I ended up writing a ton of Tarantino-inspired scripts for a year.
 
2004 included the release of three films that came out in theaters at just the right time: Shaun of the Dead, Kill Bill Vol. 2 and The Life Aquatic With Steve Zissou. Of course, the last two were by filmmakers I had just fallen in love with, but Shaun of the Dead came out of left field. I saw it early, in the summer of '04 at comic-con, with Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright doing a Q & A after (Greg Noctero, Robert Rodriguez and Ken Foree were in that audience too). All I knew about the film was that it was a British zombie comedy. I hadn't seen a trailer, or knew much else. I hadn't heard of anyone involved with it. I saw it totally blind, and it was like walking down the street and finding a million dollars in cash in a bag. It was special. It was one of the funniest films I had ever seen, but it also had very real human issues and character drama. And of course, it was well-made and gory as hell. Earlier that year I had become obsessed with Romero's Dawn of the Dead, which had become more accessible because of the re-make (Romero wouldn't be a real influence, just an obsession at the time). After the screening, I was using the restroom and Simon Pegg peed in the urinal next to me. It was the closest I came to God at the time. I told everyone I knew they had to see it immediately. I don't really need to say much more about Kill Bill or Life Aquatic, since I said enough about Wes Anderson and Tarantino already. 
 
Later that year I saw two more important films, the first being A Clockwork Orange. I don't know what else to say about it, other than it was like Taxi Driver all over again. It was one of the most extraordinary films. The opening, with the synth score, the long-zoom-out from Malcolm McDowell as Alex, staring into the camera, immediately put me in a trance that I've never awoken from. That halloween I dressed as Alex. Around close to the same time, a kid name Johnny I knew peripherally, but not well, approached me, wide-eyed, asking me if I had ever heard of Eraserhead. I said I had heard the title, and indeed I had seen the iconic poster image of Jack Nance as Henry Spencer, with the hair sticking straight up, back-lit, with a crazy expression on his face and dust in the background. "You've gotta see it, man." Johnny told me. The next day, he presented a VHS tape to me. The cover art was there, though it was clearly a regular VHS box cut up into a slip cover to fit on a clam shell. I don't think the tape even had a label. It was a copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy-of-a-copy, with video static at the bottom of the frame that Johnny claimed added to the experience of the film, and indeed it did. That night, I turned off all the lights in my bedroom and watched it alone. It was the first film I had seen that really, truly captured the feel of a nightmare. I thought about the visuals and sound design for several weeks after. I haven't been the same since.
 
Looking back on my life, those were the films that really had the most profound influence on me.

Ya see... that's why I don't jump on the bandwagon, pre-order, and fall for all the pre-release HYPE. Wait until this stuff gets actually released, find out what the hidden bugs are, and see what game the competition brings first. 

Get one! :)
 
The guy that shot the footage said it was ungraded so with some half decent grading or running it through FilmConvert, you can pull out a less video looking image. That is just for starters! You can also tweek the shadow and highlight curves in camera.
 
I do shoot ML RAW, but as I said in another post, the image is truly amazing but it is still only a hack and you can't rely on it when doing any paid jobs. Plus it eats up so much card space and the post-production process is still a pretty long effort. If I could afford to keep both the 5D MKIII and a GH4 I would, but its not an option. I'm quite happy to sacrifice that lovely RAW image for something that still looks pretty amazing and is 100% stable and easier to work with in post.

These are movies I find myself watching over again   The Red Shoes http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040725/   The Grandmaster http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1462900/   L'uomo delle stelle/The Star Maker http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114808/   Malèna http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0213847/   La leggenda del pianista sull'oceano/The Legend of 1900 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120731/   La migliore offerta/The Best Offer http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1924396/   Le fabuleux destin d'Amélie Poulain/Amelie http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0211915/   La cité des enfants perdus/The City of Lost Children http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112682/   Micmacs à tire-larigot/Micmacs http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1149361/   Un long dimanche de fiançailles/A Very Long Engagement http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0344510/       Some are not yet available on Blu Ray, but when they are you bet I shall be watching over again :P

I would think there's a lot of crossover between favorite films and influential films but I can say in my case there would be specific shots or sequences from each that I would say are my touchstones for specific types of photography or shots, color and composition.  These would represent personal taste so folks should refrain from projecting their's onto others or questioning why their own personal taste isn't represented by other's choices.  It's not a contest.  You don't win anything coming up with the most predictable AFI selection.  Deviations from the norm are a lot more interesting and revealing than some list that could be created with a statistical algorithm.