Jump to content

fuzzynormal

Members
  • Content Count

    2,492
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    43

fuzzynormal last won the day on December 4 2019

fuzzynormal had the most liked content!

4 Followers

About fuzzynormal

  • Rank
    Long-time member

Recent Profile Visitors

5,663 profile views
  1. I like the the centuries old legacy of the phrase "fast" in photography, though. It's neat-o.
  2. Yeah, but what if I like that softness? (And I do) Sometimes, flaws are not something to avoid, but to be embraced. At least for me. Anyway, the Voights are fun because you can squeak out extra exposure for dim lighting, and it's nice to have that option. FYI, just my ideas and style. Others really want that tack sharp stuff. I'm not that particular. I go for character rather than precision.
  3. I'm not a fan of the YouTube consumerism era, but I'm so old I actually resent my iPhone and what it's doing to me, so there you go. Same shit applies with the glorification of stuff. We've all done it as young people. Now it's just a different generation. As with most new people, they do everything a lot more and they do it with their own style. The fact that they have this modern and new infrastructure that's never existed in the course of human history is rather fascinating and really is kind of nuts...but that's for the 20 and under set to cope with. Screw all you young kids. You can pound sand.
  4. What do you know about the western three act story structure? What's you opinion on traditional story telling archetypes like protagonists and antagonist? Do you appreciate character development, the heroes journey, conflict, resolution, redemption? You don't need to follow these elements of standard narrative models, but I've found, for me, that it doesn't make sense to break or bend the rules until you understand them. Put it this way, do you think it would be likely to make an impressive painting if all you access to a tube of titanium white?
  5. I think I'm an okay editor and make half way considered opinions when editing. Thing is, I don't really like doing it. I don't really get excited to sit in front of the computer pushing buttons. Hence, even though I've been paid decently over the years to edit things, I've never considered myself an editor. My cousin, however, is in the industry. He cranks 10 hours a day on real productions. That dude is an editor. I'm a dilettante. Honestly, the most entertaining edit from my biz last year was a Adobe Rush thing my wife put together on her iPhone. That being said, if you want to make a serious career in the work, my impression is that you really need to do a deep dive into it; that means learning the same tools the upper echelon creatives use. But editing decks are just tools, just like cameras. There's really not a big difference between functionality. At the end of the day it comes down to your decision making abilities that hopefully help improve whatever footage is that you're working with.
  6. In the industry, I'd agree that legacy attitudes and craft work will remain. People that are considerate of what they're doing tend to make more artistic decisions. However, The YouTubers and social media influencers will be leading a certain aesthetic moving forward, I think. Hard to run from that avalanche. We'll get used to (have gotten used to?) 60p and vertical video, for example.
  7. That's the basics. Dial it in however you want, you're essentially pulling colors around in the mids. Making warmer in the upper mids, cooler in the low mids. The dark and bright stay clean, even desaturated to taste. I've never done a deep dive into being a colorist, just looked at stuff and pulled things around to my liking. Very dillitante'ish, as usual. Still have the first video I really gave it a go at the technique, shot over 10 years ago on an actual video camcorder using dem dere videos tape thingies we used to have.
  8. I've been using it for years because I do like the complimentary colors and I was in the habit of trying to make video look more like film. The world of media is forgetting film now, and the kids doing stuff aren't aware of that legacy, so the color tricks to mimic it are less popular. But I'll stick with it a little bit as I'm not into accurate color. I like my footage a bit outside of "reality."
  9. Anyone know approx. how many stops of exposure there is between 200 and 25 ISO? I long for the day I can dial in proper exposure for motion picture shooting using only ISO.
  10. Olympus EM5II. It did nothing exceptional but for the IBIS. IQ? Meh. Good enough. Colors? Pretty good, but not Canon. Still, the thing is the compact size, the design of the camera, the ergos. I just liked shooting with it. Enjoyed it so much I wanted to take it with me wherever I went. For me, it was a joy to use. Haven't had a camera like that for decades. I also have a warm spot in my heart for the GM1. Weird little thing that was charming to use and shoot with.
  11. The guy likes to make things that resemble dreams. VR seem like a good place to do that.
  12. If you have the time/collection, always use a single filter to give you what your want. Especially ND. That said, I shoot run-and-gun and I use a variable ND. It mucks with the sharpness of the image, but the trade off of being able to grab exposure in a split-second makes it worthwhile, imho.
  13. Yes. In my experience, it's best to just turn it off once you're below a FF equiv of 16mm. Unless you're trying to get completely static shots while hand-held only. Otherwise, no IBIS on the wides. BTW, Optical stabilization with FUJI lenses is good. But then you're locked into buying FUJI lenses on those bodies.
  14. Handheld by yourself? Suggest that Olympus with their IBIS is a good bet. I also use a GH5. Good codec and color, imho. Useable IBIS, but inferior to Olympus. AF? Myself, I'm not a fan of AF, like a bit of human wabi-sabi in the shots. Maybe consider buying a set of three old manual primes with a straight dumb adapter and speed booster. You'll get 6 focal lengths from 3 lenses...and you can get those lenses cheap too. More than enough to give you cinematic options. Throw in a variable ND with step up rings and it can travel across your glass --making run and gun a LOT more pragmatic. I'm not a fan of how variable ND mucks the image a bit, but the trade off is worth it. I have an old EOS Sigma 10-20mm wide and when adapted with the speed booster it's an expansive field of view.
  15. As you may have noticed, the film making industry makes plenty of movies specifically for dumb people. It's the larger market, so why not?
×
×
  • Create New...