fuzzynormal

Thanks. (I think?)

The truth is what we make it? Wow. And "Jail?" This is the propaganda that infects populism and factless-based thinking. As much as I'd suppose you'd like it to be true, the GOP would probably be unable to launch a criminal indictment into Hunter Biden because it's only a wild-hair conspiracy and current investigations into Biden's role have him operating within the confines of the law. Truthiness vs. fact. Yarn on a white board is not criminality. Regardless if Biden was guilty as sin, the POTUS is STILL not allowed to break the law to satisfy his inclinations. It just doesn't work that way in a society based on law and order. Here's another fact: DT could have worked to launch an investigation above board and he probably could have pulled it off. You and I know he just wanted the political optics, not the reality. And please note that actual facts of corruption have led directly to jail time for those in the Trump orbit. Indictments. Trials based on evidence. Incarceration. That's just a fact. Ignoring that actual fact is wildly odd to me. As for Kavanugh, it's a he said/she said. Claiming your guy is right and she's a liar is an assertion. Could be right. Could be wrong. Don't ignore that the justice department overtly refused to follow up with the accusations. Might have led to absolutely nothing, but other witnesses were ready to testify and were not allowed to. There's a fact. Also curious how "not that bad" in your examples is atrocity level stuff. Biblical injustices. Sure it could always be worse. We could implode as a species. We might. That's not an argument for allowing (or even encouraging) people to act in bad faith. I'd rather it not get to that point, y'know? Which is my point. You push back at the small stuff because the small stuff adds up to a big result the more you let it slide. Ultimately I'm not interested in disagreeing with opinions, I just want a baseline for reality...and we ain't got it right now. It's slipping away. Really? I don't. I guess I can't make the leap. Too wide a chasm for me intellectually. Moreover I believe it to be amoral, if not immoral to do something like this. If one's values are based on particular conditions, how valuable are they ultimately?

I can certainly appreciate that sort of sentiment. It's honest. I'm not a Hillary fan either. Her and the DNC deserve(d) a kick in their uppity teeth. However, I fail to see how "an ends justifies the means" attitude should be at play. If the POTUS is a bad actor, it's reasonable to call them out on it regardless of other circumstances. In other words, don't cover for the guy because you think it could be worse. Rather, think it could be better and push towards that.

Believe me, I'm well aware that there's a strategy to manipulate the media, but can we agree that any and all assertions from the POTUS are rarely "little stuff"? You know, I've heard that "not a big deal" "just a joke" argument as well. My reply is that lies matter, regardless. I'll always think it's demonstrably detrimental to the nation. Personal emotional truths are valued over factual evidence, and that doesn't lead to good places in a society that needs to be secular and inclusive to all its citizens. Now, you may disagree with that fundamental assertion of what the USA should be regarding evidential facts, and think my rationality is wrong from the start. One of my friends in particular has realized we're somewhat at odds with this attitude, given his religious devotion, so we know our perspectives --we've learned to cope as best we can. Nevertheless, hewing to some sort of ideals and reality is a thing that is important, especially in a person unable to hold onto evidential facts being the POTUS. Petty lies matter or nothing does. I'd also say, the whole "not a big deal, you shouldn't be so angry" shtick is an argumentative retreat I've hashed out with my friends too. It's a dismissal and avoidance of criticism; ultimately a sort of "shoot the messenger." Maybe tolerating criticism is just something that's not as easily shared if you're a right-leaning personality? It often seems that way in my experience. I mean, we had some fun arguments when Obama was POTUS, but I personally really never cared too much about allowing such criticisms. To be fair, I also hang with some hard-core liberals that are annoyingly intolerable with their skewed attitudes about stuff. Like nails on a chalkboard. So, yeah, the "angry" thing as a broad brush? Not sure about that nor the fairness of the attitude. Never mind that I'm...as my mom would often say... not angry (with my country or POTUS) I'm disappointed. So, here's a good example of what I wrote. The plain and simple fact is that the plant was initiated under the previous administration. By your reasoning, Barrak Obama should be the one to take the credit. (and to be clear, I don't really believe the POTUS should take economic credit for everything) Yet, DT did. His assertion is a lie, the extrapolation you've drawn from it is questionable ("some companies have changed direction" would like to see your notated examples on that, as I'm aware of companies that are doing more of the same they'd be doing otherwise, but now with stock buy backs, which can be easily argued that hurt the economy overall), but here you are offering him praise rather than skepticism. Like I'm saying, either the facts matter or nothing does. It's how DT can get away with "No Quid Pro Quo!" with his supporters even though that assertion is in direct conflict by openly admitted fact from those that run his administration. This is what manipulation and propaganda looks like and it's not a small thing.

Well, at least GPU swaps are possible on self-assembled PC rigs. i haven't ever done it, but my understanding was that hackintosh are more robust with AMD anyway... besides, you have a PC that doesn't play nice with your preferred OS, just change the OS. im not a big fan of windows, but since all I'm doing in my PC build is Premiere, why really care?

I gotta point out, from how I see it, that's really a crux of the whole issue exposed right there. Most of my friends are conservative. I used to live in Michigan, Justin Amash's district. I can disagree with Justin's POV but still respect his integrity. I appreciate my friends' integrity and willingness to engage me in discussion. Sad to say, I think our group are all outliers in this current world. The thing we do all agree on is that modern politics is not the discussion of ideas and ideals, but an exercise in weaponized psy-ops. And that's not healthy for a nation. Dr. Hill couldn't have been more on point in her impeachment testimony about that.

I don't mind. I'd rather someone express themselves than not. It not like most of us can't handle it. Big deal. If I disassociate from people I disagree with, I'ma gonna be one lonely dude.

I don't completely buy into this. My thought is simply that people who are living through things tend to view what's going on through an introverted prism. Religious apocalypse is claimed to be in motion by people in every generation that's ever existed, but yet the world keeps spinning and humanity still exists. But I do agree that nations can come and go. Wax and wane. It's what humanity does. Decadent? What does that mean and by who's standards anyway? The American affluent were decadent in the gilded age leading up and into 1920's, how'd that play out? Not great. The USA was certainly more religious back then. More religious even in the 1860's, didn't stop some bad shit from going down; exacerbated it, tbh. The top of President Lincoln's "things I worry about list" (even leading up to a civil war) was that a good chunk of the country was in the thralls of the "know-nothings," 19th century's version of a willful ignorance, unsophisticated, populist's political party. Familiar. So there's this idea that we're all somehow special and being treated to unprecedented dramatic events simply because we're alive right now... meh.

facebook memes? Wouldn't everything be gold colored if so?

In all seriousness, the video strikes me as low level corporate type work. The sort of stuff rather uncreative people slap together in a hurry. (Source: did uncreative slapped together video work for a long stretch) Is it an Apple video? I don't know. Seems way too unsophisticated for that.

I'm snow-flaking out of here forever. I'm offended by in-joke-color-grading jibes done at the expense of the greatest human being that ever lived on the planet.

Once a bucket is full, you can't add more water to it.

What is sold at the concession stand is literally more important than what you're worried about. Filmmakers are usually better off when they stop concentrating on odd details --and instead just move forward with creating something.

"F8 and be there" it's that simple most of the time. It's the "be there" part that's hard.

That's a guy getting up at 3am on the regular to get the shots. Good photography, good light.

This. It's kinda weird how there's all these wild suggestions to affect the cadence of the how a camera plays its video...but you can easily change it, and dial in a more personally favorable look, by simply adjusting the shutter speed. The "180" notion should be considered a suggestion, not a rule.

I like the 0.95 lenses on M43 and use them all the time. Still, FF does things M43 can't and visa versa. That's all.

I'm a big fan of M43. However, in my experience, larger sensors shoot sharper images at similar DOF's effects. That's pretty much it as far ascent I'm concerned. Yes, you can shoot, approx. f2 FF equivilant on a M43 with a f0.95 lens, but the lens costs $600+ and it's soft'ish wide open and also has some halo'ing. I kinda like that look, but that's me. A f2 lens on a FF camera can be had for $25 and will be pretty sharp. Shoot the visuals you like. If you find M43 coming up short, consider other options. Ain't no big deal.

To be fair, my wife pointed out how my claim of 95% of our shots is an exaggeration. She says more like 80%. But, yeah, the f.095 doesn't create incredibly odd shallow DOF depending how you shoot. It's more of a style. If the subject is a few meters away from you vs. if they're close to the lens...that's the main thing that makes a difference to my eye. After we got our doc in the can we put together a quick teaser for the film. This teaser video actually features the .095 shots more prominently. If you're looking for it, I think you can see it. But otherwise, it sits pretty easy in the edit visually with a mix of other lenses and f-stops. Ultimately I find the Voights to be perfect M43 lenses as, aside from DOF, they'll allow for some good low light video capture when you need it. They're not tack sharp wide open, but sharp enough. Again, it's a look. I tend to like it and prefer shooting manual lenses, so I'll probably keep using these lenses for awhile. BTW, I've mentioned this before on EOSHD, but I also have decided to shoot most of my stuff NOT at the 180 rule. If I'm shooting 24p, then I run the shutter @25. 30p=30ss, etc. That's adramatic motion blur effect, and it'll really take the edge off the "video" look. It's not for everyone, but there ya go.

Thanks. Hope you like it. If you like dogs and airplanes, there's pretty good chance you'll enjoy the flick.

You're invited to watch the film (or trailer) my wife and I put together with a GH5 and G85. 95% of the shots were with Voights shooting f.095. It's a look. I also just re-bought a used 5dMII for less than $400. Full Frame and fast lenses for interviews is nice. Point is, if you want to play, play. Things are cheap. Have fun. http://www.flyingfurfilm.com

I shot something else tonight with an old lens. Took about an hour. This one I'll edit and upload fer sure

Same. Rugged stuff.

Whelp... No time to edit just yet, but here's some stills from footage. Will slap something together into a video soon, hopefully.

But wasn't "Tangerine" on Netflix for awhile? Netflix has this camera list, but really...what's the list specifically for? The programs they directly produce-for-hire? If I, independently, somehow made a wildly popular movie with the GH5, I don't think Netflix's end-all-be-all prerequisite is "what camera did you use?" That doesn't seem like a smart thing for them to do. Am I misunderstanding? (Probably)