fuzzynormal

How it looks is almost immaterial to the lousiness of the writing. Man, I really wanted to like this show a few years ago; seemed like it was actually building to an immersive compelling narrative. I would forgive them their trope-y foibles thinking they had a handle on the overarching storytelling. Hoo boy, in hindsight all the red flags are there. Another example of production craft elevating script mediocrity. NOPE. American Soap Operas are better at writing stuff than these guys.

If you can't see that, you ain't ready to be a filmmaker. That's really it. You feel like you have something so you do.

Ha! I have a skit from 25 years ago that ends abruptly because the Horton security guys chased us off the premises. Some things never change I suppose.

My opinion of making documentaries follows similar principles. My first goal is to interact with my subjects as naturally and chill as possible. Gear selection is a part of that. It's a process that has led to a certain style and result that's hard to quantify, but definitely makes a difference. When I walk away with my shots and the subject telling me, "That was easier than I thought." I feel like I'm on the right track. Now, for a lot of what I do, that means I don't necessarily get the most dramatic shots --as I constantly have to improvise by giving the subject more freedom, but that freedom creates a certain feeling that might go uncaptured otherwise. I'm an unnatural interloper in moments that demand naturalness, so minimize that unnaturalness, you know? Anyway, if you follow stuff I type here on EOSHD, you'll see I'm a fan of Olympus and smaller LUMIX cameras. The single most important decision I ever made, for me, was to decide to minimize my gear footprint with a camera like the EM5II, do things handheld that would otherwise require insane amounts of gear, and just learn how to "ghost" while still directing what needs directed. On the other hand, I have an old-school colleague that can't seem to enter a room without bringing three tons of crap into it, making sure it gets all unpacked, and then spending 2 hours to capture what I'd, more or less, grab on the fly in two minutes. What he creates is often legit and prettier than what I get, it's just rarely reads as authentic to me. So, what's the end game? That's where you gotta decide what you want to be as a filmmaker. I'm making a deliberate effort to shore up my storytelling skills rather than chasing technical achievement. I didn't always use to be this way. As for IQ? Man, I've just not cared a lot about that recently as the gear gets me to the threshold I'm happy with, and has done so for awhile now. Just speaking for myself and how I'm approaching things, I'm more excited of where my career in motion pictures is going than where it used to be. (so much for saying I would shut up)

In Russia you don't watch TV, TV watch you. Here, TV is wall. What a country!

Yeah, not sure why people are amazed when these cruel ridiculous people "Fail Up." There's not a time or culture in history where that doesn't consistently happen. Something about how humans are wired, man. We just can't look away from a car crash, you know what I mean?

To add to that, numerous people are attracted to dick-head personalities. Just a fact of humanity. Adults should know better (yet don't), but kids are particularly susceptible to aggressive earnestness, regardless if it's healthy earnestness. Any type of self-assuredness is viewed as a positive. Thus, many personalities that reach broad levels of success are not uplifting and positive, but degrading. This is not a YT specific issue. This is an issue with what it means to struggle to be a good person in general. To point out this theory in practice, I'll not post, but mention this: That YT Paul asshole kid had the asshole crackpot adult from InfoWars on his channel recently. A perfect storm of brash stupidity that makes life on this planet slightly worse for happening. Now, a few special people can transcend this "be a dick for attention" scenario and have charisma that's compelling yet compassionate. It's much harder to do. The sad reality is evil is alluring.

Honestly, I look at that and think, "It looks very nice and well crafted... and he would shoot something incredibly similar on just about any camera these days." Even more honestly, an old 5DII has more visual character in what it produces than what this does. But I like like soft and imperfect images, especially for something romantic and purposefully dreamy like a wedding. Then again, that's me. I suppose I have my own style. Who really knows with this stuff? The couple may have seen his reel and love the clinical and high-res look of his previous videos. Still, what are directors of these sorts of productions exactly reaching for? Shooting a compelling film or using expensive and cool gear? I'd like to shoot on medium format too just for the fun factor of playing with neat-o technical stuff, but the more important question comes down to, what actually works and looks best? If I'm being really nit-picky, I'd say that many of the shots are stagey and the couple don't look wholly relaxed. Now, is that a factor of their personalities? --or are they a little awkward because this guy was doing a bunch of gear rigging for his Hasselblad shots? Is he demanding precision for his scene direction? Is he missing a chance to put his couple at ease by prioritizing his gear selection and his image creation? What's happening on the other side of that lens? You know, having a good relaxed relationship with your subjects is so exponentially more important than equipment. Anyway, I'm off on my typical "gear-not-so-important" rant again. At the end of the day, the new IQ era we're in is great. I'll shut up now.

"Adobe will also unveil updates at NAB but I am uninterested, as I really do think their reliability isn’t fit for pro work any more, or any kind of work for that matter." Yup. The most true words ever written on EOSHD that I've ever read. Like a lot about Premiere in theory. Can't abide by it in practice!

...for God's sake already...

Thanks! Some of the generic stock footage is actually quite useful for me.

If anyone in the U.K. is so inclined to actually go out and see this film: https://www.path88productions.com/flying-fur-screenings-calendar/2019/6/13/ramsgate-international-film-festival-uk

For the type of shooting I do, that would be the reason I'd use the Sony over the BM. Simple choice. All the other specs would be secondary considerations.

How does it handle the skin tones?

Ha! This sock-puppet sketch reminds me of some of the skits my friends and I used to make...wow, started almost 30 years ago now. We actually had a weekly recurring sock-puppet character that was part of the "sitcom" segments of our sketch show. He was our apartment complex neighbor that kept complaining about the noise next door. We were doing stuff mostly for public access TV or local PBS on and off from 91-96. It was pretty fun because it allowed me to hone the craft. We started doing things on a Video Toaster w/low-end-sloppy-editing tape decks, and at the conclusion we were using Premiere 1.0, hand coding HTML for a website, and uploading RealMedia 320x240 videos to the "world-wide-super-information-highway." (and, honestly, that first versions of Premiere was a more stable version of the current one - plus we were in the 1st U.S. market with consumer high speed internet; faster than what I have now!) My brother uploaded all that video nonsense on Facebook a few years ago. It's all embarrassing as hell, but that's to be expected unless you're lucky enough to be a bit of an talented artistic savant. Which, I can assure you, we were not. I should share that so you can see that silliness. 30 years hasn't been kind to my young sense of humor, I'll tell you that much! Point is, even though I cringe when I watch the stupidity we thought was "so cool," I'm still proud that we actually went out and managed to somehow do that stuff DIY, especially back in the day when video gear and editing systems were incredibly expensive. Like, real gear was mid six-figure expensive. Somehow us broke-ass-blue-collar-kids cobbled things together with anything we could get our hands on. Anyway, keep making things. Ideas that are realized make a difference somehow and someway; even if it's just fond memories of youth from an old guy. Ideas that never get made don't.

The Panasonic GF2 doesn't have IBIS.

I have a film I'm going to self-distribute this year so we'll see what options Apple offers... options are good to have.

FWIW, I like time lapse that has long shutter exposures. The motion blur is nice.

I'm from Michigan, rust belt central. Lots of folks just okay with being and not really eager to do much outside of their normal. I suffered the same dilemma back during my 20's. You basically have to lead the way and pull other people along. When you find the colleagues that are eager to help, you embrace them and make them integral to the process. The people that are lazy or just not engaged, just flat out ignore them. Be harsh about it. Don't indulge folks that don't deserve it. You may find that the most creative charismatic people are lazy as shit. That happens. Hard workers are more important. Get people willing and able to make things a reality, anyone else is not going to be ultimately helpful. The best thing that could happen for you is to search out or hook up with someone more talented and ambitious than you. If that happens, try your best to keep up.

I made my first films built around short 1 to 5 minute comedy sketch ideas. My friends and I would air that junk on the local public access station. It was stupid and ultimately embarrassing stuff, but it got the ball rolling. Most of us have to do it wrong to learn how to do it right. Point is, you can't do anything if you're not doing something.

Sure, you can have a environment where the players are all human and just let things happen. That's fine and fun, but it's not really storytelling. It's like playing with virtual action figures. Whatever narrative that arises could be exhilarating, but it's organic not artistically authored. Controlled fiction is an incredible art form.

I'm enamored with the idea of story telling in a virtual world. Eventually, somehow, story designers will need to find a way to incorporate effective AI that steers the narrative in the direction they want while maintaining the illusion of free will in whatever sandbox environment they've created. It's a difficult problem of math, as any random decision needs to motivate a seemingly random reaction and those threads of possibility reach levels near infinite pretty quickly. Manufacturing chance to lead into a predetermined outcome is some existential stuff.

Passive narrative will always have a place. Reading hasn't gone away yet --nor should traditional cinema be doomed, regardless of what future entertainment technology offers.