fuzzynormal

Xpro-2 is a fixed lens OVF with overlay guidelines and info if you want it. It’s a cool novelty. The thing I like about OVF is that is allows you to take in the whole scene in front of you as it’s a pretty wide view Whenlooking though the lens via EVF it’s kind of “tunnel vision,” which is good for some stuff too.

Easiest solution: Edit with proxies and you can use just about any computer. “Just about any computer” will allow you to keep your budget very low.

OTOH, I think it would be a good exercise to show how creating a watchable video doesn't necessarily require high IQ. But, yeah, that doesn't really fit the vibe of this forum, does it?

Yeah, and in my corner of the world, at my economic level, that's pretty much all I could afford to attend. So for me, a love/hate relationship with film image IQ. You can see remastered films look glorious, (anyone seen Gone With the Wind in a modern theatre? My god!). But then I remember film looking like absolute shit too. Film is the IQ king, but film also managed to be the pauper. "Rode hard and put away wet" is an apt 19th century metaphor. You could destroy a beautiful animal by mistreating it. Anyway, point being, you would have to seriously agree to degrade IQ for this challenge suggestion --in order to make it a real challenge.

I still rent and watch SD video on Amazon streaming because it's $1.00 cheaper AND there's no way my eyes can tell the difference from the opposite end of the room.

I think people would be surprised if they ever went back in time and watched the projections of most movies on the film circuit. The mangled prints that were presented in budget movie houses were ridiculous. Equivalent to 480p would probably be an improvement. Growing up in the Rust Belt and going to sad $1 movie shows was my ideal. I loved it. You really can't appreciate how terrible the IQ was. And that was the movie house. The analog recordings made at home were horrible! BTW, 864x486 is what I still deliver as draft previews to my corporate clients. They don't pixel peep. They just want the content they paid for. Also, if you want something akin to a VHS dub recorded in SLP mode (what almost every 80's kid bootlegging films watched at home on their crappy VCR's and CRT's) you'd need something like 480x270 at .2 Mbps...probably less, honestly. How about 320x180 at .1Mbps? That would be a real challenge!

Andy Kaufman Jerry Lawler Roddy Piper Bob Heenan Jimmy Heart Rick Flair Mick Foley

Not that it matters to anyone, but my brother’s and I launched into video production back in 1985 when my dad brought home a Sears VHS camcorder. How he did that on a blue collar paycheck I’ll never know. What did we do with this awesome blessing? Produced wrastlin’ videos. Hundreds of them. Story arcs, reoccurring character fueds, the whole bit. My role was the interviewer “Mystical Marvin,” and I modeled the character after Mean Gene —with a little bit of Koko B. Ware and The Million Dollar Man for my occasional wrastlin’ appearances. Good times. So RIP, Harvey, owner, executive producer, and camera supplier of the LBWF! Still talking about you all these years later.

That dude’s a freaking genius.

Use it a TON when doing corporate because the clients like it. Otherwise, when I have the leeway, regular speed is default mode. It is nice to bust it out for sentimental dramatic moments in a doc. But you need to be judicious with it, just like drone shots.

All Variable ND’s will do something funky to your image. Can’t be helped. But, you can decide if the trade off is worth it. For me, running and gunning, the answer is “okay, let’s do it” The ease of grabbing exposure quickly and getting the shot far outweighs a slight color cast or odd lens flare. I’d rather a better option, but there’s really not one, imho, when shooting on a hybrid cam and lenses.

Yeah, I did this and the final movie was a mess and I didn't like it. Not because of technical choices, but because I started shooting without a shot list, just a generic story line. Sometimes you capture stuff that's compelling, other times it just never really gels. Went into it hoping it might flow together somehow and I'd get lucky. Nope. I chalk it up to my wife and I not really being "into it" once boots were on the ground. We were crew and cast, so it just went sideways from the start as we both don't really like being on camera. So, no dialog, no nat sound, only one crazy lens (pentax a110 f2.8 with an adapter that light leaked), started with music or soundscapes you've never worked with and then was shooting something to match the music, no scouting, found locations that looked cool and used them. Whew. I can't even go watch the thing now 'kuz it's so cringy to me. Learned a lot about myself and the wife though!

I always wondered if I would ever be able to laugh at a 9/11 joke.

Ha! You should have been around in the early 80's to get a glimpse of what that same sentiment meant to viewers back then. First I recall hearing about how things were getting screwed up was when it came to "Hill Street Blues," I guess. That was a popular TV show that embraced more chaotic camera movement. But, man, talk about tame by today's standards. Of course, a similar attitude was prevalent when French New Wave came about and it punched the industry in the mouth. I say no rules. Play with the thing. That's what creatives are supposed to do. The tools of the craft allow for a heck of a lot of stretch, so pull and see what happens.

I’m really into listening to Bob Wills’ again. Can’t really explain why, just am.

If your subject is a distance from the camera, wide angle lenses are deep focus anyway. Even so, if the DOF is somehow too shallow for you, stop down.

A used Sigma 10-20mm?

Are you American? If so, you can certainly write off just about everything reasonable as business related. If you get audited you'll have to justify it to the govmint though and they may not agree.

Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately I couldn't restore thumbnail goofiness by media cache manipulation. Also, the weird thing about the interpret footage option is that it works with source file footage but not proxies. I always edit in proxies, so... Anyway, dead horse and all that.

Yeah, I got Voight primes and like them a lot. I feel I don’t need a higher end camera since my concern is shooting video. I like the GH5, but don’t love it - as I know I’m only utilizing about half of its capability the way I do things. Downgrading gear seems counterintuitive, but sort of makes sense. The 60p 4K would be hard to let go of, however.

I'm attracted to Olympus and have shot lots on a EM5II. Looking to jump back into the brand. Do you have any experience with the EM10III? Since I shoot manual lenses and don't dabble much with LOG, might be a good fit. Thoughts?

Gene Orkerlund. Huh. Weird personal attacks. Where's this coming from, anyway, and are you okay? It's hard to recall you being overtly mean in the past here. As for me and my biz'ness, we're proud of our productions. www.path88productions.com Is it high-end expert level? No. Don't think it was ever claimed to be here on EOSHD, but there's enough knowledge there to get by. Shooting with hybrid cameras is enjoyable, and sharing my experiences/work/opinions is something else that's enjoyable. If you run in more prestigious industry circles and have the agency to not hire a person like me, that's perfectly fine. We're doing what we're doing at the level we're at for a reason, and that's okay with us. Sincerely, Low Key Autistic Condesending Horseshitter Running Away In Real Life Well, for me it's easy to appreciate WeeGee's work as photographer. In my mind, his saying is not garbage, and his advice is worth considering. My take on it is simply "look at the environment more than the equipment."

Basically, going to "f8" meant that you would be minimizing the technical variables --so you could concentrate on the stuff happening in the world. The things that are actually more important to creating nice images. Lighting, content, composition, etc.

Yooper T-Shirt. Thumbs up.

The old school photographer's mantra from Arthur Fellig: "f8 and be there." It's not meant to be taken literally, but once you have enough wisdom to understand the context of what that phrase actually entails, you're gonna be fine.