fuzzynormal

The owner of YouTube could start the next Nazi party and topple a western democracy, and they'd still be able to stick around.

I'm gonna guess that the owner of YT is going to be around for awhile...Like P&O'while, TwinningsTea'while, or StaffelterHof'while.

I think I found your real issue.

I'm not often a Sony shooter. I've only ever rented Sony video cams. However, that said, I understand wanting to move to an "inferior" camera because that's where your lens dictates. I'm in the M43 camp and now have the lenses I enjoy. And while I like my GH5 a lot, I do expect to move back to Olympus my next camera purchase. As mentioned, so many other things inform the right gear for you to use. Those things aren't always listed on a spec sheet.

This is what many folks leave out of the equation regarding the "film" look. Unless you were at a premier, (and even then) you were going to be looking at some pretty crusty film print IQ back in the day. I saw most of my films at the local $1-"second-run"-theater, so I was watching projections that were laughably beat up. Anyone from a smaller town Midwest USA can tell you what those prints looked like at their local theaters by the time they rolled around. Digital may be inferior to film in source acquisition in some ways, but digital projection is pristine through the distribution chain. ...and I haven't even mentioned regional TV stations that broadcast their "Movie of the Week" through a one light 16mm telecine projector, hooked up to a tube camera, and transmitted to home CRT television set with 240 horizontal lines of glorious NTSC RF resolution. What people did with analog film and electronic tech was pretty wild looking back on it.

I don't recall the max stops the Zomei says it offers, but with my Voightlander 42.5mm I can easily shoot 60fps/f0.95/200iso in midday sun using that VND. At a certain point in the rotation it will literally block almost all light from going through it. The EM5II is just a lot better at stabilization. It's smoother and very forgiving. It also doesn't "correct" as obviously as the LUMIX does, if that makes sense. However, for a shoot like the one I posted here, having a little more random movement is okay. LUMIX cams give me a sort of handheld-stabilization hybrid look. With the EM5II, that thing is so good I can move my body and the camera in such a way that it looks like it's on a dolly. Which is fine, but not always what I want. I'm nit-picking, but I do look forward to the day wherein different algorithms and intensities of stabilization can be selected on a cam. The GH5 sort of does this ad hoc, but not in a way I'm terribly fond of. After shooting with the GX85 and the GH5 following my EM5II phase, I still miss that camera. In a practical 'get-it-done' way (for me) it can actually do more than the 4K LUMIX cams. I don't tend to go crazy regarding superior IQ (which the GH5 offers, btw), so I suppose I make excuses for the OLY cams. Sure they have flaws, but what the do well, they do really well.

If you saw light being projected through film running through an actual film projector, then yeah, it's a lot different. I always have to remind myself that many people in media careers these days never saw that sort of stuff.

You got to love it. The modern world. You can you get it right IRL, but get chastised for failure by random internet strangers.

Can confirm. It's not. FWIW, I put the GH5 IS on par with the GX85. Fuji lens IS is good too. But then again, with body internal stabilization you can apply it to any and all lenses.

Good to know! Thanks for the useful information. Hey guys, nobody will notice! I can get rid of my ND's now. Better sell them on ebay quick before word gets out about this one new trick to expose video on your camera. You won't believe what happened next... [draws a red circle with a red arrow pointing at it]

The state of Denial.

Still some homestead properties out here, for sure.

A fast manual 24mm on M43. (with a dumb speed booster and a regular dumb adapter)

Pfffst. The one thing in life to NOT get pretentious about should be beer. Can't just agree that cheap beer is actually kind of good thing? Can't we agree that good beer is also kind of a good thing?

San Diego county actually ends about 10 miles from my front door. It's a big county that stretches farther east than people realize; from the ocean to the desert. Yes, there are numerous springs all over the mountains and Desert Bighorn Sheep (aka: "borrego" in Spanish) use them as a water source. The springs also create waterfalls in the canyons. Yes, it snows often at higher elevations numerous times during the winter. We can see it from the valley. White mountains with warm and sunny weather. Not so bad. In the summer I go swimming at the local pool when it's 120° outside. It's surreal. You hop out of the pool and the water evaporates so fast you actually feel like you're freezing...in 120° weather. That last about 30 seconds. I once had to dig a trench in my back yard during an August monsoon to prevent flooding from entering my house. Exciting! DYK, BS is a dark sky community? The mountains shield us from SoCal light pollution. During new moon you can see the Milky Way with your naked eye. Astronomy is a big deal out here. You guys probably can't imagine what's it's like out here right now. Perfectly quiet and gently warm now that the sun is shadowed. Light dappling the distant mountains and few magenta clouds wisp'ing through the sky. I'm sort of hoping that the BSFF will become popular simply as a fun vacation spot for filmmakers in the middle of the winter --for L.A. filmmakers and also for those from more inhospitable climates. I mean, I think we're a neat little fest. You can't really get more unpretentious than what we do. Our winter community is a bunch of earnest cinephiles. We aren't a festival for doing deals and networking per se, but we let filmmakers get their film viewed, always, with a full house and it's just a neat environment. I mean, our "snow birds" come from all over the world during January, so the audience is surprisingly a mixed bunch. Also, we don't pre-program our festival. All submitted films run through the gauntlet of our selection committee. We've only pre-programmed TWO films. And that's only because those films were shot here in town. All other films are rated by our committee and pulled directly from FilmFreeway submissions. It's a very egalitarian process. If a filmmaker submits, they have a good chance getting in. Based on passed years it's essentially a 1 to 5 chance. Basically I'm saying people should submit their films. p.s. "No one really knows" sounds like a Donald Trump quote!

Exactly this. The film festival I work with, "The Borrego Springs Film Festival," has pretty much decided our efforts are going to be basic, old-fashioned, and filmmaker centric. We know the viewing experience is evolving away from four-walls and tub of popcorn --but damnit, there's still no better way to watch a film. And there's no better way to watch your film being watched than in a dark room packed with a bunch of people. We successfully offer this. Simple and effective. Some "festivals" can't even offer that fundamental experience! If you're an aspiring filmmaker, getting into festival like ours is worth the effort. Why bother with the projector? The last festival I got into was "online screenings only" (totally missed that on the submission, but they got my dang money) ?

Oh, I don't disagree, but it's an ingredient in a successful recipe. I view it analogous to using a great spice in a dish, but it's not the main component. Rely on it too much over the more important stuff and you're gonna ruin the meal. Anyway, don't mean to hijack a thread. Glad to see budget gear can be used for big-time images. We all know this, but to see it in such accomplishment is always cool.

Well, I'd say it could've looked better with someone more adept at grading, tbh. Obviously, a 5D RAW hack or other RAW cams look freaking awesome when in the right (very patient) hands, though. I wish I could remember the title of the film. I just remember seeing it and thinking it was harsh, sharp, and just ... odd. So much detail, clarity, vibrance that people looked botchy and unnatural. There's a few post-production recipes I use to make people look flattering in interviews and other shots --and this footage was absolutely doing the opposite of that. I do recall reading the filmmakers efforts on the post-process in an interview article. They were dealing with tons of data, eeking out every last drop from the 5dIII, futzing with post for a year, and then when I looked at the final result I felt like they dang near killed themselves for pretty much no good reason. Any chance anyone knows the doc movie I'm thinking about? Point is, RAW's great. It'll help you do a lot of things and give you room to fix mistakes, but if you get what you need in camera, you're pretty good.

Typically, for me, it's confusing when people assume impressive IQ requires being shot on RAW or some other "fat" codec. Great images come from production design, set design, cinematography, and lighting...even storytelling context. The thing is, you can easily capture that with 8-bit. RAW allows more latitude in grading, but if the material is captured right to begin with, you're good. I have stuff I shot in 2010 on thin 8-bit that looks considerably better than some stuff I shot last month on ProRes. Heck, I have HDV that is more impressive. Depends on what and how you're shooting. I wonder if EOS member Danell would agree or disagree to that? I'm reminded of some indy doc that came out a year or so ago, and it was lauded as a neat achievement because the whole thing was shot and captured with hacked RAW -- and that's saying something when it comes to doc filming. And it was cool that a small crew could do that...but then when you actually saw what they shot and how they colored it, one couldn't help but scratch their head and think, "well, why did you go through all that trouble then?" It looked terribly average. Bad lighting and odd grading. A better shooter and colorist, even if they only had 8-bit to work with, could be wildly more accomplished than what those guys did. FWIW, I just shot with the FS7. I liked it enough, but I wasn't doing anything demanding of it. For the task I put it to, it didn't look much better or worse than my GH5. And, actually, in it's standard color profile I thought the highlight roll off of the FS7 actually looked rather unimpressive.

Not me. Still a manual focus guy.

The easy analogy is 96khz. Not because having it is bad, but simply because 48khz is more than adequate. 4K vs. 1080. Same thing. Honestly, I still feel like my old GX7 delivered better IQ than my GH5. That's kuz almost all I do is delivered in 1080. The 4K GH5 can technically "do more," but ultimately how does it matter in the final deliverable? Same thing goes for my old EM5II. It's an inferior IQ camera, but if it gets me what I need then it's very much a "better" camera in certain instances. As are discussions about mic pre-amps or mic frequency response.... yet they're vital to people successfully plying such craft. Those that delve into the minutiae and wisely use it to their advantage will do so. Other people will be chasing specs and numbers.

Keep in mind when it comes to the Sundance (or any other big film festival) worthwhileness debate: causation vs correlation.

Sure build it "big" but export it at your desired resolution. In your case, I suppose a sequence of 1200x1000 might be a good bet. If you're making something that will ultimately be small, adapt your text for readability. Preview your sequence while you're making it at 25%, for instance.

tbh, I'm not so sure about that. Getting in is great, but to do so usually flows through some rather well established industry networks used by Sundance. If you're in, it's typically because you're already in the game or are being groomed. Like most big festivals, they recruit-curate almost all their program. In other words, open submissions have a chance to get programmed, but it's a long shot. Yes, that too. There's plenty of camping and hiking that make our BSFF weekend a fun get-away in addition to being a good fest. I like the snow in this shot, but the real view from that position is 90° counter clockwise. BTW, we offer a sponsored trip to here, Fontes Point, during the event. Sunrise from this vantage is really something else.

Well, none really, but that's not the only reason to go to good film festivals. They can be fun too. I know ours is a pretty good time. Simple, maybe... but fun.