fuzzynormal

Leaning heavily into the "Golden Era" of Hollywood filmmaking with this one.  Cool to play around with visual styles from yesteryear.  8-bit 4K from a EM10iii and a GH5, for those that are interested in tech specs.
 

Saw lots of Iceland volcano footage online lately, reminded me of this shoot. Straight from the source. No color grade. Play guess the camera with this one:
 

I know it's an impossible thing to really quantify to other people, especially pros, but it's been true in my experience as well.  I've just ended up preferring using Oly cams for some reason.  Ergonomics I think.
And it doesn't make sense because Oly's menu system is a bit of a jumble, but I guess once I learned it, it's been productive.
I don't do a lot of high end stuff, and what I do (still) do is almost always hand-held run-n-gun.  I get by easily with 8-bit.  My cheap EM10iii with a variable ND does the job.  Here's a recent thing I was hired for; half day shoot and half day editing with a script they recorded.  Basic basic basic, but got the product delivered to the client as they requested.  I'm not sure if I even used a high end camera for a gig like this it would've turned out much different.  So, you know, for me, the rather simple tool is appropriate.
 

Depends on what kind of filmmaker you want to be.  Most advice from these places will suggest technical skills development.  If your deposition is to play with the tools and make great images, then that's perfectly fine and fun.  
But, FWIW, I help run a small film festival. Almost every indy film I see now-a-days looks half way decent.  Getting the tech to do it's thing is pretty easy.  I honestly don't know what sort of advantage an IQ specialist is going to have moving forward in the business when literally everyone can make decent IQ.  
"All hat, no cowboy."  (Love that expression)
OTOH, only about 10% of the films I have to watch/endure throughout the submission season have the ability to hold my attention.
Story is key... Can you write?  Failing that, can you recognize a good story when you see it?  Can you develop the skill to elevate the words on a page?  It's freakin' tough.  Being a person that can do that is really remarkable.
I've taken to watching successful films that are 50-100 years old. If the story works without the spectacle of modern tech, then all you gotta do is pay attention to those sort of storytelling and acting fundamentals ...and figure out if you can develop the skills to facilitate them as well.
I find myself re-watching David Lean's early work at the moment.  That sort of inspiration is very valuable.

I know it's an impossible thing to really quantify to other people, especially pros, but it's been true in my experience as well.  I've just ended up preferring using Oly cams for some reason.  Ergonomics I think.
And it doesn't make sense because Oly's menu system is a bit of a jumble, but I guess once I learned it, it's been productive.
I don't do a lot of high end stuff, and what I do (still) do is almost always hand-held run-n-gun.  I get by easily with 8-bit.  My cheap EM10iii with a variable ND does the job.  Here's a recent thing I was hired for; half day shoot and half day editing with a script they recorded.  Basic basic basic, but got the product delivered to the client as they requested.  I'm not sure if I even used a high end camera for a gig like this it would've turned out much different.  So, you know, for me, the rather simple tool is appropriate.
 

Depends on what kind of filmmaker you want to be.  Most advice from these places will suggest technical skills development.  If your deposition is to play with the tools and make great images, then that's perfectly fine and fun.  
But, FWIW, I help run a small film festival. Almost every indy film I see now-a-days looks half way decent.  Getting the tech to do it's thing is pretty easy.  I honestly don't know what sort of advantage an IQ specialist is going to have moving forward in the business when literally everyone can make decent IQ.  
"All hat, no cowboy."  (Love that expression)
OTOH, only about 10% of the films I have to watch/endure throughout the submission season have the ability to hold my attention.
Story is key... Can you write?  Failing that, can you recognize a good story when you see it?  Can you develop the skill to elevate the words on a page?  It's freakin' tough.  Being a person that can do that is really remarkable.
I've taken to watching successful films that are 50-100 years old. If the story works without the spectacle of modern tech, then all you gotta do is pay attention to those sort of storytelling and acting fundamentals ...and figure out if you can develop the skills to facilitate them as well.
I find myself re-watching David Lean's early work at the moment.  That sort of inspiration is very valuable.

GX7 was a fav of mine.  
That had some great IQ mojo.  I like the image better than my GH5.
I'd shoot with that thing again without hesitation.  Still bummed I lost that camera.
It had the weirdest glitch though.  You can't do 60p with a 60shutter speed.  You had to set the shutter to 125 for the camera to legitimately record 60 frames per second.  60p/60ss would result in a 30p video...even though it would register as 59.97 in the meta data.  Damndest thing.

GX7 was a fav of mine.  
That had some great IQ mojo.  I like the image better than my GH5.
I'd shoot with that thing again without hesitation.  Still bummed I lost that camera.
It had the weirdest glitch though.  You can't do 60p with a 60shutter speed.  You had to set the shutter to 125 for the camera to legitimately record 60 frames per second.  60p/60ss would result in a 30p video...even though it would register as 59.97 in the meta data.  Damndest thing.

You can't save crappy shots.  You screw it up in the field it'll never look right.  That's why I'm always left scratching my head as to why shooters are so laser focused on squeaking out .5 stops of DR with their gear.

You can't save crappy shots.  You screw it up in the field it'll never look right.  That's why I'm always left scratching my head as to why shooters are so laser focused on squeaking out .5 stops of DR with their gear.

Thanks for the bump.
BTW, since we're back in this thread now, I saw this at the Borrego Springs Film Festival back in 2020.  Pretty sweet:
 
 

A work around is to do proxy editing with proxy files on your hard drive and keep the source file on your NAS.  You'll only access the source files when it comes time to render and the network access speed won't be a big issue for that process.

A work around is to do proxy editing with proxy files on your hard drive and keep the source file on your NAS.  You'll only access the source files when it comes time to render and the network access speed won't be a big issue for that process.

So I gave network editing a try too.  However, A few years ago I couldn't get fast enough networking transfer speeds even when my computer was hard wired to my LAN.
I think it has something to do with networking data packets --and the hardware's ability to switch that data in/out fast enough.  So it's maybe not just about the raw numbers with throughput?  
Maybe some consumer hardware is more advanced these days?
I don't know, but (even if somewhat functional) I'd be skeptical of this being productive overall.

Leaning heavily into the "Golden Era" of Hollywood filmmaking with this one.  Cool to play around with visual styles from yesteryear.  8-bit 4K from a EM10iii and a GH5, for those that are interested in tech specs.
 

I've done a few doc shoots with the Voigts, but the project listed above it was on the Only 12-40 f2.8, using a variable ND filter.  I also used (still use) a vintage Nikkor f1.4 50mm for other footage and interviews.

I've done a few doc shoots with the Voigts, but the project listed above it was on the Only 12-40 f2.8, using a variable ND filter.  I also used (still use) a vintage Nikkor f1.4 50mm for other footage and interviews.

On my old Gx7, it's 1080 somehow outperformed other cam's downrez'ed 4k.  Not sure what was going on with that LUMIX generation's sensors and internal processing, but it offered pretty sweet IQ to my eye.
Sadly, I lost that camera. [sad face]

I shot a doc series for our local PBS station with a couple of these guys.  Worked like a charm.  The exact reason M43 is a good format for me is embodied in this sort of gear: low-profile with impressive IQ.

I shot a doc series for our local PBS station with a couple of these guys.  Worked like a charm.  The exact reason M43 is a good format for me is embodied in this sort of gear: low-profile with impressive IQ.

I shot a doc series for our local PBS station with a couple of these guys.  Worked like a charm.  The exact reason M43 is a good format for me is embodied in this sort of gear: low-profile with impressive IQ.

I shot a doc series for our local PBS station with a couple of these guys.  Worked like a charm.  The exact reason M43 is a good format for me is embodied in this sort of gear: low-profile with impressive IQ.