Lammy
-
Posts
67 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Posts posted by Lammy
-
-
Whatever happened to this? Was it all just a big prank and a joke?
Because if Olympus release a 4K now they'd win!
-
The only thing that ever screams video to me is harshly clipped whitey/yellow/cyan/magenta highlights. Now we're mostly past that technical problem for the most part so it's all up to the artists to up their game in what's infront of the technicals!
Love the look of Revenant... everything is so wide - reminds me of Terrence Malick's stuff like Knight of Cups.
-
That GX7 EVF hump and rectangular corner just looks so ugly in my opinion... I prefer the symmetry and sleek aethetic to the GX7.
All I wanted was just a 4K update on the GX7, and maybe a 3.5mm jack and a tiltable uppy screen and maybe weatherproofing. This total re-design and 2.5 times price tag is bizarre!
-
Because if I want lightness and portability - I'd rather use the GM5 or LX100.
The G7 has all the photography features (minus stabilisation and tilting EVF) plus has 4K. It's bigger and uglier though.
The GX8 looks like a worthy successor to the GX7. But it it's also bigger and costs over twice as much,
-
I love my silver GX7+20mm but I'm ready to let it go in favour of the GX8, or the G7, or the GM5.
It takes wonderful images, great camera.
Things to note: The EVF in my opinion is also horrible. I notice tearing and rainbowy stutter on it that isn't enjoyable to use. and I never bothered with the in body stabiliser much
-
Take a look at the "Samsung Galaxy Tab S 10.5"!
It's OLED display has a resolution of 2560x1600 with 60Hz progressiv, youtube 1440p@60p looks great!
http://www.displaymate.com/OLED_Tablet_ShootOut_1.htm
Cost only 500 € with BT-Keyboard, better display, fast pivot, tablet-mode, lighter and cheaper than the new Macbook for 1500€.
Since I have that thing, my dekskop only works as print server.
Can't wait until Samsung publish a 4K OLED version of the "Note" series with 12 Inch with a s-pen, damn build it Samsung, need 4k netflix!
Actually that is seriously tempting. I also want to upgrade to the Note 4 because Display Mate claims it covers most of the AdobeRGB spectrum. And I love looking at deep blacks.
Thanks Andrew for the LG Cinema Display review. The backlight and lightbleeds at the bottom put me off too though :\
-
I don't think we need to have a public thread where we call Ed one thing or the other.
Agreed, this is one thread that didn't need to be made other than to have a last word and to keep provoking the same conversation... the same conversation... which is basically this:
"I think we should stand up on domestic violence! PS I'm a great guy, and I believe the women!"
"No one said I aint against domestic violence. You know nothing. No evidence that Phil did it. You crazy sanctimonious shit."
"I think we should stand up on domestic violence! PS I'm a great guy, and I believe the women!"
"No one said I aint against domestic violence. You know nothing. No evidence that Phil did it. You crazy sanctimonious shit."
"I think we should stand up on domestic violence! PS I'm a great guy, and I believe the women!"
"No one said I aint against domestic violence. You know nothing. No evidence that Phil did it. You crazy sanctimonious shit."
-
And god forbid you're on a film festival selection committee. So much stuff looks great these days, you're forced to sit through feeble storytelling until you realize the narrative isn;t going to say anything remotely interesting, is just a bunch of hoary tropes, and the story doesn't come close to matching the imaging.
Holy crap, yes!
I collect Film Festival short film collection DVDs and I was wowed by how the older ones were shot on film and had amazing stories. Then it got a little crappier looking with the invent of DV. Then it got a little bit better with the DSLR.
Now I feel like I've seen everything before and it just seems like to make it in a film festival and get attention requires not only a great story, but A list talent now ontop of the latest 4K camera technology. Either that or the reverse 16mm b/w. Dammit! Seriously, look at the Oscar and Bafta winning shorts over the past few years... even more exclusive now...
-
I don't see the posts as failing to see the "opposing side" so much as the side he is leaning on is being taken more seriously in weight in the face of personal attacks and Devil's Advocates.
The reason why we care and why we have so much discussions is because we all want to be heard. We all have our points of view.
There's good reason why most works of art are... well, rather liberal and show empathy. And then there's also a reason why some works are just kind of boring propaganda.
These are far more interesting discussions than measurable technical information about dynamic range and ISO sensitivities.
But uhh.. I have no idea what we are talking for now....
-
That design looks like it belongs on a cool robot!
-
I think general boredom and human connections are the most important for inspiration and ideas in narrative work.
For all else, this is awesome: www.procatinator.com
-
Yes, calling each other racist, scum, and stupid really is daft as fuck and doesn't help. The pitfalls of speaking politics and different ideologies in the wrong place...
And QMedia, I care. Just last week the popular opinion of a million Top Gear fans wanting petition for Clarkson to stay on. That's pretty good fandom, mind you. Most Conservatives were on the fence, until the report came out, where they then changed their tune to agree with the Left with the inevitable BBC sacking. It's funny how popular opinions can change given information and context.
While we can all now agree (as Andrew now with mphillips and damp posted above) that Jeremy Clarkson is at fault... and we can agree that assault is terrible... I can also see the thinking that the BBC really should have had better talent management and avoided this. Well, from a preventative measure at least, still not sure they could have done anything different after the incident. This guy has been on thin ice for over a year, and what they did was extend this season of Top Gear by 4 episodes? Interesting...
Oh and I'm also questioning the BBC's reporting on the NHS and Elections too so yez, thanks, think for ourselves indeed.
-
Poll for Clarkson's Dismissal 59% right decision, 29% wrong decision, 12% don't know.
I've been keeping an eye on the elections lately but it's really interesting looking at the overall demographic of voters for topics like the Clarkson debate. Like the usual difference in ideologies etc.
- dan and Damphousse
-
2
-
It's sad times when the most exposure people see of the Kodak brand is just selling cheap AA batteries at Poundland.
Walking around the Pinewood lot, at least Spectre and Star Wars are being shot on Kodak film still.
Makes me wonder if they were as innovative at making better digital cameras or collaborating with companies like Nikon or Arri may have turned a better route...
-
I still do not think the BBC were disproportionately punishing Clarkson here. As with many high pressure jobs, it's difficult to be fully prepared for any blow out until it's too late. It's happened now so at least there is a precedent and can only work to improve on that. Now that Jeremy Clarkson's contract is not being renewed, he can work to improve himself and relax from the stress until his next contract. He should definitely employ an Assistant and Producer that can take care of his needs in on the next show at least.
-
Is this really about overwork and mental health issues? Just Clarkson acting like a child, making a mistake and getting violently drunk is what we've been led to believe. If we ask the question of "warning signs and who continued putting him under" - well, the simple answer may just be that Hammond and May and Clarkson really enjoyed the beverages at that pub... ?
If the BBC were truly set on money - then surely they would keep Clarkson and play the PR game? If it really is just about money. The BBC are just saving their reputation, and something about no no to assault in the workplace.
-
We know that the BBC will say that they are in favour of seeking professional help for their stars who have problems, but they don't actually seem to seek professional help for their stars who have problems (which is almost certainly a high percentage of them, increasingly so for the ones who lead a higher profile life). Neither do they sack them straight away. They keep using them and using them until they make a mistake which puts them in the firing line for some criticism, then they get rid of them. If they happen to rehabilitate themselves, maybe they come back.
If the BBC was a school and Clarkson was a child... I can agree that exclusion isn't good. In that instance, the child should be referred to an specialist that's equipped for the task rather than jump from school to school.
But Clarkson is an adult that has to make his own decisions, and if he is not able to, then his next of kin. Yes, Top Gear may have contributed to his stress, but there will be procedures which they'd have to go through and it is unfair to suggest the BBC's at fault for that. Maybe they already did know of warning signs and referred behind closed doors?
Clarkson could have played the PR game and actually sought professional help, gone to rehab, and publically apologised and pleaded for his job back or whatever. Instead he's chosen to gloat on twitter and in the news and ranting about how BBC are bastards. This doesn't exactly show a sense of remorse or a mental health problem- more like a lad showing his true colours when his inhibitions are low.
Also flicking through Facebook and Twitter there's been an awful lot of Oisin shaming... wow... fans huh...
-
Until we know, let's stop prejudging him and go by what we do know. I know that at work he's a pleasant, hard working chap and I would be surprised if he deserved the suspension. It is perfectly fair to say that if he did assault this producer he absolutely should be suspended, probably sacked. That would be unacceptable
All of you people who are saying that it was correct to sack him are talking with a particularly nasty corporate mindset.
"Let's not make sure we care properly for our employees mental health and well being, because money. Let's instead work him to the point of substance abuse and stress related disorders and then can him" So you, in my eyes are corporate scum, the bane of society, defying human decency and ethics for your paymasters.
Possibly contradicting yourself about the sacking much? Does that mean you used to have a 'corporate scum' mindset just last week, or just the people that aren't you? You're assuming the BBC are not in favour of seeking professional help for alcoholism - which doesn't ring true. I honestly thought you was trolling at first... but now unsure...
PS: congratulations on meeting Jeremy Clarkson and the Dalai Lama!!!1
-
I could agree with most of what you said SleepyWill -with the exception of the BBC having an ulterior motive to make public and what is art at the end. It's a little bizarre the implication that the BBC did it to look good while destroy a man and 'appease a vocal minority' no? I already suggested another way it would have gone down, which is a simple quiet bowing out with unofficial rumours of why. There's a subtle difference with not renewing contracts and the BBC have been very tactful about wishing Clarkson the best.
And yes, people make mistakes all the time but that goes without saying. And for sure rehab is the best way. The BBC and family and friends ought to be taking care of Clarkson for that. There already is grounds to not be in a heavy stress work situation where it may or may not blow up again and therefore I have to agree with the non renewing contract. I fucking love Robert Downey Jr, Russell Brand, and Mel Gibson and me be sad if teh be banished from da life or burnt out and died at 27 liyk mah otha sistaz and bruddas!
Also Russell Brand got fired from the BBC, and he came back on the BBC for some one off documentaries. Maybe there's still hope for Clarkson fans for future Top Gear guest appearances
-
What planet do you live on Lammy. Why do you hold Clarkson to a infinitely higher standard than your political leaders that actually shape public policy and control lives. They lie, cheat, steal, send young men out to get killed in useless wars to further their own agenda, perform false flag operations, political assassinations and order drone attacks that kill innocent civilians. Where is the outrage from people that think like you on that reality?? As a "tax payer" where is your outrage??
Get some perspective. Clarkson got involved in a very short altercation. No one went to the hospital, nobody died. You and others act like he went in and shot a bunch of kids in a school. If you saw the scene of Clarkson and the producer in a movie, you would consider it real life, which it is. The audience would probably love it.
Clarkson is a loose canon, but that is Clarkson. That is what makes him perfect for the role he plays so well. That is EXACTLY why 350M watch the show. In a world filled with political correctness and brown nosing, Clarkson plays the opposition. He is the poster child of rebellion against all the nonsense. If you can't see the greatness in that alone, then I feel sorry for you.
Wow. And you guys think I'm being defensive? Hahahaha
Yes I am outraged about corrupt politicians and horrible policies and the injustices of the world. I am outraged that guys like Ai Wei Wei and Snowden get locked up. I am outraged of drones killing innocent children. Shall we derail this thread further with your assumptions on my own beliefs? I'd rather message you.
I am not outraged about the decision to not renew Clarkson's contract. Coz, ya know, it's only Top Gear. This is not an assault on free speech and creativity, this is about assaulting a human being and liking Top Gear.
I would request you re-read what I said and, with the utmost respect, take a deep breathe and drink water. Because I am not above trolling you back
-
Well Andrew isn't directly defending assault, that's a little twisted. He is arguing that the BBC should have covered it up from public scrutiny. I argue it can't be covered up and as a public tax tayer that I expect transparency in the system. This is what I want to see: http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/investigation-summary.pdf
Andrew's article argues about how there should be a different law for people up there, but again, I disagree. There may be exceptional circumstances where lives are on the line (like immunity for war criminals/whistleblowers etc.) but respectfully: popular entertainment and Clarkson isn't up there with that power of leverage.
The rest of the article and his subsequent posts about the opinionated few, political correctness, and twisted analogies... are distractions that Andrew himself introduced into the conversation. And we all know how they escalate on da interweb...
-
I have to wonder, does all this moral posturing make you feel better?
Unwinding with discussions does make me feel better, thanks for asking.
And what have you done to be so defensive about your ethics anyway?
You're the one being defensive, bro. All I said was I disagree with you.
So it's ok for two stars to punch each other then?
Consensually, yes. I'm sure you understand this nuance. I do like a good sport.
The problem here is that it should have been sorted out as the small spat it was, behind closed doors. Why get lawyers involved, investigations, pandering to the press and Twitter? To be so dramatic and political about it is bad management.
Well now we're speculating. Who's to say the witnesses or crew may not have pushed it further? Yes the BBC are covering their ass here, and it was always lose-lose.
I am sure they will put a token eco-friendly feminist in charge of restructuring a guy's motoring show and ruin it for everyone even more.
... calm down, it's only a Motoring show haha.
Nobody thinks what this storm has done to the producer.
Maybe he could have done more to save Jeremy Clarkson's job? Maybe he didn't want to do anything at all? How does one trust any one after being threatened of their job and getting a beat down? His statement seemed professional and respectful enough to the BBC's decision. Hopefully he'll get to keep his job on the new Top Gear or wherever at the BBC.
They should have severely cut his pay for the next season. That would have appeased everyone who wanted him punished, probably even better because of the whole jealousy thing. Clarkson would have accepted out of humility and the fact that he is already rich anyway
Would be better for all involved if he was just fined a lot [if the Producer was 100% on board and crew protected] and I can agree with that if it was near the beginning of his contract. But this happened at the point of his renewal and I guess the BBC must have faith that there's upcoming replacements available for the show.
Also LOL:
-
Well Clooney and Russell were both willing to beat down each other no question. That works for them.
Clarkson and Piers Morgan were both willing too and I still want to see that charity fight.
Drunk Clarkson and the undefended Producer guy? Naaah that looks bad. Yes I'm too lazy to look for the BBC code of ethics and laws on punching people...
But seriously, what is this article really getting at? O Russell makes new and different films each time and it's not like him or Clarkson is banned for life. Charlie Sheen would be a better example than O Russell. There's still 15 years worth of Top Gear Clarkson to watch and whatever else he makes in the future!
-
A truly over the top and quite frankly disgusting parallel to draw Lammy.
I'm not being entirely disengenius at all when we're talking about criminal behaviour in the arts. Especially because your article is talking just that.
The question is where do we draw the line? If Clarkson's 20 second physical assault became manslaughter? Yes it matters and I haer to agree that people (no matter how creatively talented) are not above the law because fans like their work.
Here it is - 4K on the Olympus OM-D E-M1
In: Cameras
Posted
:'( I am really interested in the Olympus Air thing too, shame it's mushy 1080p.