Jump to content

Tim Naylor

Members
  • Content Count

    218
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from webrunner5 in Sony F35 - The cheap $250,000 Cinema Camera   
    Definitely a CCD vs CMOS issue. I used to shoot a lot of Varicam (3CCD) back in the day and the colors were far richer and truer than RED.
  2. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from agolex in Kodak celluloid film saved by studios - oh and by the way - what's the point?   
    I started on film ages ago. The last time I shot it was three years ago (See: "Besides Still Waters" in last month's American Cinematographer). We had issues that I rather not revisit. For one, shooting on a remote location, our dailies were not daily. So dirty gate and static issues reared their ugly heads. Also, focus. Today's younger AC's are brought up more with focusing off monitor instead of tape. Problem is, with film camera monitors it's hard to judge critical focus. The more experienced AC's with a film background are older and hence much harder to afford for low budget indies. Should I ever shoot an indie again on film, I'll ask that the focus puller's scale be doubled.
    In short, I don't miss medium, but I do miss the efficiency. Andrew, you talk about how shooting on digital is faster and more spontaneous. Perhaps for the lone indie as yourself shooting off the cuff. Unfortunately, that's not the look everyone's looking to pay for in the theaters or watch on TV most the time. Professional shoots are still a multi headed beast. Perhaps the biggest complaint those of us who started in film and now shoot digital have is the endless rolling rehearsals, re-sets and innumerable takes plus the amount of playback that we never experienced with film. It's worse now with commercials as the video village has now become a small country of too many cooks. I defy anyone who works on features, commercials or episodic to say digital  has made work days shorter or more efficient. And now that everyone thinks they need a DIT it's done nothing for labour costs. Then with the amount of footage that now has to be reviewed, transcribed, and noted, compared to film, I wonder if the difference between film / video production is that huge.

    The best part of digital has not been with the way I make a living (episodic / commercials) but mostly for my personal projects. For people who already know how to make a film, they know if they literally can grab and go and then make a film for next to nothing. There are a few directors who've taken the immediacy of digital and exploited it. Fincher comes to mind. Several of my colleagues work on House of Cards. It's mostly available light, they work very fast, and have no DIT. I wish everyone else would catch on.
    As far as IQ goes, for nights I much prefer digital. For days its a toss up. As a DP for work, the best part I like is being able to see a close to finished image on set. You actually take greater risks when you can see your mediums threshold right there on set instead of waiting for it to return from the lab. 

    Regarding storage, anyone with anything worth storing will back up to new digital storage tech as the need comes. I still have scripts that were originated on floppy but living now on SSD. And when you die, it won't matter. You're dead.
  3. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Marco M in Samsung NX1 vs Canon C300   
    ​A face with a color chart are essential in all comparative IQ tests. 
  4. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Ivar Kristjan Ivarsson in Samsung NX1 vs Canon C300   
    ​Well put. I come to this site because I learn things about small and inexpensive cameras that we don't regularly test or use on set. Last week I shot an AMEX commercial with an F55 but we also used a BMCPC as well for a different look. Much of the info on that cam came from sites like this. For the past month, I'm on a TV show where we use Amira's all day but guess what, we also break out the A7s and Go Pros from time to time. Again this site and several others help pros get a handle on emerging tech. I'm actually considering shooting my next feature on A7s (even though we have the choice of Arri's). While I do think we sometimes over analyze  specs here and not just look at what great pics a camera makes, I find this site at the forefront of smaller, lighter and more versatile tech. Any pro who ignores these things will be left one day wondering why the phone stopped ringing.
  5. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Flynn in Samsung NX1 vs Canon C300   
    ​I have no issues with the A7s layout. Mine is permanently in a Movcam cage (best accessory ever). I never shoot video with it unless it's on my rig (18" 15mm rods, Wooden Camera hand held grips and an F&V monitor mounted on the cross bar with a counterweight in the back). It balances perfectly for hand held as well as on sticks. I use it for work and play. Sure this rig might seem a bit much for many here. But as someone who shoots Arri's all week long, it's a welcome relief. On occasion when I'm fooling around I'll shoot it "naked" (cage / top handle only) and just use the camera's EVF / Monitor. The results are fine but not reliable enough for paid work (meaning my focus isn't as good with the camera's EVF/monitor). Andrew on the other hand probably has younger eyes than mine and seems to work this mode fine. 

    If you're one of those rig less shooters let me suggest using a cage such as Tilta's. The wooden handle will definitely improve the ergonomics immeasurably. I only wish it was around before I bought my movcam.
  6. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from jcs in Samsung NX1 vs Canon C300   
    ​A face with a color chart are essential in all comparative IQ tests. 
  7. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Flynn in Samsung NX1 vs Canon C300   
    ​Well put. I come to this site because I learn things about small and inexpensive cameras that we don't regularly test or use on set. Last week I shot an AMEX commercial with an F55 but we also used a BMCPC as well for a different look. Much of the info on that cam came from sites like this. For the past month, I'm on a TV show where we use Amira's all day but guess what, we also break out the A7s and Go Pros from time to time. Again this site and several others help pros get a handle on emerging tech. I'm actually considering shooting my next feature on A7s (even though we have the choice of Arri's). While I do think we sometimes over analyze  specs here and not just look at what great pics a camera makes, I find this site at the forefront of smaller, lighter and more versatile tech. Any pro who ignores these things will be left one day wondering why the phone stopped ringing.
  8. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Jimbo in Samsung NX1 vs Canon C300   
    ​Well put. I come to this site because I learn things about small and inexpensive cameras that we don't regularly test or use on set. Last week I shot an AMEX commercial with an F55 but we also used a BMCPC as well for a different look. Much of the info on that cam came from sites like this. For the past month, I'm on a TV show where we use Amira's all day but guess what, we also break out the A7s and Go Pros from time to time. Again this site and several others help pros get a handle on emerging tech. I'm actually considering shooting my next feature on A7s (even though we have the choice of Arri's). While I do think we sometimes over analyze  specs here and not just look at what great pics a camera makes, I find this site at the forefront of smaller, lighter and more versatile tech. Any pro who ignores these things will be left one day wondering why the phone stopped ringing.
  9. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Inazuma in Kodak celluloid film saved by studios - oh and by the way - what's the point?   
    I started on film ages ago. The last time I shot it was three years ago (See: "Besides Still Waters" in last month's American Cinematographer). We had issues that I rather not revisit. For one, shooting on a remote location, our dailies were not daily. So dirty gate and static issues reared their ugly heads. Also, focus. Today's younger AC's are brought up more with focusing off monitor instead of tape. Problem is, with film camera monitors it's hard to judge critical focus. The more experienced AC's with a film background are older and hence much harder to afford for low budget indies. Should I ever shoot an indie again on film, I'll ask that the focus puller's scale be doubled.
    In short, I don't miss medium, but I do miss the efficiency. Andrew, you talk about how shooting on digital is faster and more spontaneous. Perhaps for the lone indie as yourself shooting off the cuff. Unfortunately, that's not the look everyone's looking to pay for in the theaters or watch on TV most the time. Professional shoots are still a multi headed beast. Perhaps the biggest complaint those of us who started in film and now shoot digital have is the endless rolling rehearsals, re-sets and innumerable takes plus the amount of playback that we never experienced with film. It's worse now with commercials as the video village has now become a small country of too many cooks. I defy anyone who works on features, commercials or episodic to say digital  has made work days shorter or more efficient. And now that everyone thinks they need a DIT it's done nothing for labour costs. Then with the amount of footage that now has to be reviewed, transcribed, and noted, compared to film, I wonder if the difference between film / video production is that huge.

    The best part of digital has not been with the way I make a living (episodic / commercials) but mostly for my personal projects. For people who already know how to make a film, they know if they literally can grab and go and then make a film for next to nothing. There are a few directors who've taken the immediacy of digital and exploited it. Fincher comes to mind. Several of my colleagues work on House of Cards. It's mostly available light, they work very fast, and have no DIT. I wish everyone else would catch on.
    As far as IQ goes, for nights I much prefer digital. For days its a toss up. As a DP for work, the best part I like is being able to see a close to finished image on set. You actually take greater risks when you can see your mediums threshold right there on set instead of waiting for it to return from the lab. 

    Regarding storage, anyone with anything worth storing will back up to new digital storage tech as the need comes. I still have scripts that were originated on floppy but living now on SSD. And when you die, it won't matter. You're dead.
  10. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Ed_David in Kodak celluloid film saved by studios - oh and by the way - what's the point?   
    I started on film ages ago. The last time I shot it was three years ago (See: "Besides Still Waters" in last month's American Cinematographer). We had issues that I rather not revisit. For one, shooting on a remote location, our dailies were not daily. So dirty gate and static issues reared their ugly heads. Also, focus. Today's younger AC's are brought up more with focusing off monitor instead of tape. Problem is, with film camera monitors it's hard to judge critical focus. The more experienced AC's with a film background are older and hence much harder to afford for low budget indies. Should I ever shoot an indie again on film, I'll ask that the focus puller's scale be doubled.
    In short, I don't miss medium, but I do miss the efficiency. Andrew, you talk about how shooting on digital is faster and more spontaneous. Perhaps for the lone indie as yourself shooting off the cuff. Unfortunately, that's not the look everyone's looking to pay for in the theaters or watch on TV most the time. Professional shoots are still a multi headed beast. Perhaps the biggest complaint those of us who started in film and now shoot digital have is the endless rolling rehearsals, re-sets and innumerable takes plus the amount of playback that we never experienced with film. It's worse now with commercials as the video village has now become a small country of too many cooks. I defy anyone who works on features, commercials or episodic to say digital  has made work days shorter or more efficient. And now that everyone thinks they need a DIT it's done nothing for labour costs. Then with the amount of footage that now has to be reviewed, transcribed, and noted, compared to film, I wonder if the difference between film / video production is that huge.

    The best part of digital has not been with the way I make a living (episodic / commercials) but mostly for my personal projects. For people who already know how to make a film, they know if they literally can grab and go and then make a film for next to nothing. There are a few directors who've taken the immediacy of digital and exploited it. Fincher comes to mind. Several of my colleagues work on House of Cards. It's mostly available light, they work very fast, and have no DIT. I wish everyone else would catch on.
    As far as IQ goes, for nights I much prefer digital. For days its a toss up. As a DP for work, the best part I like is being able to see a close to finished image on set. You actually take greater risks when you can see your mediums threshold right there on set instead of waiting for it to return from the lab. 

    Regarding storage, anyone with anything worth storing will back up to new digital storage tech as the need comes. I still have scripts that were originated on floppy but living now on SSD. And when you die, it won't matter. You're dead.
  11. Like
    Tim Naylor reacted to fuzzynormal in The new video sharing community for professional filmmakers   
    Deja Vu all over again.  If you've ever been an indy musician all this kinda stuff gets wearily familiar.  Expect it for "filmmakers" too.  Lots of young people on the market struggling for a PR advantage and there will always be places like this attempting to monetize on it.  Digital democracy: double edged sword.
    This Vimeo channel might be directed by a bunch of young earnest types, and could evolve into something useful, but I've earned enough wisdom to start with skepticism on this sort of offer. 
    And here's a tip:  If your PR video features a VO by a guy that can't enunciate and sounds like it's recorded on an iPhone, I'll take that as a clue that it's not exactly a professional service.  I could be wrong.  If so, good luck.
  12. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from caseywilsondp in a7s slog2 is really, really flat   
    Ebrahim, good stuff. Love that step by step tutorial. Casey, just remember to expose to the right. I get as right as I can to the clip threshold. Also, I like screwing around with the pre-sets in camera such as boosting saturation and magenta signal (ever so slightly) in both S Log or PP6. I find this gives me a signal I can bend to my tastes better without breaking down or looking so "thin".
  13. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Miklos Nemeth in Winter’s Mirror – Sony A7S and Atomos Shogun   
    Thanks for the review.  I pondered the Shogun for my A7s but then decided at the extra expense, etc., I'd sell the whole lot and get something else. Also, the stealth of the A7s gets lost with the Shogun. What Atomos needs to do, like you mentioned, is make a small 4k recorder like a Blade that I can velcro or screw on to my cage and call it day. Also, the fact that Atomos don't have an HDMI lock or hood, is disappointing. How were they expecting us to use it. Even with full size HDMI, the last thing you want is a lost connection during a take. It will happen. 
    Andrew, you may want to consider a small compact cage. I can't recommend the Movcam enough. Not much bigger than the camera, braces the Metabones adaptor so there's absolutely no jiggle, and the HDMI and sound cable lock works like a charm. You can than throw a ball mount on the 1/4 20 or 3/8" holes and not worry about wonky shoe mounts. The only mod I did to mine is buy a new handle with NATO rail so I can pack it away more tightly by popping the handle off quickly. Sorry about your Metabones issues. I have a more recent iteration (from September) and have absolutely no issues talking to my EOS lenses. AF is still slow as expected.
    Interesting conclusions about the color science. Does the color science in the A7s work the same, better or worse through HDMI than internal 1080p? I've been playing around with pre-sets and been finding you really must boost the saturation in S Log to get a decent grade. Perhaps 8bit is just too thin for boosting it in post without shadow noise penalties. I actually get my S Log closer looking to Canon log out of the box.  I've been also using PP6 a lot and getting very nice colors. Something tells me S Log was really made for a more robust codec.
  14. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from jcs in The Skin Tone Holy Grail   
    ​It's a big deal in narrative. Even with make up, we still need an accurate chip. So when we dial in the face our backgrounds aren't AWOL. I work mostly episodic TV. We have ridiculously tight turn around times. They like cameras that have less fiddling and grade time in post (saves them $$). It's the reason why Alexa and C300's have been dominating TV.  I I'd say they comprise 80 percent of my work and it's not because of the resolution. I've been on many a shoot for broadcast where they use 5D's because they love the colors. Granted, you're right about Canon being saturated and warm, but post finds it easier to dial down a richer signal than boost a thin one. 
  15. Like
    Tim Naylor reacted to jcs in The Skin Tone Holy Grail   
    Fuzzy, sorry if my posts are coming off pedantic. You're making a case that skin tones aren't that important. I'm providing many facts (which you can verify for yourself) to make the case that skin tone color is indeed the most import element in your thread "the skin tone holy grail". Back when the 5D3 was released the big issue was it was too soft. I showed that with post sharpening it was pretty good (lots of folks disagreed; many felt post-sharpening was invalid and the camera should be sharp straight from the camera). I spent a lot of time looking for a camera that provided better native resolution and went with the FS700 when the SpeedBooster came out. After many projects with feedback from many people, it was clear that people preferred the look of the Canon over the Sony. There were indeed comments on the 5D3 being too soft for some shots, but overall people love the look of the 5D3 over the FS700+SB. The FS700 still provides value with up to 240fps 1080p (ish) slomo.
    As I read about lots of different cameras, the recurring pattern for what people love the most is skin tones. We are emotional beings and we evolved color vision, at least in part, to read emotion through skin tone color. Researching the best cameras, I found the same pattern: they produce skin tones which evoke a positive emotional response: "I like it." "I love it!". In narrative and commercials too, color sets the mood, helps tell the story, and conveys emotion at a deep level.
    Hi Jonesy- Blackmagic cameras have indeed gotten good reports for skin tones, though I haven't used them. A big part of the filmic look is highlight behavior of the camera/sensor and even more important: lighting for narrative (emotion). I have started paying very careful attention to scenes that look really 'filmic'. Even that ARRI Alexa and Red Dragon can look 'videoish' with bright lighting and resulting harsh highlights. Combine such lighting with an oversharp image and you've got the video look. Notice how often narrative scenes have very little lighting, with the most lighting on the face and eyes. 
    The challenge I've had with Sony cameras, especially the FS700, is that after setting proper WB and exposure, even tweaking WB in post (including 3-way), parts of the face can look good/correct, but other parts are too yellow/orange/green/blue and don't look right. So now you have to do secondary color correction for those areas. Time consuming. The final results tend not to look as good as Canon or Panasonic. The A7S is better, but still requires more work vs. the 5D3 or GH4. For video, in my experience Panasonic cameras work pretty well for skin tones, to the point that I didn't worry about them. They just worked. For stills, in my experience Canon looks much better than Panasonic. It wasn't until using Sony cameras and getting feedback from others regarding skin tones that I started looking at skin tones in more detail.
    I was curious why so many top productions used ARRI cameras when it was only 2.8K/3.4K max resolution. The result of much reading was that ARRI provides the best color and skin tones. How do we know it's the best?  We look at what people use when cost is not an issue, which cameras were used in the top grossing/award-winning films, etc. This lead to learning more about color and skin tones.
    So while many cameras can look great, cameras which look great with the least effort are the most useful and cost effective. It's also why Canon drives Andrew crazy releasing cameras with very limited features which outsell all the other brands with more features. Canon hasn't had to compete on features so much as they compete mostly on (skin tone) color.
     
  16. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Inazuma in The Skin Tone Holy Grail   
    You asked why we make a big deal of skin tones. We've taken the time told to break it down for you. Now you seem dismiss it as a luxury too rich for your blood. Not sure why you brought the subject up the first place unless it was to tell us why it doesn't matter to you. Of course writing and directing should take a front seat - at any budget. Not a groundbreaking discovery, but you asked a tech question, hence tech answers. People with 1k + cameras usually won't have the budget to consider complex production design but next to writing / directing your one of strongest cards is how you capture a human face. And there are many a cheap camera in the DSLR / Mirrorless market that can capture great skin tones - if you take the time to figure it out. A little applied knowledge is not above anyone's pay grade. So do we care about seeking the "Holy Grail" of flesh tones? If so, ask away. I've gotten great advice on this forum on how to unlock the A7s color profile.
  17. Like
    Tim Naylor reacted to jcs in The Skin Tone Holy Grail   
    Most people online are looking to learn something new. At one point I focussed on resolution and detail, then sound, lighting, story and script writing, legal/IP, editing/post, advertising, etc.
    This thread is titled,"The Skin Tone Holy Grail". It implies learning about what are great skin tones and how to achieve them.
    While it is reasonable to point out that certain cameras have better or worse skin tones, the spirit of the thread is to learn 1) what are great skin tones and 2) how to achieve them for various cameras and conditions.
    Many posts are argumentative for the sake of argument and ego and don't contribute anything significant to learning how to achieve great skin tones.
    To be more productive, this forum could use moderation. That would start with no more antagonistc posts by the site owner, who leads by example, and by said site owner to maintain etiquette and politely keep threads on topic when they dissolve into unproductive arguments.
  18. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from jcs in The Skin Tone Holy Grail   
    You asked why we make a big deal of skin tones. We've taken the time told to break it down for you. Now you seem dismiss it as a luxury too rich for your blood. Not sure why you brought the subject up the first place unless it was to tell us why it doesn't matter to you. Of course writing and directing should take a front seat - at any budget. Not a groundbreaking discovery, but you asked a tech question, hence tech answers. People with 1k + cameras usually won't have the budget to consider complex production design but next to writing / directing your one of strongest cards is how you capture a human face. And there are many a cheap camera in the DSLR / Mirrorless market that can capture great skin tones - if you take the time to figure it out. A little applied knowledge is not above anyone's pay grade. So do we care about seeking the "Holy Grail" of flesh tones? If so, ask away. I've gotten great advice on this forum on how to unlock the A7s color profile.
  19. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from jcs in The Skin Tone Holy Grail   
    Skin tone to me is the baseline for a camera. I'm always tinting it this way and that or sometimes delivering it as "honest" as possible. If the base is accurate skin tone/color chart, I know can create the most flexible rich signal possible with my camera. When I did extensive tests for a feature last Summer, we were spanning looks from cool/green nights to magic hour golden light, but the mid level / mean look was color balanced skin tone. So we tested the big three (Sony 55, Alexa, Dragon) at a variety of ISO's and contrasts (2:1, 4:1 to 64:1) always with a color chart and the same face. If we could grade the face to look accurate the color chart should be spot on too in an ideal world. Or you end up buying a lot of time in post windowing backgrounds and faces. The F55 was the worst at that test. If we nailed the face, the color chart was way off. It'd be cheaper to rent but offset by extra time in grading. Dragon was leaps better, just ever so slightly green bias and Alexa was spot on. 
  20. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from maxotics in F&V 4.3 Inch Monitor. Incredible!   
    So I recently configured my Ronin and quickly realized that I needed another monitor. I relegated my DP6 as my AC's Monitor and went to hunt something that was small, lightweight, etc to mount on the crossbar of the Ronin. Weight being key, I looked for a 4.3 inch monitor. Lot of Movi Ops love the Small HD 4.3 which is nice but non-SDI and low rez. I was hoping when my new small monitor wasn't working on the Ronin, I could pop it on my A7s or some other camera just to have a small on board. One of the problems I've been having with the latest slew of HD on board monitors from Small HD or Marshall is that they ditched the 5.6 size and have gone bigger to 7" and 7.7". I prefer my on boards to be small and sharp. Zacuto's EVF having used it a number of times was a big fail for me. Crap colors, not sharp, etc. Cineroid and Alphatrons I find have poor build quality as well as resolution equal to my iPhone 4s. 
    What I was hoping for was a 4.3 monitor with optional EVF attachment. Big enough as an onboard, small enough to work as an EVF. But it needed to be high rez (at least 720p), have HDMI loop through (because I use Paralinx, and SDI. I pondered TV logics 5.6 at 1080p. It's an amazing monitor but too big for my needs and costly. Then I came across some press releases about F&V's 4.3 Spectra (720p). It clicked all the right boxes but was somewhat pricey (1299.00 with EVF attachment). The ads also make it look cheap (C'mon F&V hire a decent photographer already). Their NAB promo clip was dull as dishwater. As it was so new, no one I knew owned one or rented them. So I took the plunge on spec faith alone (something against my nature). I bought it from a place with a great return policy (Adorama).
    After unboxing it from a very fancy magnetic lid felt lined box, I beheld an incredibly well built monitor. Built like a tank. Better built than Small HD if you can believe that. Without the EVF piece, it still has a small metal hood built into the housing which really helps with incidental sun but without having to look down a snoot. The EVF attachment is very solid with no distortion (unlike small HD's). But what blew me away was the IQ. Miles better than my DP 6. Sharp as hell and at 400 nits it's pretty bright. Accurate colors and great in low light.  It cross converts from HDMI to SDI as well as loops through both SDI and HDMI. Very handy for more complicated sets. It comes with an array of cables for power (D tap, 5V, etc) and has a built in Sony NP adaptor. One NP 750 battery will get you to lunch. 170 degree view angle. 5 assignables. Fisher Price easy menu. False Color, Histo, Peaking, and all the other features you'd expect in a pro monitor. I estimate it'll be worth the extra cash as I'll be using it on just about every job. The only downside is lack of a waveform which may be a deal breaker for some. It has a histo, false color and zebras which is fine for me for exposure. There's talk of a firmware upgrade with waveform. For sharpness and detail especially viewed in EVF mode you'll find this hard to beat. As of now, they're the only HD spec 4.3 inch monitor on the market.
    Anyway, I'm not much of a review type person but when I find a piece of gear that truly fills a needed niche (pro build HD monitor that's small), I feel compelled to let people know. This being a site that promotes small lightweight one man gear, I think this monitor fits right in. Now my dream gear would be a 4.3 inch onboard 4k recorder or a 4k Ninja Blade to route to (Atomos are your listening?).
    http://www.fvlighting.com/spectrahd-4.html
  21. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from andrgl in F&V 4.3 Inch Monitor. Incredible!   
    My ideal monitor would have:
    Smart phone size
    1080p
    High Brightness (800 NIT or more - no more hoods!)
    HDMI loop/through (in case you need to go to Paralinx or similar)
    CFast 4k Recording
    A hinge that can either attach to camera (Andrew's example) or screw onto 1/4 20.
    Replaceable internal battery
    External power options
     
  22. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from dafreaking in Sony's "The Interview" gets release   
    ​Wait a minute I thought opinions on this film here were closed to those who haven't seen it.
  23. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from Hitfabryk in What was your big 2014 moment?   
    My biggest moment was bringing my A7s to Germany to visit my father in law. He had been stricken by Lassa fever in Sierra Leone eight years ago, rushed to Germany, was in a coma for 6 months, and ended up in a wheel chair for eight years. But then my wife and I got word he started walking in September. So we rushed out from Brooklyn to visit him in Germany. I took my A7s to shoot photos and film this amazing development. But I had to be mindful as he's a proud man (a physician and African Chief). I needed something that would be discrete and unobtrusive. With the silent shutter, ability to shoot from the hip and with no lights or flash, the A7s caught some of the most beautiful moments that I couldn't with another camera. Then when I showed him the technology and what it could do he was completely blown away - and of course got up and walked for the camera. 
  24. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from noone in What was your big 2014 moment?   
    My biggest moment was bringing my A7s to Germany to visit my father in law. He had been stricken by Lassa fever in Sierra Leone eight years ago, rushed to Germany, was in a coma for 6 months, and ended up in a wheel chair for eight years. But then my wife and I got word he started walking in September. So we rushed out from Brooklyn to visit him in Germany. I took my A7s to shoot photos and film this amazing development. But I had to be mindful as he's a proud man (a physician and African Chief). I needed something that would be discrete and unobtrusive. With the silent shutter, ability to shoot from the hip and with no lights or flash, the A7s caught some of the most beautiful moments that I couldn't with another camera. Then when I showed him the technology and what it could do he was completely blown away - and of course got up and walked for the camera. 
  25. Like
    Tim Naylor got a reaction from maxotics in What was your big 2014 moment?   
    My biggest moment was bringing my A7s to Germany to visit my father in law. He had been stricken by Lassa fever in Sierra Leone eight years ago, rushed to Germany, was in a coma for 6 months, and ended up in a wheel chair for eight years. But then my wife and I got word he started walking in September. So we rushed out from Brooklyn to visit him in Germany. I took my A7s to shoot photos and film this amazing development. But I had to be mindful as he's a proud man (a physician and African Chief). I needed something that would be discrete and unobtrusive. With the silent shutter, ability to shoot from the hip and with no lights or flash, the A7s caught some of the most beautiful moments that I couldn't with another camera. Then when I showed him the technology and what it could do he was completely blown away - and of course got up and walked for the camera. 
×
×
  • Create New...