AnthonyBert

On 12/9/2020 at 2:12 PM, Andrew Reid said:

$858m from 94m views.

Try replicating that on streaming services.

Not going to happen.

So a lot of talent going to be cut back, budgets slashed and diverted, it all trickles down to the grass roots of the film and cinema industry - small guys will lose their jobs too.

Does anyone really think smaller, indie musicians are better off from streaming compared to CD sales, financially? Not a chance.

So a big correction on the way if they follow the trend to streaming and away from ticket sales at the box office.

Sorry to disagree but... Netflix makes just over 20 billion revenue a year!!!  there is nothing to replicate. Cinema will never be able to make as much as streaming, it is just that streaming survives on a lot of content but can also auto-finance a lot f it. Your example is only talking about a handful of films capable of making such revenue, While Netflix is steady revenue. I believe that with more streaming platform more job will be created as they can only survive with more content. I guess time will tell...

Well they had it coming... WB did not kill anything... Nolan did. as well all the top actors and top director...Movie budget are getting completely out of hand.. Nolan took 20 million salary for tenet. How can that be justified? Top actor are paid tens of millions. Now, the last time I wanted to go to the cinema, probably 18 months ago, the tickets were £15.50 for their so called Imax experience... So 31 quid for my wife and me. imagine if we had the kids!! Well enough said... We simply didn't go. not because we can't afford it but because it's insane to spend such an amount to pay for a below par experience. the last few times I have been to the cinema in the last 5 years they were 10 to 15 people max in a 300 seat cinema... What experience is that? my suggestion... Bring actors and directors back down to earth, pay them decently.. make good film with good script and story for 25 million max, put the cinema ticket around £6-8, and I bet you that they will fill up again... or go on spending 200millions on some crap with high price ticket and the 20th century fox and the others will follow in the footstep of WB...

I don't really want to be controversial here, but Arri and Red are not in your list either! I'm not sure why the way Canon runs their business seems to trigger so much anger with you. If the other cameras are better, then you know what to do!

Sorry to disappoint - Went for a test of the Zcam E2 with CVP in London: 16 stop - Not true, unless the C200 has 17 stops - Testing along side C200 and more DR on C200  - The camera is well made and has an interesting size, but for me the rolling shutter was the deal breaker... It is a good effort thought. Lovely little screen on the top, but it needs to be off centred a bit more. Solid construction. I did not buy it just because of the rolling shutter. The image coming out is very nice. Autofocus I did not try but talking to Philip Bloom at the BVE he clearly expressed that the AF was unusable....

Oh boy!!!! This world is freaking me out... that feeling of freedom we think we have... Sorry I'm closing on 50 Years old, I lived through interesting decades 80' 90' and now this!!! Give it another 20 years and I think some of those old scifi movies might just be a reality.... 

Andrew you said, and I quote "At no time have I been asked for my feedback on DSLR video despite EOSHD being one of the biggest resources for DSLR video on the internet. Sony and Panasonic talk to me"

That should tell you something!  Maybe a bit less about canon's product lack of features and a bit more on the great thing that have and still being achieved with their tools would go a long way.. Just a thought.

Trust me they are not lagging behind... With all those low light and 10bits and raw etc... Could you point me to a single video that is telling a story in a better way because of these features? 

General life advice: if you join a community, start by insulting all the members by calling them fanboys/lier followers, you'll probably get banned. 

It's as if people don't comprehend the basics of proper manner anymore. And certainly don't comprehend the difference between insult and criticism.

Most of us criticize Andrew's (and eachother's) work all the time (including myself, saying once his short is terrible and includes everything I hate about film), do we get banned? No. Because we criticize properly, which is say what we don't like, and what should be done to improve the work, not order eachother to stop making films. 

______

Providing incorrect information everytime you open your mouth doesn't help either. 

People come here to gather quality knowledge, correct information, and spend a good time in a nice, friendly atmosphere where they can discuss their passion about filmmaking. Members like these providing wrong information decrease the quality of the forum, and result in readers walking away from EOSHD with polluted information and a load of utter nonsense. 

Well, Ebrahim, Thank you for your general life advice, although it felt patronising in parts. but that's fine!

A Community is exactly what Andrew has created. I have followed him and enjoyed his reviews since the beginning of his blog. I have also enjoyed some of his shorts and purchased two of his books.

I will not denied that Andrew has done a great job. But what I will not accept, is for people to be banned for emitting their opinion on his short film. I don't think they were insulting at all, clumsy at best. I even sensed, taking into account Andrew extensive knowledge, that they were probably expecting something more meaty from him, and that I believe is their right. 

Some directors, that I hold in high regards, have produced some poor films. I glad they didn't ban me from watching the rest of their body of work.

Andrew's action were extreme. We should all learn one pure truth. you cannot please everyone and that's that. Now let's accept it and move on, because the subject of acceptance is wild and wide, and unfortunately only too few really care or respect it.

Sorry If offended anyone, but that did make me upset

WOW...

You removed removed Nog and Baltic. I guess Lincoln was right in that if you want to test a man's character, give him power. I can't talk about over threads, but in this Thread those 2 guys were giving their opinions and frankly I think they had a point. I'm not a fan of that video either, that does not make you a rubbish filmmaker. You just made a piece  that some like and some other don't. 

Please feel free to also remove my account if you also think that I'm causing trouble. You will then just have lost all credibility to me.

Regards...

We got it now!!! you don't like the 1DC... Let's move on please! and let's stop all those ridiculous comparison posts.

it's ashamed because it is a fantastic camera.

Completely agree with FilmBrute. And, something tells me that the GH4 will give you exactly the same result as the sony.

Andrew, for someone who says "attention seeking for clicks." on the post above, You look like someone who knows how to play the game quite nicely too  ;) 

Oh well, that was a nice april's fool  :D

Andrew,

Can I assume that the same rule would apply to my 1DC?

If so, can i do the whole process in davinci resolve? turn the footage to 10 bit and then downscale and export to prores444?

3 points...

1 - The line under EODHD logo has to go soon since DSLR is dead for video.

2 - Holly crap I just bought a 1DC. What a waste of money (Really!!)

3 - I agree with Birk Kromann.