Jump to content

hyalinejim

Members
  • Posts

    572
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Mark Romero 2 in The Panasonic DC-BGH1 camera soon to be announced   
    Wow, no love for IBIS today?
    I couldn't go back to a non-IBIS camera. I shoot lots of B roll of people who've never been on camera before and will be gone away in a minute, doing things. IBIS means I can shoot handheld and get three different steady shots from different angles while directing the person(s) in the same amount of time it would take me to get one shot on a tripod.
    I don't use it as a substitute for a dolly, slider or gimbal. I still remember my horror at the shaky jello of my first handheld shots on the 5D Mk 2!
  2. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Gandulf in The Panasonic DC-BGH1 camera soon to be announced   
    Wow, no love for IBIS today?
    I couldn't go back to a non-IBIS camera. I shoot lots of B roll of people who've never been on camera before and will be gone away in a minute, doing things. IBIS means I can shoot handheld and get three different steady shots from different angles while directing the person(s) in the same amount of time it would take me to get one shot on a tripod.
    I don't use it as a substitute for a dolly, slider or gimbal. I still remember my horror at the shaky jello of my first handheld shots on the 5D Mk 2!
  3. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Juank in Image thickness / density - help me figure out what it is   
    Yes, density of a negative increases with exposure. It's measured with a densitometer. 
    That's where the dense/thick terminology comes from, where it is an observable quantity. 
    For digital, it's a qualitative assessment and its meaning might vary from one person to the next.
  4. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from noone in Image thickness / density - help me figure out what it is   
    I've also checked out DXO's portrait colour rating. The last thing you'd want for a nice portrait is accurate colours. Perhaps it's better to call it a colour accuracy rating then (and who knows whether their methodology is sound or not). But accurate colour is not nice colour.
    Reality looks kind of shitty, in terms of colour, compared to how its colours can be represented in photographic images.
    Colour accuracy should not be the goal, IMO, unless you're reproducing artwork or products. I would like my images to look better than reality, when it comes to colour. 
    So I would absolutely not expect the top rated DXO cameras for portraits to make nicer portraits SOOC than those lower on the list. 
  5. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from noone in Image thickness / density - help me figure out what it is   
    Yes, density of a negative increases with exposure. It's measured with a densitometer. 
    That's where the dense/thick terminology comes from, where it is an observable quantity. 
    For digital, it's a qualitative assessment and its meaning might vary from one person to the next.
  6. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to seanzzxx in Image thickness / density - help me figure out what it is   
    Your terminology seems confused: image density refers to how well exposed a (film) image is. A well exposed negative will literally be denser/thicker than an underexposed one, which will be thin.
  7. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from IronFilm in New forum Dark Theme   
    I think for the forum that the text in each post should be the brightest element as it's the most important.
  8. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Andrew Reid in New forum Dark Theme   
    Ah when phone screen brightness is on medium, it does seem to look too dark. Have tweaked the text so it's brighter. Cheers for the feedback, keep it coming
  9. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from dualmp in New forum Dark Theme   
    I think dark mode needs more contrast, at least for mobile devices, as it's v difficult to make things out unless you're in a dark environment.
    This is what a Reddit app looks like in dark mode. Everything is legible
     

  10. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to bwhitz in Canon Cinema EOS C70 - Ah that explains it then!   
    1. Some people just don't like the obvious artificial limiting/crippling of tech... they'd like real competition and better products
    2. Some people actually LIKE the boomer-protectionism of the 1980's technology markets. I.e. hacks can just say "I own X or Y expensive camera! You HAVE to hire me now!"
    3. Some people like to pretend that there is something "Magical" about $5000 or $15000 cameras that will give them better results over something like a Blackmagic P4K or capable DSLR. There isn't. 
  11. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Towd in Canon Cinema EOS C70 - Ah that explains it then!   
    In regards to Raw vs Log formats, while its nice to have a the ability to change color temp and ISO in RedRaw, etc.  The Kodak Cineon system, a 10 bit RGB 4:4:4 Log format was the gold standard for over 20 years when scanning film for digital processing in VFX and later for Digital Intermediates.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cineon
    Every post house on the planet worth its salt should be comfortable delivering professional results using a 10 bit log "digital negative".  It wasn't until the rise of HD video acquisition over the last 10 years that raw became a thing.  And the early reaction to Red's raw format was mostly met with derision due to its lossy (gasp!) compression format.  Attitudes have definitely changed as people got used to the new formats.
    I think the big step up in the video/DSLR space was when we went from 8-bit video recording to a 10-bit log format like the GH5 offered.  The 8-bit log formats from Technicolor's Cinestyle, to C-Log, S-log, V-log are just too prone to banding and color artifacts when pushed heavily.  The ability to shoot raw is nice, but 10 bit log is a totally viable format for any post house to work with and deliver great results.
  12. Haha
  13. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to kye in In praise of in-camera Digital Zoom   
    I've recently "discovered" some of the benefits of using the in-camera digital zoom.  These won't apply to everyone, but it's worth considering and I don't hear a anyone talking about it.
    Let me illustrate by taking my GH5 as an example, but the principle applies much wider, especially as cameras go towards 8K and beyond.
    The GH5 has a sensor that's 5184 pixels wide.  When you're shooting 4K, the camera downsamples the 5.2K to 4K, giving a higher quality image due to the benefits of oversampling.  The benefits of oversampling are well known, and many cameras have this.
    The GH5 also has an ETC mode, which essentially does a 1:1 crop into the middle of the sensor.  This is a common feature across manufacturers.
    If you use the ETC function in 4K, you get an additional 1.3x crop, and if you use the function in 1080p then you get a 2.7x crop.  
    Both of these modes are shooting a 1:1, so you get a tighter FOV, but the image is no longer oversampled, so the quality goes down.
    Enter the digital zoom.
    In 1080p mode, the GH5 allows a 2x and 4x digital zoom.  The 2x digital zoom is less than the 2.7x 1:1 zoom from the ETC mode, so (assuming that the cameras image pipeline is designed well) the resulting 1080p image should be an image that is taken from the middle 2.6K pixels and downsampled to 1080p.
    In other words, the 2x digital zoom is a way to punch-into the sensor but still keep the quality of an oversampled image.
    This principle will occur any time that the digital crop is less than the crop of going to a 1:1 area on the sensor for whatever resolution you're shooting in.
    The Sony ClearImage Zoom comes to mind here, where (I think?) you can zoom in by a lesser amount than the 4K 1:1 crop (which is something like 1.5x?).  Perhaps other manufacturers have similar functionality too.
    Of course, the lower the resolution you're shooting then the more likely this will be available on your camera.  For those still shooting 1080p then this is worth looking at.
    For those shooting 4K, this will increasingly be useful as sensors creep up towards 8K and beyond.
    For me though, I've now abandoned the idea of having to buy an 85mm prime, because I can simply do a 2x digital zoom with my 42.5mm lens and get the same FOV and (basically) the same image quality, and if I happen to have my 7.5mm lens on and want to quickly grab a 15mm FOV shot then I know I won't be sacrificing quality to get one.
    Had I known that this feature delivered such good results I may have actually bought different lenses, so it's not a trivial thing, and it's worth giving a quick go if your camera supports it.
  14. Haha
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Katrikura in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    Keep us posted! ML needs interpreters for us plebs as it's a bit esoteric 😂
  15. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to fuzzynormal in Is full frame really necessary?   
    I used to have a 55mm Canon FD f1.2 on a speed booster for my M43 cams... I mean, that's kinda in the ball park.  On M43 that would render DOF shallowness like a f1.8 on FF.  So that narrow focal plane capability was there if I wanted it.
    (turns out I really didn't that much)
    Also had the Voight 42.5mm f.095.  Which is a 85mm f1.9 FF equivalent on M43.  All decent lens stuff and kinda neat to own.  
    And I'll be honest, having the extra bit of "oomph" that FF gives is nice sometimes, not going to deny it.  (I mean, I still have a 5D)  But, in my world it's not worth the trade off of exceptional IBIS and some really crazy compact gear...and the shooting flexibility that offers.  
    That small gear flexibility is often overlooked by a lot of videographers, I think.  I love going on shoots with modest stuff;  a single small satchel camera bag and a tiny camera --then knocking out ridiculous handheld shots that look like they rolled off a jib or camera dolly tracks.  I'll take that capability as long as it's available.
    Other people like piling on a bunch of outboard stuff so much that even a modest DSLR ends up looking like some Panavision rig on a major studio movie production set.  That's fine if that's what you want, just not my tempo.
  16. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Emanuel in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    Keep us posted! ML needs interpreters for us plebs as it's a bit esoteric 😂
  17. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to ntblowz in Panasonic S5 Entry Level Full Frame seems to be real...   
    So UK got S5 body already.. first in the world?  The kit lens will be shipped next month ughh.
     
    How many S5 owner here going for Anamorphics?  I had my ISCO ready!  Gonna miss the 6K anamorphic from the GH5 though.
     
     
     

  18. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Matins 2 in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    Keep us posted! ML needs interpreters for us plebs as it's a bit esoteric 😂
  19. Thanks
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Rivhop in Is full frame really necessary?   
    Well, I think that DOF as defined by circle of confusion etc can be matched because equivalence theory states that you can, if the lens for the smaller format is bright enough. However, I would expect to see a considerably softer image with lots of vignetting as you'd need a very fast lens to replicate the narrow DOF of this shot, and that's how lenses behave wide open. So although the DOF might be technically the same, the images will look different. But this is caused by the glass, not sensor size.
    And yes, the selection of lenses available for different formats is different. So your choice of format will have an impact on the look of the image. But I think a lot of people are making the point that those differences are derived from the glass and are not inherent to the sensor size.
    So theoretically, sensor size makes no difference to DOF. But in practice DOF is rendered qualitatively differently because the lenses are different / behave differently / must be set differently for different formats.
    If true, it's an interesting dichotomy. But it does suggest that any equivalence test is really just a comparison of two different lenses. In the same way that one of my 50mm lenses looks different from the other 50mm lenses I have for the same format. So would you agree that once you match focal length and aperture for the same shot on different formats, you're comparing lenses?
     
     
  20. Thanks
    hyalinejim got a reaction from tupp in Is full frame really necessary?   
    On the contrary, the last few pages of discussion gets right to the heart of the question raised. And I think many people would agree that the answer is:
    The necessity or desirability of a format size depend on whether the lenses available for that format will give you the visual qualities that you value.
  21. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from noone in Is full frame really necessary?   
    On the contrary, the last few pages of discussion gets right to the heart of the question raised. And I think many people would agree that the answer is:
    The necessity or desirability of a format size depend on whether the lenses available for that format will give you the visual qualities that you value.
  22. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to PannySVHS in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    Hmm, tastiest of all threads! Besides the Eos M Super8 one or the lens thread or the BW on 8bit, of course.:) In the same league as the best of Eoshd classics. Anyway, such a fun thread. I love the  these kind of youtube links, to some cool characters who provide great knowledge in an enjoyable way. Zeeks channel is really cool and fun! Thanks guys, for such great reading and viewing pleasures, nerdom and education!
  23. Thanks
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Rivhop in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=23041.msg216899#msg216899
    Background: user TheBilalFakhouri has unlocked correctly framed real time preview for EOS M and Danne has ported it to 5D3. Previously, Magic Lantern high res modes had a preview image that had either correct framing but in unusably slow frame rate black and white or real time colour preview with wrong framing. 
    Now, however there is high res, real time preview with correct framing.
    Kind of fun to try if you already own one of the supported cams 😁
  24. Like
    hyalinejim got a reaction from Rivhop in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    One recent development that is of particular interest as @stephen mentions above is card spanning to CF and SD cards on the 5D3 to allow for higher write speeds, therefore higher resolutions and/or longer record times.
    I may have jumped the gun here though, claiming real time correct framing for the 5D3. 😳
    But if it brings people's attention to the fact that Magic Lantern is still alive and delivering the goods then that's a good thing I guess!
  25. Like
    hyalinejim reacted to Anaconda_ in Magic Lantern 3.3k 16:9 RAW now with real time preview   
    I was the same when I got mine. I don't understand how people can enjoy using those modes... Maybe if you had an optical view finder it could be fun.
     Now though, I never shoot more than the 1080 Rewire option. It's non-crop (other than the aspect ratio) and realtime live view. If you shoot this way, it's basically the og BMPCC with a bigger sensor and much better audio / battery. If you run through MLV APP and convert each clips to DNG frames, there's barely even any extra steps in post.
    As far as my test of the new builds goes, the live view in the higher resolutions and crops is getting to realtime, but they're refining it. Give it a few weeks and come back to it.
×
×
  • Create New...