Santiago de la Rosa

Hi,
Shooting with an Canon 5 MkII on Canon 50mm and Fisheye Lens. Would love to hear your thoughts...
 

I highly doubt Panasonic would change the GHx line. They have invested a lot in building a proper lens line. Moreover the m4/3 its all about the size. Have you seen the size and the weight of the zoom FF lenses? Small body + large lens = instability + fatigue. 
It is more probable to attack the high end video market with a 4K FF sensor. Put it in the varicam 35 body and price it higher. 

Hi guys,
I have just finished my first showreel of some commercial projects I did this year. What do you think and what is your suggestions about showing others what you can do?
Do you think that this showreel can attract some potential customers who want promotional videos for their companies? What are your showreels you use to propagate yourself?
 

Fixed EF mount is a disastrous choice.  Infact the lack of m4/3 mount option from RED and BM on their Ursa is a mystery as well.  When you give users the ability to stick a SB ultra or SB XL on the camera you open up vast cost effective optical options.  A m4/3 to PL / oct19, oct19, etc etc adaptor would also allow use of cheap LOMO s35mm primes.
 
Exactly the same mistake BM made with the first cinema camera EF version.  Everyone wanted m4/3!   

Your CFast media price seems a little wonky.
Cursory search reveals that the approved Lexard 3400x cards cost:
128GB = USD 341.99
256GB = USD 677.80
And I mean, those are B&H prices. Guaranteed you can find a better deal.
 
That said, this stuff (media prices) changes by the second, so I respect your compiling effort.
I await the published Raven specs. Hoping for some real awesome DR and possibly even HDRx capability.

Thank you. I have AE as part of CC so I'll look into it. I have also found the "draw a mask" tool in FCX which gets round preset shapes and looks to do what I need. 

Hi guys lets see you place where magic happens not the bedroom but your mane cave where you relax take it easy or hide from the wife. This is my mane cave small room on second floor with standing IKEA desk i keep it clean and organized lets see what you have

Masks work very good in After Effects.
There are lots of tutorials of masking, it´s not dificult.
https://helpx.adobe.com/after-effects/using/creating-shapes-masks.html
https://helpx.adobe.com/after-effects/using/alpha-channels-masks-mattes.html
 
In the composition, place down the "under the horizon" file 1 and up the "above the horizon" file 2.
Mask the file 2 with the pencil or rectangular tool the from the "simple horizon" to the end of the frame (the part of the video that you don´t want in)
And in the mask menu, select Substract (You see Normal, Add, Substract, etc).
You will see now the file 1 frame and file 2 frame, one above the other.
Here you can see how: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzAkb7Cw0uM
(Sorry for my english.)

It also simply looks like - good color science of the manufacturer. (low, low english:)
Here 1 year old beta-footage of the Ursa:
 
I love what I see, from this Cameras.
 

You are right. I wrote 'tasteful teal/cyan' (it should have read orange/teal of course) because it isn't Transformers. I think most of the enthusiastic reactions to the clip come from the two things a subtle o/t grading does:
1. the image looks balanced, harmonic.
2. the image looks clear because it's the highest hue contrast combined with luma contrast possible without looking outright wrong.
But even if a lut can do wonders, my own experience with ProRes of the Pocket tells me that you always need to apply corrections, if only for gamma. Our Mr Wedding may be a laughing stock and make embarrassingly cheesy videos, but he must be brashly clever, if he did nothing but produced such nice images.
So maybe everybody else makes too big a fuss about grading, log, finding the right profiles, ask for the right workflows. All you need is the right lut ...
 
 

Yep I've done countless tests with the VLog, and most of the conclusions of Aaron Chicago and others are pretty much spot on.
What I found was if you shoot in very good light, either outside or inside with decent video lights and overexpose with zebras set at 65 and 80 approx, then the noise especially and also the magenta blocking wont be a problem really and it does produce some wonderful images, best I've seen from the GH4 in many cases, but its definitely a double edged sword.
As its been said by others if you shoot where there are a lot of midtones and softer shadows in mid light, you will see the magenta blocking all over the place, grey or light brown walls with shadows on them are an absolute delight (being sarcastic here) magenta blocking on them pretty much everywhere.

Plus some are saying its the varicam LUT that is the problem, this is only partly true at best, you can see this problem in the original VLog file, I have done a ton of A/B's and its there in the original untreated 8 bit file as well, but its less noticeable, now other LUTS may bring it out less, thats probably true, but they wont get rid of it cause its there in the original 8 bit file....end of story, and anyone that does some serious tests will see this immediately.
Now 10 bit with other LUTS may be enough improvement to overcome or mask the problem enough...I dont know.
But to me it appears that LPowells analysis based on Barry Greens statements are spot on, its not what everyone likes to hear, but I feel LPowells conclusions were exactly right,
and it appears that even after 6 months of testing Panansonic have released a very flawed version of VLog, and paying customers (I havent bought mine yet) are entitled to feel very pissed off, they should not have used the varicam mapped version with the 79 IRE high end rolloff, they should have mapped a GH4 version from scratch.
God knows they had enough time to do it (...and Yes I know what software writing involves, I develop 3d worlds and call up scripts from scratch...I know how complex it can get)
But whats even more amazing is not a single Beta tester appears to have mentioned this publicly, its totally unbelievable, some of the people that have tested this Log profile know a lot, have a lot of experience under their belt, and the very fact they did not notice or point this out on forums beggars belief.
As far as filming goes I am a lowly hobbiest...but with a solid background in 3d design and also professional mural art and I saw it almost immediately...if I was a tester I would have been hounding Panasonic, its an 8 bit dogs turd in a lot of situations, fix it or dont release it!!!  whats going on?
Panasonic have really blundered badly on this and its not going to do them any good, face it...its a half developed product that they had tons of time to get right, and either the beta testers did not do their job...or Panasonic totally ignored them.
Some already have the release version and they say its exactly the same and gives the same result, so probably best to not expect any miracles there.
Some have even said the unreleased image app blundered version is not the real version, its an earlier beta, that also beggars belief, the release is just a code, its written in 2.3 and its highly unlikely that they buried earlier beta versions in 2.3 that somehow the image app tapped into.
This is an amazing exercise in how not to do something by Panasonic, its not going to help them in the face off aggressive competition from other manufacturers and to be honest...at the very least it will cast some doubt over the observational powers of many of the beta testers as well.
At the end of the day we have a one part cinematic looking image from VLog that has a lot of potential when shot in the right light, with perfect exposure etc...and the other part dogs turd with magenta vomit everywhere...choose your poison wisely LOL!!!
Talk about truth being stranger than fiction...jeez!!

 
 

Hi,
I'm new to all this so apologies if this is a trivial question!
I'm looking to create a shot with time-lapse sky/clouds against a normal speed foreground. I can achieve a reasonably horizontal and "simple" horizon - but it isn't a "straight line". The "foreground" (normal speed) shots would be tripod based. There are then two alternatives:
1. foreground action taking place under the horizon (i.e. not impinging on the sky or time-lapse space) 
2. foreground action takes place above the horizon.
I assume that I need a mask to achieve this? But my question is what is the best tool for this? I use FCX as an editor but have failed dismally to get to grips with Motion. 
Any advice much appreciated.
Tim

I did a lot of weddings. You may detest them, but you hardly find better occasions to test your equipment and your skills - as well as videographer as as storyteller. A wedding is as good a proof of a camera's strengths and shortcomings as any image video or fictional short, imo.

I'm on the mailing list of a site called Desktop Documentaries and recently received an email recommending a documentary kit for $1000. Uh oh! It included a Canon T5i and an H4n as THE basics for a cheap large sensor video camera package.
So with as much tact as I could muster, I replied and informed the site owner I didn't think it was very fair to be recommending this particular set of items in 2015 to people who don't know any better (the site is mainly aimed at filmmaking begginers). I expected to receive either a dismissive reply or at best be ignored.
What actually happened was I got a reply from Faith (the site owner) offering to pay me to write a better-informed article! So I did.
Here's my article, in which I discuss the evolution of hybrid cameras (from the 5D MkII to the latest 4K models) and recommend my own gear package for $1000 (including all the very basics you'd need to shoot a documentary): http://www.desktop-documentaries.com/cinematic-documentary-gear-package.html
I'd love to hear what you guys think of the list I put together (and my article in general!) and what you might have done differently ...
PS: You can also see a few films I shot a while back with the camera in question here: http://lintelfilm.uk/blog/affordable-cinematic-video
 

I was wandering around a Chinese filmmaking forum and someone said that he found a bug in the firmware 2.3 and unlocked V-log L for free.
So I came back home and tried. It really worked. Just did a test shot with Hugo in the sofa and loaded it in resolve with the Vlog lut and did a little adjustment. Here are the before and after frames. 

Here some beautiful footage from the upcoming Ursa mini 4k:

"Most of the footage was shot in Prores HQ (which looks amazing - even more so than the BMCC), Full HD, 60fps. We used all sorts of lenses: Canon 24-70 2.8L, 50mm 1.2L, 100mm 2.8L IS, 17-55 2.8 IS and the Sigma 18-35 1.8. Please note that while the firmware we had on the Ursa Mini was as close to the final firmware as possible, but was still in beta nonetheless."

 
 

The footage of the Ursa 4k is still impressive!
The Ursa Mini 4,6K is in my Opinion the most interesting upcoming camera.
https://vimeo.com/104918710

Will try, thanks for the input!

Nice that updating QT helped you.
You can optimize your media with Resolve 12, this video helped me with long files (1 hour and more)
 

Yes, CTRT, BMPCC is MFT mount, same as GH4.
You can use your lenses.

Yes, CTRT, BMPCC is MFT mount, same as GH4.
You can use your lenses.

You can always build up small camera with a cheap eBay rig and matte box if you want it to look more "serious." 
Also, I'm typing on my phone right now, so I'll keep this brief: the BMPCC is a very, very easy to use and grade. DaVinci Resolve 12 is free, and can handle RAW and ProRes without a sweat. Worst case, if you want a usable starting point, all you have to do is right click each clip and apply the BMD Film to Rec709 LUT, and boom--usable footage. I actually have a much easier time lighting, exposing, and grading BM footage compared to other cameras because of their huge DR and super robust codecs.
The camera also requires a lot less accessories than people pretend. Realistically, you need a couple big SD cards ($100-200), a pile of batteries or external solution ($60-$120), and a lens. That's it. The other stuff can be nice, but it's by no means necessary.
I'm a beginner as well (film school), and I'm finding the Blackmagic to be a powerful and straightforward tool to work and learn with. If you want more information, I highly  recommend checking out Mattias Burling's and Drew Network's YouTube series. Both are extremely informative and do a lot to reduce the camera's intimidation factor. You can also feel free to message me. I'd be happy to answer any questions and even run tests, if I can find time.

So the BMPCC has a 2.88x crop factor compared to full frame. What this means is that you'll have a wider depth of field than you would on APS-C or FF sensors, as well as a narrower field of view when using FF/APS-C glass. This means you have two main options when it comes to your lenses: 

1. You can use a normal/generic speed booster to reduce that crop factor to 2x, which makes FF doable if you're not a huge on focal lengths wider than 40mm, or a BMPCC-specific speedbooster, which reduces the crop factor to 1.67, which makes the sensor effectively just smaller than APS-C. The advantages of this option are that you have a wider assortment of vintage and modern lenses to choose from, get a stop more light (or 1 2/3 with the BMPCC-specific booster), and can give you the look of a larger sensor (which some prefer). The disadvantages are large lenses (which can be unwieldy on the BMPCC), expense (powered speed boosters and BMPCC-specific models are pricey), and no IS/AF on non-electronic lenses (which may or may not matter to you). 

2. Buy native Micro Four Thirds mount lenses. Because they're made with a 2x crop in mind, they offer much wider focal lengths that murder you way less on the crop factor. You can get a Panasonic 12-35 (35-100 FF equiv.) f/2.8 IS and have an amazing all-rounder for only $550 used, or the amazing SLR Magic 10mm t/2.1 for a 29mm FF equiv. that's built like a tank, completely manual, and razor sharp from max aperture. The advantages of this option are IS/AF on Panasonic/Olympus/Sigma lenses, much smaller lenses, cheaper lenses (depending what you buy), and better performance (again, depending--there are exceptions). The downsides are that they won't affect the sensor size/look or give you extra light and can't be used on larger formats if you ever decide to switch.

I lean toward option 2, because I like the option to keep my package small (heh heh), because I can use the same lenses on my Panasonic/Olympus MFT cameras for video and stills, and because there's some incredible glass in the MFT stable that I couldn't bear to part with. 
It's usable. Not great, but usable. I ordered a sun hood for the LCD (like the one recommended on DrewNetwork), which is the cheapest option to improve visibility, but you could also pick up a low-end LCD loupe or external monitor if you're having trouble. Definitely give it a try before you buy any of that stuff though--I've shot a music video and a short doc without any of it and done just fine. 
 
Definitely give it a whirl for editing. I started on Premiere and planned to just color correct in Resolve, but I'm finding the Resolve 12 Beta to be more than enough NLE for me. It's a personal preference thing; you won't know unless you try. 

In terms of color tools, Resolve is the most comprehensive option available. It can look a little intimidating at first, but the tools are deceptively simple. I've had good luck just watching some simple Youtube tutorials and playing around with footage. You'll get the hang of it in no time.

This guy has made a series of fantastic vids where he looks at the work of major directors. This one is on Spielberg, but you should check out the others as well.

No clue.

Something to note, that reflective screen likely sucks balls outside.