Jonesy Jones

I love what I'm seeing from the micro cinema too, but I'm absolutely thrilled by the 4.6k stuff too. Both cameras are really nice, but I think the 4.6k sensor is going to completely level the playing field. Just my 2 cents.

Can't wait to get the DS1. I am going to try the Nikon 17-55 on it. Might be too big but it's a little lighter and shorter than the Sigma. I am probably going to hold off on the DS1 though until NAB. You never know what might come out, or how it might affect current prices. Good things come to those who wait I guess.

Which voightlander is it? I'm going to be looking for a good lens for the bmpcc and ds1. I've got a couple ideas but I'm still trying to sort it out.

Thanks for doing that DP. Very good to know. So, I doubt you have the lens, but my next question would be about the Nikon 17-55 2.8. It's slightly lighter, and slightly shorter, both of which would help. It's also slightly wider, which if it goes on the DS1, would be helpful with operation. If that doesn't work, then the Tokina 11-16, which is again, even shorter and lighter than the 17-55, and of course much wider. The 20mm on a BMPCC with the speedbooster ends up a 35mm, which is a wide normal. 24mm and 28mm are even more normal (42mm and 49mm) and that is my favorite range. Not for instant gratification, because there's none of that, but for the exact opposite reason.

I was going to ask about this after I see your breakdown over at the other forum. Glad you like this one. How hard is it to eliminate the bounce when you walk? Can you get a good take each time? Is the BMPCC and 18-35 a good combo with the ds1? I assume a little lighter and wider lens like the 11-16 is better.

That list sounds very plausible for them actually. I hadn't thought of the audio recorder before, but now I can't imagine them not doing it. Sound Devices quality preamps with H4N price tag, in an ugly black box but who cares. It'll also double as an interface with Resolve. Mark it. It's happening. A larger 4K VA is happening too. I'd like them to do something interesting with long term storage. They could kill that market with something innovative. Something totally unexpected like a gimbal, or hot air balloon drone, or x-Ray machine. And much to many's disdain, they'll be bringing another camera too. That 4.6K sensor is going to change the world. They need it in a smaller body. Something in between the BMCC and pocket, probably limited to 30P. Mark it.

I'm picking up my 360TB crystal reader/burner this week. It's going to feel good knowing my data is safe forever. http://mrctv.org/blog/scientist-intend-record-entire-human-history-superman-memory-crystal

Yep. What they are doing is building an ecosystem. Buy it and build it, as you like. I think we are going to see more VA's and EVF's and what nots at the next NAB. Personally I'd like to see them offer their own low flange lens mount. Though for some reason I don't think that's going to happen. But whatever they do bring, it will probably be unique. Gotta love these guys.

I'l most likely be getting one of these too, for the same reason. As a one man band all of the gizmos take too long or too much effort to set up and carry around. My favorite slides are the small subtle ones anyway. At 20 lbs it can carry quite a load if necessary. Can't wait to get mine. Btw, would you mind posting a few slides and giving us some further thoughts when convenient. One of the things that I notice from much of the test footage is that it's not always smooth. Is it difficult to get a smooth slide with this every time?

Yah, whenever I want to search Vimeo I just go to google and type 'vimeo, the thing I'm searching for'. I get better results.

The viewer has the option of playback quality (1080, 720, 540, 360, and Auto), but they are 'hidden' by the HD button. You must click HD to see these options, and it is always set to Auto by default. We no longer have the option to choose that. However, under the 'Video File' tab there are the Player links specific to certain resolutions that can be copied and pasted, but these are not without caveats. (I have a Pro account).

Here's the link right to their Contact page, just to save you 3 seconds of clicking with your mouse. https://vimeo.com/help/contact

Yup. As I mentioned before, Everything Is A Remix is a terrific take on this. If any here haven't seen this, do check it out.

You're welcome.

Yes, if it's that big a deal you should be talking to a lawyer, not getting info from a forum. We are just trying to help you, and we are filmmakers like you. However, what I'm trying to say though is that I don't think this really falls under entertainment law in the way using an image, clip, music, etc would. You are not photographing a page from their book, you are quoting... Big difference. When you quote, you cite sources, just like a research paper. Just like professional journalists. Just like big name authors. They don't get permission. They cite. Additionally, there is far more protection for filmmakers than most of us think. For instance, I always thought you couldn't see logos in films, like a Coke can. But it turns out you totally can. If you are using it for its intended design, no problem. Now If you use that can for a bong, then you'll attract a lawsuit. The reason you don't see it in shows and movies as much is because it's free advertisement, and most productions want money for that. Have you seen Everything Is A Remix? Very interesting. Also, the book Pocket Lawyer for Filmmakers may be something you want. But for something this involved, you'll want a lawyer. I think the Publisher will play hardball. That's their job. Will be interesting to hear though. But I'm just guessing. So you'll need a lawyer. Or take a risk. You could just do it. Most cease and desist suits just require filmmakers to just take down content. If that happened, you could involve the lawyer then. Personally, I think you're clear. But I'm just a guy in a camera forum.

Did you ever write a research paper in school? I had to several times and was taught that the proper way to quote legally was to cite sources. So there are probably hundreds of books discussing this. I think you're confusing quoting/citing and using intellectually property like an image, clip, sound bite or music. Movies quote other movies all the time. They even borrow exact sets, camera moves, lines, etc. But borrowing their actual content is a whole other matter. I really believe you're over thinking this. Citing the source in the film and in the credits is probably more than covering your bases.

Since its a doc, just have the vo or onscreen text site the source. If you were writing a book, you could include the quote no problem as long as you site in text and in sources. Easy peezy.

Depends on the kind of book you are borrowing from, the amount you are borrowing, the kind of production you are creating with it, what you are doing to the portion you are borrowing, and if your use is a potential loss for the copyright owners. Lots of info needed.

Sorry the late reply. Been really really busy. Thanks for the info. Much appreciated. Thoughts all my tired mind can say. Good night. I'm guessing porn. I hope not, but I suspect. I really hope I'm wrong.

Life is more than filmmaking, but I know what you're saying. It's still theft and it's a shame and a tragedy. However, I wonder how many here have participated in piracy? Films. TV shows. Software. Music. Books. Free Sony or Panasonic firmware updates. But hey, no one likes the morality police, until they're the victims.

I would love to know more. $pecifics are what would be most helpful, but I can understand if your not comfortable sharing too much. But anything would be great. What you've found that works. What doesn't. How long it takes to begin earning something substantial, more than pennies. Do you market or advertise? Is your audience growing? Are you present on other platforms? I'd love anything you have time for. Thanks.

Yah. These images are so sweet. This camera is going to be awesome.

I believe that if you want to monetize from filmmaking, you will either need to sell yourself to someone with a lot more money than you have, or spend time (years probably) building an audience. An audience costs time or money, or both. Make great content. Give it away and promote the heck out of it. Then you'll have an audience, and a chance to create something that may be profitable.

Well I'm nearly certain there was at least a brief turn for the worse during the first part of season 4. Way more contrasty. I feel like the writing shifted then too a bit. Like they were trying something new and then realized their old formula was solid.

Me and my kids watch everyday on Netflix. Love the look. Haven't seen the new ones. Question, did they go with a somewhat different look somewhere around season 4, at least temporarily?