Jump to content

markbatey

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I found after using the XF305, using a lot of handheld, for tv for a couple of years that I had got really used to good image stabilisation - and trying to use non-stablised prime lenses on the GH2 was a real challenge. Personally I hate rigs - they turn a small handy camera into an unmanageable beast. And in the hand without tripod or rig, my stuff had a jittery look that was not at all nice. So good stabilisation is a priority for me - as well as all that image quality stuff.
  2. Andrew - Just a query about your advice on audio levels (page 71-71) in the excellent and very useful book. You say that the "mic level limiter" is in fact an automatic audio gain control, and that with it switched on the mic level adjust does not work. On my GH4 it appears that the limiter is a normal limiter, reducing the level only when it starts to clip at high levels. Also, the mic level adjust works with the limiter switched in. So I'm finding that the traditional way of setting levels works well - turn the limiter off, set the level so that it never hits the red, then turn it back on, j
  3. And here's an example from me We're cross-posting here, this was on another thread this morning... First off, 100Mbps at 25p. Then the same shot a few seconds later, no changes other than to switch to 4k. Then import to FCPX, optimizing footage to ProRes. Drop both shots onto a 1080p timeline. Add a Hue/Saturation filter, crank up the Saturation to 2.0. Export as 1080p. Obviously nobody would actually add that much saturation in real life, but it exaggerates the colours in a grey Newcastle sky. I think the difference really stands out. Settings: Cinelike V tweaked to
  4. I’m really interested in whether shooting 4k for HD output actually gives more colour information that shooting HD in the first place. There’s been lots of mathematical theorising about this, some of which I kind of understand, lots of which I don’t. So to get a real world answer, I just pointed the GH4 at the sky, and this is what happened. First off, 100Mbps at 25p. Then the same shot a few seconds later, no changes other than to switch to 4k. Then import to FCPX, optimizing footage to ProRes. Drop both shots onto a 1080p timeline. Add a Hue/Saturation filter, crank up
  5. Actually I think it's my firewire drives I'll need to upgrade before the laptop...
  6. I've been doing my late 2011 macbook a disservice. I've been trying it out, putting 4k material into an HD project in FCPX. It runs ProRes transcoded media even at "better quality" with no bother at all. With proxy obviously it doesn't break sweat and it'll handle multiple streams as well so dissolves play back smoothly. The only drawback might be disk space - the transcoded files are four times the size of HD. But if I find that's an issue I can work with proxy where the files are very small. All media running from a G-raid 4TB over firewire. And FCPX makes the whole workflow really
  7. That's all really useful, thanks. I'll try proxy first I think and see how my late 2011 Macbook handles 4k that way - if it's still slow then it looks like transcode to ProRes 1080 is the way forward as I know I can work that way with no problems in the edit. Or spend even more money and go for the MacPro - the way it handles 4k in FCPX, even with multiple filters applied is just amazing. Then it's thunderbolt raids and all that fun...
  8. Hiya, First post here, been lurking for a while, so here goes... My GH4 arrived yesterday, and I'm having lots of fun playing with it. I'll probably be shooting mostly in HD as my old laptop won't handle 4k at all. So I thought I'd do a test with the different bitrate options in HD - pointed the camera on a 60mm lens at leaves swaying in the breeze, and tried it at 50, 100 and 200 Mbps. And I can see absolutely no difference in the pictures. Is it just me? Sharpness is the same, motion blur is the same, freeze frames on moving leaves is the same. Can anyone else actually tell
×
×
  • Create New...