Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kristoferman

  1. 20 minutes ago, Gregormannschaft said:

    Amateur hour question here: what are the benefits of a fresnel over an LED light panel? I've always worked with panels and found them super useful, especially bi-colour ones. So wondering why someone would opt for a fixed K value light over a bi-colour...? I'm gonna guess colour accuracy?

    Fixed color temp will get you more light output at the same rated wattage. In bi-colors, half the leds are daylight and half are tungsten. So if you're at either daylight or tungsten, you're only getting half the potential light output. Even if all the led lights were going, fresnels would most likely offer superior light output, since there is a big reflector behind the lamp.

    Also fresnels offer much more controllable light. You can go from zoom to spot, whereas with panels, you're at a fixed, often wide, beam angle. 

  2. 6 hours ago, martinmcgreal said:

    If I'm willing to drop my resolution requirements to 2K, which I'm sensing I may indeed have to, then the F3 is the best bang for buck, no question. But I want to exhaust the 4K market first .. 

    Whilst the motion cadence on the Bolex is incredibly cinematic, the cameras image isn't that dissimilar to the pocket's, with that 35mm film look; the exact look I'm hoping to move away from with this upgrade. As previously stated, I'm looking for a more softer, cleaner, and smoother looking image, more digital/alike to the Alexa/RED's, than 35mm film .. 

    Ha! Yes, essentially .. Something which can challenge the MX's cinematic qualities, but that's far more user friendly. I'll probably opt with an MX if I can find one with low hours on the clock, and then to avoid additional weight, just keep it as stripped down as possible.

    The KineMini 4K is an interesting one .. Ticks every single box as stated, but its difficult finding decently graded footage of this thing online - making you question whether that's a user error or the cameras colour science. I assume the former, but I'd like to see the some solid cinematic evidence that thing system is as good as it looks on paper ..  

    Still pee'd off about forgetting the C100ii/300 can only output 8-bit. With the F3, it's probably the closest system on the market to delivering the 'image' I'm looking for .. If I hold out until NAB, I can probably look closer to the £6K market, but worth noting I also want to invest up to £2,000 in some new glass, so probably wise I keep looking in the current price-range for a system .. 

    So, as of now, it's either the MX or F3, or the GH5, granted it's vastly better in low-light than the GH4, which I sense it may not be. Is there anything else I've missed? Like I say, willing to drop my demands for 4K if needs be, which should open up a few other options? 

    I've never thought kinemini footage had bad color.



  3. 50 minutes ago, DaveAltizer said:

    Its not bad. Try this profile. Its the best. Its so good we are calling it "SuperLog"

    Black Level: 0 (it's disabled in s-log2 anyway)

    Gamma: S-log2

    Black Gamma: Range- Narrow, Level -7

    Knee: auto

    Color Mode: sgamut3.cine

    Saturation: +32

    Color Phase: -2 (this is for a7sII, for original a7s use -5)

    Color Depth: +6 (all of them)

    Detail: -6


    Expose 1.5 to 2 stops over.

    What would the color mode be for the original a7s? Any other changes for the original? Thanks

  4. looooove birdemic! I thought i heard a sequel was coming out, does anyone know about that?  I'm aware I could probably look it up, but where's the fun and camaraderie in that?!

    Back on topic though, I couldn't believe what I was watching the first time I saw Birdemic. The main actor is sooooo wooden and terrible. Everything about it is pretty terrible really though. Makes it a blast to watch! Even though there are so many great moments, the one that got me was the sex scene in the motel. It was so bad and the actors feet were ridiculously dirty! Gross.

  5. The real lesson here is never use western union for these kind of transactions.

    And to be clear, I'm not going down this rabbit hole of searching for proof of the existence of Ebrahim or theorizing about specifics of the scam and his involvement. I was merely stating that the first reply by the account in this thread was...strange.. and that breaking off contact with the scammed community is something that damages his reputation further. 

  6. 8 minutes ago, Michael Coffee said:

    This post reads like bullshit to me..  why not refund the money right now, since you are so well off? Why would you be banned for trying to get on here and sort it out? And why would you say that you have no obligation to refund the money, when you admit it was someone very close to you? Does this not sound like the tone of the young punk and his message on facebook? Is there an Ebrahim Sr, or has it just been a scam all along? If there are 6 people admitted as being scammed, are there really more? Has someone been standing too close to a nuclear radiology machine?  Did we really go to the moon? Will a hero solve the mystery, get the girl, and ride off into the sunset? Time may tell:)

    I had the same concerns. There are a lot of red flags in this post.

    If he is indeed so wealthy to where he makes the amount of scammed money in a day, then refund it. Don't say you'll refund it "someday" and then say you have no obligation to do anything. 

    And the biggest red flag of all is the "this will be my last post, I'm leaving forever". That is NOT something a innocent person would do. Saying you're worried about more scammers is not a logical concern.

    Someone who was actually trying to make things right would not cut themselves off from us and the victims. But you know who would? A scammer.

    It all just seems very transparent to me. The whole "this is terrible, I'd never do this! I'm so rich, why would I need to do this? Even though I'm so loaded and people were scammed of thousands of dollars in my name, I have no obligation to pay. But I will! Someday....oh by the way I'm never going to come back here again. Bye!" thing is soooo shady.

    It doesn't make sense, people!

  7. I find that the vast majority of people who pirate movies would never see the film otherwise. It's the reason I laugh when studios used to trumpet about how much money they "lost" to piracy, when in reality the actual amount lost would be a small fraction of it.

    I would be ecstatic if I made a film that was heavily pirated because in the end, people will have seen my material and might tell someone else about it.

    And more to your point, it's a very valid view point. The video game industry is the same. There are tons of old DOS games that would be lost forever if they weren't ripped and put up for free. Archival is important and nobody else is stepping up to the plate so...

  8. 15 hours ago, AaronChicago said:

    Bummer news. I was shooting with the 120t indoors and it just didn't feel "extra bright" to me. I'm used to using the Arri 650w fresnel. I put them next to each other and set the Arri to flood. It looks like the 120t is about 3/5 as bright which would put it at around 400-450 watt equivalent.



    The aputure seems to cover 3-4x the surface area so I'm not sure if direct brightness comparison is valid.

  • Create New...