BenEricson

4 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

You could just do FCP7 - XML - Adobe PP

You'll lose any keyframes / opacity / audio work etc. - but the base edit should still translate fairly well.

Yep. I use this for sharing projects with mixed versions on Premiere Pro. 

This dude shot a feature length doc with the bmpcc and the bmmcc. I think it had a festival release in 2018, but now available online. The colors out of the original bmpcc and micro have a point like quality and texture. Really beautiful. 

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The demand for higher quality webcams just increased. Also, better quality laptop webcams (but problem is the thin lid, most are even thinner than a smartphone)

But main issue is the online part... All compressed to hell and ugly as hell. Especially Skype, Facetime, etc.

Looking at the news, the other thing that needs to be fixed is the angle of the webcam. They all point up people's noses!

So true. The higher end web cams have also gone way up in price. Everywhere is sold out and eBay is marked way up. 

New York Times worked with the webcam footage in a cool way. 

https://www.nytimes.com/video/health/100000007056651/covid-ards-acute-respiratory-distress-syndrome.html?smid=pl-share

10 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

But is there anything more 2020 than trying to capitalise on a global crisis that is literally killing people by click baiting a six year old video?

So true.

39 minutes ago, androidlad said:

So how many stops of dynamic range do you want?

Sony has a 1/1.55" sensor IMX490 that does 20 stops (120dB) dynamic range in a single exposure.

 

Pastel land. Reminds me of the default camera on the new iPhones.

This is really excellent content. Thank you for posting!

3 hours ago, rawshooter said:

The sad truth is that, in order to scan 35mm and medium format stills in best quality, you need dedicated high-end film scanners like the ones made by Nikon (Coolscan) and Hasselblad (Flextight). Nikon unfortunately stopped manufacturing the Coolscans many years ago. Today, they are sought-after items costing up to $2000 on Ebay, with many models needing SCSI or Firewire connections. Hasselblad scanners cost about $15,000.

All affordable solutions on the market, flatbed scanners (like the Epson Perfection series or the Reflecta budget film scanners) do not render the full quality of film. Solutions for digitizing film with a camera and a macro lens like the Nikon ES-2 lens adapter are rather flimsy.

Agreed. Even if you have loads of time, it is nearly impossible to get the same color and texture that you get with the high end scanners. 

This scanner is really good but only does 35mm. I’ve heard a lot of people swear by it. The output really simulates what a 35mm print should look like. Correct colors etc. 

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F202603055965

I personally would rather support a local lab and get my scans back in 2/3 days via email. I’m shooting 120 and 35 so the price for high end scanners would be too costly for it to make sense. 

7 hours ago, eleison said:

It will go away in two months unless our AMERICAN scientist are lying to us which I don't think they are. 

Gotta keep up. They're not sure if it will go away. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2020/03/11/coronavirus-may-have-seasonal-cycle-that-doesnt-mean-it-will-go-away-this-summer-experts-warn/

I have an in house contract for a tech company in Seattle. We were told to work from home for the next 3 weeks. Not sure what happens then... Besides that, I have been hanging around the house mostly. Catching up on personal projects.

26 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

I think the death rates in Italy much higher than China, as for instance, they're no less mind-boggling by virus standards as well. This is a severe threat for the whole humankind. 

Weren’t there rumors that China was under reporting death tolls? I would guess that non lethal cases in the US is currently very underreported. 

2 hours ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

That’s what he said C300 if it had a different mount 

And I am saying, Canon won’t make that camera because it basically already exists. 

1 hour ago, currensheldon said:

A C100 III would be awesome an instant buy for me if it had an RF mount, 10-bit 4k up to 30fps, and 10-bit in HD. Don't care if it has high frame rates, raw, etc as I would use it JUST for my observational doc stuff - which I always shoot in 10-bit (usually 4k) at 24fps. 

Can always have a Komodo on hand for commercial work. 

This is literally the C300 Mk2 with a different mount.

15 million per episode. The episodes are like 22 minutes long. 

On 2/13/2020 at 1:24 PM, thebrothersthre3 said:

Sony is stupid for not doing the same style camera with 10 bit, new AF, and Venice color 

There's clearly an issue building a sensor to have both beautiful color science and extreme low light sensitivity. 

Canon 1DXii would do well in these scenarios too. It is also 5 times the price. 

9 hours ago, Michi said:

think Canon left out Clog2 on the C200 (for non-raw shooting) because it is designed for 10bit files... The C300 II has it. And it is very, very flat. For certain scenarios it would be usefull on the 1DX III too I‘d say.

Interesting. I work with the C300ii quite a bit. CLog2 is closest to the Alexa. It creates very soft and filmic looking highlights. 

That being said, Clog3 is a lot cleaner and generally easier to work with, unless you’re shooting into bright sources.

6 minutes ago, plucas said:

The omission of C-Logs 2-3 is perhaps a fair "cripple," on Canon's part.

What is the raw footage curve then? Can’t you select your desired log curve? I’ve never used the C200 but I thought there was an option to export out Clog2 or 3 from the raw files? 

13 hours ago, DeesserLord said:

what do they mean by "proper" 4K ? no crop ? that would be great. I think i read somewhere dual pixel AF doesn't work in 4K though.

I hope the bitrate is good.

"UHD 4K (3840 x 2160) at 23.976p [120 Mb/s] "

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1546030-REG/canon_3924c001_eos_rebel_t8i_dslr.html/specs

Low bit rate, but the 35mps codec on the C100 still looks better than the Sony cameras.

It's probably a great little camera but lacks spec wise. I absolutely loved the 60d back in the day. 

Probably also takes great stills, but better than a GH5 in that regard. 

I own the iPhone XS ( model previous to the 11 Pro.) 

I have noticed the same thing. 

The Halide app kind of fixes the problems with highlights, but still not as good as the older phones. There is some sort of HDR look that cannot he totally disabled. There’s also this plastic / noise reduction look. 

Skin tones and color in general are worse. The phone seemed to have a less warm and more neutral look than the iPhone 6/7. 

I've shot with this same setup before and had great results. Where is the noise located? On the skin / subject or the background. 

I think you will need to post a still for anyone to give you any real advice. 

I've had good results with the updated color key filter in Premiere CC.

On 1/24/2020 at 4:48 PM, Mako Sports said:

I've said it time and time again. Lens and lighting make shit look Hollywood, camera choice is basically just the film stock. 

Well, don’t forget the locations, wardrobe, and cast. That trailer would look like a YouTube camera tests without those.

It looks really good but I am not shocked it was shot on a GH5, those cameras are clearly super capable. Interesting they went with a super fast shutter. Seems extremely budget to make that call based on a broken filter? 

14 hours ago, IronFilm said:

"Difference" in what manner? In terms of ROI? Yeah, I'd say the difference for most people is quite significant. 

You'll see two dozen job adverts for a "FS7 shooter" for every one looking for a C300mk2 owner. 

 

Depends on your market. The C300 is way more popular in Seattle. Lots of corporate work with Amazon and Microsoft.

I would imagine FS7 is really popular for TV. 

1 hour ago, currensheldon said:

I think Canon really blew it with the C300 Mark II.

Just curious, have you ever shot with one? The C300ii produces beautiful images with ease. 

The reason the C300ii is so popular in mid range production is because it is a single operator operator camera. The Alexa or Red in that situation can be a burden. 

At the end of the day, the canon images at least hold up next to the red or arri in color space. The FS7 can’t compete in that space. The new FX9 looks better but the color is still not better than the original C300.

3 hours ago, heart0less said:

Having pleasant colors is like an icing on the cake, IMHO. 

And everyone wants icing on their cake. 

The F3 is a great camera. It really does have an extremely rich color output. The slog files also really handle over and under exposure very well. 

Like the other Sony’s I have used. It looks amazing outdoors and okay in mixed lighting. (From my experience.) 

I was using a Sony Swit with a dtap to power the Black Magic video assist. This was a super compact setup that worked really well. 

Really interesting stuff. I would be curious what this would do with cameras like the HPX or older VHS-C cameras. Maybe a way to sharpen up those older cameras with really organic looking images. 

On 12/28/2019 at 10:13 PM, fuzzynormal said:

The world of media is forgetting film now, and the kids doing stuff aren't aware of that legacy, so the color tricks to mimic it are less popular. 

I would have to disagree. “The kids” are the ones shooting tons of actual film right now. Largely driven by millennials it seems.

There is so much 16mm and 35mm being shot right now, I would imagine 10 times more than what was being shot 5 years ago. Nothing beats the real deal if you can afford it. 

Personally I would shoot baked in on some sort of neutral profile. You’d wanna shoot 10 bit over 8 bit 4k. 

Always shoot at higher f stop so you can pull a clean key on details like hair or the shirt / jersey. F8 if possible. Make sure you have enough light and make sure they’re far enough away from the screen so you don’t get green kickback on the side of the face / hair. 

As far as lighting, I would kinda think you’d want a little more backlight or a little falloff on the face. The frames you posted feel very evenly lit. Are you shooting waist up?