Jump to content

austinchimp

Members
  • Posts

    205
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by austinchimp

  1. Beautiful. Videos like this are the counterargument to the technical assertion that "every camera is the same, you just need to know how to process the images correctly". Yes, maybe that is technically true, but how much work and how many hours would you need to put into a Sony A7s or a GH5 to get it to have this emotional weight and texture? Something about these old Blackmagic sensors is just magical, it feels like memories. Lovely for you to have captured precious moments like this.
  2. Can't comment on Nikons but the A7rii is a pretty stunning photo camera with one of the best sensors I've ever used. I'm still stunned by the quality of the images today. It's also a pretty decent video camera as long as you don't need high frame rates. I was using the A7rii for sports shooting and my only real complaint was the small and slow buffer, so when I'd fire off a few frames of something cool happening, the buffer would get full and basically freeze the camera for a few seconds until the buffer had cleared. For portraits and slower work where you don't need to fire off 100 full res shots in quick succession then it's great.
  3. It would be interesting to see some detailed technical analysis of why images from different cameras look so different - for example the GH5 and the Arri Alexa. We know they do look different, and even if you took both images and outputted them to the exact same compressed h264 file format, there would still be a massive difference between them. Even discounting the obvious colour and dynamic range differences it seems to be there is a massive difference in the texture of the image and motion itself. But what exactly is happening in the pipeline of a GH5, or A7SIII that makes it different? Then we could start to work out which specific process was to blame, and maybe how to undo it or ask for manufacturers to change it. I guess without one of the manufacturers opening up their secret recipe, we'll never know. All I know is fairly vague terms like 'noise reduction' and 'sharpening'. I do agree with @kye that sharpening+processing+compression is likely an irreversible destructive process.
  4. I have a theory that the new Sony sensors have a lot of inbuilt processing done on the chip itself or in the accompanying electronics, which you can see in the new BMPCC4k cameras. It feels a lot more sharpened and as if there's processing or noise reduction in there. The newer BM pocket 4k and 6k cameras look very similar to the GH5s and Z-Cam cameras for me. A nice image, but not with the same magic or feel. Some have speculated that it's about the jump up to 4k, but I feel like there's something else going on there.
  5. Yeah I'm really conflicted about log profiles on consumer cameras. I honestly don't like the way most footage is graded these days, and the popular style of 'cinematic grading' which to me usually looks flat and weird when done by amateurs. The worst casualty has been skin tones, with rich vibrant alive tones replaced by green grey yellow orange stylised skin in 90% of videos on Youtube. Whether that's to do with Sony sensors or just Log profiles is a difficult question. I do know however that I have rarely seen skin tones out of any Sony camera below the FX9 that I've liked. One of the things I'm struck by when I watch old movies shot on film - from the 70s through to the 90s - is how natural and beautiful everything looks, before every shadow had to be dark blue and every skin tone had to be sunburnt orange or desaturated grey.
  6. Wow Panasonic really nailed colour back then. When I look at this and the colour from the 5Dmkii I have to wonder what the hell happened since then? Maybe my negative perception of colour in consumer cams 2014-2020ish mostly comes from Sony dominance and the pandora's box of giving S-Log to the masses.
  7. Not sure if it's placebo or something in the compression used by consumer cameras these days but I definitely perceive a certain flatness and lack of colour density in many hybrid cameras and camcorders these days, and the common factor in most of them is Sony sensors. Out of all the consumer brands, Canon seems to stand out as being an exception in that regard. They seem to be capable of producing more rich tones straight out of the camera. I was also never that into the colour from the BMPCC4k with it's Sony sensor, compared to the Ursa image. It's been said many times on this forum, but I do wish manufacturers would focus less on 8k and more on getting colour right, after all Arri has been showing how to do it right for a decade now!
  8. Yeah I think the skintone is much better with the S1a lut. It's from a hike near Benidorm in Spain.
  9. I purchased the S1 set, and I see what you mean about the colour deviation between the GHa and S1a Luts. I was quite happy with GHa on my S1 footage, but the S1 High Scale Lut looks more vibrant and cleaner to me compared to the GHa Linear conversion. Better colour separation and fidelity. Thanks for your hard work, this is a really valuable tool and a pleasure to use! Footage is 1080p 10 bit from the S1, basic corrections with the luts applied on top, ungraded. Top is S1a, bottom is GHa.
  10. @Sage Is there a discount for Emotive Color packages if you've previously bought the LUTs for another camera? I got the GH5 set and am considering the S1 set.
  11. Don't think this has been posted before - I saw this example from the Emotive Color site, and I genuinely can't believe how good this looks. It must be my favourite example of GH5 footage. Stunning filmlike color. I'd love to know more about how he graded it.
  12. Very excited about your S1 LUTs. I've been using the GH5 luts on my S1 so far and seems to work great. Are the GH5 and S1 luts very different? Do you have any samples of the Lut on the S1 or S1H? I looked on the Emotive Color site and couldn't find any. Thanks for your work and for being a presence on here.
  13. You'd be better off buying that lens, which is 90% of the look of that video. Global shutter probably helps too, but I bet you could get a similar look from the Zcam E2, A7SIII, S1H etc if you had the same glass.
  14. Beautiful work. Can I also ask what sharpening you did and how you exported it? Some of the shots are so sharp and crisp, particularly of the woman near the fire at the end. Looks fantastic. I always struggle to get crisp exports, even when the original footage has very high fidelity. I feel like h264 footage comes out much worse on Vimeo/YT compared to footage recorded in raw or prores for some reason.
  15. It's easy to get FOMO and be distracted by the latest cameras from Canon and Sony (which for me both look fantastic as a run & gun event shooter) but the S1 has a beautiful image which I have yet to fully exploit. Also a far better stills camera than the A7Siii, which is essential for me. I do hope we're getting to a post-camera landscape where all the cameras are so fantastic that we can just stick with what we've got and concentrate on the work. We've probably been there for a few years already, but with the new cameras around right now I certainly have much less envy of Red and Arri users. In most situations, with the right glass, you'd struggle to tell the difference.
  16. I know Andrew isn't always a fan of people just posting Youtube links, but after a while it's nice to see some (what I would consider) cinematic samples of the camera coming out these days. Good to remember with the new Canon announcements that the ceiling for this cam remains incredibly high.
  17. That's exactly what I did. I kept the X-T3 as it's a lovely camera to use and compact, but the S1 beats it in photo and video quality in every way (except autofocus...)
  18. My first impression of your travel video is that you uploaded it in an extremely low bitrate, which does it a big disservice. Could you upload it at 20,000 - 40-000 kbps? I downloaded the ungraded still of the man playing the violin and it also looks like 720p, which again doesn't help. To me, the color space transformed shot looks about right for the lighting, the violinist is obviously very much in the shade, which you've exposed to keep the highlights. I think there's just too much dynamic range in this shot for the camera to expose the skin tones nicely, as they're firmly in the shadows. The good news is that I don't think it looks terrible! If those were the lighting conditions then that's what it was, and the way you exposed it avoids any nasty highlight clipping. If the man was standing in the shade, then it's ok for him to look like he's in the shade. He doesn't have to look like he has a fill light. Maybe try playing with the curves a little to bring up the skin tones if possible, while keeping some blacks.
  19. Yes GHa works very well on my S1 and S1H files using Premiere. I haven't seen a real difference between the two cameras in terms of colour. If I were using Resolve I'd probably go with a color transform node and get it into Arri space or something, but I prefer Premiere so I just drop the Lut over my footage. Generally I need to reduce the exposure on the footage to get the Lut looking good. I tried loading the monitoring LUT into the camera, but it looked awful - probably because the S1 is a different camera to the GH5 obviously. I also tried the native Panasonic LUTs on the footage, but GHa looks a million times better. I like the Linear version personally, then grade from there. Of course I'd love a proper S1 version of GHa too! I think that would be phenomenal... Looking forward to a monitoring lut that works with the S1
  20. Looks great! Love the colours - how did you grade it? Looks Arri-ish
  21. I always think that shooting video is like having to think in 5 dimensions at all times - particularly as a one man band. You're thinking about the 3 physical dimensions you're occupying with your body, your equipment, the physical space of your subject, your environment, where is the light, is the sound ok.. You're also thinking about movement and time - where is something coming from, where is it going, how long is the shot. And you're also projecting part of your mind to the edit, where future-you, or an editor, is sitting down to view your rushes and working out how it all goes together. Added to that any interaction with the subject in a documentary setting where you're also trying to chat, ask questions, capture something real. Yes, it's really hard. Most of the youtubers, for obvious and understandable reasons, create content in environments where they are in control - whether that be standing with a long lens on a tripod where you can pick off shots from a distance, or in their bedrooms. What, for me, it all boils down to is this: The craft and technique and equipment are 2%, and what is happening in front of the camera is 98%. That's why you're probably frustrated if you're reading this with thousands of dollars worth of top equipment around you but nothing to point it at. There are very, very few people who can shoot mundane things and make something great out of it. Not many Dziga Vertovs or Ron Frickes around. An amazing tornado or once in a lifetime sporting play captured on a shit camera is worth 1000x the most beautifully crafted shot of your cat. Perhaps one of the problems is that there are so many people with cameras now in the world, and in actual fact so little of the world is 'cinematic' or lends itself to being filmed. That's not to say there aren't great stories everywhere, but not everything works well on screen. Likewise the reason we enjoy professional movies and tv isn't because they have the best equipment and budgets, although that obviously doesn't hurt. It's because there's millions of dollars in value in front of the camera - the greatest and most beautiful actors, spectacular scenes, great scripts and stories that have taken years of man-hours to craft. Without that, the best DP in the world would have nothing. My final comment on Phillip Bloom - not everything he does is my cup of tea, but he's certainly very skilled and knowledgable. He's had the bravery to put his face and name out there on the internet, and also you may criticise his work for being mostly slow mo shots of people doing nothing shot with a 100-400mm, but to me the fact that it's usually watchable and evocative to some degree is pretty great. As we've all seen in this forum, that's a hard trick to pull off. I've worked solidly for 15 years or so now shooting and editing big sporting events internationally, and doing some corporate, and honestly while I think I'm ok at what I do, if I wasn't shooting something with millions of dollars of value flying past my lens, my work wouldn't be interesting. I'm not what makes it interesting. I try to do personal work sometimes and I find it a struggle and it's never something I'd share here, just memories for my family and friends mainly, or tests for myself. I don't think my daily life is that cinematic or interesting to people on the internet. I've tried to make peace with that.
  22. I feel the same way about the comparison between the S1 and the XT3. I tried so hard to love the XT3, and I do love its form factor and many things about it, but the image quality of the S1 is far superior in both video and stills. In fact, I'm always amazed by how many people rave about the XT3 in reviews. I'm assuming there have been no IQ improvements in the XT4. The XT3 dynamic range is quite lacking in some situations, and the image fidelity - the detail - is kind of mushy and almost phone-quality at time. The biggest deal breaker was the photo quality in raw, which I find to be smeary and lacking in detail. I've used all the raw converters, C1 etc but didn't find anything that got really clean and sharp images. Maybe because I'm comparing APS-C to full frame? The S1 photos are 100% more detailed, although the fuji colour is great. In video the S1 detail, cleanness, dynamic range and colour is in a different league. I'd say the S1, along with the S1H (which I tested for a couple of weeks) is the best video image quality I've seen from any hybrid, and I've tried and owned many. For reference, the best absolute video image quality I've experienced is the Ursa Mini 4.6k which I owned for a year or so. I preferred the image to the Red Epic Dragon. I also had the ZCam E2 for a while which was great, but ultimately I wanted a hybrid camera. The S1 quality in 25fps is as good if not better than the E2 in prores. E2 slow motion - 50fps 4k and above - was far better though.
×
×
  • Create New...