Jump to content

Sekhar

Members
  • Posts

    389
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Sekhar reacted to DBounce in It looks like "video"   
    What exactly does this mean? I used to think that it meant that the image lacked depth. Or perhaps the image looked somehow artificial. But anymore what I think it really means is that the image is clean. The truth is many modern cameras produce clean images, and frankly that's okay. My eyes don't see film grain when I look around at my surroundings. So why do we expect cameras to show this when it's not really there? The so-called "organic feel" is nothing more than distortion. My eyes "are organic", and the images I see with them are free from this grain and other artifacts. 
    This whole "video look" thing reminds me a lot of when CD first came out. Many audiophiles complained that CDs sounded too digital, too clean... Sterile. Some producers even went as far as to add noise and hiss to their digital recordings in an attempt to make them sound more organic. I think that many filmmakers are following in these same footsteps. Trying to make the new digital format appear more like the old noisie, distorted, soft format that they are accustomed to.
    I watched the trailer for Revenant... That's the new movie that was shot on the Alexa 65. It looked wide, it looked impressive. But you what? It didn't look like film? And do you know what else? I really didn't care that it didn't. 
    The truth is, if you are attempting to make your video look more "filmic", what you are really trying to do is make your video look more vintage... You are living in the past... clinging on the a memory of how movies looked when you were a kid. It's not bad to look like video, this is what the Alexa 65 has shown us. 
  2. Like
    Sekhar reacted to ricardo_sousa11 in NX1 won't manual focus - arghhhh...   
    My camera arrived today  
     
    Cant say how thrilled I am to try it (still waiting for the adapters to arrive though), but first impressions are, the camera is really small...I was expecting it to be near the size of the 7D, but its slightly slimmer than my 600D. Construction wise looks sturdy and that screen looks amazing. Cant wait to test my Samyang lenses on this beauty !
  3. Like
    Sekhar reacted to fuzzynormal in Travel videos and 'Staff Picks'   
    Anything with some semblance of a story, really.  Combine that with good cinematography and it should be a winner.
  4. Like
    Sekhar reacted to AaronChicago in ND Filter buying advice   
    Look into a variable ND. It's adds a slight polarizing effect, but it's super convenient.
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=857429&gclid=CLqYvJD46cYCFRCCaQodQF8Nqg&Q=&m=Y&is=REG&A=details
    Use a stepping ring to work with 72mm thread: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/98938-REG/General_Brand_77_72_77mm_72mm_Step_Down_Ring_Lens.html
  5. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from TheRenaissanceMan in ARRI Alexa 65 in new trailer!   
    ​I think Jonesy was being tongue in cheek about the DOF because it's actually quite large in almost all the shots. And yes, the visuals are great, but how exactly is that because of Alexa 65 and its super large sensor? I don't honestly see how you can tell the difference from a YouTube clip. There are a lot of other amazing things going on in the trailer.
  6. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Inazuma in ARRI Alexa 65 in new trailer!   
    ​I think Jonesy was being tongue in cheek about the DOF because it's actually quite large in almost all the shots. And yes, the visuals are great, but how exactly is that because of Alexa 65 and its super large sensor? I don't honestly see how you can tell the difference from a YouTube clip. There are a lot of other amazing things going on in the trailer.
  7. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from tosvus in ARRI Alexa 65 in new trailer!   
    ​I think Jonesy was being tongue in cheek about the DOF because it's actually quite large in almost all the shots. And yes, the visuals are great, but how exactly is that because of Alexa 65 and its super large sensor? I don't honestly see how you can tell the difference from a YouTube clip. There are a lot of other amazing things going on in the trailer.
  8. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from tosvus in ARRI Alexa 65 in new trailer!   
    ​Ebrahim, you clearly like the camera. I can't argue with your opinion that the difference in quality shows even on this YouTube clip, because it's an opinion. But I don't think you supported it with anything factual other than saying that the large sensor makes it possible to shoot wide shoots with less distortion. I don't believe that's accurate. As I understand, differences in distortion come from lens design. With the same design, whether you use a small frame with a wide lens or a large frame with longer lens, as long as you get the same field of view you're going to have the same level of distortion. So, frame size plays no part other than letting you go wider with the same lens. I may be wrong though, please point to a credible source if I am.
  9. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Jonesy Jones in ARRI Alexa 65 in new trailer!   
    ​I think Jonesy was being tongue in cheek about the DOF because it's actually quite large in almost all the shots. And yes, the visuals are great, but how exactly is that because of Alexa 65 and its super large sensor? I don't honestly see how you can tell the difference from a YouTube clip. There are a lot of other amazing things going on in the trailer.
  10. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Nikkor in ARRI Alexa 65 in new trailer!   
    ​Ebrahim, you clearly like the camera. I can't argue with your opinion that the difference in quality shows even on this YouTube clip, because it's an opinion. But I don't think you supported it with anything factual other than saying that the large sensor makes it possible to shoot wide shoots with less distortion. I don't believe that's accurate. As I understand, differences in distortion come from lens design. With the same design, whether you use a small frame with a wide lens or a large frame with longer lens, as long as you get the same field of view you're going to have the same level of distortion. So, frame size plays no part other than letting you go wider with the same lens. I may be wrong though, please point to a credible source if I am.
  11. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from jpfilmz in Some new Canon XC10 footage   
    ​Yes, sharper than 1080p, but we're talking 4K here: it's supposed to be 4x the resolution, you need to raise your bar a bit. 4K out of say NX1 puts this to shame. Going by the footage jpfilmz posted, it almost looks like there's a diffusion filter (it has the soft, misty look even if more detailed than 1080p)...unless the jpfilmz crew actually slapped on a filter of some sort. Or it's just the usual Canon soft look.
  12. Like
    Sekhar reacted to Andrew Reid in Some new Canon XC10 footage   
    I'd suggest it is a bit of a stretch to compare the XC10's footage to other Cinema EOS cameras that shoot 4K like the 1D C I champion and the now available C300 Mk II...
    Just because it has a Cinema EOS badge on it doesn't mean it is going to match up in post to the 1D C.
    And certainly doesn't mean it will have a better image than the RX10 II...
    Well, we will find out... today. Just bought a RX10 II.
  13. Like
    Sekhar reacted to Julian in Samsung NX1: Firmware Update Version 1.32   
    Not very realistic to expect a major firmware update every month.
    At least they are solving some bugs quickly.
  14. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from The Chris in Using 4K to simulate two-camera shoot (and other things)   
    I had a chance to cover an amateur fashion show over the July 4th weekend at a local (Anaheim, CA) cultural event. I had only my NX1 and thought I'd share a few of the interesting uses I found for shooting in 4K. My video is at https://youtu.be/PsHTzuANSHo.
    4K on 1080p sequence will give you a free (and great quality) zoom. And that lets you go wide (by scaling the 4K at 50%) and then tight (by going to 100%). Which gives you:
    A way to fake a two-camera shoot. See the first part where the adults do the walk and you see the wide and tights shots back/forth. Or you get just go tight without a zoom, like I did in the girls (100%) or boys (~60%) sections. You can get just the composition you want after the fact by cropping as needed. You can also fake a zoom in/out and pan to cover the people you want as I was forced to do in a few places. What I'm saying is: even if you don't care for 4K, shooting in 4K can be of real/practical help/use. Let me know your thoughts. And please go easy on the models, they were just attendees and their kids.
  15. Like
    Sekhar reacted to fuzzynormal in Stabilizers: cheap vs expensive?   
    Here's some stabilized footage I shot a few days back for a goofy corporate gig.  Might give you an idea how certain moves and some very basic shots can be enhanced with the technology:
     
     
  16. Like
    Sekhar reacted to IronFilm in Anxious about getting a new camera   
    I recommend you put completely 100% out of your head any thoughts about how "future proof" your ability to use your camera in 5 years will be. 

    We're moving at a far too fast a pace for that to matter. And cameras are far too cheap for that to matter. 
     Instead pick what is right for you right now. (or perhaps in the next 6 months, or 12 months, but don't be looking any further out than that)
    Look at a couple of examples:

    Sony PMW-F3 is a camera that I just purchased last week for not much more than a grand, yet less than five years ago this camera cost US$20,000! (when you factor in the s-log upgrade) This was one of the hottest cameras back then, and was very very pricey.

    Now consider the Panasonic GH2, also only less than 5 years old, and also was for its time the hottest camera around and cost a not terribly dissimilar amount to what a GH4/NX1 costs today. How much do they go for now? Only a couple of hundred bucks or so.

    Conclusion: in 5 years time you'll be able to pick up the (former) hottest tech for pennies on the dollar, and also you'll be able to affordably buy new tech which is leaps and bounds ahead of it.
  17. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from sandro in Using 4K to simulate two-camera shoot (and other things)   
    I had a chance to cover an amateur fashion show over the July 4th weekend at a local (Anaheim, CA) cultural event. I had only my NX1 and thought I'd share a few of the interesting uses I found for shooting in 4K. My video is at https://youtu.be/PsHTzuANSHo.
    4K on 1080p sequence will give you a free (and great quality) zoom. And that lets you go wide (by scaling the 4K at 50%) and then tight (by going to 100%). Which gives you:
    A way to fake a two-camera shoot. See the first part where the adults do the walk and you see the wide and tights shots back/forth. Or you get just go tight without a zoom, like I did in the girls (100%) or boys (~60%) sections. You can get just the composition you want after the fact by cropping as needed. You can also fake a zoom in/out and pan to cover the people you want as I was forced to do in a few places. What I'm saying is: even if you don't care for 4K, shooting in 4K can be of real/practical help/use. Let me know your thoughts. And please go easy on the models, they were just attendees and their kids.
  18. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from IronFilm in Using 4K to simulate two-camera shoot (and other things)   
    I had a chance to cover an amateur fashion show over the July 4th weekend at a local (Anaheim, CA) cultural event. I had only my NX1 and thought I'd share a few of the interesting uses I found for shooting in 4K. My video is at https://youtu.be/PsHTzuANSHo.
    4K on 1080p sequence will give you a free (and great quality) zoom. And that lets you go wide (by scaling the 4K at 50%) and then tight (by going to 100%). Which gives you:
    A way to fake a two-camera shoot. See the first part where the adults do the walk and you see the wide and tights shots back/forth. Or you get just go tight without a zoom, like I did in the girls (100%) or boys (~60%) sections. You can get just the composition you want after the fact by cropping as needed. You can also fake a zoom in/out and pan to cover the people you want as I was forced to do in a few places. What I'm saying is: even if you don't care for 4K, shooting in 4K can be of real/practical help/use. Let me know your thoughts. And please go easy on the models, they were just attendees and their kids.
  19. Like
    Sekhar reacted to Nick Hughes in Subforum idea - User Reviews   
    I don't think it's necessary to change anything. People post their own reviews on the main forum from time to time. If it's a well-writen and thought-out, it gets plenty of good attention.
  20. Like
    Sekhar reacted to agolex in Do specifications mean anything regarding cameras' performance? A research.   
    Different people, different decision making, eh. I'd never follow any guide on what to purchase, but there sure is lots of people who do, especially many of the more academically minded. As always, we're just patting shoulders or bashing skulls, so let's keep going.
  21. Like
    Sekhar reacted to Volker Schmidt in Mosaic VAF-5D2... B version.   
    Yes, as Ebrahim said; when shooting raw, internal sharpening is useless. You make it in the post.

    Back to the question Ty: I´ve had the same question, a few years ago (VAF-5d or newer version) and also don´t found informations or reviews about it.
    My advice: If you can get a VAF used, regardless of the version - buy it! It´s worth the money!

    I think, the overall image quality of both versions are the same but if you like to use wider lenses then 24mm here the b-version is the better one. I have the original version and when I shoot 24mm with my Canon 24-70 the corners are less sharp, but no problem for me: looks a bit like anamorphic shooting:). My Minolta 24mm on the other hand is sharp even in the corners. 
    In short: regardless of the version - the VAF is worth the money. it eliminated the 5dmk2 issues very well!
    if you want to shoot wider then 24mm - the b-version should be your choice.
    I have a lot of tests on my vimeo site. Here is one for example:
     
  22. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Ty Harper in Mosaic VAF-5D2... B version.   
    I bought one for my 6D but had to send it back. It removed the hideous 6D moire very well, so it absolutely works. But it had a fatal flaw for me: it loses focus each time you change zoom. If you shoot with primes or don't zoom much, then this would be great; otherwise, you might want to think this through.
  23. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Ty Harper in Mosaic VAF-5D2... B version.   
    ​I thought it softened the image a bit, though it's possible I just felt that way after it got rid of all the moire. Still, using the filter + sharpening in post would give a better image than not using the filter. Even if softer, the image was more organic.
    It all depends on what you want to do. If you do docs and events and can't control what's in the scene, then yes moire will be an issue, and you'll need this filter with 5D2. But then, why stick to 5D2 when you have much better options today? I got NX1 a month back, and the 4K video from that makes my 6D video look like garbage...with or without a filter. IMO even a $700 NX500 would be better for video even if it isn't FF. Also, if you plan to go back/forth between video and stills, you'll have a problem because you'll need to remove the filter to shoot stills.
    Bottom line, ff you're doing narrative work and can control what's in the scene, then getting the filter doesn't make much sense I think. I was using CineStyle with the corresponding settings on my 6D, and those alone did a great job in reducing moire/aliasing from the defaults. So either that with your 5D2 or a different camera would work better for feature stuff.
  24. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Ed_David in New short shot on Red Weapon   
    I wish the edit focused more on him. The way it is now, it seems more about her than the patient. Unless I'm missing something.
  25. Like
    Sekhar got a reaction from Julian in First narrative film shot in moonlight Sony A7s   
    ​That is an odd thing to say in a discussion forum, where we should be sharing views/opinions without fear of derision/ridicule. Remember, it is also just your opinion that "the makers of this production are several orders of magnitude above (his) current artistic skill level," not a consensus. Even if it were, if we're to critique someone/something only if everybody agrees we're better (and therefore qualified to critique), then nothing constructive would ever happen.
×
×
  • Create New...