Zach Goodwin2

Here is one dark selfie of me:

A couple from the 7Artisans 35mm f2 M mount on its new friend the Sigma FP.
This is a pretty good value for money lens and its diminutive size makes it a good combination with the FP.

New photo taken with Edmika FD 35-105 F/3.5 Canon T2i,

Got my Sony  F3, excited to use it on shoots.

Voigtlander 40mm with Promist Filter

 
Voigtlander 40mm, no filter. 

one edward scissorhands reboot coming up😁 do a parody. Have the barber talk about the intricacies and styling  of cutting someones hair,  while he absolutely mauls a rose bush with a set of choppers or hedge trimmer perhaps 😉

ohhh, very cool!
yeah, I'd say get the owners story, do some pan and scan on some old photos of him doing his thing, see if u can shoot him actually cutting hair with some customers, and film them as well...! get some regular customers saying how much they like Don the barber, etc...

It's a barber shop.

yes! what's the business-- bakery? tax preparation?
regardless, you wanna make it personal, all about the business owner and their personal story, putting smiles on faces, etc etc
 

Alright I have talked to the small business man, and he has agreed to help me with filming him. I will say that I will be patient with the process and having to film this will take a good amount of time, and also there will be a lot happening during this time, so again I have to be patient. Is there any advice you all have in filming a small business for an advertisement on Facebook and Youtube?

I'm working up to this.  I find that the GH5 viewfinder has served me well with good visibility in bright sunlight, but I've moved to using the flip-out screen as I can't see nearly as much and have to develop other ways to got framing right.  I hope to progress to being able to use a camera without any video at all one day, and that's why I bought the Micro - at some point I just know that I'll have to take the plunge and leave the house without any monitor for it at all and then I'll be forced to compose, exposure and focus blind.  It might take me some time to really build my skills that way, but it's worth it in the end I think.

Thank fuck for live view!!

Film cameras at least have viewfinders. You still have to check your framing and composition.

You're probably too young to have seen some of the work of the classic British photographers of the 1960s Zach but some of them reached such a level of mastery of the maths that they didn't even have to point the camera at the subject.
This guy is a good example and its worth digging out the longer form of this documentary about him to see where you could go with these techniques yourself.
 

Thank for your saying what I'd have said!

Also, if you produce a film and expect one person to be your entire sound department, then "this" (monitoring without headphones) is kinda what is going on an uncomfortably large proportion of the time!

As booming is right up there with the 1st AC as the two toughest technical crew jobs on set. 

So you'll have most of your focus on booming during a take (especially if it is something really tricky, such as an unrehearsed roving gimbal shot with lots of bouncing dialogue. Or worse, improv dialogue!), which doesn't leave much spare attention to focus in on listening to the headphones you're wearing. Also, the usual setup is boom into my left ear and all the wireless into my right ear (because you're listening out for completely different things on the boom channel vs wireless during a take, thus you separate them). 

Ever tried watching half a dozen video monitors displayed on a single monitor? No, not with a stack of neat little boxes within the monitor screen for each individual camera feed, this is with all six camera feeds overlaid on top of each other! A garbled mixed up picture. 
Sounds like total nonsense huh? How could you even judge exposure for each one individually, or know if it is framed precisely accurately, or if there is a stray coffee cup in the frame or not, or if the skin tones are good?

Welcome to my world. 

Of course with a good base of theoretical knowledge (such as @Zach Goodwin2 started this thread about) and your gut feeling (built up over years of experience), then you can dial in your settings during setup pretty well and fly along on auto pilot. 

And the more expertise you pick up, the better your "auto pilot" can be during a take itself while booming it.

For instance if I hear a spike in clothing rustle in my right ear (if I hear it in my left ear.... we've got a MAJOR costume issue! Which should've been addressed in pre-production ideally), should I freak out? Well, if I see out of the corner of my eye a couple of the actors hugging in the scene, but they were not the ones with dialogue during that same moment of clothing rustle, then I can probably feel confident the ISO track of the speaker at the moment was fine itself. (and if I've got the boom spot on, I can be even more confident there is nothing to worry about for the edit!)

Plus between takes, when you've got free hands, you can be more attentively listening out for problems to nip them in the bud before it develops into a real issue. And you can be checking playback, doing PFL to check if the vital tracks are all sweet. Although.... if you're flying solo, you often might not have time to scrub through playback and listen to the parts you want to. As you're also got to be standing by ready, and able to respond to any changes.
(this is also why sticking to on set protocols and not deviating from the usual patterns is important, for example I could be listening to playback of the previous take with my ears but my eyes are on the 1st AD. Waiting to see him say "turnover", but if this take the director or cam op decides to shout "roll sound" instead I might never know! I can't hear them. And I'm not looking at them either. So there I am standing looking like a deaf idiot due to not hearing them as they "wait on sound" because they didn't follow normal procedure of the 1st AD calling it out. Of course I'll eventually clue in, but it is quite frustrating & embarrassing. This could be avoided if boom op and sound mixer are kept as two separate roles)

So, could one person be the entire sound department for a film? Well heck, you have old school street photographers shooting with film, relying on the theoretical and their gut instinct, not even needing light meters!

So it is "doable", but is it a good idea? Nope. 

You wouldn't ever run the camera department like that in this day and age. 

If you wouldn't dream of rolling up cam op / 1st AC / gaffer all into one role, then please don't do this for sound either. 
 

Narcissism to it's maximum, is this some kind of parody?

Well yeah of course it can be:

 

 


And this is all without one of these which you may need, a light meter:
 
 

But here again it is very easy to take a picture on an iPhone, just pull it out, go to camera, click to focus, and then press a button.

Calculate the field of view:
https://www.scantips.com/lights/fieldofview.html
Use the Hyperfocal Distance:
https://www.photopills.com/calculators/dof
Rely on the Sunny 16 rule:
http://anderphotography.com/workshops/astrophoto/exposure.html
Use a manual lens and measure from the sensor to the subject:

Use White Balance Presets and use them based on the time of the day:

 

lol at the same time this is the exact same thing as recording audio for video and not monitoring it with headphones. 

The only money I make is from a part-time job and I am a part-time student as well. Filmmaking when you are starting out does not pay well, because well the competition is these professional music videos for pop singers and these Hollywood movies despite how negative that sounds. We are like the indie bands at a rock concert where the majority of the audience wants to see the main bands.

If you're an indie filmmaker, then I highly highly recommend checking out HitFilm Pro! 
https://www.facebook.com/groups/426174967509293/
https://fxhome.com/hitfilm-pro

I think that everything starts with inspiration as motivation - so, my suggestion would be to watch tutorials about manipulation and effects in 3D space done with Fusion, Nuke, Flame (how to change background, tracking components, even how to make enough visually suggestive simulated 3D objects from 2D images via projection maps etc). Although great and best for fast 2D effects, AE is not as much suitable for proper 3D, but has tone of ready made templates, great plugins. Also, for everything higher than several layers/intervention, nodal structure or 'tree'  becomes more and more suitable.
So Fusion for obvious integration with Resolve, Nuke still a bit more if you really plan to get a job into big industry players, Flame if you like to feel yourself as noble and elite member as it could be. UI logic of Flame is for me pick of the software aesthetic. Of course, there's also powerful Mistika, but it becomes, I'd say, nowadays more exotic than really differentiated.
Besides, I found that nodal thinking in accomplishing 3D tasks is the most interesting encounter of logic and creativity in all software's usage. (If you wish to happily lost your mind in endless possibilities as, say, top chess players - than go into cosmos of Sidefx Houdini.)

there's a LOT of options, if you're a bit familiar with AE, I'd start there...! you can do an incomprehensible amount of stuff in AE, and it's a bit more approachable than Fusion, for example, or some of your other options
what is your intended use? if you need to make full 3D characters that's another story...

@Anaconda_ didn't you recently buy a Canon zoom? If so, the Canon 85mm 1.8 may match better.
I briefly had the lens and it is really nice, especially for the money. I ended up selling it because I don't use the focal length that often. Here's a shot from my film with it to give you an idea...

With that said, I've heard great things about the EX Sigma as well. Their 50mm from that line is supposed to be excellent as well, so you could build an inexpensive f/1.4 set eventually.
I believe they also have a 20mm, 24mm and 28mm at f/1.8.

Heyy guys!!!
so, I had an epiphany~! (maybe)
it seems to me that if you wanna make money on youtube, you need to, above all else, upload constantly. like, at least weekly, right? some ppl have a new video every frickin day, or more than one~! ive never had the vaguest ambition to do anything like that, im not about filming stuff all the time, u kno? i like to do the opposite, film stuff never ?
anyway, i have a new lil st bernard pup, and people LOVE st bernards~! and on top of that my other dog is a beast of a hybrid st bernard/great dane/mastiff, so...
instead of JUST taking stills of the lil guy as hes growing up, why not shoot some videos? i live in a beautiful forest, i think theyd be great~!
they may be glorified home videos, but who cares~! i mean, I'M on youtube searching for st bernards myself lol. and ill update it all the time with lil fun clips, and weekly weigh ins ?
so, i need youtube tips!!! help me yall!!! i need to make some money for my next film and i suck at illustrating childrens books i hate it smh. how do i get hundreds of thousands or millions of views so i can serve up youtubes precious ads to the masses

addendum: heres a video woth 7.9 million views
but as you can see, that channel only has 14k subscribers... from what ive read you need 10k subscribers just to monetize videos at all, is that correct? ugh that sucks!

Well, I may need to tidy up and organize my room. Here is a photograph of my cat in my dresser, taken on the Canon FD 35-105 F/3.5 on the Canon T2i.