Snowfun

To be fair Jon, that was a totally, absolutely, ridiculous reply... ?
Here is one of my favorite cinematic a7s videos...
 

Looking forward to watching hipsters jumping off cliffs into azure seas with their $1000 iPhones on selfie sticks, later telling the insurance company that renowned DoP @Ed_David 'said it was a GoPro killer'.

Variation...
The dream recording facility record Jewel's dreams as above. But rather than the (too predictable?) sex based fantasy they find... nothing. Absolutely nothing. Devoid of soul, emotion, thoughts or apparent consciousness whilst asleep. Jewel is fine when awake - she displays the full plethora of human emotions and functions entirely normally. 
But when asleep: nothing. 
Almost as if... (but that's as far as I got...)

I am finding this incredibly useful at the moment:
https://www.reddit.com/r/nosleep/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WritingPrompts/
There's some real amateur talent on these subs, and occasionally an idea surfaces that sparks off all kinds of brilliant writing.
I suggest if you are feeling creative and want to write film ideas, to join in.
I am writing one at the moment, which is partly inspired by Black Mirror: San Junipero.
I found the build up in that episode a bit too cliched, but it turns into an absolutely killer idea by the end. Watch it. Very very moving!
---
Here's my (rather long) film writing prompt if anyone wants to pick up on it...
"DREAMS WE DON'T REMEMBER"
A technology arrives which records our dreams and allows us to interact with our deepest unconscious characters and situations. Jewel, a student, joins a research company’s paid trial. It is disguised in the ads as a drugs trial but turns out to be run by the corporation behind the dream-recording technology. Jewel is invited to test a new version of the technology and after a particularly disturbing dream we don’t know the contents of and Jewel can’t remember, she is forced to reenact it vividly using a new experimental brain-machine interface which accidentally sends her into a coma. In the problematic dream Jewel is being turned from a human into a machine by a primitive 1970's computer engineer who stabs a screwdriver and soldering iron around in her open chest torn apart, her skeleton rearranged into a box-like shape to accommodate a rack of circuit boards and wires.
Now inside the life-threatening coma, Jewel comes to believe she’s truly a computer. She feels the currents running through various wires inside her, her vision feels digital, like a flickering virtual reality headset and when she’s touched by the user, she feels their hands on her, pressing physical buttons and keys, to give her instructions on how to behave. She starts to develop an emotional and physical attachment with her 'owner', the man who is using her as his computer.
She wakes from her coma and unbeknown to the doctors helping her, the corporation has been recording her hallucinations in the coma - all the disturbing details of it. They use the data to reconstruct a virtual version of Jewel in the form of a feminine machine, a cyberpunk replicant, to be used to satisfy the sexual urges of their own computer scientists behind closed doors. After weeks of abuse the replicant escapes into the real world and tracks down Jewel’s home where she’s recovering in the company of her close family and boyfriend.
In front of her family, the replicant tells Jewel everything that happened in the coma and what the company has done to create the ‘virtual’ Jewel. The details of her deepest unconscious thoughts and upsettingly dark hallucinations create serious problems with her family and boyfriend, and it appears for most of the coma she’s fantasising about having passionate sex with her boyfriend's boss. Jewel is embarrassed and distraught, eventually alone and shunned by her family and boyfriend. With suicidal thoughts one evening, she steals the dream-recording machine from a research lab and tries to influence her dreams to repent for the sins in her unconscious.
She fails to have a more positive dream and feels disgusted when watching back the recording, whilst immersed in the futuristic VR brain-machine interface, a tear falls cinematically down her cheek, just as the replicant Jewel puts her hand on her shoulder in a gesture of comfort...
TBC

The problem with this is that there is no definition of the "we". There are a plethora of groups who claim to know a (if not "the") "better way". There is, of course, neither evidence that any one of these is any better than any other nor, indeed, an improvement over the current state. By whose criteria might this be judged? Obviously "my" ideas are the best IFF the criteria are my own. And ultimately that's all that is being said here.
One of the intriguing aspects of this is that, unlike  a clinical trial, there is no control group - you can't test things empirically under identical conditions. In the UK, for example, it can never be tested whether Brexit will make things "better" (whatever that means).  So it is all speculation. And speculation dressed up as "evidence" or as a means to legitimise a minority interest is equally as dangerous as the flaws of our current system.
Yes, "we" (a collection of individuals satisfies the condition - we don't need a label) must strive always to change things for the better. But let's not perpetuate the myth that there is one defined "better way" nor, worse, that any one individual knows what that is.
It's like colour grading - yes we can all try to improve but we'll never agree on the "best" outcome or style or "look" (this sentence added in the illusionary hope of making this relevant to a filming forum!)
Tim

iPhone (because I always have it)
Sony rx1004 (for convenience)
BM Micro (my preference but very inconvenient - I bought the Olympus 9mm body cap and that's great fun).

I switched from the Pocket and BM 2.5 cinema to 2 Micros. Really happy with the setup (smallHD and BMVA for monitors mounted on smallrig cages).
Olympus 12-100, Panasonic 15, Olympus 9mm (the body cap lens).
But hobby use only!

I switched from the Pocket and BM 2.5 cinema to 2 Micros. Really happy with the setup (smallHD and BMVA for monitors mounted on smallrig cages).
Olympus 12-100, Panasonic 15, Olympus 9mm (the body cap lens).
But hobby use only!

I switched from the Pocket and BM 2.5 cinema to 2 Micros. Really happy with the setup (smallHD and BMVA for monitors mounted on smallrig cages).
Olympus 12-100, Panasonic 15, Olympus 9mm (the body cap lens).
But hobby use only!

@jcs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2642860/
Just 2 papers which question the wisdom of blindly applying animal models to a human context. UG stuff. Totally irrelevant to these fora but you did ask.
The fact that you "studied" something is irrelevant. I have studied the spec sheet of a Red epic. Does that make me an "expert" in the art of  cinematography? On your logic, yes. I wish! 
Your approach to the scientific method is flawed. A good scientist presents evidence FOR his or her proposition. They do not demand that someone produces evidence to the contrary. (Unicorns exist. If you don't accept that prove that they don't. Reductio ad absurdum).  And evidence in this respect isn't a collection of random copy'n'paste from a variety of sources (rarely peer reviewed).  
You mention refraining from alcohol. Generally good advice (as witnessed elsewhere by Kaylee's story). But remember
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/drink-fuelled-nations-art
Always a counter-example!
But this is impinging on my day job and it's dull. I apologise for treating your posts like one of my student essays! 
On a not totally unrelated note - you don't by any chance have direct experience of comparing high ISO footage on the C200 compared to your C300ii do you? (I think you have the latter?) I'd be interested to learn more about that as I'm thinking of a C200.
Tim

@jcs. No.
The vox pop report you quote refers to an animal study based on the effects of THC. It is easy to copy'n'paste "scientific evidence" - less straightforward to apply and interpret research findings in an appropriate way. 
Of course, such substances (THC and CBD) may benefit creativity in a variety of other ways!

Absolutely right about the "forum for friends"! I used the term "demand" as in "require" not in any aggressive or confrontational manner. Apologies if that didn't come across.
Thank you for the video link - it's on topic insofar as it's about learning! But, granted, tenuous at best. I know the advice given here is frequently "rent before you buy" but it's not always that easy so engaging with users is possibly the next best thing.
Tim

@jcs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2642860/
Just 2 papers which question the wisdom of blindly applying animal models to a human context. UG stuff. Totally irrelevant to these fora but you did ask.
The fact that you "studied" something is irrelevant. I have studied the spec sheet of a Red epic. Does that make me an "expert" in the art of  cinematography? On your logic, yes. I wish! 
Your approach to the scientific method is flawed. A good scientist presents evidence FOR his or her proposition. They do not demand that someone produces evidence to the contrary. (Unicorns exist. If you don't accept that prove that they don't. Reductio ad absurdum).  And evidence in this respect isn't a collection of random copy'n'paste from a variety of sources (rarely peer reviewed).  
You mention refraining from alcohol. Generally good advice (as witnessed elsewhere by Kaylee's story). But remember
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/drink-fuelled-nations-art
Always a counter-example!
But this is impinging on my day job and it's dull. I apologise for treating your posts like one of my student essays! 
On a not totally unrelated note - you don't by any chance have direct experience of comparing high ISO footage on the C200 compared to your C300ii do you? (I think you have the latter?) I'd be interested to learn more about that as I'm thinking of a C200.
Tim

@jcs
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902221/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2642860/
Just 2 papers which question the wisdom of blindly applying animal models to a human context. UG stuff. Totally irrelevant to these fora but you did ask.
The fact that you "studied" something is irrelevant. I have studied the spec sheet of a Red epic. Does that make me an "expert" in the art of  cinematography? On your logic, yes. I wish! 
Your approach to the scientific method is flawed. A good scientist presents evidence FOR his or her proposition. They do not demand that someone produces evidence to the contrary. (Unicorns exist. If you don't accept that prove that they don't. Reductio ad absurdum).  And evidence in this respect isn't a collection of random copy'n'paste from a variety of sources (rarely peer reviewed).  
You mention refraining from alcohol. Generally good advice (as witnessed elsewhere by Kaylee's story). But remember
http://www.tate.org.uk/context-comment/articles/drink-fuelled-nations-art
Always a counter-example!
But this is impinging on my day job and it's dull. I apologise for treating your posts like one of my student essays! 
On a not totally unrelated note - you don't by any chance have direct experience of comparing high ISO footage on the C200 compared to your C300ii do you? (I think you have the latter?) I'd be interested to learn more about that as I'm thinking of a C200.
Tim

The term "Guardian Reader" is often used to describe a "champagne socialist". The sort of person who happily debates social inequality over a glass or two whilst warming in front of an Aga in their £500,000 kitchen renovation.
The sort of person who might make a mini doc about the homeless on their personal Red in the hope of changing social attitudes.
Not something to be taken too seriously...

The term "Guardian Reader" is often used to describe a "champagne socialist". The sort of person who happily debates social inequality over a glass or two whilst warming in front of an Aga in their £500,000 kitchen renovation.
The sort of person who might make a mini doc about the homeless on their personal Red in the hope of changing social attitudes.
Not something to be taken too seriously...

I'm joking guys.

That's what it says on the box (apparently - not seen one) so that's good enough! Please, no more Nyquist...

That's what it says on the box (apparently - not seen one) so that's good enough! Please, no more Nyquist...

There is, I hope, more to being a Mod than having the ability to delete or lock or otherwise censor threads. It might be useful if one of the criteria for being a mod was a demonstrable interest in answering questions posed by interested (and often interesting) beginners and/or more experienced filmmakers - to have made a positive contribution and helped people. Not my place to determine whether Ed fits that. 
Tim

It'll be released on the 29th of September.
Pricing for the hardware will be around £50 depending on where you get it and what you may already have.
Price for the software will be £0.00/€0.00/$9.99
 

Does this board even have moderators?

If smartphone film making does take over, I wonder how long it will be before people start posting about the iPhone 12S or whatever it'll be being a bit too clinical and adapting the lenses from iPhone 5s because its got more mojo 
Or hipsters going all Lomo with old Soviet mobile phones 
 

Bastards.

I'd be careful when going too "budget". I have bought three cheap sliders. They wobble and stick and are just generally unpleasant to use. If I'd been more sensible I think I'd have bought a (cheapest) Kessler in the first place...