Jump to content

Kurtisso

Members
  • Content Count

    92
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kurtisso


  1. If you are considering an XPS, do give these links a quick perusing. I only included a couple forums about the same problem on a specific model, if you google further I'm sure you will find much much more!

    Dell XPS 9570 Audio Fun Fun Fun Forums!

    MORE FUNS

    I understand these stories all too well...

    Specs and "benchmarks" are great, as long as your computer works and continues to work past the refund policy date. ? 


  2. 16 hours ago, jonpais said:

    If you even bothered to read the title of the topic, it says "Actually you can make the GH5 look very cinematic!" As I'd already seen a number of nicely exposed and graded examples of the GH5, my expectations were pretty high, particularly when deezid is claiming to have achieved something that apparently nobody thought possible before. So yes, the first thing I noticed was that on a technical level, it comes nowhere near the level of filmmaking I'm accustomed to seeing, and falls a little short of being an exemplary piece of digital filmmaking. Lighting, WB and grading are part of the language of cinema, just as spelling and grammar are in literature: and if a book has a number of misspelled words and poor grammar, I'm probably going to put it down. There's no reason why I should have to re-calibrate my monitor when the thousands of other videos I've watched, as well as the hundreds of others I've uploaded, look good. And if a half dozen forum members say that the blacks might be a little crushed, rather than reacting defensively, deezid might take those responses into consideration and think about lifting the shadows a touch. And although this has been shot in 10 bit V-Log, because it's been underexposed, there is actually very little dynamic range in the picture - the colors are flat, there is little gradation between tones. There is another aspect that is distracting, most likely not something that can be corrected in post, and that is that not only is the image soft, but the out of focus areas and bokeh are distracting: and my eye is constantly drawn to unimportant background details rather than to the subjects.

    Hahaha oh my... I don't think deezid's choice on shadow levels is equivalent to "misspelled words and poor grammar". That's a bit much.


  3. 38 minutes ago, deezid said:

    The choice of "crushed" shadows (not really crushed, check waveform, but strong compression and pulled down to 0-3 IRE range) was an artistic one to achieve a very vibrant, dark and colorful look. ;)

    I think you achieved that look, some very beautiful stuff!

    Aside from stylistically not having a problem with the alleged "crushed" shadows, I didn't see any problems compositionally/graphically with that either. Bear in mind that I only watched the concept trailer once, but I didn't come across a moment where I felt like I needed more information in the shadows to tell me more. We decide what we want to show, and what we want to conceal. To all the people that think you needed to show more "information in the shadows", would it be preferred to shoot the entire film with a fisheye to give the most information that way too? Maybe just do it in VR? Do a grid system to show multiple takes at the same time? Then we can have all the information :thumbsup:!!!

    On a serious note though, hope the concept trailer gets you and your team the feature, it looks promising!


  4. I use a 2012 15" macbook pro retina, 2.6ghz i7, 16gb ram and GeForce GT 650m. DaVinci Resolve absolutely HATES this. Adding a key and mask here and there with a layer of Noise Reduction (neatvideo ofx) on 4k r3d causes my computer to explode on export. Just pure static of excellent rainbow coloured varieties.

    Now after throwing an Akitio node with a GTX 1070 in there... It exports very smoothly. So in that regards, it is a complete necessity for me, giving my 2012 laptop a few more years of overachieving! Also, for those using a program like Catalyst Browse for GH5 10-bit workarounds, the eGPU makes a huge difference there too.


  5. How about a medium format to m4/3 0.4x? :grimace:

    Seriously though, the GH5 has so many options depending on which glass you mainly own. If you mainly rent, just rent the different adapters along with.

    If you have FF glass, get the 0.64x XL. I did that and it works great. You can punch in to 1.4x TC mode too ;) 

    If you have Aps-c glass, get the 0.71x ultra. If you have PL s35 glass and you are going from PL-EF-m4/3, make sure the lens actually fits with the metabones optics, or smashy smashy.

    If you have s16/16mm glass, get the c-mount/PL/arri to m4/3 you need and punch in with that TC (either 1.4x or 2x, depending on the image circle of your particular lens). 

     


  6. On 2017-04-27 at 2:04 PM, PannySVHS said:

    Hey, I don´t want to bother, since I cannot afford this set, but why do you want to sell this beautiful camera? If I had the money I´d buy it :)

    A couple related things. I'm looking to go back to school next year without getting crushed by student loans. I don't get to use this magnificent camera for my work that often, so it's more of a luxury that I'm sure someone else could make much better use of. I've never seen better colours come out of a camera, and guys like Olan Collardy are really putting it to work.

    So yeah, if I had the extra money lying around to keep it I would too!


  7. Hi all, I am selling my lovely Digital Bolex kit. It took me awhile to put it together and get it ready for the big show, so I would like to send it to a good home. Optimally, I would be able to send both the camera kit and the lens kit together, but I am willing to separate the 2. The Cooke zoom can be separated from the Super Speed prime set, but that prime set cannot be broken apart.

    *Camera Kit*
    Digital Bolex D16 2TB
    Native C-Mount
    Native m4/3 mount
    PL to M4/3 Adapter
    Zeiss CP.2 shims to shim the PL adapter for accurate focus
    Customized Rubber Skin
    Assorted Side Panels (Different Colours)
    Shark Hood Monitor Mirror
    Pistol Grip With Record Trigger
    USB Cord
    XLR - D-tap coiled power cord
    XLR - AC power cord
    Trigger Cover

    *Lens Kit*
    3 Arri B - PL adapters
    Cooke Varokinetal 9-50mm T2.5 Cine Zoom (Covers 16mm sized sensor but can be adapted to s16 size image circle with Abakus adapter --not included but I can point you in the direction to acquire)
    Zeiss S16 Super Speed T1.3 Prime Kit (0.6x Aspheron, 9.5mm, low contrast 12mm with rear optic coating removed to fix excessive cleaning marks, 16mm, 25mm) with vintage metal case.

    If you are in Canada, I might be able to send you 2x 130wh Gold Mount broadcast batteries via ground shipping too. They make that 2TB Bolex an all-day monster.

    Feel free to PM me for any inquiries such as price and condition of items etc...

    5902399ddff4b_BolexKitLenses.thumb.jpg.875b3741d29cc8f1859e4885402e0219.jpg


  8. On 2017-03-27 at 11:25 AM, Ed_David said:

     I just find RAW gives me better highlight information overall, especially on the Ursa Mini, and  it is nice to worry about color temp after shooting on a doc, not during it, as you move quickly between locations, and light changes quickly.

    This exactly. Shooting RAW actually makes sense for doc approach. Throw in 3:1 compressed raw (for BM or later with slimraw) and you can manage your data pretty easily too. I've been having a bit of fun shooting a few BTS EPK projects lately and it's quite freeing not having to worry about white balance as I'm going from crazy warm lighting in the scene to the director brooding in a dim spot beside a window. I'd rather have those few crucial seconds to concentrate on getting the moment right and figuring out a way to prompt some words or action.

    Hitting that highlight recovery in resolve is instant magic to start. I also think how you are monitoring while you shoot and what mode you are exposing for affects the outcome a lot too. I wouldn't protect the highlights enough if I were to monitor and expose in log. After, when I want to grade in log for the bolex I just run the corresponding input LUT (rec709 to bolex log from Eddie Barton) in Resolve and voila.


  9. Heyall, spring cleaning time and I have a couple 1.33x anamorphic adapters for sale:

    Century DS-1609
    This Century Optics 1.33x focus through anamorphic adapter needs no real introduction. But here’s a video from Tito Ferradans about it:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b54MV9pyVk

    It’s great for anyone getting into anamorphic lenses, and I’ve even used it professionally before:

    https://vimeo.com/172027852

    It’s in as good as new condition as I purchased it as brand new old stock, added a step ring to the rear (to get it to 52mm but it can easily be changed to 58mm), and added a Cavision clamp adapter to the front to give it 77mm threads OR 82mm threads.

    It’s great for wides (35mm on full frame), and it is easy to find cheap diopters for it’s size to get closer focus.

    Century DS-WS13
    The DS-WS13 is the big brother to the DS-1609. It is a full zoom-through adapter, with a focus ring to really dial in some sharpness. It can pair with wides and teles, which is a huge improvement on the smaller 1609. I acquired the WS13 as a complement to the 1609, so that I wouldn’t have to swap the adapter when swapping lenses from wide to tele. Once again, I refer to Tito Ferradans for more information:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klB_oO_M2Lk

    It’s in excellent condition, as the previous owner purchased it from B&H Photo as brand new old stock. It comes with front and back caps.

    Please feel free to PM me for price and/or more info

     

    IMG_8905.jpg

    IMG_8906.jpg

    IMG_8908.jpg


  10. We shot this a while back with a Vid-Atlantic Cinemorph + Nikkor prime set + Sony a7s + Atomos Shogun, except for 5d3 in underwater housing and phantom for aerials. Sadly the longer cut isn't up, so it's missing my favourite scene in there. I digress.

    The lines running down the middle of bokeh is the tradeoff for getting those horizontal flares. If I were to reshoot it, I think I would have used the non-flare Cinemorph for most shots instead. It's a nice combination with the a7s, as even though you lose a tiny bit of light from the filter under-exposure is rarely a problem with that cam. It's a fun little tool that of course adds a layer of complexity as you are constantly rechecking alignment and swapping the filter each time you swap lenses (unless you mod them all) but depending on your project it can be a pretty easy and inexpensive way to get a certain look.

    A similar cheap alternative (my next project) that produces the same effect is to slip in little aperture disks as Tito Ferradans explains here:

     


  11. 3 hours ago, mercer said:

    I'll give it a go... some people believe the image coming out of the GH4 has a video quality to it, whereas a camera from BlackMagic or other brand of "cinema" camera is more tuned to create a cinematic image. So if you believe this theory, and you're making narratives, a "proper" cinema camera could be a better choice.

    My thoughts.

    Camera-wise: 

    Used BMMCC (Micro) + Rawlite or Mosaic IR cut and Aliasing/Moire reduction replacement OLPF. Uncompressed raw or 3:1 compressed or Prores if not comfortable with raw. 60fps is good for a touch of slow when you need it. If you don't though, a used BMPCC (Pocket) can be had for quite cheap now. Sure only 1080p but 4k for lower budget features is just not necessary IMO. Without knowing much about your technical details for your film, I will guess that the DR and colour of the BM vs GH4 4K will likely make the image look better.

     

    Lens-wise:

    1. I personally love s16 sized glass, and have found that really excellent cinema quality glass can be found at a good price vs. s35 and beyond. Old Cooke and Canon zooms, Zeiss superspeed primes or Cooke primes are absolutely wonderful.

    2. Buuuuuuuuut, you could also go the route of the bmpcc .58x focal reducer and get your crop to almost s35 factor and pound that light in. Throw on some cheap vintage Nikkor primes, the lovely Tokina 11-16mm wide zoom, those Nikkor f2.8 zoom beasts or Sigma 18-35 etc... that others rave about. This path probably makes more sense for moving onwards towards RED and so on without center cropping.

     

    Upgrade Path:

    Did you mean BM 2.5k Cinema or the 4K production? I think I would skip this pit-stop and just get better with the BMMCC until the RED is feasible. Playing with raw on the BM will set you up for fun with R3D too. Really getting to know the camera, where it shines, where it breaks and all of that is probably the way to make better films and really grow. Thinking upgrade and then upgrade to the upgrade for the 1st of 3 cams that you dont have yet might be a little bit much. I guess mainly what I am saying camera-wise is that I think you can condense the GH4 + BMCC/BMPC  stages into a BMMCC or BMPCC to start before looking at things like RED or Kinefinity etc... Which btw could just be rented on a per gig basis as well. I'm a big fan of trying before buying, especially when the tech cycle moves so fast.

    Hope that helps.


  12. On January 19, 2017 at 1:17 PM, iaremrsir said:

    That was actually one of things Olan mentioned in his post on the user group. He decided to go for ISO 400 instead of 200 because he didn't want the clean look for this. While it is possible to get the clean look, I think a lot of people like the mojo that ISO 400-800 bring.

    Now, on a D16 mkII using the KAE-02150 sensor, a clean image would be extremely easy to get, and you wouldn't be sacrificing much high end range at all.

    I have been loving ISO 400 so much with the latest firmware, I've been picking it over ISO 200 as well. The range and the grain just feels right.

     

    On February 6, 2017 at 7:55 PM, mat33 said:

    but but but but but this is NOT a low light camera...:grin:

    Hahaha yeaaaa,I can probably do without the night vision shots of Brighton Beach.


  13. If we are talking about film vs. digital, there is also a huge difference in how exposure/luminance and colour saturation work together. A digital sensor uses additive colour (things get brighter as they saturate and combine), whereas film stock employs subtractive colour (things get darker as they saturate and combine). This is part of why digital sensors, especially ones that don't have crazy wide dynamic range are so prone to chroma clipping, and give off a "video-ish" look. If your digital camera has a wide dynamic range and you have managed your exposure, it could be possible with a proper LUT to emulate the colour chemistry of film, by having the luminance remapped according to the saturation level. That might help with trying to get that "organic" look.


  14. 1 hour ago, hansel said:

    Are some of you guys still shooting film? I have recently started to shoot analog stills again after a 10 years abstinence or so and I have to say I am blown away how awesome the stuff is looking adding to this the  darkroom experience. Makes me want to get a 16mm camera or something altough I would feel slightly cuckoo....

    You shouldn't feel at all crazy! There's so much to be desired in film that digital has yet to nail down. The dynamic range, color and shutter/motion that film has to offer combined with vastly improving film scan technology is a worthy enough pursuit. I've posted this before I think, but check out this gorgeous 2K scan from super 8 film:

     


  15. What's the day-rate for an assistant over there? Going by your setup, I don't think you need more gear or even different gear.

    Better to invest in fellow humans than peripheral gear that gets replaced every 9 months and that you already regret immediately after buying. That assistant of yours might actually grow with you and your business, take away your stress of trying to manage a million little technical details, provide a different creative view outside of your own echo chamber and let you step back a bit from worrying about nuts and bolts and concentrate on direction and vision. I mean think about it, instead of monitoring levels on your audio, you can actually listen to the content! Instead of pulling focus you can really direct the talent and assemble the frame you want quicker. The better your work the higher you can request for your budget too no?

    Oh and hey, everyone on set (including yourself) might actually enjoy some keen, eager, not yet jaded energy around!


  16. If you are still looking for a 1.33x I might be willing to part with a Century DS-1609-SB. I have the 52mm-67mm stepper wedged behind the back to attach to 52mm fronts on the taking lens, but it can be easily removed to adapt to whatever you choose. I also have attached a clamp-style filter threads adapter to the front, giving it either 77mm, or by removing the internal ring, 82mm. Pretty easy to use with that setup, and I have used it on a professional project before: 



    _NJL3855.jpg

×
×
  • Create New...