Belle

Hey, great pictures there! 😍👌

Hey, great pictures there! 😍👌

The shooting starts this Sunday, June 11...

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/make-believers/mystery-romance-short-the-orange-of-daydreams
 
From the director of MAKE-BELIEVERS:
 
Any helpful hand is welcome, thanks for watching! :- )

I'm happy to discuss the relative merits and aesthetics of lenses, but that can be done without sensor size being part of it....... but sensor size was the premise of this whole thread, so that's what I was talking about.
I have a very particular interest in learning about how this stuff actually works.  Fluffy discussions that conflate various things together and confuse one thing with the next prevent tangible things from being learned.
I'm getting philosophical here, but you questioned my approach to discussions, so it's relevant.
Steve Yedlin put it wonderfully in his spectacular essay "On Colour Science":
That applies to all of film-making, not just colour, so let's unpack that a little.
"identify, isolate and understand any of these underlying attributes so that we can manipulate them meaningfully for ourselves"
The idea here is to identify things we like and things we don't like.  Things that work for a particular aesthetic.  
Then we isolate the underlying attribute.  We do this all the time when actually making films.  We film something from two different angles and then choose the one we like better.  We do this in isolation by looking at a frame, taking a step or two to the left and looking at it again.  We position the subject in the centre of the frame, then position them to the right and then the left, examining the effects of changing just one isolated variable.
We do this in post by choosing a warm or cooler WB, but putting more or less contrast. etc etc.  If we made a list of every individual aspect that is decided when making a film, most of us would have some idea of the effects of these and could talk about them.
We then understand these underlying attributes so we can manipulate them for ourselves.  
I'd imagine that most people into cinema in one way or another would realise that a romantic comedy would be high-key, warmer WB, less sharpened, smoother camera movement, slower editing, happier music.  A horror/thriller would be low-key, cooler WB, sharpened harsh image, jerky camera movement, fast paced editing, with ominous music.
This is about understanding the aesthetic impacts of these individual aspects of film-making.
To turn back to this discussion, or others where you feel I'm being particularly "dense or obtuse" it's actually about trying to drill down using this identify/isolate/understand approach.  As far as I can tell, I'm one of the people working hardest on these forums to actually pull apart the specific elements of film-making and understand them.  If there are others, they're not sharing their efforts or findings much.  @BTM_Pix is an exception of course.
This idea of trying to isolate variables is one of the fundamental principles of science, and its taken us from the dark ages to space exploration.  Not quite all of human knowledge, but a good deal of it, and it's not anally-retentive about details just for the hell of it, it's because it actually matters.
But, I get it.  
If you're not trying to drill down and get to the specifics, then it's fun to just hang out and say things with loose words and may or may not be true, and just agree with each other for the sake of being nice.  I'm not here, posting detailed responses in a thread about the look of various sensor sizes to chew the fat and hang.  I'm here to try and learn WTF is actually going on.  This discussion has actually been useful for me, counter to how it might appear, I've learned a great deal in terms of sharpening my understanding of the topic, further developing my understanding of how much other people actually know, and the overall psychology of humanity.
I also get it that most people here are just looking at cameras as a thing you buy to shoot, edit a bit, adjust the colour a little, export, get paid and move on.  From a business perspective it makes total sense.  Choose the best package and then just go use it.  
That's not my approach.  I spend more time in post than most, and am willing to put in more effort to develop my skills for post as well.  If I can do that and get an advantage then that's worth it for me.  My "obtuse" posts are trying to sharpen the conversation to be more specific (seemingly against the wishes of the other participants it seems) to understand concrete things.  
Sorry if you were just here to speak loosely and draw conclusions without having your logic checked, but that's not what I thought the focus of these forums were.  The entire idea of the DSLR revolution was trying to get the best results we can with modest affordable equipment, but that takes specific knowledge, and that requires rigour and questioning.

I single-handedly shot an entire narrative short film during the first lockdown, using the original BMPCC. The camera performed magnificently but I did have it fully rigged out. Shot using two SLR Magic primes - 10mm T2.1 and the 17mm T1.6. A one-person crew and one-mother cast, this is a film featuring my poor mum, who’s never acted, and a very, very unlikely hero…

Jean-Luc Godard once said “All you need for a movie is a gun and a girl.” My mum doesn’t speak very good English, so I had to do without dialogue. I didn’t have a gun so we had to do without that too. We couldn’t leave the house, so I shot it all there. And I had no crew to help me, so I did everything myself.
If anyone has any feedback or questions I'm always happy to hear!

https://youtu.be/SBwje8EDl84

Hi I am new here, just thought I would share my first youtube video.
I used to shoot video with Canon DSLRs and stopped for sometime, mostly focused on photography, but recently I moved toward sony mirrorless camera and started to test out the video capabilities.
This is mostly an experiment I did with a Sony a6600 and anamorphic lenses (Sirui 35mm and 50mm) as well as a  Sony 10-18mm.
 

Autumn Leaves Creative Style
-3 Contrast, 0 Saturation, -3 Sharpness
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4
Rokinon 14mm T3.1 Cine
Metabones EF-E Adapter mkIV

Edited in FCP X
 
 

A portrait of a dreamer, who moved to the arctic archipelago, Lofoten, to unite his love for nature with his love for forklifting. In this heartwarming documentary he also tries to tear down the stigma he feels is attached to his craft. A story about life and its ups and downs. And forklifting.

W
Why thank you.

here's the full version. PW: festival
 
 

For sure, reason why it makes little to no sense to deny 4K and above don't bring anything new as I've read here a few times... ; )
So @Andrew Reid is also on the spot with his 80% quote over the look : )
Even though, to couple "space", cinema is also and mainly "time" where stuff such as cadence, frame rate, shutter etc., play a no less relevant role (EAG :- )

@kye Thanks for the post. Certainly makes us look in the mirror.
For my real estate / architecture work, I like sharp(ish) lenses just because people are expecting to see detail.
But for people, I think that most of the kit zoom lenses are fine for 4K. Convenient, inexpensive, relatively-lightweight (so they balance well on a gimbal and are less tiring to use). I would have a bit of a problem with the variable aperture if I zoomed more during shooting, but I don't, so I don't worry about it too much.
One of the better kit zooms out there seems to be the Panasonic 20-60mm f/3.5-5.6, which has minimal focus breathing. (Some people would note that Panasonic has minimal focus.)
Also, when youtubers say to get the "cinematic look" you need an ultra-shallow depth of field, I just want to punch them in the throat. These tend to be the same people who sell creative LUT packs that look like a dumpster fire.

LOL : ) Jokes aside, I can actually agree with you not exactly as a contradiction but complexity on our "truths" or beliefs as you wish, you see we can agree on anything too (or almost ; )
Ah and being a poet coupled to these tools with "lots of character" (ain't we talk about camera + lens combos?) can make a novice (or not necessarily only just a novice) filmmaker a better one, no matter the rest for the sake of the point now ;- )
 
So thank you for bringing me to this new thread of you, you should know I am always trying to follow your posts I sincerely appreciate when focused on the same joy we both share topic related :- ) Paul Cezanne, a poet with pictures once said: "Time and reflection change the sight little by little 'til we come to understand."

I bought V5 a week and have yet to fiddle with it in A7S3. Had V4 on my previous A73 and loved the colors!
I do have a question though…probably a silly one but here goes: in S-Log 3 I can shoot incredibly clean footage in low light at 12,800 ISO. I’m curious which of these new profiles Andrew created are best in low light, and are any of them able to output clean footage at 12,800 ISO? 
 
thanks!

The cheap and cheerful Fuji XC50-230mm (mark 1)

Frame grab from a 4K internal recording on an XT-2.
 

It's another tokina. The 35 -105 rmc zoom.  No idea if it has any parentage with the tokina 28-70 atx pro or not. It's pretty much mint, the zoom is a touch tight at the close end. Took a couple of photos on sunset. There's a bit of a water theme as it rained today. If I push down on the lever over the L switch the whole fd mounting falls off from the lens

Hey kids,
my perfect camera would have been a Lumix G6 with a 100mbit codec. I love the HD coming from it. Once graded, it really looks organic to me. Just the shadows become super blocky in low light due to the light codec. Maybe I could get a GH4 for cheap and treat it like my super G6.:) My Lumix S1 is an image powerhouse. But sometimes I dont feel it challenging me but giving away a great image to easily. The G6 always gave me great pleasure in giving me an image I had to work for hard. My dearest camera still. I shot this years ago but still remember the profile settings. Here it goes, natural with contrast 0, sharpness, noise and colour at -2. Graded the heck out of it with crazy curves. Lens was the cheap and awesome Canon 28mm 2.8 and a focal reducer.
 

Hello,
How come that these panasonic L lenses are so light weight? All my canon L glass is heavy as *@#$, same as sigma ART lenses and tamron lenses. Those light weight lenses are a lot funner to carry around 😄
I thought perhaps it was a mirrorless thing, but these Canon RF lenses are heavy beasts as well. 
 
Cheers

Along the transition span and without CofC theoretical test and while manufacturers don't have retrospectively CE class marked their birds to benefit them at least to fly closer to people without needing a standard permission, I think there's no much advantage to any aircraft under 500g for now in any way other than as not requiring online training and foundation test.
Here is the transition period well explained:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/faq/116508

That's absolutely irresistible! WOW One of the most appealing no-brainer offers I've ever seen... Mate, if your posts were one of my favs before, guess now ; ) Your life is already duplicated per se for this sharing, mark my words! : D This is what makes this community a unique case worldwide @Andrew Reid :- )

These rules are a game changer now.

Some other interesting stuff to have in mind too from new current regulation -- there's a difference between 'uninvolved' and involved people, i.e. some significant definition for filmmakers... ; )
 
Who is an ‘uninvolved person’?
‘An uninvolved person is a person who is not participating in the UAS operation or who is not aware of the instructions and safety precautions given by the UAS (drone) operator’. 
A person is considered involved if he/she decides to be a part of the operation, understands the risk and is able to check the position of the drone while it is flying. 
Therefore, in order to be considered ‘involved’ in the operation, a person needs to:
give consent to be a part of the operation (e.g. consent to be overflown by the drone); the consent needs to be explicit; 
receive from the drone operator/remote pilot instructions and safety precautions to be applied in case of an emergency situation; and
not be busy with any other activities that would make the person unable to check the position of the drone and, in case of an incident, take action to avoid being hit. 
Writing on a ticket that a drone will be used during an event is not considered sufficient, since the drone operator needs to receive individual explicit consent and make sure people understand the risk and the procedures to be taken in case of an emergency.
During the operation, it is expected that involved persons will follow the trajectory of the drone and be ready to take action to protect themselves in case the drone behaves unexpectedly. If, during the UAS operation, people are busy working or watching something that is not compatible with monitoring the trajectory of the drone, than they cannot be considered to be involved.
Examples of uninvolved people: 
spectators gathered for sport activities, concerts or other mass events;
people in a beach or in a park, or walking on the streets.
An uninvolved person is not only a person who is directly exposed to a drone, but could also be a person who is in a bus, car, etc., and who is indirectly exposed. For example, if a drone is flying over a car, its driver should be considered to be an ‘uninvolved person’. The reason is that a drone flying close to a car (even if it does not impact it) could possibly distract its driver and therefore cause a car accident.
 
Regulatory reference: GM1 Article 2(18) Definitions, ED Decision 2019/021/R.

New regulation opens three ways:
1) No required authorisation;
2) No difference between non-commercial and commercial usage;
3) the vast European territory to include as for instance UK or Norway beyond EU under the same umbrella.
 
Besides, the chance for "toy" certification under the Directive 2009/48/EC.
 
Here's a more detailed useful chart then:

source

More actual information here also:
https://www.heliguy.com/blog/2020/11/24/dji-drones-retrospective-ce-class-marking/