Ricardo Constantino

I'm still wondering where @Zach Goodwin is, I want his input badly.

Okay, but what films did your Father direct?

Okay, but what films did your grandfather direct?

Apologies, that was my son typing, two of us use this account.

Tweak Senior.

Those were the good times back when we were in med school, stealing xray film and chemicals to take 8x10" nudes, eating fetus to become stronger, having fun with the resident nurses, and kodachrome, oh god, kodachrome you still remember that one time...

Again not true
Filmic images is a complete stupid word.
What is filmic to one person is mad max fury road and to others it looks horrible
The filmic look or the hollywood look we like to think of it is skintone... handling of color....dynamic range...motion...how it handles highlight s and shadows.
How the motion cadence is.
To me the best motion is from my sony f65. To others they like the Alexa. I dont like the alexa cause my images out of it im not happy with. But other dps work blows me away.
If you were older abrahim you would know we used different film stocks based on mood and feel for the film.
I am a fuji man. More than kodak. I like the green.
But neither can or not be called more filmic.
The best digital footage i saw was from the panavision genesis... global shutter later became f35 which i own.
 
But i loved it cause of the colorist and dp.
You cant make a blanket statement about a camera as filmic or non filmic.
Thats what young dentists do.
One day youll get older and see this.
 
Canon has beautiful skintones but the c300s motion i hate. I prefer the motion on the 1dc.
I dont know why.

Based on your guys highly valuable comments, here is another series. This time i compared STD -5/-5/-5/-5 with STD -5/-5/-5/0 to see how the image looks like with a "neutral" saturation.
Lets start with the OOC shots (4K 25p):
STD -5/-5/-5/-5

STD -5/-5/-5/0

And here is my grade:
STD -5/-5/-5/-5

STD -5/-5/-5/0

My conclusions: I had to lower the saturation by 25% for STD -5/-5/-5/0 to avoid turning my skin orange. After that, both shots look pretty similar. The -5/-5/-5/-5 is a tad darker and the -5/-5/-5/0 offers more detail in the shadows, yet has a bit more noise (although not unpleasing). If wanted i can supply the video files as well.

Did you have any problems sending the money?
Best Regards,
Hakuna Matata

me right now

Ran across this beaut shot on the gh2 just a few months ago. I was reeally surprised to hear it was after I watched it

Holy fuck that was heavy for a Monday morning 

I bought an old Panasonic SDX900, it's the dvx100's big brother.  I thought maybe SD had something interesting about it - lacking resolution and dynamic range.
I tested it quickly against my Sony F65 going to 8mm or 16mm, and it seems to have its own weird unique feel that's kind of interesting.
Anyway let me know what you think - post workflow I can post as well how I kind of "destroyed" the image too.

Ricardo is always posting such gorgeous framegrabs in this thread, so I wanted to give his settings a try for myself on my latest project... I'm really liking the way these are looking. (Graded with DeLuts and filmconvert) 

www.tferradans.com/anamorphic - for overall information about your questions!
and I would recommend a Century Optics small adapter (or the SLR Magic 1.33x Anamorphot) as an all arounder with nice flares, distortion and edge artifacts.
http://tferradans.com/blog/?p=7670

>reads post about rubber and condoms
>thinks 3 self
>wouldn't silicon be a better choice 5 steadicam too?
>sit back and LELs

this made my day

Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha Ha ha ha 

Yes. I posted about it a while ago in Eds thread about 1dc and bmmcc. Shot a wedding with the d16 with bmpcc speed booster and 18-35. Loved it. Did a confusing test with it too. It doesn't hit the sensor at all and digital Bolex has officially confirmed that themselves too

I will personally disagree. I've looked through all my a7sii footage and am not happy with it at all. Total shit sensor in my opinion and should only be used when needing low light. Gh4 is so easy and clients don't know the difference. Everything about gh4 makes more business sense. 1/3 of the cost. Longer battery life. Easier to grade. 
I'm DP for a possible feature length theatrical doc this year. Still in development. We will be shooting on C300 II but that's a different thing really because we have budget and it's being released in theaters. 
To own and operate your own camera I feel you should only get what you can afford. I'm a 26 year old newly wed with debt and a puppy. $1,200 camera vs a $3,000 camera that has a worse workflow and minor upgrades over a $1,200 isn't appealing to me in my situation. I need the most bang for buck. 
I'm still considering getting a used C100 mk1. Great work horse 
My opinion which has matured over the last 6 years in the industry is you own the camera that you can afford that get 90% of what you need done and done easily and well. You rent the rest 

Alright, did some tests today.
My observations so far:

- G7 in 1080p 50fps in MP4 or AVCHD mode is 99% the same. So don't have to worry about that. Will just use AVCHD for 1080p then.
- G7 1080p vs GH3 1080p with low ISO's is 99% the same. The GH3 has a bit more magenta in the colors and the G7 more green. Which one is 'better' I don't know. Probably the G7 is a bit more natural looking.
- G7 vs GH3 in 1080p mode in low light and high ISO's: Starting from ISO 1600 the G7 starts to be really a lot cleaner. ISO 3200 and 6400 is unusable on the GH3 due to too much noise but the G7 is a lot cleaner. Might even be usable at 3200 and 6400!
- G7 at 4k mode, downsampled vs GH3 at high ISO's. G7 is EVEN CLEANER at 4K mode.
- G7 at 4k mode vs GH3 at 25p -> GH3 is smoked. 
I don't see any gain in DR however. The colors are slightly different but no big deal. Slight color correction fixes either. So the big improvements are cleaner high ISO's and of course better detail and no more moiré (!) at 4K mode. Too bad I can't use an external monitor with g7 but luckily it has focus peaking. So at least I can see the focus good enough on the small screen. 
I'm thinking now of shooting the wedding on the G7 as the main cam. Use 4K for 90% of the shots and downsample in post. Then use 1080p 50fps for the slowmotion shots. They look about 95% the same as the shots I'm currently making with the GH3 so I don't need to 'get used' or anything to what I'm seeing.
Computer had no problems with 4 different types of footage on the timeline so that's great as well. 
I only need to find out how to make the Warp Stabilizer work on 4k clips on a 1080p timeline. It simply doesn't work. When I 'nest' the clip and apply WS it actually works, but it crops the image very weirdly and like 200%.
Anyone knows how to do that?

Thanks Andy!
Will do some testing soon and see how it compares to the GH3. Also, will see how my PC handles all different types of footage on the timeline. GH3's mov 50fps, G7's MP4 4K and G7's AVCHD 50fps. Sounds crazy now but that's how it might end up after a real shoot. 

Slightly less rolling shutter, nicer colors, no more moire. Otherwise, pretty identical.

Metabones Ultra  x.71 speedbooster for the GH3 as the XL is x.64 is for the 2.3 crop of the 4K cameras

A bit off topic, but having a GH3 (that would be updated to a GH4/GH5?) what speedbooster would you recommend? XL or Ultra?

I've been working with Canon EF zoom lenses for some years but I wanna buy a prime lens kit. I'm no longer using Canon cameras, so I don't mind using other mounts. I'll keep my zoom lenses anyway. Currently I'm working with Red One MX, Sony a7S and BMPCC cameras. 
This is what I'm looking for:
- Manual apperture and manual focus
- Wide apperture (around f1.4 is enough)
- Maximum 2000€ for the kit
 
I was thinking about buying the Rokinon/Samyang cine lens bundle with a 16mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm (it costs around 2000€) but I have also worked with some old Nikkor and Carl Zeiss Planar and Sonnar (I have a Nikkor 55mm f2.8 and a Carl Zeiss Sonnar 180mm f2.8) and I liked it. Do you think I should go with the rokinons?