Jump to content

Matthew Hartman

Members
  • Content Count

    494
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by Matthew Hartman


  1. 1 hour ago, Don Kotlos said:

    There is no "must be established" requirement from Netflix: 


    Camera Requirements

    4K Resolution:
    Camera must have a true 4K sensor (equal to or greater than 4096 photosites wide).


    Recording Format:
    • Minimum of 16-bit Linear or 10-bit Log processing

    • Bitrate of at least 240 Mbps (at 23.98/24 fps) recording

    • Recording format must be set to either:


    RAW (uncompressed or lightly compressed sensor data)


    Log color space (i.e. S-Log3, V-Log, CanonLog3, REDLogFilm, BMDLog, LogC)

    • No looks or color corrections should be baked into the original camera files.

    • Files must maintain all metadata (i.e. Tape Name, Timecode, Frame Rate, ISO, WB, etc.)


    Aspect Ratio / Framing:
    • Aspect ratios greater than 2.00:1 must be evaluated and discussed with Netflix for approval.

    • Framing chart must be shot before principal photography begins, and processed through the dailies pipeline which will be shared with editorial, post-production, and VFX.



     

    You're missing the actual approved camera portion from the requirements you posted. This clearly shows their spec list is outdated. The GH5 could meet the spec requirements as well as a bunch of other systems, like Kinefinity not currently present on their list. 

    The whole intent is not to force certain cameras on their production crews. You might have a cinematographer who's very comfortable and has expertise with a Kinefinity, why would you jeopardize the project by forcing a camera on them that they can't work with? It's to establish a baseline standard of fidelity of what their own colorists prefer to work with. Trust me, this is reality, they receive shitty footage as well. But they have to set a bar somewhere so that the majority of the time they're getting what they feel they prefer to work with.

    Marketing agencies do exactly the same thing. I was a graphic designer back in the day, I received plenty of low fidelity content from clients, despite having a spec sheet of preferable fidelity, but we did what we had to do to make it work. 

     


  2. 2 hours ago, johnnyd said:

    Also, if you happen to land a job to shoot something for netflix, there is a chance they have a budget for you to get a camera from a rental place if you ask nicely :)

    It would be like any other budgeted production. They just won't approve any camera not on their spec requirements list without considerable negotiation. They want complete ownership of the highest native format they can get because of future proofing, and mostly for their in-house grading department. It's an aquisitional thing. That project is then getting distributed in a streamable format. 

    I'm sure if Netfilx hired a world renouned DoP who absolutely insisted shooting on a DSLR or action cam or smartphone they're not going to be foolishly dismissive. 

    I also suspect their spec requirements list is a bit outdated and in need of revision. To me the current list is what I would expect a professional colorist would desire as optimal footage to push around in grade. There is no logical reason why Kinefinity footage wouldn't be able to meet this request. Transcoding it's proprietory RAW footage is really not that big of a deal in the scheme of things. 


  3. 15 hours ago, Don Kotlos said:

    As much as I like the idea of having a gadget that can do everything, I do hate the fact that it constantly takes my mind off the present moment. How can I then capture it? 

    So going on the opposite side an idea like this is more appealing to me:

     

    I can tell you as an industry UX Designer there is nothing "light" about this device, other than the obvious stripped down UI. The problem isn't our devices, it's our phycology. The devices exploit our phycology but they aren't the root of that issue, only a side effect, and not the only one. They are a mirror that shows us or tendency to avoid anything painful.

    I appreciate what this company is trying to acheive, because I think it's trying to address a real issue. I just don't agree with the approach. It's no different than chaining the refrigerator when your doctor tells you you've been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Sure, you inherently lose weight and reverse the disease, but you have only changed the exterior symptom of a deeper cause. As soon as those chains are released, you're headed for a relapse. You're not addressing the core behavior and what's driving it. 

    A healthy person would and should be able to have a healthy and balanced relationship with their digital life irregardless of the vehicle they use to acheive it. 

    I'll let you guys in on an industry secret. Many in my field use devices very little in our personal lives. Maybe it's because we design for them 10 hours a day, but I would be lying if I said part of our job isn't an exploitation of people's insecurities and increasing desire for instant gratification as ordered by business objectives. 

    Anything used to sooth, hide, aviod, escape negative feelings can become an addiction, smartphones are no exception. What we need (and have) are programs that detox people's addiction to their digital life. The trick here, is not to replace it with another type of addiction. 

    A good trend that we're seeing in our industry is a push to make technology more automated and "headless", meaning AI anticipates user intent without the user having to interface with a visual UI at all, which translates to no face burried in screen. We're a lot closer to this than the general public is made aware of, meaning it's already here, albeit in unrefined form.

    By large, most camera tech is slightly to moderately behind the technology curve. What you're really getting in that brand new shiny camera is already 1-3 years old when it gets released unto the world. 


  4. I can't remember where I heard this from maybe on skillshare, but basically what was being related was that the Canons get rented the most out of any other setup he carried in his shop, and he carried a ton, even proper film cameras. (He was an seasoned industry guy)He didn't elaborate why, but there you have it.

    @IronFilm You make some strong points against the idea. I'm really not looking to invest a lot of extra time into making it happen logistically.


  5. 13 hours ago, anonim said:

    (Well, to be honest, I have full three month experience with USA bombing people with especial uranium fill and other fireworks - actually, I participated in collecting traces of killed children by such generous USA treatment... Said story, of course not for this place and time.)

    *That very moment when you eat a bag full of your own shat.*

    Sorry Anonim. Even though I'm sure you know I was joking, seriously, I do not condone drone strikes, (nor does my daughter for the record) because they largely do not hit the desired target. I'm deeply sorry you had to experience this. 

    With that out of the way, I'm done hijacking the thread. Back to Fuji. 


  6. 7 hours ago, mkabi said:

    That or you Twixtor the b!tch out of 60p or better - I'm sure you can do it with your 1DX2 with its 120p mode.

    He absolutely can, he just needs to make sure he has virtually no motion blur in the footage, so he'd have to use a really high shutter speed, probably well over 1/250th.

    From my experience Twixtor does not interpolate motion blur very well. 


  7. 22 minutes ago, anonim said:

    @Matthew Hartman

    (I just only wish you to really find a friend who, after many testing-concerning situations, behave worthily/according to full meaning of that sentence. And The woman also :) )

    Thanks bro.

    Although a self admitted loner, I do have friends, I swear! 😁

    Not really investing much time into committed romantic relationships right now. I think most of those are codependant and conditional anyway. It's not the easiest life choice, particularly at 44, but it allows me the time and space to understand who I am as an individual. I think when I do go after that type of relationship again, I'll be able to approach it from a better place and give it the kind of care and investment it requires.

    I had my first kid at 23, way too young, I was a kid myself! Well, that kid now works in an underground bunker for the U.S. Army in special intelligence. (Where Edward Snowden worked)

    So, unless you all want your assets frozen and a blue sky drone coming your direction I suggest you take particular favor with me. 😎 🤣


  8. Hey my dudes and all of 3 ladies, 😛

    Do any of you rent out your gear (meaning, you are the rentee, not renter) and if so what service do you go through and how has this experience been for you? Cons? Red flags? 

    A lot of my gear sits idle between projects and I thought why not make a little turn-key on it. Thoughts? 


  9. 1 minute ago, anonim said:

    I'm completely not competent to discuss technical side of Arri or Panavision, but I think that it is not unnecessarily to remark and single out formulations that - proven with consistent attitude - are deep and noble as quoted one.

    (In fact, for me it is desirable top of the meaning even in specialized web forums as this one.)

    I derived this outlook from the many years of repeated proverbial head pairings with a brick wall to one day figure out it is possible to simply go around said wall with far less injury. Having three kids and two divorces will do that to a man. 🤣

    Cheers gentlemen.🍻


  10. Still have my eye set on the Ursa mini pro 4.6k, but also keeping a close and watchful eye on the 2018/2019 market.

    So far (clearly and explicitly for me) I haven't seen anything else in the $3,000-$10,000 range with the kind of image/motion/DR I'm looking for, which for me is big right now. I'm not in love with the size of the ursa, but the image (which to me looks more like digital film rather than video) for the price really attracts me. 

    Overall, it's not an easy decision. No one wants to end up stuck with buyer's remorse. At the same time, cameras improve all the time and will continue to do so cycle after cycle. At some point you just have to unplug from the constant update madness and work with what you have. 


  11. 2 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

    @Matthew Hartman Well, well, I'd say they don't give a damn for the camera to be used. Not when money pops up anyway. Not exactly to save their pennies for ; ) That's a double-edged sword. Arri as camera manufacturer is a different story and yes, they had to go after whatsoever. Michael Bravin episode (I even had the chance to trade some messaging with him then) is there to testify. Jim and Jarred also took their part on their marketing plot. The same a couple of years later with Sony. This decade. The transition is made in the previous decade though. Of course, DoPs have their input to give but the fees side of the story still stands. Indies will always mark the history of this medium since when Chaplin, Griffith, Fairbanks and Pickford founded United Artists a century ago. I guess you missed that from my previous post (Cheers, E :-)

    I wouldn't say I missed it, I'm simply adding another perspective. Also, please don't ever feel targeted, I mostly speak in generalities in search of the average take away. I also don't mind being wrong. I'm too old to be worrying about my viewpoints become bigger for me than finding common ground amoung good people. I'd rather have friends than have the last word. 

    2 minutes ago, Tim Sewell said:

    Now I don't personally think that any currently available prosumer camera along the lines of GH5 etc yet has the effortless cinematic qualities of an Alexa, but it's easy to see that it won't be that long before they might. At that point we may reach an interesting tipping point where the whole reliability/repair/spares issue becomes moot as a production can just buy 50 of the things and still be quids in on their camera department costs. Interesting times.

    I concure, and in fact think that we're already on the tip of that point right now. It's going to get real interesting. 


  12. On 2/26/2018 at 12:04 PM, no_connection said:

    In short creative fall update messed something up with driver and on a system level, so I had 3 2560x1440 screens that didn't go anywhere but at least teamviewer saw them.
    I uninstalled the KB and reinstalled Nvidia driver and it kinda worked. There is still an internal 2560x1440 monitor left that noone knows where it is and what it is connected too, some other stuff still left from creative fall update but it works again.
    I had great trouble installing it from the beginning too where it did the same thing. So windows update pushed out a driver for the Nvidia card that don't work and bricked it before I could do anything. So one reinstall later (are we having fun yet) and I unplugged network cable before windows could do anything, and installed driver manually first thing. Then it worked.
    Searching for this problem shows threads two years old and windows still bricks installations this way (yes we having fun).

    Just as a rule of thumb, always go with Nvidia's own drivers for their cards, even in integrated systems. Windows tries to automatically install a generic driver which as you now know doesn't always spell success and certainly won't have the latest and greatest patch/updates.

    20 hours ago, no_connection said:

    We don't have a multi screen setup, it's just for recording with OBS. The screens came from nowhere with the update.

    But yes I would try uninstalling driver and reinstall, remember to unplug network just in case Windows Update wanna install drivers for it while you do it.
    There is an option to disable windows update from doing drivers with gpo if you have Win10 Pro, if you can, do that, since Microsoft have no idea what they are doing at times.

    Windows comes with preintalled generic drivers that suit the bulk of use cases of it's users. These drivers are NOT meant for power users who demand peak performance and optimization.


  13. 15 hours ago, Emanuel said:

    @Kisaha Obviously, if you can charge for Alexa, why not? I have produced a feature shot on Alexa precisely. Without mention REDs. The point is when you simply don't want or need it. Small factor also helps when non-intrusive setups are wanted.

    No idea if that one from you to hint you are not aware if someone knows how the industry works was actually addressed to me once we've practically posted at same time. You didn't quote me either. Coming from someone in this business for 2 decades and a half now, I think I may fulfill some credits to answer anyway:

    Of course, an average budget won't cut on the camera department. Why should it be? That's the most insignificant part. The story will happen to end much different when low/no budget realm(s) pop up. Or for aesthetics or even a matter of principle, tools of choice or craft (as for example, small crews or constituted for novices) come to mind and method of work. At times, only for the pleasure we have to produce something substantially unconventional as further as possible. These light tools fit there.

     

    OK, got it perfectly now. That one was actually not addressed to me : ) It is answered in one way or another.

    I think the more experienced amoung us can agree that just like cameras there's different tiers in the industry. It is very possible you all are right and wrong depending on context at the same time.

    Budget is a key factor, but also Director/DP pairings can also vary what setups are used. There is no one setup fits all. And yes, filming at this level is as commercial and big business as it gets. The goal of most businesses is profit.

    For better or worse, there's no getting around the fact that Arri has Hollywood (and it's sister industries) in a strong headlock. Aside from obvious quality, Arriflex has been a film company since 1937. That's incredible name recognition, even despite the fact that RED, founded in 1999, some 62 years later beat Arri to the punch with the first digital film sensor, not to be confused with video.

    The above says two important things about the industry:

    1.) The industry has been incredibly relunctant, if not even hostile to change. (For better or worse)

    2.) Despite this even Arriflex, with their 62 year lead in reputation within the industry was forced by a man who sold sun glasses with zero reputation in cameras let alone the film industry to eventually concede and build a digital film sensor of their own to remain competitive. Take that Quark! (Designer humor) 

    So what's the take away here? I'll let you decide that for yourself.

    There's one more distinction I'd to call out. In the not so distant past there was only one way to climb up the ranks in filmmaking for most people at the level we're talking about. You had to make great coffee, because the men (another topic altogether) that held the keys to the kingdom were not very willing to pass them on all that freely, if ever. It was about domination, not information sharing.

    Fast forward to today and it's entirely possible to bypass that bottleneck altogether largely in part to how the accessibility of tools and network building has shifted the conversation more democratically. This is happening in the music industry too.

    Some in the industry are grumpy and skeptical, some simply busy, comfortable and by extension out of touch, and some so jaded by the status quo, or such technofiles they want to blow the whole convention up into dust. You can easily assume that the "big cats" are both hostile and intrigued by say a camera like a GH5 or a DSLR. It just depends which one of those big cats you ask, and how open to creativity and diversity they actually are. Most will be unlikely to bite the hand that feeds them.

     

     


  14. 4 hours ago, Tim Sewell said:

    This thread's going on longer and proving more divisive than bloody Brexit!

    Despite several attempts at peace, humor, relating, conceding.

    I just had a fucking talk with my 13 year old child about a contingency plan if someone comes into his school and starts shooting it up. He is scared as hell. Can you blame him?

    This is not a conversation a parent living in 2018 in the U.S. should be having with their child, and then you have otherwise sensible people here getting worked up over a stupid object, that has a tiny bit less of this, or a tiny bit more of this. Really? 

    This thread needed some perspective a long time ago. 


  15. 2 minutes ago, mercer said:

    Anyway, here’s my latest attempt, and final, after trying a few in computer calibration and color profiles. It seems to represent itself the same in the editor as it does on my iPhone. But for all I know it could be off?

    Honestly, I don’t love the shot anyway due to lens choice. The bokeh is intentionally busy and chaotic but it is a little harsher than I was originally going for. Thankfully, the luxury of being a hobbyist gives me the ability for reshoots. 

    6F0AFDB2-9098-4F1C-98B5-58655397B814.jpeg

    Your pulling out smoother gradients in this grade. Me likes. 👊


  16. 4 minutes ago, mercer said:

    It’s cool. I always ask for critiques. I’ve been told that my images are horrible on a number of occasions. I live and learn. It’s like Ed Wood said... the next one will be better...

    But I am a hobbyist who decided to try and make a movie. I shoot run and gun guerilla style, using backyard DIY techniques. There is little about my method that is traditional.

    But in reality, this is a tech forum... so technical perfection is top priority and that’s cool too... a lot of knowledgeable and talented people around here and if one knows themself as a filmmaker they can use what applies to them. 

    And yeah, I can share another grab. I’m away from the computer, so it will have to wait until tomorrow. Plus I am trying to figure out how to calibrate my MacBook Air without purchasing software. Zero budget filmmaking is expensive and I have to budget expenses based on the phase of production.

    I can assure you even professional sets use plenty of DIY gear, maybe not when they're pitching the budget to a client, but it ends up in there, trust me. 😀

    I think a lot of enthusiasts make a self defeating assumption about their own work. "Professional" in practical terms means a lot of different things to different people, and I suspect some enthusiasts undervalue the quality of their work and that the term "professional" holds some secret magic sauce.

    In my view, professional to me means passion and work ethic. The dictionary definition says it means those that exchange currency for a good or service. But in practical terms I think that means very little. 

    So I'm here to say if you're an enthusiast and have this idea that small budgets and DIY gear means "unprofessional", you can think again. Then rewind and repeat.  

    If I'm short a hair or kicker light, I'm not going to order/purchase another $700 Aputure frensel, instead I'm going to the nearest Home Depot and getting a shop LED with the highest CRI for $50. Not uncommon at all. The client won't likely even know the difference, and the grips won't be complaining either, one less trip to the truck. 


  17. I looked at JVC in my search for a cinema camera. To my eye, the image is pretty clean and comparable to most cameras in the sub $3000 range. I have no qualms with the image, nor color.  

    That being said, the image to me looks pretty digital, which is not what I'm personally interested in. I've spent considerable money to help make my NX1 look less digital and more filmic, I feel like JVC's image would defeat this effort, despite the great ENG features and internal ND. 

    I also at this point in 2018, when both Samsung and LG have released 10bit video/photo in their smartphones (Samsung will announce today) I feel like no one should be releading 8bit cameras in the $900-$3,000 range, it's just not a competitive long term strategy. 

×
×
  • Create New...