scotchtape

Officially RIP A7Siii.  At least I still have 2 EF mount lenses left!

Actual quality of light is important and you need a meter to test. The cheap flexible panels probably are the same, I had the fl3030b type, very poor rendering in the red channel.

I don't know if it's still relevant but there used to be a plugin for ae called reel smart motion blur you can look into.

My vote is that it is "bad" for video, but I still use mine for most of my work.

Frequently I'll get the IBIS jolting the frame around, even when doing slow pans, trucks or circles.  Stabilization in post works 90% of the time, but sometimes nothing can save you.

I'm almost convinced my camera is defective but I see it in other people's footage too.

It really is bad compared to Panasonic.  That being said, the nightmare that is the Panasonic 35-100mm OIS is still somehow even worse (again, for video).

2 hours ago, newfoundmass said:

The GH5 is one of the best cameras released in the last 20 years? It's auto focus is leaps ahead of GH4 and has improved even more in firmware updates. 

I own 2. They mostly sit on the shelf and I use the a7iii most of the time.

Remember all the gh5 "improvements"... I'll believe it when I see it.

16 minutes ago, Danilo Del Tufo said:

New enhanced DFD autofocus, if it works it will be great. 

Based on their track record I give this a 5% chance of being anywhere close to Sony/Canon.

4 hours ago, Jonesy Jones said:

A couple years ago I cleared about $50k. Freelance. Not great, but I could survive. I have since moved across the US and started work in another field. Freelance just never felt secure enough to support a family and the trend I see is that, while video is in more demand, people want to pay less for it. But I know that if I kept pushing and hustling I would make it..... but I hate the hustle.

A+

It's hard long term unless you're going to build up a company and have other people working for you.

Real estate is 80% low/no budget volume productions.  So if you want to make money doing that, good luck. The other 20% is higher margin but tougher to break into, and way less gigs. I just never found it to be a good money maker unless you OWN that niche in your area.

Weddings are fun when you're younger, but your weekends are gone in the summer, and the clients can get a certain way. 

West coast Canada.  I keep thinking about going back and getting a "real" job due to how business savvy you need to be to be "successful".

The videography industry is like any other line of work.  You can work for someone else for an average / low salary, or work for yourself.

If you work for yourself and you want to make money, you need to be "good" at business.  Meaning you either need to be good at business yourself, be very lucky, or have someone who is either good or lucky to help and support you. 

If have none of this, good luck. You won't make much doing anything, much less videography.

The better at business you are, the more you will make! Find your niche and go from there. I'm working my way up doing more and more corporate work. Just remember if you are freelancing you have lots of expenses you need to pay, so you can can't just charge $50/hr per project if you want to make money long term... Compensation ranges from $50 - $200 per hour per project.  Not really worth it if you are making less than $100/hr, you have to pay for insurance, gas, gear, being stuck in traffic, sometimes assistants, computer gear, music licensing, software etc... All "hidden" costs you don't deal with when employed by others. Not to mention the work isn't steady and you have to find and make your own work. Of course this also depends on the level of your work and market. If you live in a smaller market and people only pay $200 for crappy videos... You will never make any money there.

Freelancing is tough and you need to make a lot more to compete with the benefits from a salaried position (health insurance, PTO, vacation, steady income, steady income if you want to get a loan or mortgage etc etc)

Currency above is Canadian pesos and not American gold (us worth 1.3x more).

You need to find something that works for you.  If you are a social media star go for it, but I am not one, so I had to find a more old school way, just growing organically (long personal challenging circumstances).  Again like any other freelancing business, word of mouth is key! There are lots of ways to make money in this, I just prefer corporate because you can find good clients that won't stiff you on the bill and actually have some budget to make things look nice while not being full on Hollywood or advertising.

I don't have experience working for a media company because tbh you won't make much, and from what I can tell the film industry side can be a bit toxic but ymmv.  I spent most of my working life in an office so I'm more comfy with that culture.

Pricing you learn from experience. There are some great yt videos on this and I'm glad others have talked about it.  At first you take what you can get, then you realize you're not making any money, and you will need to figure out how to value yourself. Eventually think about your business like a business.  If you hire a camera op at $30/hr can you charge a client $30/hr? Of course not, you're not making anything... You have to charge $60/hr for that expense... 

But start from step one.  Do have a portfolio, is it any good etc. If you can't make it working for yourself there is no shame in working for someone else, it's just that it's hard finding a good (subjective) paying salaried job in this field. If I couldn't work for myself in this field, I would 100% do something else as unless you are in film and union your hourly is going to suck. Do not compete with Craigslist rates unless you want to be paid bottom dollar and never make any money.  That's just my experience and opinion, I'm sure it does not apply across the board.  Also dependant on living costs in your area and what you want out of life.

Good luck!

I try to make sure I see the red dot first before getting on with it

Sometimes I still mess up

Gtx1080ti. I forgot the ram speed.  Medium speed because threadripper wasn't playing nice with faster ram at the time.

Wtf, "everyone" shoots 60p and drops it into 23.976 timeline for slomo and it works fine... I do it all the time, and I'm pretty sure everyone else does too... 

Im using 1 ssd for os and programs, 1 nvme for scratch, and 2 more nvme for source footage.

When I built this machine (original threadripper, 64gb ram) I thought it would be smooth sailing for editing. I used the good stuff too. Nope. 4k thumbnails still take time to load and playback is not always smooth in resolve.  I don't know where the bottle neck is but IMO if nothing has changed, the premium for nvme is not worth it over ssd.  The only thing good about nvme is the number of drives I can have.  I have 8 drives currently mounted. 3 ssd, 3 nvme, 2 HDD.

Because it is all hearsay on the internet right now  

No point in buying anything until the reviews come in.  That being said, if it's really good of course it will do well, I would switch too if it has AF in 4K60FF and everything else is up to snuff.

11 hours ago, gt3rs said:

You are saying that 1dx is crippled with questionable features.... like the dpaf in FF, like many others in this forum, there are 3 threads with multiple posts similar to yours saying that Canon is crippling dpaf in ff without realizing that nobody else has ever have made Raw ff with af.... so your post was good info contains?

No, my original post complained about Canon's long history of crippling their cameras and taking history as a guide, wondered what they will cripple on this camera (which is still in rumor phase).

My second post I referenced the 1DXIII, maybe that was a poor choice, but do you need me to list the TXi series using the same sensor for half a decade, the missing 24P modes of EOS-M6, RP and 90D (which then magically appeared months later after that other not to be named user of this forum claimed Canon couldn't do it because reasons), the lack of 1080p24fps on several higher end cameras etc.

Are you saying that Canon doesn't have a history of crippling cameras??? Are you serious?

17 minutes ago, gt3rs said:

O boy again.... point wich camera can do >4k FF  Raw with AF?

I help you: C700 FF (but only with additional recoding module), C500 II and then 1Dx III.... not really questionable as no other manufacturer has a FF camera that can do it. FF Internal Raw 4k or above with AF no other camera so why people continue to complain?

I didn't mention any of those things but ok. #triggeredcanonfan?

How anyone can think that Canon will not cripple their cameras is beyond me.

Even the 1DXIII has questionable PDAF in full frame modes, not to mention no IS in RAW and... NO 24P at launch...

I'll believe it when I see it.  

My sessions are never very long so I just use the small NP-F 550.

 https://www.sounddevices.com/mixpre-3-mixpre-6-maxbatteryruntime/

Says 6W power consumption with 4x phantom and recording.  So for Mixpre3, less than 5W.  2 NP-F 550s is 20WH so about 4-5h runtime.

If you use the bigger 970s it's about 45WH each so, 90WH equals about 18h.

In any case, feels like it runs for longer but I've never done a rundown test.

I use the Sony NP-F sled... works great...

On second thought maybe I don't need this...

Not to be negative but is there any way to get around the narrow FOV, for example the $10K Preston light ranger 2 have a FOV of 18 degrees and basically has a line that you can focus along, but that's it.

I'm assuming a much more affordable system is not going to get around that.  It's still very useful for interviews / narrative, but kinda useless for runandgun

I was hoping to find a use for pocket 4K for me but I can't seem to find one   I even bought a cage and 2 T5 drives.  Not knocking the camera, just need AF

Can't wait for mjpeg codec @800mbps, and 50mbps h.264 with no intermediates /s

If you want a bcam then why not... But at this point who knows when it will actually be available... It's already been 2 years since it's expected release!

"Use Timeline" works for me, I tried other settings and I don't think they're right, to be honest I don't know how to use that part, but "use timeline" works well.

On the camera I just have Pro for the color mode, and Cine4 for gamma.  The only other thing I changed was the knee to 80%.  After a bunch of shooting I found that messing with any of the other settings wasn't helpful.

Adjust exposure before the Arri LUT observing the where the skin tones start hitting the highlight curve (go too high and you will lose contrast in the skin).  You might want to adjust gamma up as well because the LUT is quite contrasty.  Basically the you want to put things where the LUT expects them to be otherwise everything will look weird.  Then after the lut, you can boost exposure to "video" levels where everything is brighter for youtube etc.  IF you boost exposure too much before the LUT you'll push everything into the highlight compression and lose contrast.

The other part is after the LUT I do skin tone correction by isolating and using the hue adjustments.

Even if it is priced high, still worth it for some of us for the AF and 4k60p ?