Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


HockeyFan12 last won the day on April 12 2018

HockeyFan12 had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About HockeyFan12

Profile Information

  • My cameras and kit
    Arriflex 765

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It's hard to know without seeing the location but bouncing soft light off the ceiling does seem like the best answer. @androidlad has a good point. If you go in for close ups and are lighting with overhead bounce you might have heavy shadows under the eyes and might want to bring a small reflector, though. If you have more money, a Joleko off the ceiling or a piece of bounce board is often useful but is more directional than bouncing off the whole ceiling.
  2. It might? I've used it to smooth out macro blocking before. Sometimes the "temporal smoothing" setting, when you set it to 5 frames, is able to reconstruct detail so you can push your footage further.
  3. Neat Video (and some practice with Neat Video settings, it's got a lot of settings). But it might also smooth out/get rid of macro blocking so then you need to export it again at a low bitrate.
  4. Really interesting analysis, I hadn't considered this but I think it's very true... But in Endgame I feel there was a conscious attempt (and a pretty overt one) to shoehorn in dramatic choices. It's just that they feel false. Iron Man's daughter (spoiler alert?) was meant to be a foil against the time travel plot. A "Frodo leaving the shire" moment. And it's meant to be a character arc that Iron Man (spoiler alert?) lets himself die in service of saving the world, when he started out as a war profiteer. A T-800 melting himself moment. But the thing is... that arc already happened with Iron Man (in Iron Man) and I think the bigger problem isn't the lack of choices, it's that the choices feel obvious or artificial. Of course they save the world. But, by the same token, of course Luke leaves Tatooine. And yet... that choice resonates with me. Nothing in Endgame really does. Why is that? Why do the choices in Marvel movies feel less like choices than the choices in the classics? Maybe it's because the morality is so black and white that it's difficult to empathize with the antagonists? I really don't know and I do wonder... But credit to the Russos for the effort, Endgame is a well-crafted movie and that goes down to the script imo. And I thought Civil War, which they also directed, had real stakes and real choices in it and a strong third act that was smaller and more personal, more about personal choices than it is about us vs them beat-em-ups. Sort of a revenge vs forgiveness thing with a huge second act that's a beat-em-up and a third act that's more personal and emotional. And with a real choice in it. I gotta admit, even though I don't really care for the MCU, Civil War had some interesting stuff in it. Same with Transformers 1, I agree. That felt like a movie to me, too. ....of course the broader subtext is I want to compare this tribalistic lack of empathy, lack of emotion, and lack of choice with today's political atmosphere and even the us vs them mindset with Sony vs Canon vs Nikon vs whatever... compared with how things were decades ago where it was more moderate and centrist. But I won't. 😉 Because that would be an us vs them comparison... And it is much more nuanced than that. For better or worse, I think Marvel movies are the right movies for our times. I just hope better times are ahead.
  5. I think Marvel movies (other than Iron Man) have a similar style of storytelling to recent Spielberg movies (and Transformers movies). Instead of there being a character arc for the protagonist and that being the focus of the story, there's an external threat and then some elite heroic force stands up to that threat and stops it (could be Iron Man standing up to Thanos, could be Lincoln standing up against slavery). To that extent, these are movies about rejecting external change rather than they are about embracing personal change. That kind of story appeals to me less. (Not that I'm advocating for either slavery or for Thanos.) Even with older blockbusters like Armageddon where there is an external threat, it's about the "everyman" standing up to save the day when NASA can't. Or in Enemy of the State it's the individual vs the establishment–this is the trend in the 90s imo, populism. And there's usually an accompanying character arc. With recent Marvel movies, and recent Spielberg movies, and maybe just recent studio pictures in general.... it's the "elites" saving the everyman. And often the only arc is the everyman learning to embrace the "elites" while they expel whatever outside force threatens the everyman... But I also agree about MCU being extremely well made... I dunno, structurally it reminds me more of tv, which it basically is. Or sports–watching your team trounce the other team. But credit where it's due–you'd expect MCU fans to pile on Scorsese and vice versa, but it seems the discourse has been civil and intelligent. I used to think the appeal of MCU was watching your team beat up the other team. Maybe it's more complex than that and MCU fans are more sophisticated, and ironically it's Scorsese positing an elitist us vs them framework here.
  6. My guess: Paint out light sources. Track the background. Add smoke elements (normal transfer mode I’m guessing), adjust levels/blur/etc. Position/add fire elements, change to screen or add transfer mode. Adjust levels/blur. Roto foreground. Add embers/sparks. Maybe add haze, foreground smoke, etc. Color correct to add orange tint. (And of course track the camera motion so the elements follow it. Or that whole thing could be a still with shake added in post.)
  7. I think those will work if they're bright enough. The only thing the gaffer said that I think is worth considering is you might also want a constant (non-flickering) dim orange source that's very soft/ambient or else it will look too high contrast and fake and also try to make sure the flickering feels a little random/offset. But that depends on the lights you're using. If it looks good as is it's fine. And fog/haze is good but consider adding it in post in addition or instead or else the bright areas will clump around the light sources. And be careful of front lighting smoke, can wash out the frame. Shoot some tests maybe but I think you'll make it work. Also maybe download a high quality iPhone app and then add in compression artifacts etc. in post for the vfx shots imo.
  8. I’ve used this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKEv02ALtNY A gaffer I worked with recommends mixing the magic gadgets with a light that’s always turned on (once the "fire" starts) but dimmed way down. If it’s just the magic gadget it will look too obviously like a single pulsing source. You can add a few magic gadgets at different strengths and different speeds or with orange/yellow gels of different color/intensity. Fire is somewhere around 1800K-2500K I think. Tungsten lights are closer to 2900K so you can use orange gels to get it more orange. Or dimmed down tungsten bulbs are more orange already. But gels are most flexible in my experience. You can use a regular dimmer or one like this: https://www.amazon.com/Yescom-Variable-Controller-Settings-Hydroponics/dp/B00U3LD1WA/ref=asc_df_B00U3LD1WA/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=198107334619&hvpos=1o1&hvnetw=g&hvrand=8937789165355064762&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9001876&hvtargid=pla-351845451838&psc=1 Or use a few of these mixed with one tungsten source with a gel or tungsten balanced LED with a gel, and have that source be soft (the "ambience" from the fire) or even bounced: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1437657-REG/luxli_orc_viola_m2_5_rgbaw_led_light.html/%3Fkw%3DLUORCVIOLAM2%26BI%3D225%26ap%3Dy%26smp%3Dy%26lsft%3DBI:514 On a bigger budget, the magic gadget is a better choice imo. But not too different. Of course you have to plan and time it all up. Coordinate the effect on set with what's going on in post (in your head and then in post). A heat haze effect helps, too. Video Copilot has a pretty good one and it's cheap. I'd be wary mixing real flames and fake. Difficult to match the levels or control them. And you're working with real flames. But if you can pull it off, that might provide the most realistic effect. In my experience, if flames are the light source, they're really going to blow out so sometimes it's easier just to add them all in post even if it doesn't look 100% real. The flames are going to be a lot brighter than the rest of the scene, which will be underexposed, and that's tricky to expose correctly but if you add all the flames in post and use power windows on faces and whatnot it's not so bad imo. Fog elements help, too. Use screen or add transfer mode for the flames imo. That reference vid is comped pretty well imo and the elements look good from that vendor. Shoot and comp tests if you're unsure.
  9. https://www.salon.com/2018/04/28/how-superhero-films-became-the-guiding-myth-of-neoliberalism/
  10. I've liked Canon and Panasonic in the past but if this has A9 AF and Venice color it's game over.
  11. Thanks, I'll have to find an accountant, but that's a good start. Appreciate the advice. @CyclingBen yeah that's just the type of stuff I'm writing off this year. Or plan to. A little tricky since I mostly do post work now but am moving more toward shooting again a bit more (but also might scale down my freelance work and do more work as an employee). Looks like I definitely need an accountant. Thanks again.
  12. I think I spun the same logic back on you in the last thread, so I won't bother again except to take it as encouragement I was doing something right. But I'm genuinely curious what you think is delusional or narcissistic about my posting. (Also, do you actually think there are undercover Canon reps here posting surreptitiously?)
  13. I have my doubts about the licensing argument, too. I suspect this is multifactorial and other factors include available hardware and support costs. Whether DPAF is on or off, for instance, alters the rolling shutter timings on the C200. Who would have guessed? None of us but engineers under NDA know the full story here, but the willful crippling narrative reads as most delusional to me. (Someone mentioned something about sensor temp and that sounds crazy, too, but much less crazy.) Regardless, I can nevertheless see a coherent argument for crippling (market segmentation) and heat (lining up some timing on multiple chips with the sensor) at least existing in the realm of coherent possibility, and even for licensing fees–even if I don't think any of the three tells the full story. But the idea that paid Canon reps are visiting this forum anonymously to spin their decision to cripple the camera is borderline Pizzagate-level delusion. This is a stills camera; it's not a hybrid like the GH5 or newer Fujis and it's not even being marketed to videographers except incidentally. I like the DIY ethos of this forum and the articles on unusual lenses and focus on image quality on the cheap, but thinking Canon cares enough to mess with you like that is tin foil hat-level delusional narcissism and I'm surprised to find it has a place here.
  • Create New...