Ben J.

I should mention that this youtuber is pretty big; so unlike a lot of youtubers that would benefit from exposure, he doesn't really need any.

I've seen companies use clips from youtubers in their videos many times. I wanted to know if, as long as you give credit to the youtuber, its okay to use part of their video in yours? I know there are things like fair use, and this would be used for a product video but it is also sharing awareness as well (though mainly, a product video).  Is it legal to show a youtuber's work as long as you give them credit?  I wanted to use a clip from this youtuber because it show the danger of not wearing a mask when playing airsoft.

Awesome! Thank you guys for all the replies! And oh my goodness.....I would die if that was my camera (im sure the studio was happy).

7 minutes ago, tupp said:

Use the Glidecam with a rain cover and keep all flaps on the rain cover tucked-in (or use tape).  Should be okay.

 

Another option is to use a heavy, clear freezer bag around the camera, with the opening taped to the lens hood.

Gotcha, so you think that would be enough to prevent paint from getting in and keep the camera from getting damage from force impact?

21 minutes ago, tupp said:

When you said "Glidecam," I got the impression that you were using a Steadicam type rig -- not an electronic gimbal.

 

Furthermore, a solid underwater housing might be too much for a gimbal.

Well I meant either. I prefer using a gimbal but with the water housing that obviously would be too big or most likely cause problems, hence using a glidecam; I meant either one.

1 minute ago, tupp said:

An underwater housing seems like overkill for your purpose.

 

A rain cover and a strong lens filter might be better and easier.  If you are concerned about damage from the impact force of the paint balls, you could try an insulated rain cover.

Yeah but would that mess up the balance of the gimbal? 

45 minutes ago, Anaconda_ said:

Are you shooting real games or staged?

Can you wear high vis so at least nobody purposefully shoots at you?

You could try one of those bags for snorkeling. Then you don't have to worry about paint getting in the camera.

If you're worried about impact damage, you could put some socks or something inside the bag.

I guess we could make it staged, but I still would want them shooting. I want to make it feel like its real and not staged. I saw some shots from the previous videographer who worked for them and it was very obvious that it was staged. Maybe not to the untrained eye, but to me it was very easy to spot. I'm thinking of using this, but trying to see if there is a more affordable option. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1608185-REG/ikelite_71475_200dl_underwater_housing_for.html

Question, so I work for a paintball company and I need to know what would be the best protection for my camera on a glidecam getting shots of the action? I know people will say, just film it from far away, but I want the audience to feel the rush of the paintball players. I don't have much of a choice anyways.

I've already found a front lens protector possibly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g3J-YpwzHw 

Now just trying to figure out how to protect the body of the camera and lens. 

18 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

Looks clean as a whistle to me for ISO 1250. On many other cameras that shot would be fizzing like hell!

For some reason it won't let me upload other files giving me a 200 error?

12 hours ago, Shirozina said:

Yes use the Histogram and / or Zebras to set exposure. Your WB is not set correctly as the image has a blue/magenta bias - how are you setting WB? 

Yes you are right, I think I changed the matrix filter (tint) on it in camera to get rid of some yellow (which would explain the blue spike)

1 hour ago, Don Kotlos said:

Are you using a Cine profile? Some of the Cine profiles use the full 0-255 range, while the display (& zebras) work on the safe zone of 16-235. So you might think you are clipping but only because in camera you visualize a smaller range. 

No, its not a cine profile or log profile. So are you saying I should use the judgement of my eyes and the histogram to set exposure?

Shirozina said he couldnt see the noise, can you see it? Cause I can see it. 

1 hour ago, Shirozina said:

Only Cine 2 / zebras 105% show the absolute clip limit on these cameras - all other's show clip before that actual limit. Also all cameras show clipping only on the green channel so you have to make sure you get a perfect WB otherwise you can clip on the red and blue channels and not be aware from the zebras.

Yeah I set a custom white balance for perfect wb, so that shouldn't be the issue.   

1 hour ago, Shirozina said:

I can't see any noise on my UHD screen laptop (but my eyes can't focus close enough to be sure). Loading it into my NLE shows you are underexposed though with the whites peaking at only 80% so upping the exposure will help reduce any noise. Hope this helps?

Thats the strange part, it shows on my camera that I'm over exposing if I go higher, I'm not sure why. Unless 0.3+ or 0.7+ doesnt mean clipping? I thought it did though. Even when I expose more, it still has the same amount of noise, but I'll do another test again when I get back home.

Also, make sure you're looking for the noise in a dark room so you can see the shadows better. I notice it a lot on the corner wall and the desk.

So I have been using my sony a7sii for a good few months, but always wasn't sure what the noise was suppose to look like for a regular functioning factory sony a7sii.  It looked fine to me and never bothered me till now. I'm lately seeing a wall of thin noise in my shots. I don't know if this is how its suppose to look or if this grain is not normal. Please tell me. This was either shot at 1000 or 1250 iso, and this is set to exposure at 0 by what the camera is telling me to expose at. (no auto at all).

Here is one with my picture profile with all color depth set at 0 and its not cine 4, or the slogs 

C0089.MP4

On 7/24/2017 at 7:36 AM, Adrian Lim said:

Thanks for getting back to me so soon . 

I preset the K to 3.6k , 4.3k and 5.6k  prior.

i only used the monitor to show the huge difference in colour changes after altering the white balance .

 

where did I go wrong ? 

Was it the Setting of the K ? ????

 

Your using two different color temperatures in the scene. One is the room light which is just flooding the whole scene in what I assume 4800k or 3900k, the other is the monitor which is suppose to be set around 5600-6500k. All the sources have to be the same color temperature for best results. It's the same reason why if you are lighting a subject in a incandescent/tungsten room, and you set your kelvin to match the tungsten at around 3200k, why sunlight coming in from windows looks very blue. You have to set a custom white balance with both sources hitting the 18% grey card in order to get good mixed lighting results (or as someone said above me ^, dial it in manually till it looks correct to you).

My question is, does stretching a normal non-anamorphic video in post cause banding, pixel problems, compression, or any sort of negative effects? If I just did a minimal 1% stretch, would that ruin the footage?

5 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

Stockings?

 

Cool, thanks for the suggestion. I forgot about stockings. Not sure how I feel about the light loss, but oh well, can't have everything I guess

I have a sony camera which has more than enough sharpness. For 50mm for closeups, I want a softer look without lowering contrast or affecting bokeh (as most softening filters do with making the bokeh look like you have dust particles on your lens). I know this is unorthodox, but if I touched the lens with my finger and put a bunch or finger prints on the lens, wouldn't that do a better job of softening the lens without lowering the contrast that much? I'd use my hbm 1/2 softening filter, but the bokeh gets affected. I know people recommend rubbing petroleum jelly and stuff like that, but I don't like the uneven look/over the top look.

On 3/29/2017 at 2:38 AM, Kalani said:

Thank you.

I think that it doesn't come from the WB. In fact, when I switch to another PP the greens are greener.

So, i'm pretty sure that there is a tweak to apply in the color depth...

What model, are you using?

8 hours ago, Kalani said:

Thank you.

I think that it doesn't come from the WB. In fact, when I switch to another PP the greens are greener.

So, i'm pretty sure that there is a tweak to apply in the color depth...

Try changing phase to +1 instead

9 hours ago, Kalani said:

Hello everybody,

I just bought the eoshd pro color for sony.
I did a quick test and i found that greens (for example : the grass or leaves) are too yellow.
I tried to tune the color depht but no sucess. What would you recommend ? Higher the green color depth?

I have another question concerning the white balance : generally speaking, do you stick with the 3 custom settings or do you set a custom white balance for each scene?

Thank you for your help.

Did you adjust the white balance matrix? And as for someone who just bought the camera and has had it for a month now, I can tell you not to treat this camera like a canon camera in terms of WB. Try the standard values of 3200k,5600k, etc... While the eoshd pro color wb values are pretty close to standard, other profiles like autumn leaves or custom ones I made use 2600k instead of 3200k for tungsten.  I just bought a 18% grey foldable card/fabric by impact, and I have to say that using a custom white balance would have saved me a headache. I usually do manual white balance and dial it in manually for each scene, but if your not in a hurry and have time, I suggest using a custom white balance. If not, there's no reason why you can't or shouldn't try saving presets; as it can't hurt.  I personally just haven't found use for using presets yet.

On 2/28/2017 at 3:12 PM, Mattias Burling said:

Cool, but thats not what I need. My goal is to have all the needed filters in camera so I can swap lenses without having to move the filter.
I use magnetic filter adapters today for quick swaps of for example the build in ND.

But it would be nice to have both an ND and IR Cut (or just IR) built in.

Well it was too good to be true. Unfortunately despite advertising it, they discontinued it a while ago. Kind of pissed at the lack of updates to their site and material at schneider optics. So after a week of talking to people from B&H and schneider, I'm back at square one. Looks like I'll either be cutting the glass, or just sticking to one filter....which I'm not happy about, but we'll see.  These filter companies need to get their head out of their asses and wake up to 2017. Update your dam sites schneider and tiffen!

This guy I follow did a review 

On 2/25/2017 at 4:42 PM, Mattias Burling said:

Is there anyone of those you think would be ideal for modifications?

Getting a bit interested in this myself.

SO GENTLEMEN. Despite having some good feedback, I think I have even better news! Check this new item out (never even knew about it). https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/856343-REG/B_W_66_1071048_82mm_Kaesemann_Circular_Polarizer.html   And after talking to schnieder optics, the HBM filter has been updated with front threads!!

Also, which fotga adapter is this? I see a $132 a $58 and a $85.99 one.

Wow I can't believe how far this went! Mattias Burling, you should do a video on this haha! 

On 2/26/2017 at 8:30 PM, noone said:

YES! It works with my 17 f4 L TS-E.         I wont post any of the rubbish samples I just took but this is going to be a lot cheaper using a 43mm piece of filter glass instead of buying a 150mm IR filter to fit in my X-Pro filter holder.

Now I really have to see if anyone makes a 43mm circular apodization filter that works like an STF lens that I can use with my 100 f2.     There is a company that makes them I think but I am shuddering about the price.

noone, how is your experience with the fotga adatper? Can you control aperture manually? Any problems like light leak or crashing/shutting off the camera?  I've never heard of this adapter before, but if I run into the problem that I'm currently having, this might work. Be interesting to see a video test with that IR filter.