TARS

While the barrier to entry is getting lower gear-wise, the about of media consumed is going up astronomically, thanks to social media. This is baseless speculation on my part as a non-pofessional, but more and more on my Facebook and Instagram feed I'm seeing promoted posts from companies of all sorts putting out photos and videos professionally made for that specific medium. Everything from big brands to local weed shops. There could be a growing market to make 30 second type videos for businesses to fuel the content machine. If you're looking for business, you could try reaching out to businesses that you see are trying to grow on social media with a proposal to schedule some time to make x amount of videos that they could roll out on social. Just a thought.

If you watch it past the 2 minute mark, he's explicitly explaining what "he" did as if this was an unsubstantiated rumour that he had then figured out. What actually happened was two comprehensive videos were made, one doing exactly what he has copied, and another explaining the math. These were done by one guy and found nowhere else on the internet. He's seen the video and he copied it essentially verbatim. There would be no problem if he had at least credited YodaYeo for the discovery. But instead, he used the phrase "what I did" about a hundred times. If there was nothing wrong with what he did, why would he be deleting comments from anyone that references YodaYeo in the comments?

Are the majority of Fuji lenses good for video? My girlfriend shoots on an X-T1 and I noticed when I took a picture with the 35mm f2 WR that it breathes like crazy. I'm definitely intrigued by the X-H1 because we're kicking around the idea of switching to the same camera system to save weight for travelling.

Sucks that he had to add a request in all caps not to plagiarize his work in both the title and the description. I'm looking at you, Peter Gregg. EDIT - What's worse about Peter Gregg's plagiarized video is that he has gone through and deleted every comment from anybody pointing out the fact that he's presenting someone else's work as his own. What a prick.

Except the $500 price difference between that and the GH5. The GH5 is a hybrid camera, so not all users need a LOG profile. The GH5S is a video camera, so it wouldn’t make sense to not include it.

It’s not something that everybody requires. Panasonic’s explanation was the camera could cost $2000 without it, or $2100 with it, basically. Whether you agree with the logic or that a log profile is worth $100 is up to you. But that’s the only explanation they gave.

Anybody buying a product from this company should read this first: https://www.motionvfx.com/mblog/how_to_make_money_on_violating_copyrights,p2217.html I’m not passing judgment on people who buy their products, but a lot of creators know what this feels like, so I thought people here might like to know.

At the Dropbox link below I have created a "Fade In" and "Fade Out" title that you can use. Drop them over whatever you want to fade in or out and drag it as long as you want it to be. By default it is 2 seconds. I also put a saturation rig on it, so in the title inspector you can keyframe saturation if you feel like bringing something up in black and white and then adding colour as part of the 'fade'. https://www.dropbox.com/s/7x8hrct0tvte9mb/Fades.zip?dl=0 To install them, just unzip it, then put the "Fades" folder in Users>yourname>Movies>Motion Templates>Titles Then restart FCPX. EDIT - Or do what Jim said.

One thing that Final Cut is missing is an adjustment layer. So working natively can be a pain in the ass if you're adding something like a letterbox. The problem with the FCPX letterbox is that it gets adjusted along with the image if you use the transform tool. To get around it, you have to create a title to use as an adjustment layer if you want to be able to add things like letterboxes, or to be able to drag a lut across multiple clips or something. Ryan Nangle also made one of those and it's available for free here: https://sellfy.com/p/Nxcc/ I would also recommend getting Alex4D's free letterbox effect because it's way better than the native one. It is here: https://blog.alex4d.com/2012/10/28/alex4d-letterbox-fcpx-effect/ For the fade in, are you just looking for something that brings up the exposure from 0 to 100% over a set period of time? If that's all you want, I can make you a fade in and fade out title you can drop over a clip in your timeline then drag to whatever duration you need if you'd like. It would make things a bit faster than manually keyframing it. For audio you can just use the handles.

I'm with Mattias. Once you learn how it wants you to edit, it's incredibly fast and intuitive. Regarding transitions, one thing that's really cool about Final Cut and Motion is that if you create your own transitions, you can save them as titles and drop them over top of your clips instead of having to put them between. This also allows you to stack them. For instance, if you make a wip pan transition and a spin transition and save them as titles, you can put them both over the same cut points and it will combine the effects. Ryan Nangle made a good video showing this recently. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UI8kjqt09A So Andrew, in your case, you could create a fade as a title and it would stick to your clip. Or you could then make it a compound clip if you really wanted to. It's obviously more of a hassle than what you want, but it also provides more opportunity for creativity, IMO. On the negative side, one issue with 10.4 is that the colour wheels only work for exposure in rec 2020, and the colour board works only in rec 709. See the explanation here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bESH7_p6aRk

I have my lower limit currently set at 400 because I'm still not sure that 200 is the base ISO in the linear picture profiles. Upper limit is usually 3200 for me, but I'm not doing client work so don't worry too much about the noise. You should do some test shooting to determine what an acceptable upper limit is for your use. You will still have to adjust the ISO manually if you don't put it on auto ISO. If you put it on auto, it will stay within the range you set.

The reason there is a dedicated video button is so that when you're in any one of the stills modes (M, S, A, P, iA), you can quickly get a video clip by pushing that button without having to change to Creative Movie Mode (or whatever they call the video mode on the dial). When you're in movie mode, the shutter button which is normally reserved for stills also can be used to start video recording. Note that if you set your C1, C2, or C3 settings while in movie mode, the shutter will start video recording in those settings as well, which is really handy. Regarding ISO, I have been under the impression that 400 is the base ISO for all video modes on the GH5. So shooting in 200 would lower your dynamic range slightly. However, recently I saw some people contesting in a Facebook group that the base ISO is only 400 in HLG and VLOG-L, and that in all other modes it's 200. The documentation from Panasonic appears to support this, but it goes against what their reps have been saying in videos since release. Relevant portion below: https://www.panasonic.com/uk/consumer/cameras-camcorders/lumix-g-compact-system-cameras/dc-gh5l.specs.html Hopefully someone smarter than me can come in and clear it up definitively.

There was an interesting thread today in a GH5 Facebook group regarding the autofocus that will be of interest to many people here. This guy suggests in the video below that the autofocus can be dramatically improved by changing the shutter angle. He then goes on to provide proof with an adapted lens. In the Facebook group, several members have been confirming the results with both adapted and native lenses. Before you get too excited, in the video he says it only works for 25p or 30p, and no shutter angle adjustments help for 24p for whatever reason. If you can live with a 150 degree shutter and need your AF to track for something. This video is worth having a look at. EDIT - just wanted to add the relevant reasoning from the video description:

It can be mapped to any fn button. The best part is that once it's set as a fn button, you can just hit the button twice to toggle between on/off. You don't have to push up on the joystick or wheel to change the setting like you would for quickmenu options. I mapped it to the button next to the lens and use it all the time. It's awesome.

Can anybody explain to me why the sky appears to be rapidly pulsing between white and light blue when it's blown out? I'm shooting 4k 23.97p 10 bit, if it makes a difference. I've noticed it a couple of times, typiaclly in high contrast environments. For instance, if I'm in a jungle, the sky that peeks through the leaves will shimmer a bit. I think it might be the autofocus hunting or something, but I still have to do some tests when I have some time. If anyone is familiar with this and could tell me what it is, that would be awesome. EDIT - I should also mention, I'm shooting in full manual other than autofocus. ISO typically locked at 400, and shutter at 1/50th.

I felt like there was an outside chance this was legitimate until "mic jack". I would love to be wrong though. If it's real, then maybe Canon has identified vlogging as a growing market with big potential. Because this camera would be perfect for that.

I'm travelling for an indefinite period of time (at least a year), so I only carry the GH5, three lenses, and a microphone. So weight, volume, weather sealing, and the ability to easily attach and remove filters were the things that mattered the most to me. But I am doing video about 90% of the time. But like I say, if you're manually focusing anyway and don't mind a bit of extra weight, I would use something that isn't fly by wire.

I have the Panasonic 8-18, and while I do love that lens and it’s sharpness for photos, it doesn’t really have the practical advantages for video you might think. The autofocus is bad to the point where I don’t even use it for vlogging. I’ll set focus and flick the switch on the barrel to manual. It’s that bad, even in daytime sunlight. The IBIS also doesn’t play very nice with it on the wider end. There’s a lot of jello and background warp happening there. But That will likely be the case for any lens that wide. it is still one of the better options for the system, given that it has filter threads and has great image quality. Just be aware that the autofocus can be maddening and fly by wire is verrrry difficult to pull reliably and consistently. for my purposes, I still think it’s the right choice. But if you don’t mind the bulk of adapted lenses and will be doing mostly manual focusing, there are better options.

I know this thread is mostly about the content that YouTube chooses to promote in terms of exposure, but today there has been a lot of rumbling on YouTube and around the internet about the internet browser, Brave, and Basic Attention Token. I reckon it's worth mentioning here because it seeks to cut out middlemen like YouTube to make a better advertising experience for both creators and advertisers. The browser blocks all ads and third party scripts, then users can choose to watch ads to receive BAT, which they can then distribute to the owners of their favourite blogs, youtube channels, etc. It's a really fascinating idea. It blew up a bit today because they're giving away $5 worth of BAT to everyone who signs up, which must be distributed to your creators of choice in 90 days. Read more about Brave here: https://brave.com/million/ And if you're a creator, you can sign up to receive BAT here: https://publishers.basicattentiontoken.org/ Just in case, no, I am not affiliated with this company. I just think it's a cool idea.

When I was in high school, it was Jackass and Bam Margera. My parents thought it was awful. I thought they just didn’t “get it”. I get Logan Paul’s appeal to kids that age for that reason. To me it seems like nonsense and a waste of time at best, but I’m “old” now. I do agree with Andrew and others that have pointed out that it’s outrageous for YouTube to be pushing that video in trending with a blurred out dead body in the freaking thumbnail. Especially after the whole Pewdiepie/WSJ thing. If you’re gonna try to say your platform is more advertiser friendly, maybe you should give a shit when your stars are disrespecting dead people and showing corpses on said platform.

Thanks for the explanation. For me though, the always being positive thing is common amongst YouTubers. It's not something that I like because it doesn't feel genuine. But I have heard multiple YouTubers in the travel niche say that any amount of negativity on their channels garners a massive barrage of dislikes and negative comments about being "ungrateful" about living a "dream life". So for some, it's just taking the path of least resistance in a career where you're completely open to criticism from the entire internet. Not sure what Peter's deal is, but it could just be that.

Would you mind elaborating a bit on why you feel that way? I'm not looking to come to his defence, just curious about your point of view.

Peter McKinnon is the best YouTuber going, AINEC. He absolutely exploded over the last 8 months or so to over 1 million subscribers. It's been wild to watch. He does photography and videography tutorials mixed with some vlogs. He just seems like the coolest dude. https://www.youtube.com/user/petermckinnon24

I agree. If felt more like a blue cast than an actual grade. Some scenes looked like they shot them in broad daylight and someone put a blue gel over my TV screen. Bizarre.