anonim

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

A lot different look than the older BM stuff. But still a good short for sure. Nothing really blown out. Trouble is to me I would be hard pressed if I didn't know what it was shot on to guess well...what it was shot on. ?

I'm always so happy to see people just go with camera and shoot beautiful scenes like weekend painters did once upon a time... BM cameras are so good in that because of its forgiveness about mistakes... So. one more, maybe now for the @Kye if there's some curiosity how Pocket 4k look combine with Voigt 17.5

3 hours ago, IronFilm said:

There isn't a massive difference in light between f1.7 and f0.95, what perhaps a bit more than a stop? (especially if you compare T stops instead of F stops)

Having earlier every Panasonic zoom, I'm afraid that difference certainly will be more than 2 stops.

32 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I don't think they were trying to prove anything. And at the time they started it the BMPCC was just about one of the best camera you could buy for any money short of a Sony F35, F65 or an Arri which you can't afford... There has been some pretty amazing stuff shot on a camera that at one time, was only 500 Dollars for a while brand new because they couldn't sell it for the 995 Dollars they wanted. I would not doubt half or more of the old timers on here have had one at one time or another. I know me and Mercer have. Probably I might buy one again soon. Only weakness in them was the damn HDMI port.

 

It seems to me that you little bit confused BMpocket and BMmicro  Movie was shot with Micro (Pocket was sold at promoting price during one season)... and actually Micro cinema camera had pretty unison confirmation of being pinnacle of Blackmagic effort before moving to another "look". Many pretty serious cinematographers valued its image more than Ursa's. (I'm sure that, say, @Zak Forsman could say more in that regard...) In fact, Micro cinema camera is still actual.  

17 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Who gives a shit about a little wobble. 

Malick and Lubezki certainly would agree with you: "Song to Song" (in enormous quantity) and even "Knight of Cups" are full of wobbling handheld shots. And there it was not even intentional pseudosymbolic usage (as, say, in chasing to describe distorted perception) - they simply and really didn't "give a shit about little wobble" mesmerizing spectator in constantly flowing, poetical, juxtaposed, surreal movement.

Actually, there's no more rules in movie language. Moreover, probably never were - except to now how and where to cut across them in most efficient way.

Personally, I think that creators of that war movie obviously use wobble with purpose, as much as colors and light leaks. 

51 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

Why would they waste all this production on that camera?

Really don't know... maybe you didn't check posted BTS clip which explains shooting process? Obviously they think about, see and value result different.

11 hours ago, tekeela said:

Can I get some feedback on my planned P4K purchase list? This is my first camera, first lens, etc. I've tried to do as much research as I can, now I just need some learned eyes to double check I haven't made any real dumb decisions. Planned use will be no-budget narrative fiction and a bit of casual street filming.

Lenses: Meike 25mm T2.2 + Meike 16mm T2.2
Filters: Tiffen 77mm Indie Pro Infrared/ND Filter Kit
Monopod: Sirui P-326S with VH-10X head
Storage: Samsung T5 2TB

I would be planning to buy more of the Meikes as they came out, and I don't have to worry about sound for now. The other alternative would be to go for the Metabones + Sigma route. I already have the camera, a smallrig cage and a couple of batteries. Not sure if I'll need a bigger battery or not.

Let's me to try to be useful 

Lenses: T2.2 might not be enough flexible (as exclusive in arsenal); 25mm and 16mm are too close

Filters: That one is pretty expensive and slowing shooting process solution

Monopod: Maybe to try first with some UW lens and see how you manage handheld shooting with it regarding style and possibility

1 hour ago, kye said:

There are many things that really define what a camera setup is capable of..   DR, 8/10/12bit, lenses, filters, etc, but sensor size isn't one of them.  

Yes, words saying that size actually doesn't matter but DR consoled me through all my life

16 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

 It is not even half as good as the footage I showed from the OG BMPCC with a piss ass little s16mm sensor.

One of the most beautiful and skillful cinematography I saw in last 10 years belongs to "Lore" by Cate Shortland director and Adam Arkapaw as dop... they used exclusively s16 in it. I'd dare to recommend that movie to everybody who yet didn't see it - at least just to take one breath relaxation/inspiration from hard battle of sensor's size/capability fascination.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1996310/

34 minutes ago, Skip77 said:

 If all the GH5 owners are waiting on the Gh6 then that makes sense and I would do the same except if I had a GH5, like my G7, I would have already figured out that the 4/3 sensor is not even super35 size and I would have already done my research that told me and glass. I think most Gh5 owners know the faults of the camera and what the S1 and Z6 do better already so no need for me to call it out. The GH5 is just not the camera I would recommend for anyone looking to upgrade.

 

Hi, I'm curious: if I, after reading remarks to @Kye's post made after his awakening, confirm that 4/3 sensor is not even super35 size and that Hollywood cinematographers are moving toward full frame sensors - so consequently Z6 and S1 are more recommendable camera than GH5 - would you disagree in something with me?

4 hours ago, currensheldon said:

I’m not asking for a cinema camera to shoot feature films on. 

 

Yes, because it is so obvious that it's impossible to shoot feature films with IBIS, as well as any part of it because every spectator immediately leave theater when notice that ugly micro jitters on screen.

4 hours ago, MeanRevert said:

Speaking of IR and the Pocket 4k... talk about perfect timing!

In taming IR effects maybe could be useful to check Captain Hook's  solving efforts via usage of his lut

http://www.captainhook.co.nz/blackmagic-cinema-camera-lut/

6 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

https://blackmagiccameraclub.wordpress.com/2015/01/25/prores-lt-vs-prores-hq-vs-raw-on-the-black-magic-pocket/

Thanks, test confirm me my one experience: difference is pretty obvious even in exposing just one snapshot. RAW has noticeable better 3d definition, more details in the ground, more DR in left part of the clouds which seems to keep same form and position through shots. Watching footage flow without web compression makes difference even more pronounce.

Prores HQ might be sufficient for somebody, not enough sufficient for someone else. For me, personally, having possibility of RAW shooting is exclusive quality and reason why to choose BM cameras instead others with better ergo, IBIS etc.

On 4/6/2019 at 9:31 PM, mercer said:

 

@mercer vs Paolo Sorrentino: The Young Pope, episode 9.

1 hour ago, Shirozina said:

Can you post some side by side examples as this has not been my experience unless the Resolve has misinterpreted ProRes as Video range and clipped the highlights.

Just to note or remind: in case of additional (and crucial) highlithts recovery possibility (that thebrothersthre3 mentioned in post) there's no need for examples: with RAW you can do it on rec.709 timeline, with ProRes you can't. As simple scenario, shot same scene with both, intentionally making clipped highlights. With ProRes you can't bring them back. With CDNG do such settings in Resolve CameraRaw menu

Decode Using: Clip

WB: As Shot

Color Space:  Rec.709

Gamma: Gamma 2.4

... and picks of highlights are coming back from void (and such view has metaphysical impact on me), so you can further mold distribution of DR as you wish.

13 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

If I use an ND filter (which I am planning to do anyway) is there less IR, or it is completely irrelevant?

If I have to use ND, do I have to put ond of those aforementioned filters before or after the ND?

1. I'm afraid there is more IR with ND filter.

2. I think it is irrelevant where to put IR filter.

(If you in aesthetic choice chase for little bit of vintage look, IR pollution actually might be useful.)

2 hours ago, Shirozina said:

There is no more DR shooting RAW over ProRes

I have to disagree from my experience with BM cameras - not strictly taking notion of DR (that after all debates seems to me too vague), but simply true RAW vs PR HQ looks better or made such impression-feel even at first glance. Not day and night, but there is a visual difference as I can see. Of course, my eyes are not at all ultimate judge, it might be result of autosuggestion - so rather call for everyone to try and compare. (I don't know how BRAW stay in comparison.)

2 hours ago, Geoff_L said:

Just a question :  prores raw is, at the moment, not editable on PC. Do you guys think that it may be possible one day ? I'm eager to try prores raw recording with the Z6, but not ready to ditch all my computer gear to switch to apple (no money for that). Thank you !

Prores raw is editable with newest Edius 9.4 version.

1 hour ago, mercer said:

How do you know they haven’t offered?

I know about offer - but I just supposed that noble counter offer was: post of CEO or nothing, because they didn't choose right, as through all history all Canon-ized smart asses... so to say while mr webrunner5 is still awake to quickly correct me in my indian-american try.

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Because the entire Digital Bolex market is a drop in the ocean to the Canon behemoth 

I see... That's probably also answer to (I think logical) question why Canon yet didn't choose to hire mr @mercer from EOSHD for its ambassador. 

2 hours ago, mercer said:

I just found this 5D Mark II ML Raw video by accident.

It’s an ML Raw test from the early days. It is a test for a horror film so it has some graphic/violent content... in case that bothers anybody.

Looks brilliant to me. Surely I'm naive, but I can't quite understand why Canon can not simply repack, say, that 5D II + ML Raw sensor/codeck solution and sell it as some sort of its own Digital Bolex version to so many devoted Canon indie/moviemakers and admirers?

1 hour ago, Geoff CB said:

Soooo I'm going to throw stones here a bit. I tried out the camera an had some serious problems with it. The form factor threw me off. Why for the love of god are BM still putting reflective screens on their cameras for video? 

Thanks... Is the screen that bad for your usage? There are pretty different information from reviewers.

Also, I suppose  ou know it, and know better than me, but just to remind - actual power of BM camera line lays just in these magic sliders at the left in Resolve when using raw files  It is so mystical exciting to me to see how blown highlights getting back their picks, how truly molding is WB... I can't resist to feel that something similar maybe it is still possible with my life: bring back to life picks of hopes, totally change skintones of my destiny...

For sure there are so many different aspects and layers to reckon in it, but back to the topic...

I'll get in wednesday Moza Air Cross - it has interesting unique feature of expandable plate space, so I'm curious if P4K can fit in it without additional accessories. Strange, I didn't yet manage to find anywhere if somebody has that gimbal working with P4K. Although it has 1.6kg payload, it is still enough for that camera and yet very light (under 1kg). Air Cross could supply power for GH5 or Sony cameras via dumb battery,  and I think that the same easy could be possible with P4K and Canon LP6 with maybe just changing jack in... I bought it for Micro cinema camera so will see...

11 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

He filmed Movie with a Camera before all that happened to him. He fell out of favor way after that movie. Yeah at the end he may have seen the light as they say, but he was thick in it in the beginning. Shit happenings. But still.

Sorry, it was contrary. After that movie he received whole support... But that pre-Stalin era was (just in term of creativity and indeed revolutionary ideas) totally different from usual manner represented in West: some of the greatest painters, writers, directors were offsprings from initial enthusiasm  of pure revolution, before it degenerated in Soviet version of controlled state.