meudig

Yes.
Yes it is.
Running new 10.4
They added LUT support... wow only took 5 years!
First thing I tried to do was arrange the workspace... nope, can't move jack shit around. Just toggle on/off panels and resize panels.
No, scratch that - first thing I tried to do was a drag and drop of selected media from Finder to the media panel in FCPX. Won't work. Have to go through the shitty import panel!
Next... Tried to make a favourites bin of regularly used effects and basic transitions. LUT, colour correct, etc. all in one place, always present on screen ready to be clicked on. Nope. Too hard for Apple's programmers?!
There are still too many tacky presets and effects to wade through to find the basics. An overwhelming number of iMovie style transitions and gimmick effects. Why are these in a pro editor that costs £300?
Finally, at this point was tearing my hair out... So I tried something REALLY SIMPLE. Fade in and out of a clip. Ah but no...
Even this simple endeavour landed me on my arse. Perhaps I just don't know how to do it right, but the intuitive way is this... Drag transition onto start of clip, and one onto the end of the clip. It would only do the end. Oh, ok. No fade in for me then! Then, it brought up a complaining OK/cancel box about not enough source material to apply a cross fade... Whatever. Clicked ok, and it seemed to shift timing of the clip! WTF! But I had my fade-in and out! Want to hear something really funny? I then dragged the clip to somewhere else on the timeline to check the positioning tool and it dragged the clip there and forgot to bring the fade-in/out with it... WHY WOULD YOU WANT A FADE IN AND OUT TRANSITION WITH NO CLIP!?
Piece. Of. ShIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT.
But yeah... LUTs.

Performance wise it is good though... I'll give it that.

So, as much as I love my Canon lenses, I am having a lot of fun messing around with vintage lenses and ML Raw. I still cannot believe how amazing the Minolta 35mm 1.8 is on the 5D3. Here are a few more shots...





My next big goal is to convert a 58mm 1.2. But in the meantime, I think I’m going to buy a Helios... it is one vintage lens that has eluded me for the past 5 years. I found one that is listed as New Other in EF Mount? Did the Soviets make a Helios in the EF Mount? I believe it’s the 44-M 7... maybe? Also has anyone used any of the new Zenit Helios lenses? I saw a 50mm 1.2 that looks intriguing. 
And here’s one more from the Minolta.
Also I want to add so there isn’t any confusion to some users that are unaware... Minolta lenses will not adapt to Canon EF without having the lens modified. There are adapters but they have a corrective glass inside that is not of good quality.

Got myself some new glass for Christmas. I do prefer native lenses but the Sigma Speedbooster combo works really well! Screengrabs from GH5 + Speedbooxter XL + Sigma 35/1.4 + Black Pro Mist 1/4. 
Edit. Oh yeah, thanks to @jase and @kidzrevil for introducing me to Black Pro Mist, and other, filters.

I don't appreciate this comment.
And I agree with @Cinegain
Less one-line URL posts to shitty clickbait news articles.... and more camera tests from YOU guys. Make your own content.
If you do take time over it, you'll post less... but better quality. Just a thought.

Hey all,
I've just finished up a new grading tutorial especially for any of you shooting CinemaDNGs. It actually works with any CinemaDNG, not just limited to Blackmagic cameras.
In the tutorial I show you how get access to the full dynamic range, richer colours throughout the full range, and all in a curve thats a lot nicer to grade than BMD Film.

Feel free to leave any feedback or questions and I'll do my best to help you out!
 

As anybody who reads my comments already know, I bought a 5D3 last Spring and instantly fell in love with the images I was getting. After almost two years of searching for the right camera for the stuff I was looking to shoot, I found it in the 5D3. 
But...
I am the first person to admit that the post process of ML Raw can be a little tedious and requires a massive amount of storage. Since I am a hobbyist with narrative dreams, I’ve been searching for a second camera to shoot fun little vignettes in between shooting days with my 5D3. Shooting is a form of meditation for me and instantly calms me.
After a couple of cameras, I ended buying an RX10ii on the cheap. Now I had the camera last year but struggled with getting good color from it. This time around, I’ve decided to mostly shoot in sLog2 and Cine2 with monochrome and I am pleasantly surprised by how good the images turned out on my first outing with it.
I’ve always loved B&W photos and movies, but I’ve never really shot much with it, so I look forward to learning and experimenting more with it.
Now, I have been posting around here for a few years and color science, correction and grading are all popular discussions but there is rarely mention of B&W.
Does anyone shoot in B&W anymore? Does anyone have any video or screengrabs that were captured in B&W or turned to B&W in post that they’d like to share? Or even strong opinions for or against it?
I’ll start off with a few screengrabs. The first two were shot in sLog2...


And this one was shot in Cine2...

Hey guys, great posts in this thread. One thing, I actually DID put the shooter in the center of my piece, just in an overly calm way of wording. My own words from my original post: "With the GH5 a whole new crowd of videofans are doing their short seqences of slowmotion and IBIS demonstration..." Oh, how I love to cite myself:)
@Sage nice lensing and framing and great color out of your GH2. I like your emotion 2 montage, links into some great GH5 color moments here, awesome montage as well. I do think that too, that GH2 with the right lens choices and profile and WB has really nice color.
One thing, GH2 shooters always lead me to the most interesting material of pure camerawork: framing, lensing, color contrast- palette- and composition,  composition of objects, subject/object choice, camera movement and speed and point of view and distance, lighting. That is so to say what the GH5 lacks the most, this kind of library.
By the way, maybe a bit unexpected, a guess the camera game. I suggest without browsing his materail for an easy solution. I expect @mercer  to fall for some temptation of purchase again:)
 

Yes, the native GH2 color (with Smooth -2 and Flomo 2) is better than the GH5s native color. I will never sell my GH2, just because of its significance to me. Maybe I will do a GH5 > GH2 conversion for a bit of fun & nostalgia haha
 

@mercer exactly, profound analysis. It took cinegain digging into 6months old vimeo posts to find a decent GH5 video. I found the cinematographer with the GH2 on the first page with vimeosearch by date, just searching for GH2.
@Cinegain, first example is long, and seemingley milking the concept without offering much visual interest in doing so, 2min seems bloated to me.  Tonal gradation more nuanced in the hightlights than what typical GH2 videos show. It is  not offering cinematography but photography rather so, with all that slow and unspecific movement. Second video looks colorwise like osiris lut has been used. I have seen only super few GH5 videos that have wowed me due to the generic approach in all departments of cinematography, lack coming from users side.
Here is another nice one from the same  cinematographer. 36 seconds of well chosen angles, framing, subject distance, distinct choice and parts of movements. Even in slomo:) Also Shows great understanding of the basic graphic principles and works them to the best effect.
 
 

Obviously, the GH2 has a little bit of a head start but yes, there seems to be a different level of filmmaking that occurred 4-5 years ago compared to today.
I think it’s a combination of beliefs and methods that forced people to be creative with what they had, the limitations created aesthetic opportunities, but these limitations also kept the membership much smaller...
Now with the advancements, a lot more people have decided to give it a try. On eBay alone I have seen about 6 GH5s up for sale in the past month where the seller said they bought it because they decided they wanted to make music videos or short films but have since moved on to other interests.
When the tech becomes more important than the content, there will be an influx of mediocrity. 
With that being said, I have seen a ton of nice GH5 work, but I’ve also seen a ton of nice t2i work and with all of the tech and visual enhancements of new cameras, I cannot say that the GH5 videos are better than the t2i or the GH1 videos I’ve seen.
Hell, look at Kendy Ty... his films have gotten worse since he moved on from the t2i. Other’s films have gotten better.
Interesting post.

Should check out some fashion films on Vimeo... e.g.
Thing is... at the time of the GH2, normal folks weren't really looking for an 'in' to cinematography, just us enthusiasts and perhaps professionals that would love to either get into it affordably... or just because of the compact factor. And that was pretty close to the 5DmkII and T2i/550D boom that made us focus on these kind of cameras. These days, especially with vloggers using DSLRs and mirrorless cams, we've been seeing everyone doing test videos and that's the thing that get searched for most as well, because people are still looking for their 'in' right now, now that this method of shooting has evolved. Andrew, Caleb, Dave didn't have a GH5 guide out that quick, so then every n3wb had their chance to play important and release reviews and recommendations about stuff they actually hardly know a thing about. And it has become way more accessible as well, so there's just more people getting into it... but nobody really knows what they want to do with it... so you have people with 0 knowledge and 0 experience, but this camera and all they can come up with is shooting test videos, figuring things out. That's not a very good measurement to base anything on however. The GH5 is undoubtedly more capable than the GH2 was and WILL in the right hands, be a much better tool with better results.
Though yeah, when there was this 'pick one camera for the rest of your shooting' or something, the GH2 was the one I picked. Just because you only had the basics to worry about and because it really was my first interchangeable lens camera, which I bonded with and learned from so so much. But nostalgia has little to do with how a camera actually performs or what it is capable of. That's still down to the person operating it.

Please take my headline with a blinking eye:) With the GH5 a whole new crowd of videofans are doing their short seqences of slowmotion and IBIS demonstration. But indeed most of these pieces in my opinion don´t show subjects of visual interest but random results of moving hair and moving girls heads and lips and eyes from all so common angles with nothing in the frame but the slomo victim, may it be human, flower or the elements of nature. Any of these shots taken as a still put on a wall would make a mediocore choice.
Here is a video showing what the GH5 does not seem to enable shooters of the vimeo universe to achieve: simple choice of subject, disciplined lens and framing choice, intriguing but simple editing. Here it goes, the magic of GH2 makes it possible: staying true to the form, perfection in length!! , framing, subject and rhythm, composition in color and geometry. With the most common choice of subject, the human gestalt and the very common context of fashion.
 
 

BMPCC + Carl Zeiss 25mm lens. Stylised color grade based on my BozBMDFilm to Rec709 LUT. Download Page: https://goo.gl/B9Ns51
 

Wrote up a little guide for people new to this and looking to buy their first recorder. And is the way I see the world of low budget recorders is they're ranked like this (starting from worst/cheapest to best/expensive):
Tascam DR22WL / Zoom H1 (I'd suggest skipping right over this tier of recorders! But hey, my first ever short film I did years ago was with a chinese shotgun running straight into a Zoom H1!! :-o Shocking but true... everyone starts somewhere!)
Tascam DR60D mk2 (the DR60D mk1, before the mk2 came out, is what I myself started out using for no budget shorts as a budding location sound recordist)
Tascam DR70D (the *minimum* I'd recommend for a location sound recordist, even if you're just a student / no budget guy. Although in desperate cases, you could scrape by with getting the DR60Dmk2, but doing the opposite and stretching for an F4 is very worthwhile. Certainly, I could travel back in time I'd just have gone straight for the Zoom F4 from the starts! *Except* the F4 didn't come out until a few years later...  you live in a very lucky time with so many wonderful options to choose from!) or Tascam DR680 (these can be found at bargain prices secondhand, which is what I did before I then later on purchased a Zoom F4 once that came out & I spotted an F4 at a good price)
Zoom F4 / Zoom F8  / Sound Devices MixPre6 (I skip right over the MixPre3, as the MixPre6 is very similar yet does so so much more at only a relatively small extra cost. Also I regard the three of F4/F8/MixPre6 as all on broadly the same level to each other, just varying slightly from each other in one area or another that ones might have a small lead over the other one. This is the tier where I'd see you're now reaching the semi-pro level)
Sound Devices 633 / Zaxcom Maxx / Sanosax SX-R4+ (finally you have now got up to the "industry standard" when it comes to recorders people use for small shoots, especially when mixing from the bag. If you're doing this full time as your job or hiring someone who is, then likely this is what is being used. Either that or similar gear, or even something better above this)
And if you considering ones priced above those last three....  you're surely doing this full time as a sound recordist and getting a healthy income from that, so why are you asking us here on Frugal Filmmaker? ha! :-P But yes, tonnes and tonnes more options exist at the higher end as well!
Finally, if you're considering something in the budget range within what I just covered, but isn't one of those that I mentioned, then it probably is *not* a good idea to buy if you're intending to be a location sound recordist. 
Something else only might *maybe* make sense if you've got in mind some other purpose for it, such as perhaps you want to record a band in a studio (which has very different needs / constraints), or you're the rare exception which proves the rule, or you are getting lucky finding some amazingly priced deal which can make an otherwise bad purchase decision then make sense if "the price is right".
For instance I didn't include the Roland R88, as I feel it is extremely poor value for money in 2017! However.... there was a time at the end of 2016 when the Roland R88 got a huge price drop because it was being discontinued. Even with that massive price drop, the Roland R88 probably still wasn't a smart purchase vs the Zoom F8, but the big drop in price at least made the R88 a somewhat competitive option worth mentioning in a round up of all the various choices. However, that sale is now long since ended, and the prices I see on eBay for a Roland R88 is even higher than what you used to be able to buy it new from B&H Photo! Clearly those eBay sellers are dreaming. 
Anyway, that was just one example which might have been applicable but isn't now, so I don't rule out the possibilities of something like that perhaps popping up again in the future especially if you very keenly look around for secondhand deals. But for over 95% of people reading this, that won't be applicable, and just stick to going with one of the main ones I mentioned earlier.
 
http://ironfilm.co.nz/which-sound-recorder-to-buy-a-guide-to-various-indie-priced-sound-recorders-in-2017/

Maybe if films like BR 2049 had real suspense people would keep quiet.  That's the elephant in the room no one wants to talk about.  Yes, there are people who are simply rude in theaters (as in every other place).  I've turned around and pushed a guy in the chest to get him to shut up.  Which was stupid; three of them.  So I hate people who talk in theaters too.  However, once I get over my initial annoyance at someone talking, I often think about it and conclude I would have talked too if I had no interest in film-making itself. 
I enjoyed the cinematography of BR 2049.  Hearing the dialogue added nothing, if anything, it made matters worse.
The filmmaker has someone's undivided attention to start.  The audience has paid real money.  The saying in stand-up comedy that you must "kill" your audience is almost literal.  The audience will show no mercy and "kill" the stand-up comedian if they're not funny.   Hollywood gets lazy; good for the independents!
In short, I no longer blame the audience when many people talk.  Ironically, no one talked at my showing of BR 2049, but I respect my audience-mates less for it

Convergence culture is king. Whilst the big screen is important, accessibility is even more important. Of course you can have both the theatre release as well as the streaming release. Obviously they might be opposing forces.
I co-wrote a dissertation about horror films last spring (speaking of "It"), and while I learned alot about building suspense, I realised how cheaply they can be made and how well they can perform at the box office. The last couple of years has been great in that genre, with films making two times their budget on the opening weekends. Maybe the only genre that can to that, persistently, in this day and age.
 
 

Convergence culture is king. Whilst the big screen is important, accessibility is even more important. Of course you can have both the theatre release as well as the streaming release. Obviously they might be opposing forces.
I co-wrote a dissertation about horror films last spring (speaking of "It"), and while I learned alot about building suspense, I realised how cheaply they can be made and how well they can perform at the box office. The last couple of years has been great in that genre, with films making two times their budget on the opening weekends. Maybe the only genre that can to that, persistently, in this day and age.
 
 

I think we often see that massively-hyped films with great opening weekends often fail to sustain their momentum as word of mouth gets around that they're not actually that great! Hopefully BR2049 will do the opposite (I haven't actually seen it yet, but I'm salivating at what I've seen so far of Deakins's photography).

I'm not stuck with domestic grosses, where do you get that impression? In fact, this movie was probably greenlit mostly because of foreign market revenue since the original Blade Runner was a flop in the US. It is a cult movie nowadays so it could gather a worldwide audience to make it financially viable -let's hope it does-.
The issue is that whatever international distributors spent on international marketing is irrelevant to studios. Most of the times, studios make movies, market them and exploit them in the US -where they control the whole production chain up to movie theatres-. That's why we can sort of calculate how much they spent and their break-even point. International distributors usually pay for their own marketing campaigns and simply give back 50% of the BO gross.
Well, that prediction may not be far off! giving a x4 performance through its box office is kinda optimistic, though. That would be an ideal -yet possible- scenario given the good reviews and word of mouth. Take into account that more "hyped" movies like the Twilight films only manage to double the first weekend gross during their box office life. And no, those figures do not include DVD/Blu-ray, Streaming on TV rights... those are the very last chance for the producers to get their money back. Hey, even Waterworld eventually broke even... 

True. 
Although I've never gone to an electronics store and seen a "real nice picture" on a TV.

Oh, well I think I did once, but I suspect Philip Bloom had been there and already turned off all the extra bells and whistles.





Thank you Philip!

Watched it today. Have a direct comparision to the original, as I have watched it for the first time right before some friends and me went to
the cinema. The original was very enjoyable as was the recent incarnation. Both with similarities but total different beasts in other ways.
2049 is a real cinematic experience like the first one is. The longer and calmer scenes gave it its own rhythm and tension. Some of the deaths felt not necessary nor helpful
for the story and the film itself. The photography is impressive and must be seen on a big screen. The bigger the better. James Bernadellis review describes
the qualities of this film very well. Visually it´s a masterpiece, plot wise it does fine.

If the budget was around 155M$, then 400M$ is a reasonable break-even figure. Producers/Studios generally receive an average of 50% of the gross Box Office (the other half is what distributors amd cinemas keep). It is an old rule of thumb that movies need to make between 2 to 2,5 times their budget to break even, depending on marketing expenses and distribution deals.
According to this, Blade Runner 2049's marketing expenses would have been less than 35M$ which frankly seems to make sense given the media presence and promotion has been OK but not huge... In addition nowadays there are many movies in which most of the marketing budget come from pre-opening campaigns by "affiliate brands". I remember Men In Black 2 had a crazy high marketing budget -for its time- but it was mostly paid for by Mercedes-Benz and Burger King. Minority Report also had important sponsorship and product placement deals with big brands -Nokia and Audi, I believe-. I don't know about Blade Runner 2049, but wouldn't be surprised if the marketing budget had been tied to the agreements they managed to sign.
Truth is 35$M is a poor opening, but we have no idea how long its legs will be (8.7 on ImDB) or how well it can go in international markets... we'll see!

The Martian is PG-13 (larger potential audience), skewed more heavily female, did better with younger audiences (2049 was 86% over 25) and did $54m+ on its opening weekend. In fact its second weekend was better than 2049's debut at $37m, because of all the buzz it had terrific legs. It also did $228m in the US alone. Blade Runner might not reach that with its total global gross. Hollywood accounting aside, the studio has to be disappointed with returns of less than $8000 per theater for such a wide release - and it barely topped $50m outside the US. The Revenant got a seriously fat boost from all the Oscar nods, going from $54m in grosses before nominees were announced to $170m+. But to counter your point - opening weekends can be a fairly accurate predictor of overall success as 25-35% of the total gross typically comes in the first week of release. This one seemingly had a built in audience so it would be front loaded. If that's the case it could drop off the cliff pretty quick.

Well break-even would suggest that for the movie to make a profit, it has to do over $400m from ticket sales, blu-ray and merch, doesn't it?
So box office isn't everything and yes bomb maybe too strong a word but the problem is clearly illustrated
Hollywood will kill its own product if it carries on like this chasing $400m returns on art.
Because it's an impossible business model and the only way this level of greed can be maintained is by churning out branded, franchised, heavily marketed lowest common denominated trash for the masses.

It hasn't premiered in Japan or South Korea yet. I'm unaware of how popular it is over there but it might be a huge market.
The ties between Columbia (Sony) and Japan are of course obvious.
I remember the articles about the Warcraft movie and how poor it did domesticly, while it made most of its revenue in the Chinese market. Legendary pictures also had strong ties with China.
 
Just a thought.