kye

What is BK pollution? Even Uncle Google couldn't tell me what it means

If you have to adjust the ND manually then it's no easier than having a variable ND on the front. It's probably better optically, but it's the fact the camera can expose for me without mucking up the aesthetics that is what I'm interested in. I want the ND to be controlled by the camera automatically like the FS5.

Welcome! Nice looking stills. Have you tried to match the GH5 with your Alexa yet? If so, how did it go?

You mean in addition to RAW? If you shoot in Prores then you don't need proxies My 350Gb of footage took 11 hours to render proxies. Good thing I didn't have to go anywhere and take my laptop!

Or just implement it for both, and make the camera a bit bigger. Hell, someone could even make a range of speed-boosters with it included (the optics would probably be required to accommodate the extra thickness) and if they updated the MFT lens mount communications protocols to support it then it could just be a bolt-on accessory without needing external power or wires or whatever. Then every GH5, G85, G9 user could also have one. I refuse to pay $700 for the Metabones SB but I'd pay for that.

I remembered another possible use for 360 cameras. 360 cameras + 8K (or higher) 360 cameras might make a great second angle for professionals who shoot events or weddings, especially if you put them on an extendable pole and put them up high. I think they'd make great wide shots that would look like static drone shots but could be gotten in places you can't feasibly use a drone. Eg, a wide shot of the crowd at a concert (either looking towards the stage, or back from it) or at the back of a wedding ceremony for a wide view of the bride walking down the aisle, etc. This wouldn't be too hard to use either, just mount the camera on an extendable arm and mount it to your tripod (or a separate one), then whenever you setup your camera, hit record on it, extend the arm, forget about it and get your normal shots, then retract the arm, hit stop, and deal with the rest in post. You don't even have to watch the footage it gets, just knowing what shots you want from it and scrubbing back and forth to find a good snippet is enough. A second variation would also be possible: 360 cameras + high MP sensors + crop modes If they implemented modes where you could crop into the sensor to reduce the resolution but up the frame rate then it would be a flexible camera to get specific shots from it, so it wouldn't be a one-trick-pony and wouldn't be limited to allocating its bitrate to the full 360 angle. Like the P4K / GH5 / Sony/ RED cameras that can can downscale the whole sensor or can do a 1:1 crop, and can trade-off resolution for frame rates, imagine if you could have a 360 camera where you position the camera, connect with your phone, engage the crop and frame rate you want, adjust framing (I'd imagine crops would be limited to certain areas of the sensor), then hit record. This would enable the full bitrate to be used for 4K120 at perhaps a 16mm equivalent or 28mm equivalent focal length. You'd get that epic wide shot of the crowd bouncing, the band screaming, the lighting peaking, and the pyrotechnics flaring, but you'd get it well framed, in slow-motion, with plenty of bitrate. Or if you framed the wedding from within an autumn tree you could get that moment of the bride laughing, the guests reacting, and the autumn leaves falling in the wind all in slow-motion. Those are hero shots that would define a style, like how every wedding photographer needs a drone now. Plus these cameras are silent, unobtrusive, and would be pretty small. Imagine if the Insta360 One X was three or four sided, and each had 30-50MP sensors, had the crop modes, and could write 90+MB/s to a microSD card. It would cost more than the consumer 2-camera version and be larger too, but it would still only be the size of a small drone, ie, semi-pocketable. When those sensors are in smartphones none of that tech will be that special, it will be the combination of them that creates the potential. It's also worth noting that the Insta360 Titan can do 11K30, 8K30 in 10-bit and 3D, so the beyond 8K tech isn't a dream either, it's here for pros now. Hell, even if it had four cameras and four microSD card slots and it just recorded full resolution from every camera to each slot and you had to use a merging program in post, that would be fine too if it gave you the quality required.

True. There's a threshold at which people are so pissed off with the results that they make a big noise about you, which would stop people hiring you. However some markets are big enough that bad feedback doesn't get to every client and slick sales-people still make sales. Interesting is definitely the word...

(quoting @jase comment in the other thread - to see the image full size you have to click through to the other thread) Thanks, that's very helpful I can see what you mean about there being an equivalent amount of detail but with less sharpening. In fact it's quite a difference in sharpening, I didn't realise there was that much of it being applied TBH. On the whole though, it doesn't seem like there is really much downside to using it. Looking at individual frames really blows me away, such a great looking image

As much as I love the IBIS on my GH5, I will say that recording prores internally would be lovely. I'm rendering proxies for a three week trip and 350Gb of footage, it's done about a quarter and has been going for a couple of hours now and it says it has about 7 hours left.. that's an hour more than when I started!! 4K Prores Proxy has broadly similar bitrate to 4K 150Mbps or 5K 200Mbps footage and both are 10-bit! That person who shot that video in Prores Proxy (or was it LT?) had the right idea

Yeah, that FS5 video is exactly what you want - the tech doing the tedious things that you can easily describe and leaving you to do the creative things that you can't easily describe. In terms of AI creating rough-cuts, it works for things like home videos where it just picks the shots with the nicest smiles and tries to include everyone, but other types of videos like commercials, drama, music videos, corporate, etc have much more complex and subtle criteria and often editors themselves don't even know consciously why they prefer one take over another, or why a group of certain shots is better than other groups of similar shots. I've seen a number of those BTS with big-budget feature editors and they often have as many or more assistants whose job it is to log, sort, tag, and create rough cuts. Having a computer do those things, as well as laborious things like checking focus down to pixel level on every shot, would be worth money in basically every scenario.

Fascinating. I can feel a camera test coming on

Yeah, even in small cities, the world is still a big place unless you stand out in some way or are part of a very small field, like if you're a specialist or charge a spectacular rate. Sadly, human nature is quite pervasive so these aren't unique issues! You only have to be good enough to get hired for work - you don't generally have to be that good at actually doing it

You're welcome!! ??? I figured there might be some extra love in there for Canon. Is Canon + ML the only hybrid setup that does 14-bit? I never focused on what bit-depth the BM cameras operated on, or what external setups could offer. I remember those 10-bit vs 12-bit vs 14-bit conversations we had where most liked 12-bit over 10, and some even preferred 14 over 12.

I completely agree that ML footage looks wonderful, but for me so does all RAW footage. Do you notice a big difference between your 5D ML footage and other RAW cameras? or is it just that RAW loveliness?

What was the main difference that you noticed? Resolution, or something else?

I'm a business consultant, so spend my working days in head offices dealing with management types and office politics. I once spoke to a coworker with a HR background after we ejected someone from the building who was beyond useless, and I suggested that we make a note never to hire that person again and they said that there was some kind of HR rule and we couldn't make any kind of list like that. I don't know if that was just for that company, or a wider regulation, but that company wasn't anything special, so similar limitations are likely in other organisations. The company was around 5000 employees, so the chance that someone else in management somewhere sees that person has experience within the org and re-hires them is considerable. But it has its upsides too - if someone only wants to work with people who agree with them then good riddance, I'll go somewhere else and actually be productive.

Cool topic and interesting predictions. Innovation tends to come from the intersection of technologies, less from a single technology reaching a threshold. Here's a few combinations that might be interesting: 360 cameras + AI with face-tracking + AI video editing This could create a camera that consumers just take with them to events and it automatically records video, frames shots in post, and edits them together to deliver a finished product or products (photos and video). This might even be free if FB / Amazon / Instagram think the data gained by spying on you is worth the hardware costs, but if you willing to pay for it then they'll happily take the data and your money. Electronic variable ND + better ISO performance (or dual ISO, or Triple ISO?) This combination could create a camera where we control the creative parameters (SS, F-stop) and the camera manually exposes using only non-creative controls (ND, ISO). This means you can set whatever aperture you want, 180 degree shutter, and then take exposure off your plate and think about more creative aspects of shooting. The "cinematic vlog" crowd might help with this as there's a ton of them and they care about SS and F-stop but want fast-paced shooting, and will be adding their voice to the pros who also want built-in NDs. NLE + AI face-tracking and shot analysis Not something people talk about, but there might be benefits to NLEs being able to analyse your footage. Immediate benefits would be logging footage by reading slates (if you have them), detecting takes (visually similar shots repeated over and over), tagging of shots with which faces appear in them, etc. Combined with smart bins this would save a lot of leg-work, especially in doc work where you have huge amounts of footage. For the less serious users (some people felt that FCPX was really iMovie, so Apple are trying to reach these people) you could also have expression detection, framing detection, and other ways to rate clips. The existing 'choose the best shots and make a sequence' technology could be incorporated, creating a rough-cut with a single button. More advanced features would be to watch you through the webcam as you view shots and further refine based upon your reactions. This could be huge as people are recording video and photos all the time, and editing your photos and choosing the best ones has been made easy but video editing is still something the average person doesn't even attempt.

Yeah, it's the same with most industries, maybe all of them. It's who you know not what you know. I don't know about the film industry, but in my industry you can do very well by just being very social and talking a big game. It also helps if you don't know anything, people who are clueless tend to respond positively when clients make non-sensical requests and that makes them 'team players' but the people who actually know why those ideas are ridiculous (and are willing to admit it) are negative influences and are to be eliminated at all costs. Fun fun fun...

In a sense, after Exit was aired, there's no reason that Mr Brainwash wouldn't stay famous, regardless of if he's an artist or not. Hollywood has shown us that there is plenty of room for people only being famous for being famous, and that once you kick-start that with a PR stunt of some kind (sex tape, art documentary, whatever!) then the world cares about how many times you chew each mouthful of breakfast and everything else.. The shredded Banksy should be worth more not less after it was shredded. It's physical art and now performance art Anyone with aspirations about what they're making feels like this. I continually see great moments happen when I wasn't filming and think about the film I could have created had I got those shots, ah well.... Keep shooting

Now you mention it, I kind of agree. I was preparing to refute your statement by saying that stuffing up the motion would ruin it - just like stuffing up anything else would also ruin it, but that's not true. I'm kind of typing out loud here, but you can take a cinematic film and stuff up the colours, remove the slow-motion (many films just slowed down the 24p footage in post anyway, still looked ok), you can crop the framing, etc and you don't have that instant-video kind of effect. Deep DOF doesn't ruin it, camera shake would put a dent in it perhaps, bad lighting would put a dent in it (although all kinds of natural light is fine). What else did I miss?

Neither did I, fun stuff! I just watched a doc called Saving Banksy on Netflix and it was about the guy that tried to save a Banksy from San Francisco and wanted to save it from being painted over by cutting it out of the wall, and what happens after that. It's not as good as Exit but still interesting to watch and leaves you with the same WTF reaction over the system and how things just don't fit together. Recommended

OMG - run! Stop down the aperture! Shorten the shutter speed! Disable all slow-motion! Bang up the ISO! Must. Protect. Camera. From. . . . Vloggers!

Odd, there's normally an option for these things. I have a Panasonic point-and-shoot with some ridiculous zoom (20X or 30X) and wow was it annoying before I found the "resume zoom on wake" option Are you saying I'm a troll? Genuine question - it's hard to understand how other people see your behaviour.

I was reading about it after posting and apparently there is a lot of confusion. The wikipedia page for Mr Brainwash (link) has some interesting snippets in it. Which seems to suggest that it's all fake, however then there is this: and this: and this: What we have is a real person, who was featured as a real artist in a fake documentary by a real artist, whose status as an artist is challenged and the real person won't say he is an artist. So that seems pretty straight-forward, he's not an artist. He reveals in a real documentary that all his work since his debut has been completed by a team of graphic designers. Definitely not an artist then. Unfortunately, since his debut, apparently he's done the following: Designed album covers for Madonna Designed art to promote Rock The Vote Done work for Michael Jackson Might have been part of the official promotion for Red Hot Chilli Peppers Directed a video for Coke featuring Avicii Did work for Coachella "created a one-of-a-kind Mercedes-Benz 2015 GLA" for Mercedes, whatever the hell that means Appeared in performances and has sold art worth something like $250K. Does making art, selling art, or appearing as an artist make you an artist? Who knows, but I just love that even by reading the wikipedia page you're still not sure what the hell is going on, and I think that's the whole point. The questions aren't if he's an artist, how much Banksy did, if the documentary is real or not. The questions are: What is art? What makes something valuable? Do we judge people by their actions or by what they say (or don't say)? My take-away impression from the docs was that it was kind of like a prank on the art world that they fell for, but I think that the prank is actually on humanity, because there just aren't answers to these questions. And how shallow was the DOF on that film? About right for a documentary - nothing to do with the work I create

Did you ever watch a documentary called Exit Through the Gift Shop? It was a film made by Banksy about the guy who was making a documentary about him. It is a ouroboros mind-fuck and spectacular in every way. The reason that I mention it is that the guy wanted to be as famous as Banksy but without doing any of the work or getting good at art, so he did a bunch of paintings for a huge show and they were terrible, but he talked himself into thinking he was great, and then because he sunk so much money into it people believed he must be great and so his work sold for heaps of money. In the end you're kind of left wondering WTF happened, what is good and what isn't, and how the F can anyone tell anyway. Going for the money doesn't always end badly!