kye

3 hours ago, AlexTrinder96 said:

This film was posted on the P4k FB group earlier. WOW.

By DAVE HILL

Thanks for sharing that, what a wonderful piece.

Lots of great things to say about it, the thing I liked most about it is that it really had a strong and coherent style, fun and whimsical but also tender and genuine too.  But perhaps the greatest compliment I can pay it is that despite it being shot on a significant camera, and being shared in the thread discussing that camera, when I watched it I stopped thinking about the camera and just enjoyed it as a creative work and all thoughts of equipment dropped away.

This is the point of art, to take us to another place, right?

4 hours ago, drm said:

The exposure changes that he discussed in the video are clearly visible in the BMPCC4K footage, *if* you are not shooting RAW. It is the case that a lower ISO in the 100-1000 range and a lower ISO in the 1250-6400 range shows more details in the shadows. The ISOs in the higher end of each range do a better job preserving detail in the highlight areas. There is also a very dramatic change in the exposure from 1000 to 1250 as the camera changes from the low gain to the high gain circuit. ISO 1250 is substantially less noisy than 1000. I will have to compare again, but 1250 might even be less noisy than 800, but 800 would preserve bright details much better than 1250.

I guess that my point is that you do need to learn the subtle differences in this camera with regard to proper ISO selection for your scene, if you are not shooting RAW. I have not noticed the dramatic difference on my GH5 or GH5s cameras, despite their being dual native ISO cameras. It is fun to get to explore these

Just a small thing but the GH5 isn't dual ISO, only the GH5S has that.

I wish my GH5 did have it, but sadly, no

18 hours ago, Adam Kuźniar said:

I wish all these cameras started at 16mm on the wide end. I always lack the wide angle for shooting in tight rooms and I almost never go all the way to 500mm or whatever the long end is

Yeah, after having the XC10 (with it's 24-240mm equivalent fixed lens) and my iPhone (and it's fixed lens around 24-28mm equivalent) I switched to the GH5 and bought 16mm and 35mm equivalent primes for my main lenses (as well as some longer ones).  I thought about the 24-240 range and I realised I was sick of the 24-28 range.  I shoot travel and home videos and so mostly my shots are about people in a location, which is 35mm territory when you factor in the practical distance I am from people, and the other main shot is really wide for those grand landscapes, or interior shots.  With the ETC 1.4x crop the 35mm becomes a 50mm, so that adds a bit of reach, and the 16 becomes a 22mm but I hardly ever use that length.  I'm so much happier with 16mm as my wide end.

4 minutes ago, mercer said:

Thanks @kye !!! I am going for this “look” due to the film I’m working on. Great tips for Resolve... of course some of it was Greek to me, but I will look into this. The JM method required a lot of nodes and transfers from Linear to Log. Since ML Raw is linear, IDK if that method helped with that shot or not. Prepare yourself for a PM, if you don’t mind?

Ah, Linear - of course.

PM away, happy to help.

32 minutes ago, mercer said:

Yeah, I have like two tricks so I can make most footage look either way with any NLE... skillz. 

But seriously, I am just trying some different things. I prefer coloring in FCPX, I think the curves are smoother but I think I prefer processing the footage through Resolve better than MLV App. MLV App is just too slow. I wish I could get the LogC curve in Resolve. My next test is to use the CST that Juan Melara uses in Resolve. I tested it once a while back and with just a simple LogC to Rec709 LUT and an S-Curve I came up with this...

That was shot with either the Canon 24-70mm f/4 or the 35mm f/2... I forget. 

That is a really nice shot..  even working in the landscape photographers S-curve from the waterline into it   and of course, ML makes the image quality look effortless!

Maybe you can process the footage in Resolve and get a LogC output..  Do they give you the Colour Space Transform OFX plugin in the free version?  If so, you could pull everything into the timeline, set whatever RAW settings on each shot you wanted, then in the Colour page, go to the Timeline node editor (instead of the Clip one) and using the transform plugin convert the shots to LogC before exporting all the shots as separate files?  If you output as a 12-bit codec (I don't think there are 14-bit codec options but maybe there are?) then you shouldn't lose too much colour info in the conversion.  I know that LogC can be quite flat as it's designed to hold a lot of stops of DR, so higher bit depths are preferred.

The only question in that workflow is what colour space to transform it from, because Canon RAW isn't a colour space in that list.  You seem to be pretty locked-on to the look you're going for, so maybe just cycle through the list and see what gets you closest?  I've graded ML RAW footage in Resolve and couldn't find any definitive answer on what to use, but there were a few options that looked about right.

In terms of having 'skillz', if someone can get the look they're after from any NLE with only a couple of changes, those are skills indeed!

Edit: just worked out CST means Colour Space Transform lol.   Sounds like you're on the path already

1 hour ago, TurboRat said:

Impulse bought a Pentax 28mm f2 that’s supposed to be a repackaged Contax Zeiss ‘Hollywood’. Not the best decision, since I hear you can get one for 60bucks a few years before but now it goes for a thousand since its rarer nowadays. Saw one for 500  on ebay and snatched it. Here’s the eoshd writeup: https://www.eoshd.com/2013/07/60-pentax-lens-thats-actually-a-800-zeiss-by-designer-of-stanley-kubricks-nasa-glass/

Kinda want to see how it shoots video on my GH and Sony a6500 cams since I dont see any video about it on youtube

Nice!!  Looking forward to hearing (and seeing?) your impressions when it arrives

I kind of like that feeling on eBay when you think you might end up with a bargain, but mostly I just pay too much and don't know what I'm doing! ???

2 hours ago, kaylee said:

heres a stupid question: if my (slow) sensor readout runs left to right, top to bottom, is that a factor in moving the camera?

like a camera whip to the left would be going the opposite direction of the readout, so to speak, so panning to the right might look a little better?

any truth to that? this is the kind of "article" im going to write for kayleerumors lmaooo

The biggest delay is from the top to the bottom of the frame (or at least, it is in every camera I've seen - maybe others are different?) so if you're panning left-right or right-left then it won't make much difference.  Think about those RS tests where people just move the camera left-right-left-right-left-right-left-right and the whole thing is wobble-vision.

Technically each line is a little compressed or expanded horizontally when you move sideways, but the jello effect of the rolling shutter is mostly just vertical.  If you had some magical way of eliminating the vertical effect (a plugin that lined up all your vertical lines perhaps) then maybe you'd notice a compression or expansion when panning, but I suspect it's too small to really be of much importance.

2 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

LMAO.

 

Now THAT is how to shoot a camera test!!

Bravo!

25 minutes ago, mercer said:

Gotcha, my dad used to say that as well when I worked with him. Thanks, BTW... I’m trying a simpler workflow in FCPX with a camera LUT and just some curves. 

When did you switch to the simpler workflow?

To me, the colours look basically the same as previous shots you've posted, so if you've changed workflows during that time I didn't notice any difference so you're matching relatively well

6 hours ago, canonlyme said:

Guys, I do not know if you know the rules about open discussion, but it is said that you express your opinion without respect. Having an opinion is not about winning, this is a forum not a fight. Your opinion is not more credible because you have had more commens or likes in this forum, I am having my discussions not just in this forum, but in real life, family, cafe's and student classes. 

saying: your comment wins, I find this a very ungrown way to lead discussions- and i am young. The video is of a craft that has at that time won a video arthouse price in vimeo, we are not judging things here by the means of a filmmaker, but most people here are videomakers. This is a video that is so good, that just because it is hectic, does not ask to be hated. I get the feeling your strong espression of "fking hate" does not only come from dislike, but maybe also fear. Is this something you can easily recreate, making so many different shots, or is this also something that is overwhelming you through the quality of images that you can achieve? youtube allows you to play everything at speed 0,25, an easy fix not to cause any seizures. Have you watched lord of the rings, do you fking hate one of the most iconic movie scenes by hitchcock in psycho, cut way under 1 second in average? 

The sounddesign of this video is also very high, is sound something that you do not care about? About the grading, what you say makes it seem that you hate coen brothers movies and most movies since the 2000's except arthouse, as this is a standard complementary grade of colors, which has been used by painters. 

Feel free to clear me up about your opinion, I am interested in discussing this with you. But I have seen ignorance in many parts of this forum, so it would not surpise me if not. The ratio here is : talking about your favourite lens < creating something yourself. I am making a thesis that you are not a better filmmaker than allesandri, and you would not be able to create such movie with a gh3 - prove me wrong.

This board is a little more hip-and-shoulder than other places, so strong opinions are kind of the norm here.  They do spark disagreements sometimes too.  However, this forum has been through a number of discussions about the merits of free-speech vs political correctness and (IMHO) the general tone of those conversations was that open and honest opinions were more valuable than keeping nice with everyone.  Be that for better or worse!

In terms of the style of that video, it is a very strong style of editing, one which we know the internet took up heavily and is now a cliche, and for many without much talent is a crutch and people churn out videos with impressive transitions instead of making useful content.

You may also not be aware, but many of the people on here are older, who came from broadcast or ENG where the bells and whistles weren't even available.  I don't know how young you are, but there is a huge range of tastes, much moreso than the 20-something "professionals" who think that The Matrix is classic cinema, and haven't watched a foreign or B&W film in their lives.

Besides, @webrunner5 is just grumpy sometimes

6 minutes ago, mercer said:

Well... I thought it looked pretty good until you posted that...

I meant that it looks really good

That's an expression that my dad always used to use when something exceeded his standards or expectations - like if you hired a car but swapped your Toyota for a Lexus and asked if that would be ok.  I guess it doesn't translate well ?

10 hours ago, hansel said:

Hey Guys and Kaylee,

so I am adding the finishing touches to my first "proper" coorperate image clip, man what a cluster fuck but still fun and quite a steep learning curve on every level, communication wise, shooting and editing aswell.

To get to the point. Some clips I have shot espacially ones where tripod panning it feels like I am back in Canon t2i country resolution wise. On top of that I have shot the pans in 50p and when rolling in 25p it seems fairly choppy, slowmo seems to sober it up abit. I was wondering if someone has a trick for Resolve to even out the chops? Further would the precieved resolution los (maybe just motion blur?) be less when shooting in raw as the compression can't really handle it and mushes it up?

Just in general I am trying to get to grips with how it works as pretty much all the glide cam shots i did seem to be super smooth (as in not choppy) AND sharp but they are not straight pans. Is it a sensor readout problem?

Anyway maybe so can enlighten me a bit, cheers.

In terms of what you can try to improve the clips you've already shot, here are some thoughts.

Try using the stabiliser to smooth out the pan a little.  The stabiliser will crop into the image, but if you're only wanting to stabilise a slightly jerky pan then it shouldn't have to crop much at all to really help.  Here's a useful video:

If you're really seeing compression artefacts then you can attempt to hide them by adding a small amount of blur to smooth them over and then adding a small amount of sharpening after that to match the look with your other shots.  This is a pretty nasty thing to do to your footage and if you add too much of this treatment it will look like very low quality footage, but if you add a tiny tiny bit of this then it might improve things a small amount.  I'd suggest using the OFX plugin called something like Soften and Sharpen which allows you to soften/sharpen small/medium/large textures individually, so you can do it all in one place and just turn it on/off to check if you're making things better or worse

Nice work on plowing through a paid gig - hopefully the first of many?

9 minutes ago, Matt Kieley said:

Finally got my hands on a Canon V10X15 15-150 c-mount zoom lens for just $20. I shot this very quick test on the bmpcc (shot wide open) and I love it so far. The lens is pretty big so I'm using rails and the SmallRig lens support. I like the zoom range--10x is the same range as my beloved DVX100 (though the FOV is different). It has nice round bokeh at 2.8 that doesn't have those odd "dips" as the smaller range c-mount zooms I've had (V6X17 and similar Fuji lenses I've had).

Looks like retro film, both in the good ways with the bokeh and rendering and the bad ones with the highlight flaring.  Not bad for $20!  Nice work

42 minutes ago, mercer said:

So, I was able to get my lead actor to sit through another one of my lens tests. This is the Nikkor 24mm f/2...

What do you think of the image?  Looks just fine to me

7 minutes ago, Emanuel said:

Digital is becoming film with these new toys around.

- E : -)

The output files are certainly starting to look like film, that's for sure!

5 minutes ago, AlexTrinder96 said:

Well we're talking about the pocket 4k, I have not seen any evidence to suggest a better way to expose? ETTR doesn't seem to be necessary in this camera.

I asked the pro colourists if I should ETTR with the 10-bit footage on the GH5 and they said it wasn't necessary and it would be better to expose as normal.  I thought that people used ETTR to get better signal:noise in 8-bit, so anything 10-bit or more should be fine.

Although, the exposure video from Filmmaker IQ wasn't talking about ETTR as much as adjusting where the DR was around your middle-grey.

It would be interesting for someone to do some tests with setting skin-tone by exposure levels at the various ISOs and seeing how the different shots grade in Resolve.

2 hours ago, Kisaha said:

I bought a gaming laptop with a 1060 6GB last year, as a middle solution for 4K editing, before I spend 4-5000€ (including a good con/pro-sumer, but not reference grade monitor) for a new workstation this, or the next year.

If I need 5000€ for a good, but not very good, 4K solution, how much I will need for 8K? And how much an 8K reference monitor will cost?

*cough* proxies *cough*

An 8K reference monitor will be crushingly expensive, just like every other genuine reference monitor out there.

Here's a thread where professional colourists discuss reference monitors that might prove interesting to everyone here....  https://lowepost.com/forums/topic/467-budget-grading-monitors/

We are all playing in the very shallow end when it comes to grading (and our wallets are very grateful..)

8K is a resolution to shoot in, to do VFX in, and to export in.  It's not a resolution to edit in, or grade in.

Photography is completely different to video..  If I still did stills (ha ha) then I'd be shooting my 700D and loving it, but for video, well, it was so disappointing that it inspired me to go 4K.

5 hours ago, socs said:

Be nice

Canon cameras have a lot of things going for them in both the image and non-image departments - from things like colour science and DPAF, to reliability, and to ergonomics and lens selection.  

Sometimes the internet can overlook non-image considerations like reliability and ergonomics and be caught up in a frenzy of just wanting pure specs like stupidly high resolution, enormous bitrates, and radical over-sharpening.  This forum tries not to get caught up in specs-only discussions (although we do sometimes), and we have a healthy respect for the softer cinema-like rendering of film, the lower resolutions from ARRI and pre-4K cinema cameras, but mostly we draw the line at the barely-720p fuzziness that Canon passes off as it's 1080p files.  

Partly it's because the image from Canon is so lacking in comparison to other offerings at similar price points (or even getting used equipment at half or a third their price points), and partly because through Magic Lantern we've seen what the hardware is capable of producing, and yet Canon continues to protect it's cinema line-up by not wringing the best out of its existing hardware architectures.  A lot of people on here started shooting video on Canon DSLRs and have migrated through frustration to the other brands because the image quality just didn't meet minimum standards.

In terms of being nice, you won't find people here being nice all the time... however you will find that most people here are forthright with their opinions but are mostly sincere and want to help.  

Welcome!

AF on the GH5 has always had problems, but testing AF reliably is almost impossible too, as you can never perfectly replicate the same subject framing, movement, lighting, noise patters, etc.  If you had water damage in the camera then I think it would be really obvious, with it trying to focus all over the place or not doing anything at all.

I'd get out and shoot stuff and see how you go

3 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Well, some people take this stuff a bit more serious than strictly in a geek perspective : -)

Well, there are exceptions of course

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

One of these days I'll have posted some paid gig shot with this same unit. Count on it : ) When people will probably be hysteric with some other new release over here.

That's kind of the challenge isn't it.

We see people doing small budget fast turn-around projects like news reporting or micro-docs and doing a great job but these people are often too busy to talk about gear or just don't care about nerdy things, so we don't know what they're using or get their impressions.  Also, these people often have a really solid understanding of the fundamentals like exposure and controlling DR with excellent lighting, etc, and so for them most cameras with pro features are really the same because they can get great results with almost anything.
We see people doing small budget fast turn-around projects from nerds who like to talk gear, but most of the time they don't do a good job so their output isn't really demonstrating the potential.
And finally, we talk to people who are doing higher quality larger budget productions where we could really see what the potential of the equipment is, but things don't air for ages, so even if the person is willing to talk about gear and techniques etc we have to wait ages before the end result is broadcast and we can see things for ourselves (like John Brawley for example).  These people are often late adopters too, so they'll wait a year to pick up a camera, then after production it will be another year before the footage sees the light of day.

In a sense, the only chances we really have are the amateur YouTubers who have an interest in high-quality film-making to buy the latest gear and talk about it, who have the money from their full-time job to travel and point their camera at interesting things, and who have the time to do more than just slap on a LUT and upload.  

1 hour ago, drm said:

The BMPCC4K gives you the ability to have an A, B, and maybe even a C cam for roughly the same money as one of the traditional mid-tier cinema cameras, but gives you higher-end features like RAW recording and good dynamic range. I think that many people would be better served with a 2 or 3 cam setup of BMPCC4K's instead of 1 big A cam and a cheaper B cam. I run a 3 cam setup on almost every shoot. Having 3 matched cameras lets you have redundancy, makes matching footage easier, and has many other advantages.

Excellent points.  People often discuss camera bodies in isolation without thinking about lenses or media, or often talk about those things as a single rig without thinking about those who have multiple camera setups, or those who talk about multiple camera setups often do so without taking into account that they're running a business and have to make money etc.

Having three matched cameras also guarantees things like compatibility of batteries, lenses, media, and then in post things like exposure / DR / bit depth as well as technical aspects like compatibility of file formats, etc.

Yan, your sensor and images look fine to me.

@webrunner5 is right about exposure, the advice I got from the professional colourists was to just expose normally.

7 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Ahh I like the B&W. Hardly anyone, me included shoots it much anymore. Looks good, even grain wise for the situation. Actually I sort of like grain using B&W.

I really like grain in b&w too.  Which made things good for street photography because you typically set the camera to MF, pre-focus at maybe 1.5m, then have a slower aperture to get a bit of depth of field, and you still want to have a fast shutter, which means you use auto-ISO to expose and that means you get noise unless you're in bright sunlight.

I'd recommend the other videos from John on that same channel too.  Thorough, well researched, clearly explained, and is one of the very few film-making channels that remembers that there were films before the year 2000.

3 hours ago, @yan_berthemy_photography said:

Ok, thanks @kye

 

As I mentioned, I did not remove the lens from the body when I did the very fast transition, I waited around 1 hour hours for a stable temp,  is the sensor affected?

I doubt it would be.  How does the image look from it now?