Matins 2

5 hours ago, webrunner5 said:

Who in the hell even uses an Optical Disk Drive anymore? I haven't owned one for years and years.

"The Commission considered that the cartel participants had coordinated their competitive behaviour, at least
between 23 June 2004 and 25 November 2008."

"It's 2036, who uses 14 year old optics?!"

Busted again.

https://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2022-06/cp220101en.pdf

On 2/7/2022 at 5:36 PM, HurtinMinorKey said:

What did VR ever do to you? It's like the last bastion of where tech still makes a huge difference in the end product. 

That being said, I agree with your sentiments about the abhorrence of the almost complete corporatization of human interaction. What a time to be alive. 

VR goggles are one of the most retarded inventions ever.

14 minutes ago, Matins 2 said:

First of all, 300 Mbps equals 37.5 MB/s, meaning that a 3 GB file takes 80 minutes to transfer.

Correction: ~1.3 minutes for a 3 GB file. I don't see how this can be done smoothly.

-

First of all, 300 Mbps equals 37.5 MB/s, meaning that a 3 GB file takes 80 minutes to transfer.

Screw Sony.

3 hours ago, kye said:

Interesting comparison, but to be cinematic instead of blurring part of the image they should have taken the 4K image and blurred all of it to soften the jagged edges and make it look less like low-bitrate highly-compressed 8-bit 709 footage.

I look at the image on the left and think it looks low-resolution and low-quality and the image on the right and think it looks high-resolution and like someone added an emboss filter over the top set to 15% opacity.

I look at those images and I think: what on earth did this individual do with the export settings and what settings were used on both devices?

4 hours ago, kye said:

If, one day, someone makes a phone that does look cinematic, then it will be described as "it looks like the images from larger, better, nicer cameras".

Can't the same be said of digital cameras compared to film?

On 10/7/2021 at 12:42 PM, barefoot_dp said:

CPU & GPU barely puffing, but definitely wishing I had more ram. the 32GB is maxed out when I have 2 projects open at once - which I do regularly to consolidate versions from multiple editors.

The Intel i7-6700K can handle 64GB of RAM.

23 hours ago, Emanuel said:

the leftover where a tiny sensor size definitely will never help and that ZV-E10 is such a fine example.

"Hi there, we will be sending the new iPhone next week to our loyal Youtube content creators for purposes of comparison. We would highly appreciate a Youtube comparison between our Sony Alpha 7S III next to the device we will be sending you. Perhaps some low-light comparisons in a dark backyard at night could really do our device justice. Thank you, Sony"

22 hours ago, Emanuel said:

Two majors AFAIK: 10-bit 4:2:2 ProRes coupled to that incredible main camera versus the leftover where a tiny sensor size definitely will never help and that ZV-E10 is such a fine example.

A bulky device with software that belongs to the 90's versus a phone with 1TB of memory that fits in one hand and doesn't attract much attention if any. I get it, its sensor is tiny. It's not for professional video use. But neither is the a7s3 (imho).

1 hour ago, Emanuel said:

Here's why this replaces next to nothing.

The iPhone actually holds up fairly well, despite what this Youtuber is saying. It still misses a 35mm lens though.,

I'm impressed by the footage coming from the iPhone 13 Pro.

Do whatever is best for your health.

On 9/13/2021 at 5:50 AM, leslie said:

i did get a giggle out of this image...  everyone caught up in their own little virtual world. Without a clue whats actually going on. Art imitating life or what ? 🤔

 i'm lucky, i'm heading away from civilization for three weeks. Otherwise i'd be hard pressed to keep my pants on, "metaphorically speaking of course 😳"  However i'll be back in time to see it at the local cinema.  With a large popcorn and frozen coke and a little red pill. I'm just praying, its not some kind of rehash/remake, fleece the public kinda sequel.

They could do a whole movie about this subject. An analog man lost in an increasingly digitized world. And I would definitely watch it. Not this nonsense.

58 minutes ago, MurtlandPhoto said:

I think {hope} we're seeing some clever marketing here. Much of the trailer footage shows a sort of hyper-realistic video gamey aesthetic... perhaps because it is a video game of sorts. Maybe it is the next iteration of the matrix after Neo reached the source and saved Zion. Similar to how the Matrix color tone was green and the real world was blueish in the trilogy, perhaps the matrix is ultra bright, colorful, and contrasty in this movie??

It looks absolutely terrible. But it was totally to be expected.

On 9/12/2021 at 11:49 PM, TomTheDP said:

Wachowski

3 hours ago, mkabi said:

Definitely a "look" to fit how movies are made today.

Do I like it... not really - but I'm more interested in the storyline and the direction that (atleast) one of the original creators will take this movie. Its definitely hitting the right notes with regards to my nostalgic preferences.

But... its always been about the storylines for me. Get past the glitz and glamour, get past the CGI, get past the colouring, get past the editorial choices and cuts, get past the BGM or musical choices -> hit an original storyline and I'm in.... I don't want a regurgitated storyline just because its supposed to be nostalgic - I would rather watch the original series for that.

Might as well read a book...

What were they thinking? Is this a parody? What's your take on it?

There is no need for autofocus for that.

I know of no service that has 'nailed it'. I don't think any service will anytime soon. What's really missing is situational awareness. These services make no distinction between the word "look" directed to multiple people from a distance, or "look" in a one-to-one story in a living room.

13 hours ago, IronFilm said:

@Matins 2 and now you know what the cost of a high quality global shutter cinema camera can be. 

Good news for you though, their price has dropped massively on eBay! You might pick one up now for only sub US$5K with some luck. (then start adding on all the costs of all the extras...)

Or here is a Sony SRW-9000PL for sub US$4K:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/154268601736

Actually, I'll start being serious for a moment, as I just noticed how much the Sony F55 (global shutter!) have continued to drop. You can get one here for just US$5.5K: https://www.ebay.com/itm/124658333277
And if you'd prefer an OLED viewfinder instead, here is another Sony F55 for only slightly more: https://www.ebay.com/itm/324443097872

I'd say that a new decent CCD-based RAW-shooting camera with the size of an FX3 shouldn't have to cost tens of thousands of dollars.

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Or even worse, what a Sony F35 cost back in the day!

CCD, global shutter.