Clark Nikolai

Of course, my friend!😂 Yeah, so true. I find I check out photography stuff even when at a thrift store or garage sale. You never know there might be something cool even though I already have more than enough gear. So I have a new parameter/rule for myself. Use what I can and if it falls short of what I think I need, I have to get creative to make up for that. One example, I have two wide lenses that vignette on the D16. An 8mm and a 6.5mm. I've been looking for some super wide C-mount lenses that don't vignette. Very few were ever made and they are asking over $1000 for them. So, as I want to do some shoulder mount work on my next project and want to go wide for that, instead of justifying to myself to spend a lot of money on expensive lenses, I'm going to get creative and use the lenses I already own and just mask to a slightly narrower aspect ratio to cover the vignetting. (I've decided to use The Golden Ratio of 1.618:1.) So something that was because of a financial limitation now will influence the look of the project and might even make it "better" in a way than what I was thinking of before.

Yeah. the people were just clearing out old stuff. They said they didn't know if it even worked anymore, they hadn't used it in ten years. I didn't know the model so didn't know if it was good or not but I bought it (despite already having a bunch of cameras). I'm glad I did as it's a very good camera. Does it still count as G.A.S. if something doesn't cost much?

It's kind of liberating sometimes when you set aside all your perfectionism and just have a good time with modest tech. Recently I went on a several day bike trip on Vancouver Island (beautiful place) so I couldn't bring much. I also wanted something I could pull out of a belt pouch with one hand and click while still cycling. I have a Canon G16 (garage sale find for $6) I was first considering which takes beautiful pictures but is kind of bulky then I found in a drawer an old Sony DSC-T100. It's only does JPGs at 8 megapixels. Below my current standards but then these things are a trade off. I was only just going to email a few people some pics when I got home so it's good enough. I liked how small it was on the trip. I also used my phone but it's an older one without a zoom, also it's awkward to use compared to a camera. I had to stop cycling to take a picture with it. With the "real" camera, I could reach down, put the wrist strap on, flip down the front flap to turn it on and click, and put it back, all while still cycling. So it all worked out and I got some amazing pictures within the limits of the situation.

This might be something that takes some figuring out. On the series I worked on, with the initial meetings with the producer, both the editor and I preferred Final Cut, the producer had heard some things from the early days of the FCPX launch and was hesitant. We did have to figure out a workflow though and buy a third party plug in to output a AAFs for the audio editor (who used ProTools). I'm so glad we didn't end up having to use something else.

So true. I AE'd on a feature a few years ago that was using Avid and it took about five months, it would have been one month in Final Cut. I wasn't complaining since I was getting paid by the hour, but it was like going back in time. Yeah, AI enhanced interpolation with slo-mo, better auto colour correction and working with the new multi-cam iOS app.

I've used most of the big NLEs and prefer Final Cut. The magnetic timeline is so fast to use once you learn it that tracks seem so 20th century to me. Like they're something left over from a Steenbeck film editor or something whereas Final Cut is definitely from the 21st century. I'm sure if they hadn't patented the magnetic timeline all the other NLEs would have copied it by now. The roles thing and the built in database are so good, again once you get to know them. I've assistant edited on both TV series and narrative films, (including a feature) using it and it's much less work and takes less time than my experience with Avid or Premiere. I think Apple is going with the approach that they have something so good and it's so popular that they promote it much. They kind of don't need to as it's become the de facto standard for web video production. They don't update it as often as some would like but when they do it's always a better version of a feature than anyone else's and tends to be rock solid too. I think it's not going anywhere, in fact they just had an update this morning.

Interesting. I have a Panasonic HDC-SD9 which has 3 CCDs but then compresses badly to MP4. I've been thinking of testing it with an external recorder and seeing what it gives. (It's a camcorder that had good potential but then in trying to be the world's smallest they did some bad compromises with the design. It could've been so good.) I miss the robustness and longevity of tapes, the ability to just pop another one in when you've filled the previous one, etc. Having said that some of my old tapes are developing drop outs so I guess longevity isn't even there (with miniDV/HDV that is, oxide particle tapes are still fine from the past.) I remember some years ago running into a friend on a corner as he was shooting with his then new Panasonic HDC-SD7 which he had just got. He showed me that it records to a card and not a tape. I was suspicious of that because I knew that a file on a drive can get corrupt, accidentally deleted, etc but it's hard to accidentally tape over a tape. He said that "tape was dead and cards are the future". I didn't believe him but he was right.

I read that the dark lighting on film noir films was for budget reasons initially. To cover up gaps in the budget in the sets by just not lighting some areas. Ah, yes, The HV20 (and HDV) revolution. I did some great stuff with my two matching HV20s. The image still holds up. (Some of the tapes haven't though. They're starting to develop drop outs.)

Interesting... I don't like it either. I suppose it was novel at one point but not now. I follow a YouTube channel located in the French Riviera. Shot with iPhones with the stupid "Portrait mode" which means the backgrounds have that artificial blur added to simulate low DOF. It bugs me because it's a place I've never been and one of the reasons to watch their channel is for the scenery and because of that I can't see the scenery. https://www.youtube.com/@MeandMonAmi/videos It's become like the difference that used to exist between video/television and movies. The super crisp sharp look is now associated with real time, documentary or "real" things and the "filmic" look is associated with fiction. Oh, don't get me started on it either. I was hoping that the Pyxis would be it, and while it looks like a good camera, it isn't a Digital Bolex successor. (It's more a successor to the Micro Cinema Camera.) In a way there are new cameras that have that look but they start at $20,000.

Interesting, so for me, somebody just needs to make an adaptor to go from HDMI and DC power to this USB-C EVF standard. One thing I would need though is that things like the focus assist and grid lines be part of the viewfinder and not be something the camera has to produce.

Yeah, probably. At this point I realize that there's no rush to get an EVF of my own. I have access to a Cineroid EVF I can borrow any time I want (though I don't like how big it is), it does work so I can take my time getting something. Ideally I think something like a Zacuto Gratical Eye would be great. I would need an HDMI to SDI convertor. The smallest I've found is an e2work brand one. It seems to not be available anywhere anymore. All the others are bigger physically. Another one that would probably be fine is a Kinotehnik LCDVFe, but seems to have been discontinued years ago. I know I'm being picky here but I really don't want it to be too big.

Interesting. When I felt it was time for me to go to a better camera I was seriously looking at the Ursa Mini Pro but the fixed pattern noise thing was a turn off. I also was looking at the BM Production Camera 4K, Digital Bolex, the Ursa non-mini even (which were like a full size VHS camcorder). I see the BM 4K Production Cameras now on Craigslist for only CAN$1100 which is pretty amazing for their image quality. I wasn't liking the poor audio quality part though. There are always trade offs with cameras. I ended up getting a deal on a Digital Bolex and loving it. It's not easy to shoot with but the results are worth it for certain types of shooting. I had a small group over for supper and a screening (projected) of my latest film shot with it and one of them, who's a layperson and not involved in film at all, said something like the image had a certain quality to it and wondered if I had a special camera or something. In the end I paid a lot but I'm super happy with what I ended up with. No FPN, good audio, amazing image quality, etc. It's also become a bit of a conversation piece when I've been out shooting. I've met a few interesting camera buffs that way. I think to compliment this would be something like a 4K camcorder with built in gimbal type stabilization. Sony, Canon and Panasonic all make similar models. I have an HD Sony (PJ650) that I love for its ease of use, stabilization and all that. We live in a golden age of so many camera choices and most of them are very good and much better than the few choices we had in the past. In fact we can even get super picky about minor details. It reminds me of coffee and craft beer. Thirty or more years ago it was all crap and now so much amazing beer and coffee is available we can look down upon very good coffee because we can choose super good coffee.

Now I want to put cameras in my shoes.

And of course I meant to type 24 (not 23) there. I find the projectionists can vary a lot in experience. They can range from the very experienced to volunteers. If you can make your file fool proof it'll hopefully look good.

Some TVs and media players interpolate frames. It can be turned off of course but if you're not around for that then it's up to whoever on the other end to do that and they might not even know about things like that. It's pretty simple, just in Final Cut (or any NLE), make a timeline at 30 or 60 FPS, then put the 23 FPS file in it. Make the settings such that the NLE doesn't interpolate but just duplicates frames, then output. The same with deinterlacing, it's better if I do the deinterlacing (and upscaling of SD videos). Then they receive an HD progressive file that technically at a high frame rate so any equipment down the pipe doesn't mess with it.

A trick if you're sending a video file to somewhere else for exhibition and therefore wouldn't have control over things like this is to put the 24 FPS file into a 30 or 60 FPS timeline, then output. This way you control how the 24 gets mapped into 30 or 60.

Right. I find it odd when the camera is in the subject line. Unless it's specifically a camera test, then it should be in the description along with the other information about the shoot.

Yeah, it makes total sense. Cameras got really good over ten years ago so anything made in the past decade will be fine for most things. The differences will be subtle and to do with ergonomics and convenience of shooting. I have a ten year old Sony HD camcorder that works great! I could've upgraded to the 4K version of it but there's never been a reason for that (and the 4K version is bigger.) It's not the only camera I have but the idea of letting go of it never crosses my mind. It's too useful mostly because you just flip the screen open and roll. I think anything goes nowadays.

Just watching this video: After 2m55s the guy from BM is asked if the viewfinder could be used on other manufacturer's cameras and he says that there's nothing preventing that. If another camera could output Display Port information and power through USB-C it would work. So this is very interesting. So for this to work on another camera, there might need to be a little converter box that brings in power and converts the HDMI or SDI to Display Port. What I'm also curious about is if things like focus assist and frame guides are done in the viewfinder or in the camera.

Interesting. I've been working in REC709 for the sole reason is that I'm just not ready to jump in to REC2020 and the learning curve that it might have. I also might need a new monitor or something. At some point I'll learn all about it as it seems to have huge advantages over REC709 and I want to have them. (Another thing that I want to one day learn about is ACES, another big scary thing.) My D16 has a colour space that is like HLG called Bolex Wide Gamut. It keeps the full dynamic range of the image but isn't flat looking like Log would be so is watchable even before using a LUT or something. Here's a white paper about it. https://digitalbolex.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Bolex_Log_Bolex_Gamut_TechSum.pdf

You're right I was. I'll clarify better what I mean. While they're all a little monitor with a loupe some are an approximately 3" LCD with a loupe (meaning the whole thing is big) and some are an approximately 1" OLED with a loupe and the whole thing is smaller. I see they exist as part of DSLRs and such but I'm wanting to get something like that separately so my whole rigged camera package isn't so big. The ZCam EVF could work I suppose. For my purposes there's no rush on this. (Still need to figure out a small shoulder rig anyway.) I've tried a Cineroid and it's way too big for my taste.

Yeah likely some type of Thunderbolt protocol likely to have both power and video signals through it. Just a guess. The Z-Cam one and most of the Portrays EVFs are just small LCD monitors with loupes. The Oeye-Red EVF is more like what I'm thinking.

The Pyxis looks good. No mention of global shutter so probably has rolling shutter of some amount. The thing I'm intrigued by is the USB-C EVF. I find out now this has already been out but I wasn't aware of it. Can it be hacked so it can accept HDMI and used on other cameras?

I had another thought. Since the patent (if I understand right), is for 4K and above compressed raw recorded internally, then a camera could be made that recorded internally to 3.99K compressed raw and so not violate the patent. Many people only shoot 4K to stabilize in post and to punch in and deliver in HD.

At some point both costs of SSDs will be so low and data transfer rates will be so high (Thunderbolt 4, etc.) that it won't matter much in practical terms if raw files are not compressed. I could see new cameras saving internally in uncompressed raw, (ProResRaw or uncompressed BRaw) which would not be subject to the patent. At one time shooting HD was super expensive, now it's super cheap, the same with 4K and other things. If the cost of media is within the budget of a production, and the transfer times for copying the cards is short enough for the shooting schedule, then it doesn't matter.