IronFilm Posted June 16, 2018 Author Share Posted June 16, 2018 1 hour ago, squig said: The rolling shutter is hideous, but I soon discovered you can use a tripod with a center post to get a pseudo steadicam effect by opening the legs and holding it by the center post. Same but with a monopod! The ultra frugal emergency "steadicam" kaylee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenEricson Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 16 hours ago, Raafi Rivero said: I'm gonna call both/and here. There are no two types; we are snowflakes. We are all limited in different ways: some in our ability to master technical details, others in composition, in content, others still in understanding what makes a good image on an emotional level. There are simply an incredible number of levers to pull to create a stunning image: lens and camera choice, f/stop, filtration, lighting, subject, location, subject distance and on and on. The process is inherently imperfect and complicated by the huge number of decisions there are to make. What I like about Geoff's talk is that he doesn't choose one or the other. Yes, the talk is called "fuck the numbers," but then he goes on about an 8K scan of a classic film negative and the resolution in the chainmail of a costume in a terrible movie. Understanding the process of image-making is messy. It is a journey. Over time our attempts to master as many of these levers as possible will show on the screen but we will all have strengths and weaknesses. Honestly, it sounded to me like he just loves the way film looks. I agree, but that’s what I took away. I mean going from that Sony a7s or FS5 interview to motion picture film alone sells that fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 1 hour ago, BenEricson said: Honestly, it sounded to me like he just loves the way film looks. I agree, but that’s what I took away. I mean going from that Sony a7s or FS5 interview to motion picture film alone sells that fact. In similar vien that's why I kinda want my D750 back. While not 4K, it had great motion cadence, and a look I loved. When I see a used one for $750 I will purchase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webrunner5 Posted June 16, 2018 Share Posted June 16, 2018 2 hours ago, Geoff CB said: In similar vien that's why I kinda want my D750 back. While not 4K, it had great motion cadence, and a look I loved. When I see a used one for $750 I will purchase. You sound like @mercer I love Nikon colors. D750 is a special camera no doubt. IronFilm 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racer5 Posted June 17, 2018 Share Posted June 17, 2018 Geoff's not saying that gear doesn't matter, he's saying gear has gone backwards - and "the numbers" being pushed don't correlate to nice images. Bayer sensors interpolate chroma and will never yield colors as accurate and gorgeous as the examples he cites. And if the sensor behind that filter is 4k and up it only looks increasingly crunchy and ugly, nothing like natural optical clarity. He's not advocating against the best tools (in the right hands of course), he's saying the specs being pushed are actually a strike against aesthetics. And he's right. webrunner5 and mercer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kye Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 5 hours ago, racer5 said: Geoff's not saying that gear doesn't matter, he's saying gear has gone backwards - and "the numbers" being pushed don't correlate to nice images. Bayer sensors interpolate chroma and will never yield colors as accurate and gorgeous as the examples he cites. And if the sensor behind that filter is 4k and up it only looks increasingly crunchy and ugly, nothing like natural optical clarity. He's not advocating against the best tools (in the right hands of course), he's saying the specs being pushed are actually a strike against aesthetics. And he's right. Agreed. It's the same in the "hifi" equipment that big box retailers push - they're great at the things that are easy to measure and explain to customers, but music is sorely lacking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronFilm Posted June 18, 2018 Author Share Posted June 18, 2018 Yes, it is easy to have a natural bias to what you can measure vs what you can't measure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kye Posted June 18, 2018 Share Posted June 18, 2018 2 hours ago, IronFilm said: Yes, it is easy to have a natural bias to what you can measure vs what you can't measure. There was a great story about the early days of audio when a loudspeaker designer was claiming he could hear the difference between two loudspeakers and the measurement-focused people were saying that the two measured the same and therefore he couldn't hear any difference. Later on they devised some additional measurements (that weren't possible with the technology of the time) that showed differences in-line with what the designer had claimed. His response was priceless - Was I supposed to have not heard the difference until you worked out how to measure it? At least in film-making the argument is limited to what looks best. In audio the people who are obsessed with measurements claim that any differences or preferences not measurable don't even exist! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.