Jump to content

Its not always about latest and greatest


enny
 Share

Recommended Posts

Wow, after some googling I found a working link http://videobam.com/KBArS to the Red short. They may as well have gotten Tommy Wiseau to make them a film. It's an excellent example of having all the tech and none of the skill. The camera isn't everything. 

 

That is absolutely and truly the most awful attempt at a film I've ever seen in my entire life.

 

I'd take a thousand of that fellas films on 550 and 60d before I'd watch that 6K heap of shit again...

 

At least Tommy Wiseau is funny. I can't believ e Red (and they did) associated themselves with that, then pulled it later! What were they thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

The problem with threads like these ain't because I disagree with them, it's because it's just about stating the obvious.

 

Keep posting nice work and some bad examples as well and we'll learn from them.

 

But let's leave off the gear angle of the discussion because it's just ridiculous IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be honest with ourselves gentlemen when you want to do a scientific experiment you hold all the variables constant except the one you want to study.  If you want to study which camera is better you get one good creative team and you give them a series of cameras to create their vision.  You don't pick one idiot and give them a camera and then find a genius and give them a different camera.  This is basic experiment design that I learned in high school at the ripe old age of 15.

 

I'm on a budget and I have several Canon lenses so I shoot a Canon t3i.  If I was given a Canon EOS C300 of course my movies are going to look better.  They will still look like crap compared to someone who actually knows what they are doing but they will look better than what I can produce with a Canon t3i.  We know this.  No need to get cute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, after some googling I found a working link http://videobam.com/KBArS to the Red short. They may as well have gotten Tommy Wiseau to make them a film. It's an excellent example of having all the tech and none of the skill. The camera isn't everything. 

That link takes me to porn advertisement and i can tell you that porn looks better the that red dress video

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember that blockbuster film 28 day by some director named  Danny Boyle ;)  shoot on xl1s first generation miniDV instead of 35mm film and the film was dam good just shows you technology hacks and 4ks is nice but the art of story telling and cinematography is better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember that blockbuster film 28 day by some director named  Danny Boyle ;)  shoot on xl1s first generation miniDV instead of 35mm film and the film was dam good just shows you technology hacks and 4ks is nice but the art of story telling and cinematography is better


A notrious error. It's true, Boyle used the XL1, a 4:3 miniDV (only the XL2 had a 16:9 sensor), but mot DV. He captured the raw signal from a modified camera.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But let's leave off the gear angle of the discussion because it's just ridiculous IMO

 

It is, yes... but i'd hate to think there are people sat here thinking they need 4K, 14 stops DR, raw etc before they can actually go out and do something cool.

 

I'm still making money off stuff I shot on HVX200..... there will always be something better, a new spec to drool over... But don't waste your life waiting.

 

Go Do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

remember that blockbuster film 28 day by some director named  Danny Boyle ;)  shoot on xl1s first generation miniDV instead of 35mm film and the film was dam good just shows you technology hacks and 4ks is nice but the art of story telling and cinematography is better

 

The question is would the movie look better or worse if shot on an Arri Alexa.  All kinds of movies are blockbusters.  That doesn't mean every blockbuster has the best acting, soundtrack, lighting, script, videography, colorist, etc.

 

Life is all about probability.  I'm sure you could take a Panasonic G3 and make a blockbuster movie with it but It's probably more likely to happen with an Arri Alexa.  I think it's time to stop hunting for the exceptions and concentrate more on the rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

but i'd hate to think there are people sat here thinking they need 4K, 14 stops DR, raw etc before they can actually go out and do something cool.

 

If that's their mistake then let them make it. It's a pretty stupid one, to be oblivious of the obvious. Almost as stupid as discussing is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course we shall compare the characteristics of various cameras, but better under the perspective of how we deal with them. Because if the relative video quality is the only measure, this would all be about the cameras and how we deem ourselves better equipped by the minute, which I think would be naive fallacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

A notrious error. It's true, Boyle used the XL1, a 4:3 miniDV (only the XL2 had a 16:9 sensor), but mot DV. He captured the raw signal from a modified camera.

 

It was pretty cutting edge digital at the time. The DP for Danny Boyle on that film was very much into the early digital technology... A true trailblazer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

If you want to study which camera is better you get one good creative team and you give them a series of cameras to create their vision.  You don't pick one idiot and give them a camera and then find a genius and give them a different camera.

 

Indeed helps to take the variables out of it and the nut behind the camera is a very big variable.

 

There's nothing sadder than seeing a talent being hamstrung by shoddy image quality.

 

On the other hand there's nothing wrong with choosing something which you're comfortable with and works well for you and arguably that's just as important as the image. If the 60D is working for you but the Blackmagic might cripple you because of the different design, then why change?

 

Gear choice is a personal thing and I don't begrudge anyone for choosing what they choose as long as they aren't restricting themselves unnecessarily through a lack of consideration of the options!

 

What I'd hopefully like to avoid in this thread is the blindingly obvious statements about talent mattering more than specs (even though they are BOTH important). There's no need to state the obvious over and over again like some are doing. It comes across as patronising and nobody gains anything from it in terms of new knowledge or inspiration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


What I'd hopefully like to avoid in this thread is the blindingly obvious statements about talent mattering more than specs (even though they are BOTH important). There's no need to state the obvious over and over again like some are doing. It comes across as patronising and nobody gains anything from it in terms of new knowledge or inspiration.

 

Like I said we see this ALL the time in the photo world.  Frankly there are a lot more legitimate discussions going on in the video world because video is not as mature as photo.  There are a lot more tradeoffs with video cameras and it truly does set up a scenario where different cameras are right for diffrent people.

 

I am not very good at grading so although the best footage out of the bmpcc smokes anything I've seen out of my T3i for me as a hobbyist I just feel I will be more productive with the T3i.  If someone had the know how and skill and was going to do a project for me I would definitely pick the guy with the bmpcc.  But for me personally I just don't think I can handle that rig adequately to justifiy the investment.  In fact I am eyeing the Sony RX10 just because I have to accept unless I am willing to improve my grading skills a more consumer camera is better for me.  But I'm never going to say the Sony RX10 has better image quality than the bmpcc.  Nor am I going to say image quality is irrelevant.  It's all a balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's their mistake then let them make it. It's a pretty stupid one, to be oblivious of the obvious. Almost as stupid as discussing is.

 

But you must understand that some people on here might look to you for direction.

 

They see a nice video, then see you saying it was a bad choice to use the 60D which is "Crap O vision" or whatever you said. They can't afford a raw workflow pr a kitted out BMCC, so put off their project until EOSHD deems whichever camera they buy next as worthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'd hopefully like to avoid in this thread is the blindingly obvious statements about talent mattering more than specs (even though they are BOTH important). There's no need to state the obvious over and over again like some are doing. It comes across as patronising and nobody gains anything from it in terms of new knowledge or inspiration.

 

this thread was actually quiet interesting and there was ZERO patronising posts until you joined in with the crap'o vision post.

 

time to get banned again i guess.

 

you should really consider guest posts, as this place is quite cool but your single mindedness isn't... your gear lust and canon hatred stops it from being a good place to visit. apart from the occasional good review, you are the worst part of EOSHD, quite strange that.

 

bye bye

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what, wait? Are you banning the author of this website, Andrew Reid?

I'm confused :-)

 

Anyway, I don't think its crap o'vision, just an opinion of a person.

Clearly it's a different one than yours, but still.... banning someone for it? Seems strange.

 

Thought it was a great thread :-)

 

My $0.02:

 

Camera and equipment are instruments. Using the best instruments possible get more out of your talent.

Without talent and vision, all instruments are practically worthless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

crap o'vision that's gona be the name of my production company. i can smell the money

 

For people who can afford latest and grates of course 60d will be crap but for others who cant not so.

 

i use to be technology this and that buy shit thinking i need it like i need air but year down the road what did i shoot? did i get creative with all that gear BIG FAT NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites


i use to be technology this and that buy shit thinking i need it like i need air but year down the road what did i shoot? did i get creative with all that gear BIG FAT NO

 

I hope you appreciate the irony of this statement and your earlier reference to 28 Days.  The DV camera used to shoot that movie was the latest technology at the time.  The movie would have looked better if he shot a lot of it on ancient low tech film.  You just contradicted yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...