Nikkor Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 The problem is if you want to shoot such a movie you need good actors. Good luck finding any. Finding a character (may it be a face or a interesting figure) and having him walkin around and making looks is a lot easier. Add some shallow depth of field to create ambience where there is none and you have a filmic impression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troilus910 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 You kind of nailed it. Mind you if we took half the time we spend messing around testing cameras, reading reviews and forums, etc., and spent that out in the world meeting actors, attending workshops, watching live theatre, etc., it might help solve that problem. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christina Ava Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 Unless your name is Terrence Malick and you are willing to burn bridges with practically every Hollywood star you have worked with. (and don't get me wrong: I love some of Malick's movies). i thought that actors adore malick, and line up just to put their name on the credits, his direction of brad pitt, restored some lost respect i had for pitt. he has everyone in the movie focused and beautifully illuminated. have you heard that actors dont like working with him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troilus910 Posted May 9, 2014 Share Posted May 9, 2014 i thought that actors adore malick, and line up just to put their name on the credits, his direction of brad pitt, restored some lost respect i had for pitt. he has everyone in the movie focused and beautifully illuminated. have you heard that actors dont like working with him? I don't want to derail the thread but to quickly answer your question: it's not that they don't like working with him, it's that they're not always happy with the results. Stories have been flying around since Richard Gere showed up to do ADR for Days of Heaven, realized half his dialogue scenes had been cut and became furious . Compilation of gripes (some major, some minor) can be found if you google "To the Wonder: 10 Actors cut out of Terrence Malick Films & How they Reacted" on indiewire. Malick makes unique films and what ends up on screen is not always what actors expect. Nobody else working with stars at this level could get away with what he does. But he does make beautiful looking and often very moving and poetic films. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted May 9, 2014 Author Administrators Share Posted May 9, 2014 You kind of nailed it. Mind you if we took half the time we spend messing around testing cameras, reading reviews and forums, etc., and spent that out in the world meeting actors, attending workshops, watching live theatre, etc., it might help solve that problem. :) How about you best do both, because filmmaking is never about a single thing. It is everything that's important right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troilus910 Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 How about you best do both, because filmmaking is never about a single thing. It is everything that's important right? I agree. That's why I said "half the time." :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boumba Posted May 10, 2014 Share Posted May 10, 2014 I couldn't agree more with themartist when he says: "I think there should be maybe an area of the site devoted to short screenplay writers partnering up with eager filmmakers to create some more compelling collaborations." I may not be J-L. Godard but I think I can write fairly well and I have original ideas. Unfortunately, I cannot shoot, mainly because I have problems with my eyes, and I feel frustrated and disappointed because all DPs I have been in contact with are asking for considerable amounts of money and prefer shooting commercial than films d'Art & d'Essai with broke unknown writers :-( Oops! Sorry! Posted twice. Wanted to edit & delete the redundant one, but couldn't... Boumba 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael1 Posted May 11, 2014 Share Posted May 11, 2014 Great comparison test! I was surprised how well the GH4 did. The clarity is incredible. The image wasn't as flat, but in some cases I think it actually added to the aesthetic, especially the building scenes. I would love to see a test with the two cameras (and the GH4 with other cameras) "out of the box" - no speed boosters, no firmware hacks, etc. Michael Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgv5 Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 This comparison and most of them are made of entirely static shots. In this case clarity and detail are amazing, 4k outperforms 5d's 1080 in terms of detail and its obvious. Things are little different when camera is moving (for example in glidecam shots). Add even tiny amount of motion blur and its hard to tell the difference, footage looks decent at most, compression artifacts in gh4 footage becomes much more visible either. This is where 14 bit raw color depth and highlight/shadow recovery ability gives better overall image quality and nicer feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzynormal Posted May 12, 2014 Share Posted May 12, 2014 My point is that much of what some people consider to be "the cinematic look" is simply one kind of look used in cinema. If I were to believe half the nonsense I read about aspect ratios, I'd have to conclude I shouldn't enjoy my favorite film of all time because it's shot in 4:3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 If I were to believe half the nonsense I read about aspect ratios, I'd have to conclude I shouldn't enjoy my favorite film of all time because it's shot in 4:3 Kubrick? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 One of my favourite independent directors has started testing the GH4 against his RED. http://danieljohnpeters.com/2014/05/14/gh4-2/ Cinegain 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tai Klyce Posted May 14, 2014 Share Posted May 14, 2014 Did anyone address a comparison between these two cameras for 4k delivery? I think the 5D3R should hold up very well upscaled to UHD/4k (I will need to try that next) but the difference in detail and sharpness from anamorphic stretched to 2.5k vs the GH4's 4k is apparent when you're comparing the two. That difference is minimized when sitting further from screen, but even my friends (with un-trained eyes) could see a difference pretty easily. Still they both produce lovely images, I think Andrew is right, these are the ultimate cameras for the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted May 15, 2014 Author Administrators Share Posted May 15, 2014 One of my favourite independent directors has started testing the GH4 against his RED. http://danieljohnpeters.com/2014/05/14/gh4-2/ Nice shots in there and like the concise writing style. I liked it enough to get that generic EF speed booster for my GH4. The results look pretty good judging from Vimeo. £70 can't go wrong! Or can i!? Time to find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Rzazewski Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Does someone know of a simplified proxy workflow on a mac with premiere pro/davinci resolve for the GH4's 4k files to final output in 1080p? And what's the best way of grading to retain the shadow/highlite details? 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.