Jump to content

Making the most of the iPhone, GX85 and GH5 and shooting in the real world


kye
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've gone through a journey over the last few months, and have come to a new clarity in my work.

As most know, I shoot video of my family but want to make it look as much like high-end TV and films as possible.  This involves shooting in completely uncontrolled situations with no re-takes.

My new found clarity is this.  

Priority 1: Get the shot
You can't use the shots you didn't get.

Priority 2: Get shots in the best way
Shots that aren't in focus, are shaky, don't have good composition etc aren't optimal.  Also, having shots where subjects are aware and nervous of the camera, people in the background are staring at the camera, etc are also not optimal.

Priority 4: Get the nicest image quality
Insert all the normal camera stuff here...  DR, colour science, etc.  No, I didn't mis-number this, it's priority 4 because it's so far away from priority 1 & 2 that there is no Priority 3.

Priority 1 is about feeling comfortable pulling out the camera and shooting, and having it be easy and fast to use.  No fuss.
Priority 2 is about stabilisation and focus, but is also about camera size.  Smaller is better.

This means that iPhone > GX85 > GH5, but unfortunately for priority 4 it's the opposite.

Overriding principle: Use the biggest camera that won't draw too much attention in the situation.

My first challenge was to see if using the iPhone was going to even be feasible.  I mean, the image quality that I saw from it was horrendous.  @mercer laughed when I called it "MAXIMUM AWESOME BRO BANGER FOR THE 'GRAM" but it was potentially the most savage insult I could think of - and the way to make images look as cheap and amateurish as possible.  I own the iPhone 12 mini, which has the normal and wide cameras, but not the tele.  One thing that escaped even my attention was that this has HDR and 10-bit support natively, so it's got at least some potential.

Long story short, I filmed a test scene with all three cameras, as well as a colour chart I made in Resolve and a colour checker and attempted to match them.  Matching to the GH5 was obviously not feasible, but I like the GX85 so I matched to that.  Matching the GH5 to the GX85 was as simple as making a few basic adjustments.  Then came the iPhone.... I tried matching the scenes first, with limited success.  Hues and saturation and Luma behaviour were clearly different and not in easy or nice ways.

That's when I turned to the colour chart and tried to look at what was going on.  At first, the iPhone vector-scope was horrifically tangled, but in a stroke of luck I noticed that the luma curve was pushed up to brighten the mids, and when I brought it back to being linear, the vector-scope immediately fixed itself and was stunningly plain and straight-forwards.  Win!

This is the before/after of the greyscale from the colour chart:

image.png.d84fdedc38a3fa51f133569d11acd595.png

image.png.1c9f54f1b75af53d1588539480701dc4.png

While this isn't a perfect linearisation, check out this before/after of what it does to the vector-scope from my Hue vs Sat test pattern in Resolve....

image.png.7324962b0e99b0c5a32ce585dd3af20d.png

image.png.c91f1ccf8671e52957a6b919dcc70350.png

(I'd removed a few rows in the mildly-saturated region so I could more easily compare between cameras.  This is the GH5 in HLG without a conversion to 709 for comparison)

image.png.944cbee4b439c461b4826ee4e50f0091.png

If I apply a CST to the GH5 (from rec2100 to rec709) and include saturation compression, we get this horrific thing:

image.png.06901dd177174f4359ca63fafc944bc1.png

I've used that CST technique in the past and it's been fine on real footage, so it's not as bad as it looks.  But the moral of the story is that the iPhone now has easily manageable colours.

I was absolutely stunned when I realised that grading the iPhone footage could be as easy as working with the GH5 footage.  Plus, it's 709 footage in 10-bit, so it should be prone to less banding and artefacts than the GH5 footage, which is 10-bit log.

Next step is to use the colour checker to match the hues and saturation levels of the GX85.

Here are the vector-scopes before matching..  GX85:

image.png.07ee2c7014b319a65fd94705500e133c.png

GH5:

image.png.eaf2f078a4d7ecee4825e36ca6c11277.png

iPhone with curve:

image.png.a53b8b19ae620e046001d01e61f2e40c.png

Obviously the iPhone is nothing like the others, which is what you'd expect - Apple gave it a very distinct look and it's very different to the Panasonics.

I also took shots of the colour checker in -3 stops and +3 stops.  This showed that on the underexposed image (-3 stops) the iPhone is less saturated than the GX85/GH5 and on the overexposed image (+3 stops) the iPhone is more saturated.  Resolve has a curve for this.  I couldn't match it completely as it required a brutal adjustment but I pushed it in the right general direction.

After applying some hue and saturation adjustments, we get quite a good match.  iPhone:

image.png.25501be8e113f870f488e88302dd57e6.png

image.png.fd2fd3960bd570917c5e093d77c20346.png

The plots at -3 match well, but the plots at +3 are all over the place, with the GH5 clearly having some rather strange issues.  I'll ignore these for now - the goal is to make the iPhone into a camera that can be used for filming more than just memes, it doesn't have to match perfectly.

I also applied a gaussian blur to the footage to un-do the horrendous sharpening that is applied.

Here are some sample images from a recent trip with the above adjustments applied, without even adjusting each image individually - this is just the starting point.  As I shoot auto-WB I'd be adjusting each image individually, main focusing on skin-tones.  It should also be noted that these adjustments apply equally well to the normal, wide, and selfie cameras, and also apply to the 1080p120 and 1080p240 modes from both the wide and normal cameras.  These shots include a mix of these.

75410420_iPhonegradev1testshots_1.4.1.thumb.jpg.668c74614d437d74b9486b64fe3c4a0d.jpg

172316349_iPhonegradev1testshots_1.5.1.thumb.jpg.202ed0dd64ab4950b624c39e4c5d3770.jpg

1574031678_iPhonegradev1testshots_1.8.1.thumb.jpg.2d411f79a5921edbfe0d972e4f46bfb2.jpg

2127750380_iPhonegradev1testshots_1_12.1.thumb.jpg.829eda70a9e562963231bb2389db3841.jpg

1117560961_iPhonegradev1testshots_1_14.1.thumb.jpg.5f529aff1044cd085f9cae7321f21073.jpg

It looks like a real camera to me!  Not the best in the world, but it doesn't make me regret shooting with it, so firmly in the usable category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

So, where does this leave us?

Well, the iPhone wins Priority 1 hands down - so many people are vlogging or whatever in public now that it's almost invisible and I feel very little friction in using it.  It's always handy in an easily accessible pocket, and the camera is fast to use from the lock screen.  Once you're in the app it changes FOVs almost instantaneously, and will even change camera while recording, so that's hugely usable too.

It's also pretty amazing at Priority 2.  The stabilisation is simply incredible - I do the ninja walk pretty badly but it manages to give practically perfectly stable images even when walking on stairs etc.  The AF is also fast and reliable, and because it has a very deep DOF it doesn't have the problem of choosing the wrong thing to focus on.  It's got a large screen that is pretty easy to see in full-sun, even if you're trying to get a high or low angle and aren't looking straight at the screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GX85 is the next challenge.

For Priority 1 it needs to be kept handy and accessible.  This means either being kept in-the-hand or kept in a pocket - keeping it in a bag adds access time unless the bag is on the front of my chest.  Both of these mean that the rig has to be kept as small as possible, which essentially boils down to lens choice.

The 14mm f2.5 lens is an absolute gem in this regard.  In the 4K mode (which has a 10% crop into the sensor) it's got a 30.8mm equivalent FOV.  I edit and deliver in 1080p, like all sensible people in the real world who haven't confused their ass for their elbow do, and so I can also use the 2x digital crop feature, which gives a 61.6mm equivalent FOV.  These two FOVs are hugely handy for showing people interacting with the environment around them - environmental portraits.

It also has good low-light, good close-focus distance, and has a bit of background defocus if the subject is close.

I have the GX85 configured with back-button focus.  This means that I hold down a button on the back when I want to engage AF and hitting the shutter button doesn't engage it.  This works brilliantly in practice as it means that I can focus once for a scene and then shoot without having to wait for the camera to AF.  I also have the viewfinder set to B&W and have focus peaking enabled in red, making it easily visible.  The histogram is also really handy to know what is going on too.

For Priority 2, this setup works well - the tilt-screen is great, AF is super-fast, IBIS is impressive and very functional, and I find using it in real-world situations to be easy, fast, and very low-friction.  It still gets some attention, but it's not excessive.

I find that for most shots I want to stop down to ensure that everything is in focus.  This is because my work is about the subjects experiencing the location and the interactions that are going on.  A nice portrait with a blurred-beyond-recognition serves very little purpose as it could have been shot anywhere at any time and therefore has no relevance.  This lens can give a satisfying amount of background defocus for mid-shots if required, and especially for macro shots, which are occasionally relevant in an edit.

Here are a few grabs SOOC.  

In grading I would typically lower the shadows to the point where the contrast is consistent (assuming it makes sense for the scene - lots of these have haze which you have to treat differently) and I would even out the levels of saturation etc.  I'd also sharpen or soften images to even out the perceptual sharpness too.

Interestingly enough, most of these images have enough DR, and even have elevated shadows, despite the camera not having a log profile.

1484436978_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1.7.1.thumb.jpg.bc3adc8ab443fccccb5f7f8fe741bdf4.jpg

1642767449_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_24.1.thumb.jpg.149cc320b2e0c28af164387cd74ce339.jpg

957511172_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_65.1.thumb.jpg.dfe95f87e4e7fed9d993f1abc2cc4e5c.jpg

630619019_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_79.1.thumb.jpg.730ca2b27005afae97fd69abfd2fa460.jpg

2112558068_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_133.1.thumb.jpg.0c84deee8b84ad414b59ec413d03da3c.jpg

151108995_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_250.1.thumb.jpg.6644f323d3133887cbdc25d3a6c7ddbf.jpg

247767489_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_265.1.thumb.jpg.ea081a4004621f6d1f917a8f44ba3c16.jpg

45223785_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_267.1.thumb.jpg.ca14a69cd72616d2ca7198f4fd2ebdb6.jpg

1773464298_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_290.1.thumb.jpg.4610ed4c7cb418c2b24b966667d70ca3.jpg

1797438186_GX8514mmgrabsfromKorea_1_549.1.thumb.jpg.5f6cc529f921b323f027f661a6755e65.jpg

These provide a really solid foundation to grade from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last is the GH5.

Firstly, it's noticeably larger than the GX85, so much so that it's not pocketable (despite what BM might claim) so it's less convenient to transport, and it's not "palm-able" either so you're walking around obviously holding a professionally-sized camera, regardless of what lens you use.

I tried taking it out with the 14mm lens one day instead of the GX85 and I found it more cumbersome to carry, more conspicuous to passers-by, and even subtly more imposing on my family.  When I accidentally found myself carrying it through anti-government protests (long story) I was thankful that the riot police weren't looking for anyone that looked like foreign media.

I typically pair it with manual-focus lenses, and found this to be quite cumbersome compared to the AF of the 14mm lens, but with faster lenses you need to worry about what it will focus on, so it's a whole other ballgame which even the animal-eye-AF cameras get wrong because they don't know which cat you love the most.

While the EVF is reasonable, but not great, the screen is cumbersome to use unless you're shooting from eye-level as you need to flip it out to be able to tilt it, not only making the camera a lot bigger (physically and perceptually to everyone) but also less manoeuvrable and more fragile if you get bumped etc.

Obviously the image is the nicest out of all three cameras, but you really pay for it in size and weight.

For Priority 1 and 2 it's definitely the last-resort, and I'd only pick it over the GX85 in very specific circumstances now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This leaves me with the best setup being either the iPhone by itself, or the iPhone + GX85 which means that the iPhone can do the wide and the GX85 can do the normal and tele FOVs.

The 14mm is good when combined with the 2x digital zoom, but still lacks some flexibility.  When I got home I put on the 12-35mm f2.8 zoom and while it's far more flexible, going a bit wider and hugely longer, the additional size puts it half-way to the size of the GH5 and severely hurts Priority 1 and 2.

This left me with a choice:

  1. iPhone wide + GX85 + 14mm
  2. iPhone wide + GX85 + 12-32mm f3.5-5.6
  3. iPhone wide + GX85 + 12-35mm f2.8
  4. iPhone wide + GX85 + wide-zoom like 7-14mm or 8-18mm

The question was if the iPhone wide camera was good enough in low-light.  I reviewed my footage and basically it's good enough indoors in well-lit places like shops or public transit, good enough in well-lit exteriors like markets, but very very borderline in less-well-lit streets at night.

For my purposes I'll live with it for the odd wide and will lean heavily on NR, which will give me the ability to have a longer lens on the GX85 which extends the effective range of the whole setup.  

I did a low-light test of the iPhone, GX85 and GH5 and found that the GH5 and GX85 have about the same low-light performance, iPhone normal camera is about GX85 at f2.8 and the iPhone wide is about GX85 at f8.  Considering that iPhone-wide/f8 was very borderline, if I aim for something like f4 or better then the lens should be fast enough in most situations I find myself.  I don't really find myself wanting shallower DOF than the 14mm f2.5, and could even have less without much downside.

This means that the option of a zoom lens is not out of the question, and the 12-32mm pancake seems a very attractive option.  It's larger than the 14mm when it's on and extended, but when it's off it's basically the same, and it would give a huge bump in functionality.

I took a number of timelapses on the trip too, and having a zoom would make these much easier as well.

I'm contemplating the 45-150mm as well, but we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2023 at 10:38 AM, kye said:

I'm contemplating the 45-150mm as well, but we'll see.

The Pana 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 is not much larger/heavier and has better OIS (but it's much more expensive used). It's been my main 'travel' lens for years.

On 4/6/2023 at 12:32 PM, mercer said:

It's a shame that Panasonic hasn't upgraded the GX85 and G85 with 10bit.

Apart from market segmentation and heat issues, I suspect the processing chips used in the lower-end cameras can't support it. They also have major crops in 4k and pixel-binned (probably) FHD, versus uncropped and over-sampled video in G9/GH5/GH6.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2023 at 7:32 PM, mercer said:

Interesting post. I really like the GX85 shots. It's a shame that Panasonic hasn't upgraded the GX85 and G85 with 10bit.

It is a shame, but the fact that it's a 709-style profile seriously helps out the 8-bit.  If it was an 8-bit log profile then you'd be stretching it for a 709 grade, but this isn't the case with these cameras.

The iPhone is a 709-style profile and is 10-bit.  That's (very-roughly) equivalent to a 12-bit log profile..  very nice!

The more I use the GX85, the less I find it wanting TBH.

16 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

The Pana 14-140mm f3.5-5.6 is not much larger/heavier and has better OIS (but it's much more expensive used). It's been my main 'travel' lens for years.

In some ways this would be a good option, but I really really appreciate the smaller size of the 14mm and the 12-32mm (at least when it's not in-use).

I found that I would "palm" the camera when carrying it around:

image.png.6406dfa90784fc814f9b681c229a38aa.png

This really helped me not attract un-due attention and protected the camera from bumps in crowds etc, but kept it at the ready when needed.  I could do this with a longer lens but it makes it significantly larger, and makes pocketing it a lot more challenging.

I wouldn't really miss the room range above 32mm, as that's 70.4mm FFequiv when combined with the 2.2x crop-factor of the GX85s 4K mode, when walking around, as I edit in 1080p and could punch-in to 141mm FFequiv.  When I was using the 14mm f2.5 I punched in using the 2x digital-zoom all the time and didn't notice any loss of image quality at all.  Maybe there would be a small loss in low-light but I never noticed it in the final footage where there wasn't a direct A/B.

16 hours ago, ac6000cw said:

Apart from market segmentation and heat issues, I suspect the processing chips used in the lower-end cameras can't support it. They also have major crops in 4k and pixel-binned (probably) FHD, versus uncropped and over-sampled video in G9/GH5/GH6.

The GX85 only has a 1.1x crop into the sensor for the 4K mode, and the 1080p mode doesn't have any crop at all.  I haven't really experimented with the 1080p modes TBH as I wanted the 100Mbps bitrate of the 4K mode.  

I do wonder how much would be supported if we had full access to all the modes supported by the chip.  Obviously the chip in the GX85 can support being given a 4K read-out, can apply a colour profile and do whatever NR and sharpening is done to a 4K file, and can compress a 4K output file at 100Mbps.  To imagine that it might be able to compress a 1080p image at 100Mbps isn't that far-fetched.  Who knows what else might be available on the chip.  ALL-I codecs, 10-bit, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm into the edit from my last trip.

Putting everything on the timeline results in a 5h22m sequence.  Resolve interprets still images as a single frame, so they aren't padding out the edit time.  My first pass, where I pull in just the good bits of the clips got it down to 1h35m.  

The way I edit is to use markers to separate locations and sequences within a location, which lets me organise the footage (Resolve isn't great if you're shooting on multiple cameras without timecode, so things are often out-of-order).  For example, we went to an aquarium and saw the otters getting fed, saw the sharks getting fed, etc.  In a sense, each of these is like a little story, and for each one I have to establish the scene, then have some sort of progression in the sequence that addresses the "who was there", "what did they do", and "what happened" sort of questions.

I've identified over 40 location markers and over 40 sequence markers within those locations.  Some locations only had one sequence, but others were full day-trips and had a dozen seperate sequences.  That's over 80 stories!

My next steps are to work out which stories get cut completely, then to confirm the overall style of the edit.  My challenge is always how to get from one location to another and establish the change.  I typically shoot lots of clips when walking, on buses / trains / taxis, etc for this purpose.

As it was South Korea, known for K-pop, K-dramas, and the super-Kute things (their reality TV has lots of overlays like question-marks when people are confused or exploding emojis when people are surprised), I'm contemplating a super-cute style with lots of overlays, perhaps using animated title-cards that show where we are and what we're doing.  This would be an alternative style of establishing the location.  I could even have little pics of who was there (sometimes the kids came with us and sometimes not).

Then I'll identify the best shots from each sequence, which other shots are required to tell the story, and then cull the rest. Normally that shrinks the timeline significantly again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/11/2023 at 6:48 AM, kye said:

I really really appreciate the smaller size of the 14mm and the 12-32mm (at least when it's not in-use).

Even the 14-42mm PZ is really compact when not in use and it's very cheap. That small extra tele could be useful too. There's even a cheaper rebranded version on Aliexpress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davide DB said:

Even the 14-42mm PZ is really compact when not in use and it's very cheap. That small extra tele could be useful too. There's even a cheaper rebranded version on Aliexpress.

Yes, it's a nice lens (used it as my main video lens back when I had Pana G6 with a 'power zoom' toggle on the body). It doesn't support dual-IS though. The Oly 14-42 EZ pancake is also 'OK' and has zoom and focus rings instead of toggles, so is a bit nicer to operate. I think build quality is better on the Pana lens though.

On 4/11/2023 at 5:48 AM, kye said:

The GX85 only has a 1.1x crop into the sensor for the 4K mode, and the 1080p mode doesn't have any crop at all.

Oops - yes, quite correct, I was thinking about the mid-range 20MP Pana cameras (GX9, G95, G100 etc.) when I wrote that, which have 1.25x crop in 4k. No excuse really as I own a GX85...

On 4/11/2023 at 5:48 AM, kye said:

I do wonder how much would be supported if we had full access to all the modes supported by the chip.  Obviously the chip in the GX85 can support being given a 4K read-out, can apply a colour profile and do whatever NR and sharpening is done to a 4K file, and can compress a 4K output file at 100Mbps.  To imagine that it might be able to compress a 1080p image at 100Mbps isn't that far-fetched.  Who knows what else might be available on the chip.  ALL-I codecs, 10-bit, etc.

I suspect the processing chips could do 100Mbps All-I 1080p, but having lots of video mode choices in a mid-range camera (aimed at ordinary buyers/users instead of video enthusiasts like us) I think would just be regarded as confusing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like you have a process that works and you're content with it.  Very cool.

I'm in the same boat.  Since I'm low low low budget, I shoot what I can with what I can and align as best as possible in post.    I just spent a month and a half filming with a shitty 500mm lens simply because that's all I could afford.  It's not great, but it's not a deal breaker either.  So, off into the field I went and I used it.

And also, combining multiple cam footage with different lenses is not that hard unless, as a filmmaker, you're incredibly intent on having an extremely tight cohesiveness to the IQ --and are desperately striving for seeking out that extra 5% of IQ.

Your test prove that consolidating various footage is viable, and my anecdotal experience follows.

I know a lot of us here really want to find the perfect recipe for all of the above, throw in some secret sauce to make it all work, and that'll make us sit back in the editing seat and go "golly, doesn't that look wonderful!"

However, since consumer IQ tech is pretty damn good now, as a documentarian my goal isn't about the tech, more often it's simply get the shot that tells the story, then tell that story.

These days, when it comes to IQ, I worry much much more about the floor than the cieling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

Seems like you have a process that works and you're content with it.  Very cool.

This is mostly true.  I subscribed to the 'subtractive' model of editing where you start with all your footage and then remove the parts you don't want, making several passes, and then ending in a slight additive process where I pull in the 'in-between' shots that allow it to be a cohesive edit.  I'm aware there's also the 'additive' model where you just pull in the bits you want and don't bother making passes.  Considering my shooting ratios (the latest project will be 2000 shots / 5h22m likely to go down to something like 240 shots / 12m - either 8:1 or 27:1 depending on how you look at it) and the fact I edit almost completely linearly (in chronological order of filming) I might be better off with an additive process instead.

I've also just found a solution to a major editing challenge, and am gradually working through the process of understanding how I'll include it in my editing style.

11 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

I'm in the same boat.  Since I'm low low low budget, I shoot what I can with what I can and align as best as possible in post.    I just spent a month and a half filming with a shitty 500mm lens simply because that's all I could afford.  It's not great, but it's not a deal breaker either.  So, off into the field I went and I used it.

And also, combining multiple cam footage with different lenses is not that hard unless, as a filmmaker, you're incredibly intent on having an extremely tight cohesiveness to the IQ --and are desperately striving for seeking out that extra 5% of IQ.

Your test prove that consolidating various footage is viable, and my anecdotal experience follows.

If you're not deeply attuned to the subtleties of the image (as I know some people are) then its quite feasible to match footage across cameras, and even do image manipulation in post to emulate various lenses, at least to the extent that it would be visible in an edit where there are no side-by-side comparisons.  The fact that a scene can be edited together from multiple angles that were lit differently and shot with different focal lengths from different distances is a statement about how much we can tolerate in terms of things not matching completely.

11 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

I know a lot of us here really want to find the perfect recipe for all of the above, throw in some secret sauce to make it all work, and that'll make us sit back in the editing seat and go "golly, doesn't that look wonderful!"

However, since consumer IQ tech is pretty damn good now, as a documentarian my goal isn't about the tech, more often it's simply get the shot that tells the story, then tell that story.

I had a transformative experience when I started breaking down edits from award-winning travel show Parts Unknown (as that was what most closely matched the subject matter and shooting style I have).  I discovered a huge number of things, with some key ones being:

  • Prime (which streams high-quality enough 1080p that grain is nicely rendered) showed clearly that the lenses they used on many episodes aren't even sharp to 1080p resolution, having visible vintage lens aberrations like CA etc
  • They film lots of b-roll in high frame rates and often use it in the edit at normal speed (real life speed) which means it doesn't have a 180-shutter, and yet it still wins awards - even for cinematography
  • Many external shots have digitally clipped skies
  • Most shots are nice but not amazing, and many of them were compositions that I get when I film
  • The colour grading is normally very nice and the image is obviously from high-quality cameras

This made me realise that the magic was in their editing.  When I pulled that apart I found all sorts of interesting sequences and especially use of music etc.  But what was most revealing was when I then pulled apart a bunch of edits from "cinematic" travel YouTube channels and discovered that while the images looked better, their editing was so boring that any real comparison was simply useless.  

This was when I realised that camera YouTube had subconsciously taught me that the magic of film-making was 90% image and 10% everything else, and that this philosophy fuels the endless technical debates about how people should spend their yearly $10K investment in camera bodies.  Now I understand that film-making is barely 10% image, and that, to paraphrase a well-known quote, if people are looking at the image quality of your edit then your film is crap. 

When you combine this concept with how much is possible in post, I think people spending dozens/hundreds of hours working to earn money to trying to buy the image they like, and spending dozens/hundreds of hours online talking about cameras without even taking a few hours to learn basic colour grading techniques is just baffling.  It's like buying new shoes every day because you refuse to learn how to tie and untie the laces and the shop does that for you when you buy some.

11 hours ago, fuzzynormal said:

These days, when it comes to IQ, I worry much much more about the floor than the cieling.

Absolutely - that's a great way of putting it!

My consideration is now what is 'usable', with the iPhone wide angle low-light performance being one of the only sub-par elements in my setup, and, of course, why IQ is Priority 4.

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

  • EOSHD Pro Color 5 for All Sony cameras
    EOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
    EOSHD Dynamic Range Enhancer for H.264/H.265
×
×
  • Create New...