Leaderboard

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1343596437' post='14709']I happen to be very impressed with GH2 footage I've seen. In fact, the GH2 is the camera that made me think, "Okay, now I have no more excuses for not making my own films." But the GH2 certainly doesn't compete with film. But I don't really see that as the point though. [/quote] That's what I think as well. The point is not, that Coppola, should he decide to shoot [i]Apocalypse Again[/i], would say, friends, we are going to the jungle, leave your cumbersome old film cameras at home, we put on a Lumix each and be done for. And whether Christopher Nolan should go on using film despite the high quality of our amateur equipment - is that our business? Where our views diverge is in your transition we can't compete now [color=#ff0000]but[/color] soon: [quote name='galenb' timestamp='1343551432' post='14696']Com'on people! :-D I really hope no one actually thinks film is going to be replaced by a $800 micro 4/3 camera? Okay so film kills GH2 but what about RED and Alexa? And really, we may not have the technology to make a movie that looks better then film right now [color=#ff0000]but just wait. In a few years...[/color] [color=#222222][font='Helvetica Neue', Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)] [/quote] This is the excuse ("Okay, now I have no more excuses for not making my own films.") not to express ourselves using what we have. Hollywood is like an army with helicopters, napalm, predator drones and everything, all aimed at our hearts, and we have only smartphones. What is the smart thing to do? Use our phones as clubs against the enemy cause that's the appropriate answer? Do I actually think that film is going to be replaced by an $800 Lumix? No, but my conclusion is not, give up, but stop caring about things you can't influence. What Hollywood is not particularly good at, is expressing my, Axels, views. I know how video looks on big screens. Neither do I dream of competing with [i]The Dark Knight[/i] aesthetically, nor do I care about Gotham. Today all talk regarding poor video quality really is lamenting on a high comfort level. Never before were the means to deliver [i]sufficient[/i] quality for cinema so affordable. Don't look at the aesthetics too close.[/background][/size][/font][/color]

Some of my favourite shots I have shot at F5.6 on an anamorphic. Knocking back a distracting background is important, but it doesn't need to be creamed out entirely, that is just boring. In my opinion a backdrop should be like a painting, where you can see the brush strokes and texture but it doesn't distract from the main subject. Excessive shallow DOF has been used and abused too often for my liking!

Yeah i really don't see the issue. I mean even in its compressed state, i'm still seeing things on the other side of the windows. She doesn't look like she's playing pool on a dying star like we usually see with dslr's. I think there's enough d.o.f. to isolate whatever you need to in frame. A lot of that "cinematic" look, is gonna be on you boys... None of us have gotten our hands on this thing with a dolly, or an anamorphic, or a slider yet.