Leaderboard

I really have enjoyed reading this blog. I've been on a ten year hiatus from filmmaking. I started shooting Super8 film and tried to work my way up to larger film formats but in the end debt on my credit card became too much. The recent advances in affordable video cameras has pulled me back in. I haven't bought a new camera yet. It seems that in one year there will be several great options for under $4k. This is the best blog I've found that offers both updates on new technology as well as great insight. Thanks for all the work keeping this blog going! I, for one, greatly appreciate it.

Let me quote those last words: [quote name='Coppola'] [font=Helvetica][size=3]... for once the so-called professionalism about movies will be destroyed forever and it will become an art form.[/size][/font] [/quote] He is not talking about any technical issue. What he predicted became reality at once. With Super 8 cameras and later home video. There were artists, driven by the need to express themselves, who took these simple, so called 'unprofessional' means without glancing at what 'the industry' did with their millions. To an artist, the comparison of consumer cameras to professional cameras is of little interest. [i]Ars gratia artis[/i] (pompous MGM phrase). A real indie doesn't need comparison. If I have to say something, I don't care about if it meets technical specs. If all I want to do is identify myself with the achievements of others, I am pretentious: [quote name='Coppola'] [font=Helvetica][size=3]Nothing is so terrible as a pretentious movie[/size][/font] [/quote] BTW: Great film, I prefer the original cut. One good argument for the use of true anamorphic lenses: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078788/technical You see the typical lens flares and the funny looking focus transitions very often. What you also see in the specs: Shot in 35 mm, but published in 70 mm. Nobody ever complained about inappropriately low resolution ...

https://vimeo.com/45985040 Not sure if you guys have seen this, but it's pretty awesome. The last quote from Coppola was especially relevant!

and here we go again ... ;)

I feel sensor size is an issue. Even if it's twice the BMDs price I'm sure Kineraw S35 is gonna help you capture the deep, movie feel more easily than the heavy crop of the BMD, with equivalent lighting etc. BMD has a lot less physical space gathering light than S35... I have the RX100 and it's a bit dead but it's useful. Try out a medium format stills camera with no AA filter and you're looking at creepily 3D pictures (if you light it well of course), a huge area gathering light. IT definitely makes a difference. Roll on medium format video! ;)

multiply your 1920 wide figure by 1.5x. = 2880px wide create a custom frame of 1080x2880, 24fps/25fps when initially setting up the project. import your footage in and then drag your first clip into timeline. click it and then go to effects tab. on 'motion' deselect uniform scale and set horizontal scale to 150%. bring the rest of your clips in and then right click and 'copy' the first clip. select all the other clips and right click and 'paste attributes'. it will stretch all of the footage by 150%. otherwise, right click your clips in the preview box and hit 'modify/interpret footage' then there might be a selection for 1.5x anamorphic. i know there is a 1.33x option. if not maybe you can create one? exporting.. I use quicktime .Mov. H284 compression. 24bit, bitrate depends on the type of footage. frame size =1920x1080. using this frame size means the frame is smaller and black bars get added to the top and bottom. with this there is a perceived detail improvement due to the vertical lines being squeezed. if you want to maintain 1080 tall on the actual image area you need to use uncompressed .mov then set your output frame to match your preview frame(1080x2880) hope that helps:)

Oh and new Blackmagic forum too! http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com