Leaderboard

I used this position shake trick for most of my promos, just came to the conclusion on my lonesome, but it's good to share :) Subtler int he first one:   [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNGquFXmLOU"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNGquFXmLOU[/url]   More extreme here:   [url="https://vimeo.com/48174944"]https://vimeo.com/48174944[/url]   I did it in After Effects using a wiggle expression on position. Set a frequency either at frame rate or below, and use no more than a pixel or so. It works great!

You can see it here in the title card right at the beginning (very subtle, you might have to make it HD and full screen to notice it), that's using Final Cut's "Earthquake" filter.   [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcNvHmjx4Y"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpcNvHmjx4Y[/url]

i like the Rokinon 650-1300mm for interviews handheld!  it's really hard.   :(   but that's what she said!  :o

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2523.jpeg"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_2523.jpeg[/img][/url] Here's an ingenious cage solution for the Blackmagic Cinema Camera by my neighbours in Berlin - ReWo. Rather than a bulky cage which wraps around the entire camera, ReWo have chosen to form their cage around the mount tube. Yes finally that strange EF tube has a use! The cage provides mounting points for ReWo's wood handles via Arri rosettes, top handle, mounting points for accessories via 1/4" and 3/8" threads and a 15mm rods block.

This is the one I have right now, although I never use it mounted on the camera, but on a light stand. It's the most powerful out of most of the mentioned lights and uses cheap NP-970 (as well as AA batteries). Also the color is quite there, it doesn't have a green tint.   [url="http://www.amazon.com/Aputure-AL-198-Camera-Lighting-Camcorder/dp/B008VKMLE4/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1351190687&sr=8-3&keywords=aputure+led"]http://www.amazon.com/Aputure-AL-198-Camera-Lighting-Camcorder/dp/B008VKMLE4/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1351190687&sr=8-3&keywords=aputure+led[/url]  Then one option I'd like to have (but I haven't tried yet) because of it's higher power and the fact that it can be plugged is this one:   [url="http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Dimmable-Switch-Battery-Charger/dp/B0054EI79I/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1354919069&sr=8-2&keywords=312+led+light"]http://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Dimmable-Switch-Battery-Charger/dp/B0054EI79I/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1354919069&sr=8-2&keywords=312+led+light[/url]   This one up there could be bulkier, but it doesn't seem to be much bigger. Both lights come in daylight and selectable temperature versions. In the latest there are 156 daylight balanced LEDs and 156 tungsten balanced ones, so supposedly it has the same power as the daylight LED light only when all of the LEDs are on (which is a color temperature that sits in the middle). You sure have options! EDIT: I think the 312 ones are the same as the ones Tomekk mentioned, but these from Amazon are branded as Fotodiox, which is a brand that hasnt't let me down yet (in the adapters department at least!).

I first thought, my god, another cheap effect. But I have to admit (and I'm happy to learn) that it looks fantastic. Thank you for the examples.

To clarify, two people use this account. My wife (Caroline) and I (Peter).  If the post is argumentative and or about tech it is usually me. If it's about style and/or has proper grammar, it's definitely her.   

I guess we all assumed stuff. The OP was talking about a non-IS lens being usable even on a tripod. We respond supporting ourselves in personal experience, I believe. Then the thread starts drifting and we end up discussing whatever it is drove our attention away. For the last 20 posts I was thinking the OP wanted to shoot handheld with the 200mm! haha But to summarize, I'll add my list of 2 cents. 1. It's hard to discuss stuff when we don't share the same language, and I'm talking about mere technical terms (or not so technical). I assumed "handheld" was about literally holding a camera with your bare hands, no support whatsoever. IS does help, using a non-IS lens is jittery as hell. And that's talking about a 200mm on a full frame camera. 'Cause it becomes around 300 on a super35 sensor or an APS-C sensor. Then 400mm on a MFT sensor! So unless we agree on the camera, it's hard to say how bad or good it will look. There's definitely a "handheld look" as opposed to using a camera "handheld" or shooting with a "handycam". If I shoot with a shoulder support I wouldn't say I'm shooting handheld, but I'm definitely getting a handheld shot. So there's that, if it means anything to you. 2. I shot a documentary last monday with just my 28mm, 50mm and 135mm (and sadly, my 14-42mm kit) on my GH2. 50mm is as far as I'd go when shooting handheld (that is, using my bare hands). I like to think I've pretty steady hands. But 135mm (270mm on 35mm equivalent) is crappy footage altoghether, of course. But when I put on my shoulder rig, things start to look sweeter (although I really really miss IS). In other instances, some kind of support like a monopod or a tripod acting as one (of course, the ultimate weapon is a proper tripod, with which I've managed to get awesome pictures using EX Tele on the 135mm). I could put together a private popurri if you want to see those shots. 3. About IS not working handheld on a 200mm lens, markm... I used the HV series (HV20, 30 and 40) for a couple of years almost daily. I loved it, and still do. They all have image stabilization AND rolling shutter and shooting at their maximum 10x zoom was the equivalent to 430mm in 35mm terms. I'm not gonna say it was the best footage out there, but it was certainly useable. So I can say tele shots with IS do work. And of course, on the other hand, I would've never achieved them without it. Here's a promo video I made to sell my cam with many shots I made through the years, and there you can see many long tele shots (like the little Beagle's ass, the two Jehova Witnesses on the building, the road/plane shot which reads "CON MUCHO ZOOM...", the crowd shot of Fito Paez's scenario...) [url="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgWXuQLQgM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmgWXuQLQgM[/url]

Konica AR 40mm/1.8 and 85mm/1.8 are highly recommended... the 85 is difficult to find at a good price but well worth the effort...

Just be really subtle with it. If you look at real film transfers it's not a lot, just on the edge of perception to take the rigid digital edge off, it works really well. 

check out the 'wiggle' expression in after effects..sounds like it'll accomplish what you're looking for   [url="http://www.videocopilot.net/basic/tutorials/09.Expressions/"]http://www.videocopilot.net/basic/tutorials/09.Expressions/[/url]   edit: posted too slow..but that'll give you a tutorial of how to make it work

    Great, thanks! You got it right at last, we're talking about the difference between the look of 'handheld' footage and the way you're holding a cam. Don't mess those things up. When you're shooting shoulder or chestmounted you get (most of the times) the look of handheld footage, so that's why it's called handheld.   Handheld in the way you describe as holding the camera with just two hands only is only 'doable' with smaller cams for a short period of time. With the larger cams, like the pdw-700, holding it like that means you can't pull focus or zoom at the same time, even pulling focus alone will mean you have to support a 10/15 kilograms beast with just one hand, good luck in getting usable footage for longer than let's say 20 seconds. In my experience you're always looking for a third point of support, it might be a part of your body, a wall or the floor, it's just for keeping the cam steady, the motion in control and getting the shot right.   But let's end this discussion and agree that 200mm on crop and handheld isn't recommended to say the least.

  OMG, what an offense!!!     English is not my native language, but what I read from this is "The BMCC is a much better deal. Andrew, when are you posting some footage so these people stop talking shit?". The way I see it she was supporting what Andrew was saying, and didn't deserve such a harsh response, but that's just me.     So you compare the BMCC to the F55 and claim that the F55 market needs nothing else than a BMCC, but the C100 is a completely different market. Seriously...

  Price!! Minimum shooting price is $3000 + $299 battery + $200 SSD + $100 vari-ND. Stick it on your tripod, shoot ProRes and you don't need to upgrade your editing rig. So a long way off $6500 C100 price for a better image. Same Canon lenses.

Andy,   I'm curious to get your opinion on some lens questions if you're open to it (or anyone else for that matter.   1) I"m about to get the GH3 and feel open to getting one of the Voigtlanders. Do you have a preference for the 17mm vs the 25mm in regards to what would be more useful?   2) If one was to use old manual 35mm slr film lenses for the GH3 do you think the Canon FD line is the best to go with considering price, quality and adaptability to m43? For example, I have a few old Pentax K mount lenses but wasn't sure if there were issues adapting this to m43.

I don't care what anybody says, but I have used several "make your footage look like film" plugs and this is hands down the best.  You can not emulate the grain of film convert with any NLE built in "grain" effect, and if you have, please share.    Is this a plugin that you should use on EVERY single project? No.  If anybody thinks this software is bogus, then all company's (apple, avid, sony, adobe, canon, panasonic, RED, BMD,and so on) should stop progressing and leave EVERYTHING exactly how it is because everything is as perfect as it can possibly be.  How much sense would that make?  Give the company credit for giving people another option to enhance a project. They provide tons of presets, but you're not forced to use them.   The customer support with the people at film convert is pretty awesome, if the price of film convert it what bothers you, shoot them an e-mail or LIKE them on facebook and tell them you are interested but like most starving artist working on a budget and I would almost guarantee they will help you the best they can.  I have made suggestions to blackmagic before on some things that would be nice and convenient and they basically shut me down, I make the same suggestions to the people at film convert they welcomed my suggestions and are open to new ideas to improve their products.    Film Convert is probably in my top 5 favorite software purchases and I am glad that my purchase will help to better the software and allow them to keep moving forward.  I could go on and on about film convert but the fact is, you either like it or not, like Germay said, grade your project how you want to give it a "special taste" as axel calls it, and then throw film convert on it as a final mastering touch, if that look fits the project.  I'm a big fan of magic bullet looks, but I never use their presets, I'll create the look I want using the tools they provide.

Hey all, apologies in advance for barging in on the conversation, but we just found this list, and wanted to let folks know that we've just released a brand spanking new version of FilmConvert, with all sorts of new camera specific profiles. In particular, we've now got Technicolor, Flaat, Prolost, and Marvels Cine picture style support for your 5D, as well as full GH2 support with data on all the built in profiles. We're always on the lookout for feedback from keen filmmakers, so we'd love for you to cruise over to our site, grab a copy, and tell us what you think. Cheers all!

Sorry Andrew :) But I still think this is overkill :-)

Hello all! New to here. Very excited about my new GH2 body. Apparently a lens is needed though. How about that? I purchased my GH2 mainly as a B-camera to use when shooting interview for close-up, beauty stuff to complement my medium wide (using the Panasonic AC130 as my A-cam), but hope to eventually learn to flex its muscles on more interesting stuff. I'm looking for some lens recommendations. These are kind of two separate questions, but what would be best for my needs and then what would be cheapest but workable? My research seems to point me to the Voigtlander 25mm, but it's a little pricey for me right now. I plan on getting the cheap kit lens (14-42) just for the purposes of learning the camera, but it seems the kit lenses aren't quite going to deliver me that nice shallow DOF look I'm hoping for. Any budget options that'll do the trick for me, putting it on a tripod and getting close up, blurry background, b-camera interview beauty stuff? Thoughts? Much appreciated. -Noah