Leaderboard

Something else important about bitrate is the codec used, and the settings the codec is using. Some codecs can be more efficient at 30Mbps than similar ones at 70Mbps. Actually, even the same codec could be more efficient at 30Mbps than at twice the rate, depending on which settings it's using. According to the Magic Lantern guys, Canon's H264 compression on DSLRs is not very efficient at all, and that might be the reason why Sony FS100's compression is so much cleaner at half the bit rate!

As an addendum, you can get a lot from 8-bit source in post. Most of those complaining about footage "falling apart" are in fact complaining about the 4:2:0 spatial compression aspect, that destroys red-channel resolution, not the limited 8-bit colour pallete, or the temporal compression of bit-rate.   For this reason I tend to avoid capturing 4:2:0 footage with a warm balance. I always head towards green and blue, there's more resolution there, then bring out the red in post, when you work in a programme like After Effects for example.   Work in a 32-bit space, and you eliminate compression aspects as much as is possible. Your footage is treated as individual RGB, 32-bit frames, instead  of 4:2:0 sub-sampled 8-bit heavily compressed GOPs.   You can't gain back information you lost in capture, because compression is destructive unless it's lossless, but you can get the best from your footage this way since you aren't limited to 8-bit colour values, and there's no need to transcode.   If you don't clip your highlights, and keep the lows away from the zero point where the codec compression is worst (Cinestyle does this, and you can do it on sony cameras too) you have a greater chance of achieving a film look.   Not clipping and lifting black reduces your range of bits that are used for colour shades BUT i find it far easier to bring in more shades in post, than I do to recover clipped highs and shadows, which is of course, impossible.   But of course, if you know exactly the look you want, and it can be achieved in camera, doing it that way when using heavily compressed footage will actually yield a nicer result.   Decisiveness and consistency on set pay off...

Simply put: The number of different colour shades the camera can record. It's bit depth, because unlike a bit-rate, it isn't measured over time.   Essentially (as technical as we need to be) 8-bit allows 255 different levels of colour for each channel. 10-bit allows 1023 different levels.   Each channel is: R G and B for 4:4:4 or uncompressed, while it's Y (white), Cb (blue) and Cr (red) if it's sub-sampled (like 4:2:2 or 4:2:0). . The result is that 10-bit codecs record a greater number of subtle shades, great for skin, the sky, and other subjects with subtle gradients.   I say codecs rather than cameras, because most of these sensors convert analogue light to digital data at higher depths, like 14-bits, which has 16384 possible levels per channel. The rather crippled codecs then interpolate (pick the nearest one) out of 256 shades, so you can see how much data you're losing.   That's why people are always complaining, because a lot of companies make a conscious decision to cripple their hardware for commercial reasons.   There are certain considerations, like processing, heat dispersal and buffer speed and size, but the main concern of certain companies is profit margin. Which is why those companies are so huge.   Now, in practice the division of these bits across dynamic range spectrum blah blah is very complex, but it doesn't matter. More is nice.   But you can make a movie that gets Oscar nominated, or a promo that makes you a fortune, with 8-bits, so don't worry too much even though it's nice to know and nice to have more.

First testing of modifications I've made to the 12mm taking lens & the LA7200. More details on Vimeo : )   https://vimeo.com/58622880

There's no thought behind it as far as i can see, they didn't decide not to include it cos it's "more pro" to have fewer options on-board. The bloody Arri Alexa has peaking. some use it, some don't. It's a standard camera option.   it's Canon brand philosophy to make as big a profit margin as possible by altering as little as possible in order to segment a line. I will need a lot of convincing before I believe their "cinema" lenses aren't slightly modified L-lenses.   The EOS DSLR line has no peaking in any of the Canon firmware (except C300, C100 and C500 which aren't DSLRs) so Canon didn't add it because they consider such development to be an unnecessary development expense. You may get it at a later date. Maybe. Most likely everyone will get really excited when an impending firmware update is announced, and it will just add a few bug fixes. That's a Canon classic   They simply wrote some extra code into the 1Dx and added a heat sink, shuffled a few bits around and added a fortune to the price. They didn't even print its own manual, you get a 1Dx manual and a 1DC add on.   The sad reality is that I would have dumped the 550D/600D ages ago except for Magic Lantern. I've used nice cinema cameras. I still think Magic Lantern is a work of utter genius.

I like the look of Samyang, yes. They make good lenses for the cash.    I'm not a big fan of L-glass anyway. It wins resolution tests and other such anal things against Zeiss and Leica, but the resulting image is lifeless in comparison, IMO.

For 2-megapixel (1080p) you don't need L-glass for the best quality. Samyang is pretty good. Cheap because it lacks AF, but the glass is very good.

It's the same sensor as the ikonoscop it I remember correctly. Audio wise, of course I'm all in favour of having the best possible quality, which means getting additional qualified people and equipment, but that's not always possible. Amazing works like Undercity or Hell and Back Again would simply not have been possible with a crew bigger than one single person, and I'm all in favour of making it easy on such artists so they keep coming up with more and better work.

  There is a kind of workaround. Firstly, the camera REC flashes when there's less than 5 mins of record time left.   You can also calculate how much remaining record time there is on a given SSD if you know the record time for a full disk.  For example, I know a 240GB SSD gives me close to 30 mins @ 25 FPS.   When you play back the last clip recorded, the TC field at the bottom displays the total record time.  This way, let's say it's 00:22:03:00 i know i have about 7 mins of record time left.   They won't do in camera file management.  They might do an in-camera format....maybe...   Alexa's don't allow you to delete individual clips, nor do RED....   jb

To make a long story short....   The c300 uses a proprietary sensor readout that makes it relatively immune to certain visual artifacts like moire and rolling shutter.    As far as bit depth is concerned, a higher bit depth gives you a lot more leeway in post. Camera's like the c300 compress information so that you get a great image out of camera. But this information is compressed to give you the best image right out of the camera. However, when using 8-bit, you lose sensor information that informs what the scene would look like under a different exposure or white balance(which could be considered extraneous).    For example, if your out of camera image reads shadow detail as 100% black, you will only get greys when you brighten it. At a higher bit depth, those shadows will contain detail that can be elicited through brightening.    Does this make sense?

  Well, you can get very respectable looking grades with Magic Bullet.  You can even do it on the super-cheap with their Mojo version, but it's very much a black box with only a few options.  I won't ever not recommend Magic Bullet as long as Stu is getting something out of it, because I know he's largely responsible for there even being affordable color grading tools.  DV became not just a viable format for indie filmmakers but one with a meaningful aesthetic possibility mostly because of Magic Bullet.   That said, watch this:   http://vimeo.com/57325168

  it will probably be an easy modification.  if there is rubber grip on the focus ring, carefully prize that off and there should be a few grub screws underneath.  it'll likely be a case of adjusting the focus ring so the scale is slightly off (you'll lose minimum focus by a few inches, and gain slightly further than infinity).  This is of course depending on the +/- amount of adjustment they left on the lens either side of correct focus calibration.      

All of these parameters are very important to 2 types of people:-   1. The ones who shoot big budget films, cinematic automotive commercials and other high budget stuff. 2. The people who need a reason to not go out and shoot anything.  Blaming the limitations of 8bit colour etc for their lack of ideas or personal drive.       I used to hanker after 444 10bit, uncompressed blah blah blah.  now it bores me.  IMO you'll probably be happier not knowing about it.

as i said early in that thread it is really easy and cheap to make an anamorphic... putting it together and getting it to look better than a 150 dollar ebay proskar is a mount everest for anyone even slr magic. i called it the proskar equation. listening taking advice from all the customers is also a big mistake : ) most people are nutters or mental defectives. any chance i can have mine waterproofed. i don't like blue flares can i have custom pink not red as i i hate red has to be pink or yellow with a green hue. any chance you could put a light inside the lens so when i am in the countryside with cattle i can still have flares maybe listen to one customer in 30 no in a hundred also believing that the fan boys would really spend cash is another.

So basically, it gets brighter, wider, and usually only looks softer at the edge cos the centre gets sharper.   Man, people will moan about anything in video these days! I'm guilty too, but deep down I'm just glad I don't have to shoot on DV anymore.   This is pretty fucking awesome...

Nope. Shot on it tonight and love the image. It is the best image you can get cheaper than a Red. Lots more Blackmagic stuff coming soon. Things only slowed down because of the winter period and Christmas.

  Sound schematics is not easy when trying to filter out electronic noise interference within camera.  Alexa or F65 have A/D converters almost just as good as top notch Nagra's or Sound Devices.   It's really expensive for a company to even be at the pro level for sound development.  24/96khz capture doesn't mean shit in the audio world its just marketing.  high grade converters are everything.  preamps and 48v within camera is practical but as far as db and noise forget it.  You'll always get noise or some inconsistencies when you want to crank the boost level needed.  I rather have a top line-in with an external pre and field mixer setup and a good mic.  of course all that doesnt mean shit if your boom operator doesnt know where to place a mic or know the best crop from his monitor....  hidden lavs, etc..all need separate proper audio gear.  but whatever standard works for you..

Making the light and surfaces a little more pleasing and inviting can be done with a color correction pass.  It really needs that.  I'd maybe see how you like it with the motion text slightly sped up.  It seems like there's a lot of travel time before the letters come to rest.  I get that you want it to look elegant and professional but with so much "air time" there were times my eye was drawn over and watching the letters fall into place, spending processing working it out like a puzzle before the words were finally formed, rather than looking at the footage.  It's a careful balance.   It's kinda hard to add people to what you've already got though unless you're going for some really bizarre, stylized commercial with graphic "standee" versions of the therapists or something.  I could see that working in Japan maybe, but local businesses tend to not be very creative (all the while expecting the same-old-shit to bring in new customers).   When you know they're wrong and their decisions are going to hurt the final outcome, doing what you can to show them an alternate version can often un-fog their thinking, as long as you have "what they asked for" as well.  You gotta be pretty secure to just do what you know is the "right way" and disregard the client's input when you know it's bad.  That's taking a gamble on knowing, deep down, they just want it to be good and effective and hope they're the type that can put their own ego aside and not flip out because they were ignored, even if you proved them wrong (or in spite of their anger over being proven wrong).  

Your clients have no inkling of how persuasion works. People hesitating to undergo any of the advertised treatments need to feel the good vibrations, not fear to be led to the poison death penalty room (cause that was my first impression, and I bet I'm not too different from the rest, just look at the the beheaded skeleton between the beds: weight loss? Oh yeah!). The receipt for a good promotion is simple: Cut away the bad aspects, show only the positive results. Difficult without beautiful, happy people? Impossible.   But: I have done the exact same thing for a dentist. I showed him the clip, the rooms were more friendly, with a lot of modern art surrounding the instruments. I told him, I wouldn't recommend to put the video on his homepage, because it still was a torture chamber, and we needed really some relaxed faces to get this impression fixed, but he didn't give in. Next time, I promised myself, I wouldn't commit to anything of that kind.