Leaderboard

  I'll name one I'm pretty proud of.  I created the flying traffic system for The Fifth Element.  The whole thing.  The whole system, that I then made workable enough for the lesser experienced team of about twelve artists assigned to me.   This was after being sent to London to work directly with Luc Besson and his editor Sylvie for two months during filming at Pinewood Studios where I pre-visualized the chase sequence as Luc was doing it, getting Avid rushes from the day's shoot so that I could place building extensions and cars in the scene to help Luc decide on further shots.   When I got back I created the entire system that let other artists on my team place traffic and give them a randomized selection of flying car models.  I had to build in the ability to, if necessary, control all of any specific car's appearance features (dirt, scratches, color, etc.), or model, or possible elimination entirely, without disrupting any of the other cars.  There was no one else to rely on.  I had already established myself within the company, founding artist #7 of Digital Domain, as the guy you went to when you had a VFX task that you didn't quite know how to do but knew it needed to be solved.   I went further, for the fun of it, giving the artists the ability to assign personalized license plates and custom signage to the flying bus lines.  That whole sequence is literally filled with subliminal in-jokes and references only we'll ever fully appreciate (along with Mark Stetson putting us into that sequence...I'm in the first shot where we see Leeloo's POV, across the street, swinging a broadsword around Kurgen style).   While not a favorite in my filmography to actually watch, it's one of my favorite working experiences for the work itself and all the surrounding experiences.  It would go on to win the BAFTA that year for visual effects and be nominated for an Oscar in VFX.  You can read about me in the Cinefex issue for that film, maybe the American Cinematographer too, I forget, as well as the hefty, hard-bound, coffee table book on the history of Digital Domain.   Presuming I'm any sort of bench warmer, I guess I should be angry but it's just so ignorant it makes me chuckle.  You really don't even know what you don't know.       edit: I do like how you skipped over, despite all your "filmmaking" talk, that I'm one of the few here that's actually done it.  Not clever, but predictable.  Your talk might impress or intimidate other folks who also talk about making films but not me.    PS: all kidding aside, if you want a clear understanding of what I did on every shot in that reel there's a downloadable shot breakdown document on the vimeo page.  Feel free to verify any of this by contacting folks like Mark Stetson or Eric Nash, they're on FB.  Just, please, screenshot their response when you ask them if I was a "benchwarmer", lol.   The only time that I have ever been a COG, implementing an FX solution created by someone else, that I can recall, ever, would be the digital webs created by Theo Vandernoot for Spider-Man 2.  I was happy at that point, coming to the end of my contract with Sony Pictures Imageworks, to not have to think so hard for a few weeks before going to AFM to get mine and my brother's first feature, one of the first feature length narratives shot on the F900, on the path to distribution.

[img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/fs100-slrmagic-hyperprime.jpg[/img] As I recently discovered Macs really seem to hurt your AVCHD footage from the FS100, GH2 and NEX cameras. Especially the Sony FS100. It is no wonder these cameras often get a bad reputation for limited dynamic range, crushed shadows and blown highlights - when you are only seeing the middle part of the full 8bit range of luma. This Rec.709 portion of a 601 space (16-235 instead of the full 0-255 the FS100 shoots in) is incorrectly remapped to 0-255 by Quicktime. Therefore apps that use Quicktime at their core like Premiere, trip up. This makes a huge difference to the image. When fixed, you recover over 10% of your dynamic range, highlight and shadow detail, along with a much smoother roll off to whites and blacks.

From what I understand the only image stabilization with the GH3 is through the lenses, specifically lenses made by Panasonic.    Assuming this is true, I'm curious how people have fared with the GH3 when using legacy glass and/or non Panasonic lenses in regards to image stabilization.       Just curious what people thought was wise/reasonable in how to maximize a stable image when shooting with the GH3. Obviously a tripod helps but was looking to see if anyone had thoughts on this issue.      

I'm trying to decide whether it's worth buying the new Canon IS primes for video use, specifically the 35mm f/2 IS.. However it's almost $1,000 and for that price I could get the regular 35mm f/2 and a really decent video Monopod..   Miller makes one that's about $150 (on sale right now for $128) for the monopod itself and $160 for the quick release plate. Sachtler also make one but it is quite a lot more expensive at $692 monopod+quick release plate..    It's really just for when I can't use a tripod.. I really like the idea of being able to get steady hand held shots, but a monopod isn't really that much extra weight anyway.. I think the pro of the IS is that you aren't really restricted in any way but with the monopod you can also rest the weight of the camera on it inbetween shooting. Also with the monopod it will also give lenses without IS that stabilization too.   Thoughts? Also, if anyone has experience with the Miller or Sachtler monpods I'd be really interested to hear what you think about them. Thanks.

  Can I have a job?   My credentials? Sometimes I make over a whole $100 filming local sports or seminars............

I remember walking round some of the set for the Fifth Element at Pinewood when I was there working on a shoot for a commercial. Quite a while ago now. Personally I like the work of both Andrew and Philip. Spend more time here than at Bloom's site. It's amazing how his whole celebrity status blew up. They say there is no such thing as bad publicity. Hopefully this little spat will drive more people to this site and people will discover the quality articles. And the warm friendly group of contributors here!

Check the link to see the Dragon Picture.  6K still.  http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?94476-Double-Dragon

  That's the thing, I don't go around trumpeting that just to do it.  Not unless provoked.  I'm here because I came across one of Andrew's reviews when I started investigating anamorphic lenses for DSLRs.  I'm happy to share with anyone but my primary focus is as an enthusiast who also enjoys learning from others every day.   I was impressed that Andrew was a doer and not just a talker like so many on the internet who are really in it for some sense of celebrity and not doing the work.  I like the fact that I don't know what Andrew looks like, yet that's the first thing you learn when you go to see what someone like Philip Bloom is about.  "Oh, he's so dreamy!"   I make mistakes, have made a fair amount here, because I can be a loud mouth too.  But, seriously, I'm here to learn more about these tools and all the various creative solutions people find for shooting, largely on a budget, so that I can apply that to further narrative feature films.  I like that they're so far under the radar of the establishment that it feels like being part of an insurgency.  That's why I'm here.     edit: and I wanted to make another thing clear.  I try to always interact with people here, on Vimeo, on PV, anywhere, based on the work they show and the words they say.  Not their resume or filmography.  When I click like, or add a comment of praise or anything like that it's not predicated on any pre-existing knowledge or bias involving someone's background.  I don't believe in someone's credentials as a means to judge their imagery.  If anything, I'll only go look if I'm at odds with some concept or statement that they've made and my own credibility has been challenged.     The only time I think I've really fired off a tactical ego-bomb like this one was to shut down a particularly belligerent fellow on the Bloody Disgusting forums who didn't think I was either justified or qualified to have an exceptionally low opinion of James Cameron.  I don't want to make a habit of it.  It doesn't feel good to me...after that first couple seconds of hitting 'enter'.

  Yeah, I met him at the Floston Paradise party at Cannes the year The Fifth Element opened the festival.  One of the many great experiences associated with that film.  Luc and Gaumont got us all invites, those of us interested in attending Cannes.  Like when he booked the Cinerama-Dome to give us an exclusive screening of the film when Columbia either failed to have a crew screening or didn't invite the FX team.  He's cool like that.         Who are you talking to?  Yeah, I know...     ...my FB album with stills from the actual film...         ....oh, or did you mean to pose that as a question?  Yes.  Yes I do like working with actors.  They seem to like working with me too.       edit: here's the PV topic where I outline more about the latest film, including a bunch of behind-the-scenes videos shot by one of my PAs...I posted it there rather than here, I dunno, at the time I wasn't feeling like most of the prevailing voices on the forum here would be interested...

  When exactly did Bloom say that 8 bit 4:2:2 would, in anyway, compete with 12 bit raw? How is he trying to change that view?   I like this site for some things, i like PB's site for some things..... I couldn't give 2 shits about the bickering and egos behind the info. But spreading FUD is no help to anyone.

  Above: my Blackmagic Cinema camera with ReWo cage - a shootout with the Red Epic is coming soon BlackmagicUser.net recently did an interview with John Brawley, the cinematographer close to Blackmagic Design and main tester for the cinema camera. His experience exposing the camera goes along with what I am finding, that the Blackmagic Cinema Camera works best when you 'expose to the right'.

[quote name='AdR' timestamp='1343884351' post='14816'] That's part of the problem, especially with h.264 footage, because many apps scale the luma when they see the h.264 flag in the meta data. The two methods I've used are: (1) Open the files in QT7 (which I have heard ignores scaling flags), then take a screengrab and open in photoshop. Use Info Window and Levels histogram to determine luma scale. (2) Set up AE CS6 with color space of Adobe RGB(1998), and import .mts file, then use Synthetic Aperture for scopes and histograms. (I believe using Adobe RGB (1998) causes AE to import the .mts file without any luma scaling.) If anyone has better methods, please post them. [/quote] Couple of methods I use: 1 - Rewrap the .mts clip to Quicktime using Clipwrap, Media Converter, FFMpeg, etc. Bring the .mov clip into Davinci Resolve, open the "Clip Atributes" and choose to interpret the color levels as "0 - 1023". 2 - Bring the .mts clips into SCRATCH, go to the Process Module in the FxCtrl tab set the YCrCb RGB mode to "Full". Both these methods work in OSX and Windows. Resolve [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/18737/501a48b24a929_resolve.png[/img] SCRATCH [img]http://www.eoshd.com/comments/uploads/inline/18737/501a48dd7e034_scratch.png[/img] On a side note, these workflows work very well to create ofline editorial media and then reconform for color grading.

O dont have FCP x only PPro so Fix is for P Pro cs5.5 cs6