Leaderboard

  Never had a problem with my R1MX... Guess I'm lucky. lol   But seriously after a day of shooting I'm happy with the BMCC. I've seen folks talking highly about this cam and it deserves it! For me, it's not a red, but c'mon, it's really cheap for what it delivers.   My only complain is actually the cinemaDNG format. it's so damn heavy! They really should invest in some codec like redcode or cineform. It'll be hard to keep the storage ok. We backup all our raw footage and right now, for us cinemaDNG is not an option. We're teanscoding everything to cineform but not ideal.

I've no love for Sony, no vested interest in RED (yet) but this is what you get with the liberalization of patents that happened not too long ago, allowing corporations to snap up patents for stuff they never created just so that they could use the legal system as a weapon and as a means to subvert free enterprise and create monopolies with one hand while fighting them with the other.   It's just sorta funny that this time it's David wielding patent law at Goliath instead of the other way around.     edit: holy crap, RED sued Andrew (dismissed)

http://vimeo.com/59539071 The Lens Whilst Canon L lenses are like a fleet of company Lexus cars. This isn't really what I want in my films. I need something different. Something with character. For this reason I've long been using anamorphic lenses. I recently shot some test footage with the Iscorama 54 anamorphic. This is essentially an Iscorama 36 but instead of a 36mm rear element it is 54mm. Even though the whole lens is double the weight, not as sharp and almost triple the size I like it because it has character.  

its always great to follow your blog Andrew! Finally I managed today to register... This combo with BMCC and the ISCO 54 looks promising. But how did you mount this heavy lens? On the pictures it looks frightening. And b.t.w.: since we are also located in Berlin: if you need a SDI monitor (TVLOGIC 56 wp e.g.) and rigging gear for testing you could always stop by to our studio in Friedrichshain for a coffee and we will borrow you one of ours. Just drop me a mail - would be a pleasure for us.

Nice article and some great shots on the video. The REWO rig, bmcc and isco looks like a lovely refined system. good balance looks evident. one of the first images of the bmcc rigged into something that looks usable and comfortable to handle. I didnt know the 54 was less sharp than the 36 and I feel the lack of 36 style barrel glow is a negative point about the 54. Something is quite lovely about the glowing barrel of the 36. re. optimum lens choice, I look forward to sending over a sample to EOSHD of the new custom lenses I am developing specifically for adding some extra character to footage (and primarily anamorphic footage) :) I think they might add a hint of extra rustic glitz to the image from the mighty 54!

Ok so I have been searching the web and forum for some time lapse settings for my gh2. I know there is a hack for it but I was wondering, for a simple, cinematic time lapse (shot with video not stills- for now), what settings would you use on your gh2?   I know keep everything manual (focus, exposure) with a tripod. But as far as shutter speed? 1/2fps? I am just trying to find the correct settings for my gh2 to use it in a  time lapse. The time lapse is of people in  party by the way.    if anyone has a tutorial on shooting time lapses with the gh2, that would be great. Couldn't find anything like it on the web.  

Having uploaded a few of my videos to the free version of Vimeo they still lose far more than I see in other peoples uploads. And thats including the free version of Vimeo as well.   If I use the Vimeo HD preset on PE 10 it gives me H264  1280 x 720 29.97 frame rate NTCS. When I go into advance and change it to PAL 25fps it changes the frame size to 720 x 576!! Why should that be?   Currently I am using my own profile of H264 1280 x 720 25fps PAL. In all cases the pixel aspect ratio is square pixels.   When saved and viewed on my PC it looks and sounds fine. Once uploaded to vimeo and further compressed you get brief patches of blocky pixels in the picture, and in my latest upload a jerky feel to any rotating motion. Also there is a brief audio glitch out of the blue as well! I understand that going to the paid version of Vimeo would give better results but I have certainly seen some excellent results of GH2 footage using the free account. Any tips on how to get the best out of the footage?   I have just added the latest small video to the screening room. This was mainly shot to test out a 50mm f1.2 rangefinder Canon lens on the GH2.    

While in "the library" I was thumbing through an old issue of American Cinematographer and came to an issue talking about Soderberg shooting Full Frontal on a handful of Canon XL-1S...I think this was a 2001-2002 issue.  The price of that camera was somewhere on the order of $4800 with that soft kit zoom.  I forget what the VX2000 cost but it was somewhere close to $4K if I remember right.  The camera I wanted at the time, one of JVC's slick, professional DV jobbers, that cost about $7500 if I remember right, minus the lens.     Anyway, it made me appreciate just how amazing the Scarlet-X and, especially, the BMCC are for their respective prices, given what far, far lesser cameras have cost in the not-too-distant past.  Not to mention, 135Mbit 3:1:1 HDCAM cost you a cool $100K around this time.  We're shooting better than that on $800 cameras now, thanks to the GH2 hacks.

I was pleasantly surprised to find this documentary broadcast on SBS Television Australia.....at first I did not know anything about the production.....and then I found myself immersed in the content and Mark Cousins' presentation.......it runs for 15 hours :)   In the unlikely event you've not heard about this extraordinary documentary here is a link to the trailer.   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAQNc6aQtO0

http://vimeo.com/58252561 Johnnie Behiri has a Canon 1D C on loan at the moment as do quite a few other people. I've been watching the various footage and here's my view of how it performs...  

There's just been some pretty startling research published by a university in the UK which could herald the biggest change to imaging since the switch from film to digital. Indeed before it has even begun, 4K may become obsolete along with resolution itself - killed not by 8K or Super-Hi Vision but a completely different kind of technology. A vector based video codec has been developed at the University of Bath.