Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/10/2014 in all areas

  1. Did you actually set out to write the snobbiest post ever or did it just sort of happen? because to do that by accident is quite an achievement.
    2 points
  2. Shot in my spare time during a commercial gig. Autumn Leaves creative style, -3,0,-3. Edited in FCP X with Impulz LUTs
    1 point
  3. This was done couple of years ago. The whole thing was written, filmed and edited in about 3 weeks time so everything was in a rush. Some shots are pretty bad, editing is not really all there and some cheesy dialogue. I was embarrassed to show this to people so I didn't really put it out but I guess bad feed back is better than no feedback so here it is. Any comments are welcome thank you. Filmed on Canon 60D / Sigma 30mm f1.4 / Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 / Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
    1 point
  4. The old 5D Mark II has had an outing on the long-delayed new Mad Max movie as a "semi-disposable stunt camera". The DSLR was chosen as a proven work-horse crash-cam despite being released way back in 2008. Principal photography for the film completed in December 2012 but ended way over budget and recently underwent various re-shoots, pushing the release date from 2013 to May 2015. The 5D Mark II is a very old model by 2014 standards but I'm actually not surprised it still gets some very nice work in the film industry. I'm working on updating my 5D Mark III raw shooter's guide with the intent to provide a version for 5D Mark II users and in the process discovered something very interesting about how the models compare... Read the full article here
    1 point
  5. To listen to your customers... that is a small step for a man and a giant leap for a company.
    1 point
  6. Looks great...but damn...they just couldn't get those holy skin tones right. What a bunch of amateurs. Oh wait...
    1 point
  7. Vesku

    16-235 vs 0-255 help

    Lets think that GH4 0-255 is like "8bit RAW" camera. When you grade to 0-100 IRE you are compressing colors to 16-235 (normal video levels). Then you have a final program with proper and legas colors. If you want to watch that original GH4 0-255 "RAW" video and see all these 256 levels you must set your player or video card to limited range (16-235). The computer is still not limiting your video levels, it only passes all those 0-255 directly to your monitor and you see it right. It is kind of confusing because the full range setting is actually limiting GH4 0-255 levels in monitor and the limited setting is not limiting GH4 0-255 levels. If you watch GH4 "RAW" 0-255 without any settings you loose 16 black and 20 white level because video players and video cards has default settings for normal 16-235 video. GH4 wider range of levels just spill over the edges. Some players may have auto levels function and with it you may see all the levels. With Potplayer auto levels I still cant see the exact result, it is about right but not completely. Some day we wont need this old limited 16-235 video standard and we can use 0-255 scale like with photos. Today some systems use and show 0-255 properly and some systems understand only 16-235. Then there are superwhites 235-255, blacker than black etc...
    1 point
  8. Guest

    16-235 vs 0-255 help

    I am well and truly lost now. I've set my GH4 to 0-255. When grading I make sure my luma waveform is between 0 and 100 IRE in FCPX. Is there anything else I need to make sure I do?
    1 point
  9. Nikkor

    Camera for interviews

    The a5100 has a better codec. Btw, it's called product placement.
    1 point
  10. This is my setup as a one man band. Shotgun mic straight to the H4N, which goes to the GH4. So far I've had great results with the H4N as a safety track.
    1 point
  11. I am forced to blow my own trumpet again - and with my back ache, I need to limit how much I do this! :) I am absolutely certain that there is a difference between rendering of imagery between smaller and larger sensors. I see a difference, and obviously professionals who spend £80k on a medium format digital back see it as well - otherwise they'd just shoot 36x24 and pocket the difference. What you are disregarding is that dof isnt just about the ratio between the in focus and out of focus blur. It's about the intimate step between the two. Generally when comparing a longer and a shorter focal length (both of the same quality), the longer focal length will be higher resolution with less aberrations, distortion, and less vignette wide open. This is known as a rule which is rarely broken. a fast 50 will always be better than the same quality fast 35mm. when you add these apparent strengths of a longer focal length and then obtain a wider fov by increasing the format size you maintain the quality of the longer focal length while gaining the same fov as the wider lens delivers on the smaller format. This is what makes the difference - the ratio between in focus resolution and the amount of blur is contributing to the clear difference between how different formats render the same fov's. The reason fast zeisses lenses are known to have their 'zeiss 3d pop' is because they are able to deliver large amounts of defocus blur while also delivering very sharp in focus subjects. A 50mm 2.8 hasselblad distagon on 6x6 format 50iso will out perform a 25mm f1.4 (if there was such a thing worth mentioning!) on s35mm at 50iso when we consider both will render similar fov and dof ratio but the 50 f2.8 distagon is razor sharp at f2.8 and the 25mm f1.4 will be nasty and need to be closed to f2.8-f4 before it comes close to the resolution of the 50. the 25mm will be 'in focus' on the subject, but in comparison to the 50mm lens the in focus area won't look sharp.
    1 point
  12. 40mm lens s35mm apsc 2.40 aspect ratio spherical lenses (non anamorphic)
    1 point
  13. Yeah maybe I should have allowed multiple votes, but I think this might be more fun. There is so much you can do with two primes (a wide and a long). I also really like my 24mm and 85mm, but on S35. The 24 has low distortion, enough background de-focus (2.8) and not too weird perspective (what is the term for the opposite of background compression?). 85mm is a beautiful focal length and I would probably have chosen that if it wasn't so limiting on S35. :)
    1 point
  14. Here is a good test video showing different ISO uses.
    1 point
  15. Canon's last great camera, before the era of microwaved meals like the 7D Mark II.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...