Leaderboard

I use to use Music Bed all of the time, but this year I had an employee contact me. She was asking me if I could help out by telling her more about the project that I was working on. The musician that wrote the track I used wanted more pieces to show their music with. So I told her about the project. She started investigating into employee counts etc... Anyhow, it turned out that I had the count wrong so I owed another 100 or so dollars. It was my mistake, but I found it very sinister and devious the way she approached the whole thing. It left a bad taste... So that being said, here are the places that I have been using every since: https://www.pond5.com http://www.art-list.io/ http://www.premiumbeat.com/ http://freemusicarchive.org/ http://www.epidemicsound.com/ And I also hire musicians to create custom tracks or contact people directly about licenses.

I wonder if many people know who that is. His name is Fulgencio Batista, one of the many US-backed dictators of the world. Here is the wiki article for more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulgencio_Batista. I urge you to read it, it will not take more than 5 minutes of your time. If you don't then I will just include three quotes from your past president JFK: "At the beginning of 1959 United States companies owned about 40 percent of the Cuban sugar lands—almost all the cattle ranches—90 percent of the mines and mineral concessions—80 percent of the utilities—practically all the oil industry—and supplied two-thirds of Cuba's imports". "Fulgencio Batista murdered 20,000 Cubans in seven years ... and he turned Democratic Cuba into a complete police state—destroying every individual liberty. Yet our aid to his regime, and the ineptness of our policies, enabled Batista to invoke the name of the United States in support of his reign of terror. Administration spokesmen publicly praised Batista—hailed him as a staunch ally and a good friend—at a time when Batista was murdering thousands, destroying the last vestiges of freedom, and stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from the Cuban people, and we failed to press for free elections" "Batista's rule was one of the most bloody and repressive dictatorships in the long history of Latin American repression"" Fidel was an attorney who had run for parliament in 1952 elections that Batista canceled with yet another coup. When Batista felt he had made his fortune he fled Cuba with it, and after years of struggle Fidel and his army took charge. Guess what happened after that. The bay of pigs invasion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_of_Pigs_Invasion). I bet this will make a much more interesting story that can educate people and help them elect wiser Presidents. P.S. Oliver Stone has two documentaries about Fidel Castro that are worth watching. Also Oliver Stone's "Untold history of US" is a great doc series to watch.

Well since the E-M1 II already oversamples from 5K and is very very close indeed to the A6300's 4K the answer is yes. GH5 will have a flood of high detail. I long since stopped caring about the sharpness of 4K though. More sharpness is the last thing we need. 10bit, dynamic range, colour, less aliasing, less moire, less rolling shutter are all more important when it comes to 4K, which already has too much detail according to most of the cinema audience reaction to it being projected.

Would actually go with the Aputure C120-series (there's a 't-model that is tungsten and a 'd'-model that is daylight balanced). It has a Bowen-S mount, so you can use all kinds of add-ons, softboxes, beauty dishes, parabolic reflectors/umbrellas, with grids, snoots. Their own Lightdome looks pretty sweet: http://aputure.com/en/light-dome.html . Would be nice to have 4 or so. You could do with 1 less and then get two of the C20 mini fresnels in time (still due to come out). Of course I know about Broncolor, Elinchrom and Profoto, but they're more photographer's tools... little to nothing with LEDs... and expensive ones at that. Not sure if they're in budget and at all good for video. But with the Aputures you know... what more do you really need? Thinking about a studio set-up like that for next year myself. This is actually quite a nice video on the effects of different light set-up styles:

Shot on C300 II (4K), cover photo and beach scene 1DX II (4K 60p).

I have been filming weddings for 10 years. Ask yourself: Am I beauty or am I documentary? If you are beauty then go with full frame (doesn't matter by whom, get shallow DOF). If you are doc, then get a c100. Develop an instinct for schedule changes. eg. When everyone is going to the next room, and when. Even if on paper,, it always changes. Ask people where they are going and why. Coordinate with the bride's best friend. Groom knows nothing and his friends are there to get wasted. Develop a signal so your. B cam can. Go wide when u go telephoto eg. Ring on finger Everything on slider, tripod or gimbal. Go hand held at your own peril. Seek perfection. Oh, and don't fuck up the dance by being embarrassed to light it.

Please show us what you're getting... for you to have such a knee-jerk reaction, it must be good! Seriously, we could all benefit from what others think the best way to use the GX80 is rather than making it a echo chamber.

I now watch this video at the start of every day to put me in a calm, meditative state.

I find with most 8 bit cameras, unless there is a designated flat profile, that a variant of Prolost Neutral is your best bet... for me anyway. So with the GX85, I have found the best results to be Natural with Contrast -5, Sharpness -5, NR -5, Saturation -2, -3. I find default saturation to be fairly obnoxious in most cameras, so dialing it down usually helps to even the RGB channels. YMMV @Andrew Reid If he used nouns, verbs and adjectives to relay his point we could have a discussion.

Looks like you've found the reference image Sony's engineers used for skintones. Maybe Magic Lantern can hack the pizza and reverse engineer the cheese to make it look more appetising? Then Sony can take delivery from the pizza boy and start all over again.

Hey, America's excursions into the politics of the caribbean, central america, and south america have been awesome and usually turn out great. Cuba was an anomaly!

He has $100k and he thinks my C-LOG profile is too expensive at $15. And then he expects help from my forum.

As a former composer, this thread makes me so happy that I did something else... Musicbed "too expensive" lol

This thread was created so we can all share our opinions on the lut pack, as some of you may know, these were created specifically to the NX1, however, I've made some tests on Sony Cine4, Nikon D800 and Canon 5D Mark 3 with very pleasant results. The lut pack contains 9 different luts, ranging from color to black & white, stylized looks to achieve a filmic effect on the nx1 footage. Heres a sample of what to expect from the looks : Fully Graded with Greenleaf Later today I will add new screengrabs of all the different looks, and what its best used on. Feedback is very very important, this was created for the community, and I will follow all of your opinions in order to update the pack and deliver the best possible results! I hope you all have fun and like using them as much as I've had created them! Happy gradings!! Buyhere : https://sellfy.com/p/HNAk/#

So, we had a quick shoot, here's the result: Setup: GH4 4:3 anamorphic mode, pentax 50mm smc f1.7, Sankor Compact 2x Single focus anamorphot which is still for SALE, DIY LED panels, homemade dolly with a fluid head and a regular tripod work. You might notice that the opening shot is with a spherical lens, well that's because of the glidecam. Edited & graded in premiere with some luts. Cheers!

Well think about it, the contrast setting changes the luminance values only, it does not change the actual dynamic range. So what you effectively do is compress the number of possible luminance values. That information is lost it cannot be uncompressed in post. Similarly for saturation you compress the UV vector. So what would be the point? I really do not see the point in lowering sharpness, I cannot spot any edge enhancement effects on the GX85, -1 seems harmless so I put it on -1 but I do notice resolution loss when sharpness goes down. With respect to noise I do set it to -3 (and -4 with high ISO). The noise reduction of the GX85 seems to be dynamic as it really kicks in at higher ISOs and I find this noise reduction unpalatable, to me the results almost looks like a water color painting, I prefer being stuck with a noisier picture. However noise and the ability to compress effectively is of course a trade off for we only get 100Mb/s. The GX85 codec does provide illegal highlights so it is very important in post to bring them at legal values first otherwise you run the risk of clipping your highlights. I like the Natural profile and use iDynamic at the Standard level.

I used to care alot about resolved detail with 1080p cameras because so many of them were barely 720p mush. With 4K, I care way way less and would rather have the other image elements be in place. Dunno what the GH4 actually resolves, but I'm sure it's not a perfect 4K. It's definitely plenty, detail wise, for me.

I have been wondering about the settings too. I found that dialling down the NR made everything over 800iso very noisy and having to use Neat Video can get a bit tedious. I've been thinking about using the custom settings and dialling things down in post a wee bit as it doesn't seem to be working for me the other way round. It'd be interesting to hear different thoughts.

The fact that you have 100k$ and dont know where to spend, makes me believe this money is going to be spent very very badly. Maybe join forces with a director? Someone who would have any idea on the technical side of things, that could bring your vision to life?

Interesting, I'd like to see your comparisons, as it's not a problem I have noticed, and I do use my NX1 extensively for stills as well. What would constitute a super low contrast scene exactly? Shooting directly into the sun/washing everything out? I typically tend to underexpose (which I suppose would innately make things more contrasty) since the sensor protects shadow detail so well, but highlights burn easily (also speaking only of stills here). And I do understand the need for high ISO of course, but personally I almost always shoot my lenses wide open, just the aesthetic I prefer for my work. Being able to stop down and deepen the depth of field without worrying about noise is certainly an advantage though, especially when the cam is on a gimbal or moving quite a bit, Unfortunately a luxury NX users don't have! Keeping on topic though, for me personally, other than lusting after some sweet 4k 60P that it unfortunately can't provide, the NX1 truly brings everything to the table that I need in a wedding camera. YMMV of course. @Kisaha I'm planning on posting my opinion of the NX-L in the next couple days! I've been using it quite a bit for a variety of different work, I'll be posting screenshots. I really like it so far though!

Thank you for finally commenting more on what seems to be one the most popular EOSHD threads since starting your forum. We're all eager to hear your settings... possibly even willing to even pay for them... I believe the consensus (in this thread) was indeed the ones I said above: Standard or Natural (-5,-5,-5,0), many of us commenting on A3G3 WB adjustments. Your contention is the contrast setting... IMO lowering the contrast minimized the hot spots found on skin and other situations. I'm interested in what you have to offer. Maybe you can shoot some video and tell us what you think like your recent Sony video which I found very instructive. Many of us have been asking for a long time for your input.

I understand the logic, but I always thought the point of dialing down contrast wasn't about getting more dynamic range, it was about dialing down the baked in contrast curve, so you could choose your curve in post. Obviously people have differing opinions on this, but some of the nicest footage I have seen with the GX80/85 is from Martin Wallgren and Jase and they shoot with the Natural or Standard profile with -5 Contrast. Even back to the GH3 days Noam Kroll recommended using Standard with contrast dialed down.

Not who you asked, but I really find the NX1 quite useable in all but the most pitch black of situations. With an 85mm T1.5 on there, especially combined with the new speedbooster I recently purchased from @lucabutera, which gives a further stop in light gain, I never have to take things above even 1000 ISO really, and normally I'm far, far below that. I really doubt you're going to be filming in a church that is darker than what ~T1.2 and 1000 ISO can illuminate. Worst case, filming in 4k, if it's a static scene drop the shutter from 1/50 to 1/30 and you can soak in even more light. Sonys are cool, but I pretty much never need anything higher than 1600. That would be one crazy dark wedding.

So which settings would you suggest, Andrew? Which profile is the one you would use most often? Thanks everyone for your help!

Standard Panasonic picture profiles are not designed to turn into 'flat mode' and if you dial down contrast this might give the appearance of more dynamic range (as the lows get a lift) but actually it does nothing to increase the dynamic range of the final graded material. You're just crushing the blacks back down again in post and reducing the tonality of the image in-camera, less colour information due to less contrast in an 8bit image.

A little further explanation...

That was trippy and soothing...

The general consensus is either Natural or Standard with everything at "-5" with the exception of saturation, which should be set at "0." For WB, I use "Sunny," adjusted to A3G3. In my tests, the Natural profile performed a little better in the blue channel. The reason for keeping saturation at "0" is due the codec being 4:2:0, resulting in limited color information in the first place. Hope that helps.

Has anyone figured out what's the best all-round picture profile that still leaves some headroom for playing with the colors in post? I'm coming from a BMPCC and will be getting the GX80 next week, but I don't have much time for experimenting with the picture profiles. Maybe some experienced GX80 users could share their favorite settings with me? Some say that "Natural" (everything -5) seems to be nicely gradable, others say that "Standard" is the better all-round setting. What are your observations?

p much the only anomaly in US foreign policy that i can think of tbh @Don Kotlos thank you for reminding me to watch the untold history of the US!!! totally meant to it fell off my queue

La La Land looks great, I'm a sucker for lots of colour. A ton of that is the art direction though.

FS5 if you need 4K, use Shogun to get 10-bit compressed version of the raw stream. Main option unless you go $10,000+ for a complete package.

I've shot with the pocket a lot. It is true, very filmic image, but if you mess up it can easily look really bad. Any moire or IR pollution and the image is instantly ruined. The F3 reminds me a lot of the pocket, but the larger sensor gives you less noise. I've never shot with the digital bolex but it really has that caked on color look that film gives you. So much richness in the saturation. Pocket would have trouble getting a look like this. I've seen good pocket footage, but nothing quite this good. The frame shutter is huge, so motion is much different. Depends on what you're shooting, but that alone makes a huge difference.

Interesting the 5DS and 5DIV are on there. ML isn't The 5DS actually shoots quite nice 1080p. It will be a contender if they end up porting ML RAW to it.

Idk, if I had that kind of money and needed/wanted 4K, I would probably go with one of the Blackmagic Cameras... probably the BM 4K Production camera... or maybe the new Terra and then I would put the rest of my camera budget into my short/feature production budget because you'll always need more... or maybe even rent the camera for the narrative and commercial work and then buy a C100ii for your bread and butter work. But to be honest, if you can't make a good narrative short on the C100ii, you probably can't make a good short. Have you considered 5D mk iii ml raw for a short? Honestly one of the most beautiful images I have ever seen.

http://www.art-list.io/ I've been using alot. It's a different model in that you pay one fee and can use their whole catalog.

I would have thought that you'd need a whole production crew, and a rather large budget to create something similar to the link you provided.

Hi everyone! Good news, heres the free lut so everyone can try and enjoy. IF you havent checked my lut pack yet, please do so, also please follow me on Sellfy! Let me know what you guys think! https://sellfy.com/p/4eZU/

a7s is awesome and silly sharp. The 1DXII is kind of a rip off because you not only have to buy the expensive body but you have to invest a ton in storage. I spent $550 on CF cards just to shoot a short music video. But ooh that color and detail =)

This guy charges stupid money for things that you can find cheaper. So, yes you can find them for £500, but certainly not from this guy. Just because one person charges extortionate prices for things, doesn't mean that that is the price they go for or the price you should pay. The lens the OP is talking about is not worth over £1K & only a fool would buy one for that price - there are cheaper & better anamorphics out there.

That film looks great. Stone, Gosling and director of Whiplash shot on film... yes please. I think there have been Alexa moments that I've wanted to scream PUT IT IN MY VEINS. Most recently in Sicario, and memorably in Drive and Only God Forgives too. I didn't enjoy the latter very much, but there are some scenes in there where the cinematography is just gorgeous. But film sure is special. Here's a short from Sundance 2013 I fell in love with. It wasn't until this year when watching it again I realised it was shot on film:

Just watched Listen Up Phillip - shot on handheld 16mm. Beautiful colours and a real retro feel.

I think he should spend it on a green and yellow spinach & mozzarella. Tomatoes probably too magenta for him.

My VA-panel TV dims and fades contrast and colors when viewing at close distance. The uniformity of the panel is not good either (2 photos of AX800). It was Panasonic top 4k model 2014 and very expensive (about 5000$). Movies and videos looks still very good. My IPS monitor has perfect viewing angles and uniformity but lower contrast.

I do not see why a computer monitor for video editing should be IPS - you sacrifice dynamic range (deep blacks) and you are very close straight on to the screen - you are not looking at a sharp angle. You want good DR, not viewing angles. The best 43" 4K HDR TV is the Sony XBR 43X800D. It is VA. For HDR you need the triluminous pixels (like the quantum dots of Samsung), the wide color gamut, 60p, 4:4:4 and 10 bit, and it has all that. It is $599. AFAIK no other 43" or below has the necessary HDR features of this one. http://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/by-size/40-42-43-inch/best

So, I have finished the building of my two LED panels. And they work pretty good! I have used 6000K leds, and each got a luminance of 4000 lumen. Here are some screengrabs from the music video I shot few weeks ago (not graded, only the scr1.jpg). All shots by GH4, the first one with tokina 11-16, the rest with Pentax 50mm SMC + Sankor Cinemascope Anamorphic, ISO around 400.

Love the info you're sharing, but minor math correction. The G7's 4K crop factor is actually 2.2-- slightly improved over the GH4. With the SBXL providing a .64x reduction, that puts your final crop factor at a healthy 1.408x. That's almost the exact size of spherical s35. Pretty swanky.