Leaderboard

full time freelance editor here. I bounce around at a couple different companies whose clients are the major studios. for example, I cut this piece for the mummy. the pay is great, frankly. i have been doing this sort of work for about ten years. I have also directed two features. the most recent was distributed internationally by paramount three years ago and we're still seeing good money from it. I don't spend more than I can afford on cameras and lenses, but am fortunate to be in a pretty good financial situation. No debt at all. My wife and I do not have kids. She also happens to be a film editor so she has an appreciation for my gear lust. But yeah, short version is that I work professionally editing and directing, and some of that income supports my personal collection of camera bodies, lenses, and support gear that i use more for fun, personal side projects that keep me sane.

Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/videography/comments/6j535x/i_made_a_dank_meme original source: https://tapas.io/episode/277406

Official Magic Lantern forum for Raw Video - http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?board=49.0 Updated for 2017 Magic Lantern camera capabilities at EOSHD - http://www.eoshd.com/2017/06/magic-lantern-raw-video-current-camera-capabilities-updated-2017/ Creating a sticky thread for this as it's one of my favourite topics. This thread is just to compliment and contribute to the main magic lantern site. I am testing: 5D3 5D2 100D (beta / experimental build) 70D (beta / experimental build) 50D Bitrate calculator: http://rawcalculator.bitballoon.com/calculator_desktop Following 70D progress is a priority for me as it's the only one with both Dual Pixel AF and articulated screen... 5D3 doesn't have that! https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=14309.2850 Main builds and ports in progress at Magic Lantern: https://builds.magiclantern.fm Experiments including 10bit/12bit raw and 4K raw crop mode: https://builds.magiclantern.fm/experiments.html My regards to all the Magic Lantern devs!!

From GH5 try and experience event in Taiwan today, they said firmware to improve GH5 Video AF will be up around September.

Just curious how most of the people here afford their gear? Who works full time in video production versus a day job with video as a side gig/hobby? I freelance full time but it's become apparent that I need to figure out a way to get my rates up, since I can never afford anything. I seem to have a very minimal gear list compared to most people on here. What are your secrets?

5DMK3 Raw 3k upscaled to 4k. The first shots are filmed in a mirror's reflection so they are not as sharp. I really hope the C200's raw is similar to this.

I love my X-T2. I've only had it for about a month and used it mainly for stills so far. Planning on doing more video soon. I carefully chose my lenses around their IS zooms for video use and their weather-sealed primes for photo. Here's a couple shots I got in Hollywood.

Hello Matt, of 2008. I hear time travel is popular these days, how else did we end up with Trump? How's your DOF-adapter going? Did you sell your DVX100 or did you bring it with you to 2017? When you get back into your re-Tardis... Give Dr Who an A7S, it will be a great pub-trick when you return to 2008. Cheers - Andrew

Heads up to users of the 72mm version of the SLR Magic Rangefinder (the discontinued one without distance markings)... The rear 72mm attachment ring on mine had some rotational play. I decided to see if I could remove it. I succeeded, turned out the connector was a step ring glued on! Underneath a 77mm thread, just like the one with distance markings. See pictures. Trying to remove the step ring (at your own risk ;-)) might be worth it as it brings the RF closer to the attached anamorphic glass, benefiting vignetting. Conclusion: both versions of the Rangefinder are mechanically the same. The budget version just misses distance markings and got a step ring tacked on (!).

That looks good to me, very similar to what the Wiggle expression does when dialled down to low parameters in After effects. It is perhaps not a traditional side to side 'Gate Weave' look, but definitely gives a physicality to the locked off shots that look quite natural. The rhythm to that movement is similar to operator breathing whilst holding a heavier camera as steady as they can...so it is not distracting IMHO. The advantage of adding post moves like this - is that is can (as in your example) make the camera appear to have added weight, and that its nodal point to be further back...like a physically larger and heavier camera. This little visual cue can often give the viewer the impression that it has been shot on a 'movie camera', rather than a super light weight dslr. I often apply stabilisation to my footage (even for tripod pans) at a very low setting. This gives a similar effect of a larger camera being used, since it dampens the camera moves to appear to be a bit softer. you could even go a bit more subtle for the longer takes - the nice thing is it that these subtle moves work great when very little movement is introduced...just enough to break the staticness of a locked of tripod shot (if that is the intended look).

I just made a little test, the video has been shot in few minutes (I had no time even for correct framing, focus, I was in hurry I just made it to test this plugin so I used a little tripod to be super stedy). Sorry also for color correction. Tested one of the Jarle’s Deadpool Handheld Camera presets. I made it because I wish to ask you your feeling about your suspension of disbelief, let me know please.

who did the scan on that film...? Who was your DP? If a lab does a bad scan (it's rare)..but they'll do it again for free. 200k was the budget of the completed movie? the latest quote I got for two 400 rolls of 35mm and 3 rolls of super 16mm was 700 dollars for developing and top pro scan. Just call one of the kodak labs... if you're nervous start with one roll of film...it's cheap...you can make a full length movie with super 16mm for under 5 thousand

I'm a freelance editor. I make a TV show every week and it's guaranteed work 5 days a week for as long as I want it. I also do camera jobs most weeks, or weekends. So long as I meet the deadlines on the TV show, they're flexible, and don't mind me taking the work home where necessary. That also accommodates more jobs that pay higher mid-week. Since the editing is guaranteed work, I don't charge as much as I do for 1 off jobs, but it gives me a steady income I can count on, which is many ways is more valuable as a freelancer. I also have a good accountant friend who helps me get some nice breaks. He advises me when I should stop buying gear, and when I should buy more to make my company look more successful. I don't know how or what he's doing, but he's basically told me that since I'm a 1 man company, if I invest x-amount every year on equipment, research material and things like that, the government don't take so much at the end of the tax year. I'm not a numbers kind of guy, but it seems to be working out for me. Like the other post here says though, I do have holes in my shoes and I cut my own hair haha.

I edited this Mummy trailer:

Just put your thumb behind the cap and pull, it clicks off... And you can put it back on again. Can't confirm if this works with all EF-S lenses but it does with this one and it's easy.

I bought the new Tamron 10-24 and it's fantastic. Weatherproof. Has IS and has really quiet autofocus. It's perfect for the 5d4 cause it fits the mount without modifying it.

Will test. Check this guy out - found a secret port under the rubber grip of the 100D. WTF!? https://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=16040.msg186201#msg186201

It seems like the Canon 17-55mm is your best bet. If you wanna go cheaper, then get the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8. For your "50mm" get the Canon 28mm 1.8. Or if you want primes only, then get the Sigma 20mm art for your "35mm" and the Canon 28mm for your "50mm."

Analogies like this make no sense. Gopro essentially makes one thing. Kodak essentially made two - film and cheap cameras. Competition and market shifts killed both. Canon's other divisions generate more revenue than cameras, even if they lose market share (which hasn't happened, Sony's gains are replacing the other's losses) they still have other divisions that continue to be revenue drivers. As much as people keep wanting to call Canon the next Kodak, its simply not true. SMH.

You just don't "patch" 4K video, are you nuts?! It needs different hardware, thermal solutions, and a lot of different things. 4K isn't just a name, is a very demanding procedure with much more information and needs top of the line processors, chips, cooling solutions, input/output, etc. Also, I don't understand how you go from the 6D to C200, and back and forth! You have to know what you really want, access the market, and then go buy whatever works for you. An entry level full frame camera, and a middling S35 cinema camera are very far apart. Check the XC series, great little cameras there, or the JVC LS300, if you do not want to pay much. the 6D you are describing for 2000$ would have cut 2/3 of 5D sales instantly. The problem was the 5DmkIV. It is a "lesser" (to a degree) video camera, so everything below that have to have much worst specs than a 3500$ - middle tier, to be honest - photo camera. In my opinion these cameras aren't true hybrids (so, I don't care), are 80-90% photo cameras, and that is fine with me, and I look elsewhere. The only big hope for Canon is the M series, and they are very far behind completion there too (and with new cameras such the 6DmkII, I do not see a real great M camera any time soon.) P.S I just bought another NX1, 28megapxls and 1.5X crop factor. It also has 4K, 120frames slow mo etc.

Here is the real question. Did you ever sat in a theater projecting movies in 4k and thinking "I wished the resolution was better". I know I didn't. I think 8K is way too much as a viewing format. But as always, higher resolutions can see some good uses for VFX and scientific applications. As for myself, I shoot 1.5k 4:3 (yep, read it correctly) , so I really don't care about the resolution race :D

I have two jobs, one which is not great but pays well. The other one being making videos. So basically, I have one job making money, and the other one spending it ! (But I always keep my expenses low by using older gear and going thrifting every week-end :D)

All your lens are belong to us.

Don't forget the subterfuge involved. Last morning in Berlin so suggest going to the flea market as I'd been reading about there being lots of interesting locally produced jewellery available there. Just sat in cafe reviewing the only locally produced gems that were actually bought.

Which clip was that? I am not saying don't use retro looks. They are in the giant tool box, and everything is permitted. 99% of these tools are there to enhance the experience by reducing the input, to filter out mundane or distracting elements. The content of the images (the 'what' you see) should be as strong in itself as possible, without music enhancing it (and ironically often shiftening and lessening the original impact). A well-composed image will make it easy to choose the right style (the 'how'), be it sDoF, HDR, punchy, black & white, strong grain or moody colors. Or reduced image steadiness.

The field of view seems much smaller because of the larger difference in vertical height between the two aspect ratios (4:3 stills and 16:9 or 17:9 video). But they're all using the full sensor width. Most photo cameras are 3:2 for stills, which is more rectangular than 4:3, and thus there's less of a vertical difference between stills and video. The GH4 cropped/windowed into the sensor for UHD and C4K, but not for its 1080p modes, so there was a difference in width as well as height.

Why couldn't you use a vND with the 18-35? It has a normal filter thread.

Good point. It's a layer of meaningfulness, if you will. On the one hand people strive for ever higher resolution and and ever more realistic detail, on the other hand this never was the reason why audiences suspend their disbelief. They are captured by something that looks stylized, intentionally distorted, artistically transformed. It's not about reality, cleanness, it's about transcendence. Filmlook recipes during the last decade made these looks exchangeable. If not used with due subtlety und scrupulousness It's not perceived as a genuine quality (subconsciously associated with the old and magic techniques of big cinema) but as amateurish. It's then more linked to millions of cheap music videos on youtube. EDIT: so if Dan Wake wants to simulate original "shake" of the old movies in 2017 he should be aware that the average viewer might also subconsciously see through this and spontaneously decide whether the whole simulation is worth suspending his disbelief.

LOL that is funny because it is soooo true. I am sitting in a mall to post this as I have run out of credit with my (prepaid) internet and using free Wifi, wearing a shirt and jumper I purchased from a charity shop (they were absolute bargains and it is the same place I got a couple of pretty good tripods for $5 Australian each). And am (in part) looking for lenses on Ebay while here!

Yes. Any extended use in warm weather (actually, doesn't even have to be that hot) will cause it to overheat when shooting 4k video. The battery grip "fix" isn't really a thing. Some report it as helping, but I doubt the accuracy of their findings. It's never fixed any of my Sonys that overheat. (Even my A7SII on the latest firmware will overheat when shooting in direct sun, and that's with a grip.) I shot with an A99II for several months. Loved it. But the overheating was becoming more of an issue as we're heading into the summer months. (Worked great in Norway though!) Tip: the A99II (and actually all new Sony cameras) can use the dual-channel wireless receiver on the hot shoe.

Have you learned about it from this review or on your own? :D Even though I dont own XT2 im following this tread from begging and do ocasional research on the web, The colors SOOC is one of the best ive seen, if fuji brings touch screen, fully articulated screen and maybe even ibis Ill jump the system, I want to scale down but I hate sony :P I would prefere FF aesthetics but I like the smaller lenses that are made specifically for APSC cameras and thats where Fuji wins knowing that canon will never deliver with specs that what we all want and knowing I dont want MFT camera Fuji is the only altarnative :D

Custom single focus test 35NAP 2-2

I like Audacity.. but it's basically all I've even looked at since it's the free one. I've heard it's limited compared to others, which I believe, but I've never felt too trapped

Shooting 8k is not too much. 8k and beyond has/will become more and more necessary for movies that involve heavy visual effects. Being able to work with high resolution plates that have the headroom to allow re-positions and the overall detail boost for blue/green screen work is a huge advantage. When 8k live action is inter-cut with CG characters, the 8k footage (often down-scaled considerably) now matches the resolved detail that CG characters and environments can have (because they do not have to be 'captured' photographically). Traditional techniques of lightly degrading/softening the CG image to match the live action plates is becoming less of a thing when shooting higher resolution 'cleaner' live action elements. 8k is also a no-brainier when it comes to being an attractive acquisition format for archive purposes, it will have a longer shelf life in regards to being compatible with ever-evolving displays and projection systems whenever the 'negative' needs to be revisited. All of the above has a recent real-world example....Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 Back in the day, Vista Vision format was often employed for effects shots that required optical compositing and many passes through the printer would cause generation loss. Once the larger format of Vista Vision optical composite was down-scaled and printed to 35mm, the grain was effectively reduced to a regular size (or smaller) and the generation loss of detail was no longer apparent since the reduction to 35mm was effectively returning full resolution to that smaller format. ILM were the most famous users of this technique and that is why they became the best in the business...providing the best quality optical composites for effects shots in films. Although we no longer have optical compositing generation loss to deal with, shooting larger format at 8k+ still has many of the advantages that these old optical tricks gave. The effect of reduction/downscale alone to a lower resolution gives a massive improvement to perceived sharpness, as well as huge reduction in noise - since any noise artifacts are literally shrunk. I remember when people were asking if upgrading to HD cameras was overkill...how quickly we forget. 4K down-scaled for HD/2K delivery works great, since compression and noise artifacts from footage is visually reduced, So 8k down-scaled to 4/2k projection makes particular sense in this regard. Consumer 4k cameras often have so much in-camera compression applied to get to that resolution, that the image suffers until down-scaled to HD anyway, which is why a solid HD camera with good picture and colour, often trumps a 4k camera, in terms of delivering a pleasing image. So, shooting cat videos in 8k at home might be too much (unless it is really cute) , but there is an increasing need out there for 8 -16k cameras out there for film production that require visual effect integration...last time I checked, that accounts for most Hollywood releases for the past 25-30 years.

Looks great. That little extra resolution is nice. Somebody wrote a while back that 5D3 ML Raw just makes them smile... and it's so true.

i have holes in my sneakers but bought a super 16mm camera and 5 rolls of kodak..(cheap but not that cheap)

Recommended wide glass

17mm and up wouldn't really be that wide, depends what you're after I guess. I have Tokina 11-16, it's pretty average to be honest, I mean it's usable and the image is good enough but nothing about it is all that interesting.

Another vote for the 18-35mm (I'm selling mine if you're interested.... but I'm in the US). AMAZING lens. As sharp as many $40k cine zooms, faster than cine zooms, and par focal. Diffraction limited wide open in the center. Good rendering, too, feels apochromatic. Ridiculously good. But it's not that wide. It's as wide as I need to go and as wide as "classical" lenses go but for that John Woo/Terry Gilliam/Michael Bay look you gotta go wider and tackier.... This lens is a classic, though. A+. The 14mm Samyang has too much distortion imo. It's okay but kind of gross for video. A lot less bad cropped than it is at FF, though. Also a lot less wide. C+ 11-16mm Tokina is fine. Not exciting rendering and high flare and some CA but I find it to be quite good. Sharp. An okay look. Very low distortion. 11-20mm is a little better. Neither have a lot of character. B The 18-55mm kit lens is not horrible but you'd need to remove the EF-S tab. It's not that good... but it's really not that bad and for its price used it's a big winner. And it has very good IS. Too bad about the EF-S tab. It's a decent lens. I (incomplete)

will update soon, I have a HardCoreNDA coming very soon.

+1 For the Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 (but has not filter thread) The 14mm f2.8 Samyang is great for the price ($300) but no filter thread either and it has a weird mustache distortion (noticable with 5Dmk4 crop in video ?) The Tokina 11-16 is also a great lens with a 77mm filter thread, the V1 is very affordable but has a lot of CA. Built like a tank with a nice hard stop on manual focus at infinity (at least my version) Sigma 20mm is wonderful as well but no filter thread. Then there is the "native" EF 11-24 f4 is you really want to go wide. It has a back filter slot but the beauty is $3k...

Sigma 18-35mm F1.8 would be my favourite. The Samyang 14 and 11-16 not too great. Nikon 14mm F2.8 AF-D is much nicer. Sigma 20mm F1.4 would also be superb, although not as wide as your 14's and 17's obviously. You can also pop the cap off the Canon EF-S lenses like 17-50mm F2.8 and 18-135mm, and they will fit like a charm

On the other hand, films like Kendy's get made and have the style they do and the energy they do in part because of the flexibility a small camera/minimal crew. IQ isn't a big deal to most lay viewers. As long as the sound is decent, the image doesn't have to be pristine. Anyway, it's all just tools. Pick the ones that gets you where you want to go. Some people WANT to move to "Video Village" and build a career there, others would rather run free with a GH1 and a single prime lens. There's no right or wrong answer.

Samyang 14mm

Tokina 11-16 is cheap. This guy tried it here:

Back to the Bolex family again! I few weeks ago I just send only 5 emails to Bolex shops all over the world and there was one guy in Ellijay (US) that has one in stock, not mentioned for sale... till I mailed. Today I received this little lens and it is in almost NEW quality. Now I have two 1.5x lenses, but I think the Bolex will be standard mounted on my NX1.

180fps is 180fps. To title it 360fps is nonsense

Yeah but even on the Photo side the 6Dmk2 is very disappointing. They move in 2008 with the 5mk2 creating the DSLR video thing by mistake. Now they do everything they can to cripple their DSLR. For me the final hit was the 5Dmk4. I don't know why people still expect anything from Canon. They never fail to disappoint release after release. I already stopped buying EF lenses, I got a GH5 for video and I'm really considering switching to Sony with the next A7R and A7S camera. Especially now that Sigma and Rokinon are jumping in the FE boat.

I like the look of vintage documentaries and for me (having shot on a gh2 and gh4 for all of my personal and client work) I have found lenses to be the most significant decider in the "look" of any of my films. All of the "look" in this clip is because of the lens, I used an Angenieux 12-120 from the late 60s: Grading is necessary and especially with these old lenses if you want to bring back some contrast. I have been using film convert (fcpx plugin) lately and really liking the grain in that emulator, and also the relative speed I can get a decent look going. This short with the rally cars was graded with a LUT and some individual tweaks (it was before I purchased film convert) but I find film converts grain to really add a nice layer in that "film" look. I would say though the lens is where you start, and going back a couple decades gets you a look thats not so common anymore.

I am going to be exiting out of the NX system and was Backer #1 for the Nxl. If anyone is interested, let me know before I start posting it on the usual for sale forums. I am based in the USA.