Leaderboard

Here's a series of screen grabs from some video today...critique?!?

Yep easy to trap. "Please send to Ebrahim Saadawi, 1 scam street, fraudtown."

Look at the new voigtlander. 40mm 1.2 for the E mount. The diagram looks like a speed booster behind a medium format lens, the samples look medium format to me, although bokeh at 1.2 looks ugly. http://www.cosina.co.jp/gallery/iida-40-1_2/01.html

I am pleased to announce that a year after the original, there is a major update to EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras. In addition to the new Pro Color, I am launching EOSHD Pro LOG as well. This takes all the advantages of Pro Color into an easy to grade C-LOG-like profile for your Sony camera. Pro LOG also comes with 25 EOSHD Film LUTs for an instant cinematic grade in post. Read the full article

I’ve been watching some C200 videos on Vimeo now that the camera has been out in the wild for a little while. So I figured I’d link to a few that look pretty good. Actually every one I’ve seen looks pretty good. Wish I had an extra 6 grand lying around. Here’s another with some lowlight footage...

Really nice! this lens went to my shopping list as well

I was looking for some footage to see how good/bad RS was on this camera and found this https://***URL removed***/videos/3141149812/olympus-om-d-e-m10-iii-4k-sample-video I notice it's choppy and not fluid so after some analyzing I see every 5th frame is dropped overlaying several frames you can see gaps where the edge should have been filled in, now you see 4 edges and one gap where the 5th should have been. (it's from the container on the train part, if you want to screenshot and drop it into photoshop to verify) I would be hesitant to point a finger before I have checked the prores file in about 2h (but considering logo and transitions seems fine) I would guess that ether the camera is seriously messed up, or dpreview messed it up, but if it's frame rate conversion done by the reviewer then that is at best very neglectful and at worst a deliberate act to downplay the camera. Converting 30fps to 24fps would drop every 5th frame btw.

Micro's motion felt good at 180 shutter. Yes, on Ursa, I found 190 degree shutter was too blurry, 180 was too choppy and 185 was just right for me.

I could maybe post the fusion file if anyone wants it. The method is pretty simple, start by making a saturation map, detect edges on that so sharp change in saturation make up the bright parts and no change becomes black. Blur that slightly and convert to apha channel.. Use that to blend a desaturated version with the original. That way any sharp color transisions (like fringes) gets dialed down while the overall color remains unchanged. Slow change also remains unaffected, but depends on edge size. The same technique can also be used to bring a busy area down a notch

This sounds like a really good understanding of it. Yes, in particular the GH5 looks like it definitely adds in-camera noise reduction. Gives it a plastic-y feeling to the midtones and highlights. As if using neatvideo on the footage a little too agressively. Interesting observation about motion blur and Blackmagic. Also I found shooting 185 degree shutter on the ursa mini 4.6k makes the motion feel more like an alexa.

The really sinister bit, of course, is that even if you wrote the story then to get it out there you've got to play along with the very same game. At the end of the day, its fast becoming true that the only difference between the two organisations pictured here is that the Stasi didn't have break out areas and football tables to make it all look fluffy and innocent.

Matt Price / Sound Rolling is my top recommendation: https://www.youtube.com/user/ThatWasSound The reason why? He is the *only* professional sound recordist on YouTub who is putting out regular and informative content in this niche!! (every other channel in this subject niche is either a brand instead, or a retail store, or a non-specialist) One last recommendation, and this one is ever so slightly biased.... *me*: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCniNTuAtkFiSCQNfIaw9SJw Although I have only a tiny tiny fraction of the amount of content that Matt Price has! Plus I haven't been doing it for anywhere near as long as he has.

Interesting article found via Daring Fireball / John Gruber (well known Apple blogger): ‘The Real Story in This Mess Is Not the Threat That Algorithms Pose to Amazon Shoppers, but the Threat That Algorithms Pose to Journalism’ Maciej Ceglowski, demolishing a “news” story [from reputable Channel 4 News in the UK] that spread around the world claiming that Amazon’s suggestions were helping people make bombs, when in fact they were helping people conduct high school chemistry experiments:

My guess it s it have to do with how the electronic curtain sync operate , the rolling shutter and the encoding. It s a subjective observation but for example the motion blur on blackmagic camera is much more ...somewhat contrasted and apparent, whereas on sony/panasonic mirrrorless it s less visible.In camera noise reduction also remove some of the motion blur smoothness making it more hard and less pleasing. But the motion perception is affected by your stabilization and your focal as well, I guess hand holding a tele lense on a alexa or a red epic won t look very nice if you compare it to a 35mm on a7r2 on a gimbals.

lol true, i was actually exaggerating quite a bit with that figure. in my eyes thats part of the beauty of a suuuper simple set thats free – even if we have 9 hours of stuff to do we can do it over 2 or 3 days... all good – theres no elaborate lighting, costuming or makeup. and thatd be better for the actors of course. but just saying im not trying to create a situation where i do a literal 9 hours of ~anything~ lol no way

Who is this camera for then? Wedding videographers shooting in terrible dim/mixed lighting? Who would be able to afford the EVA1 + lenses, but not a few Lowel lights? I just recently picked up a second Lowel DP (1K) light, used, complete with barndoors, protective screen, and bulb for $60 from Adorama. The first one I bought used for a similar price. There are also good, bright LED lights that are portable and affordable, so "not having access to power" is no longer an excuse. Lighting should be something all filmmakers (not videographers, but filmmakers) use creatively, to express a feeling, not something that comes last, after camera, drones, gimbals, etc. If low light is a concern, why not buy an A7SII for a fraction of the cost of the EVA1?

Where people prefer the motion cadence of one camera to another, the difference would be the sampling interval. Is it precise, right-on every frame, or does it jitter, and if so is it constant, variable, is the magnitude constant, variable, is it uniform/Gaussian random etc. It's interesting with all the tests folks have posted over the years, I don't recall seeing one on motion cadence / temporal and/or spatial jitter. Motion picture film has spatial jitter during playback in the theater, so even digitally acquired material transferred to film would have playback jitter. Via testing one could discover how much, if any jitter helps make the viewing experience more pleasing or not. I'm personally am not a fan of large amounts of jitter, however perhaps small amounts might help create the illusion of being more organic. Or maybe the opposite is happening, cameras with little or no jitter are what people prefer when they say they like the motion cadence of a camera. A scientific test with perhaps a very accurate strobe could be used to test cameras. Another way would be to introduce jitter in a completely synthetic test with computer graphics/animation. I do know from video games running at constant- vblank-sync'd 60fps, a single frame drop is massively noticeable and used to be a criterion to fail a game in QA back when there were no online updates available. Similarly, if a game is running with constant variable jitter, a single frame drop or game slowdown can be barely noticeable. Found research papers on temporal jitter for video: https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS508US508&q=temporal+jitter+video+quality&oq=temporal+jitter+video+quality. Quickly skimming the conclusions, I didn't see a clear idea presented beyond what I mentioned from video game experience: constant temporal jitter is better than perfect timing with occasional jitter/dropped frames. Temporal jitter used to remove rendering artifacts: 24Hz judder can be an issue with panning, perhaps temporal jitter can provide a kind of temporal anti-aliasing, resulting in less apparent judder. This would make sense based on the 'perfect 60fps highly noticeable frame-drop video game' effect. This could be tested by adding jitter to juddering video to see if it helps hide the judder. Another factor could be effective motion blur with a digital sensor (may not be precisely related to the camera's shutter setting). This too could be scientifically tested.

Mais Doido Ainda, Still Further... ; ) you mean, Panasonic?

I haven’t watched the short yet, but I’ve been at my BS job all day and wanted to reply to a few things that were written. I think Luke’s original post about thinking how you want to market the web series is the only way to go. I cannot even begin to imagine how one would go about making a narrative piece at our level without some forethought and planning. So with that said, I believe you are one hundred percent correct in thinking about episode length. I also think you are correct in wanting to keep them as short as posssible. Back in the day when Warner Bros. made all of their famous cartoons we all grew up on, they surmised that the perfect length for their animated shorts were between 7 and 8 minutes... so a 7-8 page script. It fit well in their programming and they learned that it was the perfect length for keeping people’s attentions. Today, with people’s even shorter attention spans, a YouTube web series episode should be even shorter. I would try to not go over 5 minutes per episode, especially for the first few. Now that isn’t to say every episode has to be five minutes on the dot. Perhaps your first is three and your second is five and your third is seven and your fourth... your story beats should guide you. If you write a well written piece that respects the genre, everything should fall into place.

An excellent write up. I've linked to the review in my article on the sd Quattro H: http://www.barrons.com/articles/sigmas-marvelous-sd-quattro-h-seeing-reality-1506011091?mod=BOL_da_rta I agree about the DP3, as well. It's my favorite. Cheers.

Hello Andrew, I just wanted to say thank you for all your hard work with EOSHD…I have been following for years and this is my first response on the forum. Hi every one! I hope in some way this is useful for the community, as I did a quick test of the ”EOSHD Pro Color Premium Bundle”. If everything attaches properly you will see comparison shots of: PP OFF_Sony Neutral PP 1_EOSHD Pro LOG Cinema PP 2_EOSHD Pro LOG S PP 3_EOSHD LOG PP 4_EOSHD Pro Color Original PP 5_EOSHD Color XR Notes: • “Balanced” and “WideDR2” are the EOSHD Pro LUTs that are applied to Cinema / LOG S / LOG (no other adjustments). • “CC1” refers to slight final adjustments of exposure and contrast to more closely match the comparisons (no specific change of color or saturation in the post process). • The post process was done in Adobe Premiere with Lumetri Color panels • I doubled checked all settings and did a custom white balance of 5100K (no other adjustments) • Some shots where slightly over or under exposed, but I wanted to maintain ISO (800 / 3200) and aperture settings. Lights that where used for the shoot: Key Light - Aputure LS 1 (5500K 40% Power) Hairlight - Aputure AL-528W (Default Daylight 50% Power) Fill - Silver Bounce (40Inch) FYI…I have never used Sony’s built in Creative Styles or Picture Profiles since owning the camera, and realized after the fact that “Neutral” is actually close to a graded style. In hind sight, I am thinking I should have used “Standard” instead for the comparison. I am very excited about the color of "EOSHD Pro LOG Cinema" and the freedom to move away from 3200 ISO, not sure how much loss in dynamic range there is but I will keep testing. I apologies in advance if I have in any way misrepresented the ”EOSHD Pro Color Premium Bundle” in this test and I am open to any constructive criticism.

The Ebrahim Saadawi scam thread was one of the most entertaining things I've ever read on the internet. Sad it never got resolved (afaik).

It would appear the primary factor in motion cadence would be the clock / sampling interval. If the sampling interval is perfect, e.g. each frame sampled at very close to 1s/23.976, that will have different a perception vs. a system with temporal jitter. It would seem film would have some temporal jitter, vs. a digital system would could be a lot more precise. The question is what 'looks better' and if temporal jitter is helpful, how would a digital camera implement it? (statistical sampling: average interval, variance, magnitude etc.). Likewise, if temporal jitter is pleasing, why aren't there post tools which specifically address this? (I've seen film effects which 'damage' footage, however nothing so far that subtly creates temporal jitter based on specific camera systems in the same way e.g. Film Convert works for color/grain). With a precise motion pattern, cameras could be measured for temporal jitter / motion cadence (it would appear that cameras with genlocks could be jittered live).

Maybe it was a well designed plan to get you to review their filter

Hey, Philip Bloom here, send me one of them Kinefinity Terras. -- but all fun 'n jokes aside, that's pretty sad

Hey guys! I made these footages in order to test the new EOSHD Pro Color 3.0 and I'm loving it, by the way, It was a sunny and really warm day.

Haven't had much time at all to go through all the new combinations, or play around with the grades, but the new profiles are really nice! I think I'll be using "Pro Log S" A LOT, and for anything that needs a quick turnaround the new "Pro Color XR" profile is night and day more useable than any other profile (including Pro Color 2 IMHO). This is just my take after using it today on my FS5. Still need to dive into the grade to see how everything handles. More to come but wanted to share this. Didn't take much time "fixing" anything - wanted to show how easy these new profiles are:

Move the 35mm back and this image is dramatically different. And yes it will match a 90mm since all that matters is distance to subject, not all this lens compression nonsense. This article explains/demonstrates it perfectly. http://admiringlight.com/blog/perspective-correcting-myth/ "The perspective in a photograph is 100%, completely dependent on the photographer’s physical distance between them and their subject. That’s it. Not the lens, not the format, nothing but the distance. To create an image with telephoto compression, the photographer backs away from the subject and uses a longer focal length to keep the framing the way they want. The key point is: It’s the backing up that changes the perspective, not the lens. If I am 1 foot from my subject, and the background is 100 feet behind, and I frame the subject with an ultra-wide angle lens, the difference between me and the subject and the subject to the background is 1 to 100. Now, if I back up 10 feet and frame the subject so they’re the same size in the frame as my original composition by using a short telephoto lens, now that ratio is only 1:10. This causes the background to appear much closer to my subject than in the first instance." Shoot both lenses from 15 or so feet away and crop the 35 to match the 90, images will be identical. If you try to get the same framing in cam, the 35 will be much closer to your subject, creating the unflattering look with people, minimizing background elements - like making mountains and buildings look smaller and so on.

Someone is pretending to be me, trying to scam free products out of the DSLR video community. Huge thanks for this company for being smart and sending me an email through this site, to check it was actually me!! Previously also James Miller I think was a victim of this kind of thing as well, but the real victims are the small businesses who lose valuable goods to an imposter! (This is a message to the person behind this ruse: It's completely fraudulent and we will get the police involved)