Leaderboard

Let’s see how long this post stays up. I have started a countdown…

I'm not really one to say... I still shoot ML Raw on a Canon 5D3... I will say that the FZ2500 is hefty. It's kinda like a brick, but it's a solid camera. The all-i 1080p out of it is really nice. I stopped looking at the newer RX10s once they moved away from the constant aperture lens and the built in nd filters. I've only had version ii and I liked it a lot. They also seem to hold their value. The last one i bought used back in 2017, I paid the same amount that i see them listed for now. Here are a couple frames from it...

I don't care who is running the camera division at Panasonic, but would really like to see an EVA1 successor. It will probably be L mount and full frame, which is okay with me. Would love to have the Focus Squares focus peaking from the EVA1. Needs to have a movable viewfinder, or low latency HDMI and SDI ports, and dual CF Express type B cards.

Thanks so much for the great advice! I've started watching Darryn Mostyn'stutorials and will also check out Cullen Kelley's and the video's you included here. Thanks so much again!

Have you ever watched this one @mercer? Your face! : ) And simply one of the loveliest pieces ANYONE can EVER watch on the screen! End of the story. So I hope this may serve as definitive word on the responsibility you have as creator, no excuses, you're much more than a writer and... period ; ) EAG :- )

I think it still looks pretty good, those old Panasonic CCD sensors were really cool... I had one of their P&S cameras back in 2009... I think it was an FX150. Loved that camera. The mjpeg files had such a thickness to them. I grew up in the 80s and I agree about the footage giving a nostalgic feeling... I swear when I remember my childhood, I see it in 110 film. Back in the camcorder days, there used to be a trick where you'd copy a clip and stack it on top of the other to make it have a little extra heft, you should try it with one of your film emulations.

I love seeing the reels that everyone has posted! 2023 was a fantastic year, just not for film or video! It was the first year since 2012 where I made 0 video projects. My hope is to spend 2024 getting back to narrative films. The difficulty is finding people with the time and resources to make movies for fun. I did get to take some fun photos. I've used an A7rII for photos the last couple years. My primary lens is a 28mm Nikon AI, which it has been since I bought it 6 or 7 years ago--talk about good return on investment! I attached a couple pictures I took this year. The snowy one is a Canon 24-105, and the others are the Nikon 28. Importantly, my photography kit weighs just 2.28lbs/1.03kg with filter and lens cap, and fits in a pouch on my daypack. Most of my adventures include a lot of hiking, and some rock climbing, so I like a camera that is A) small and light B) not stored in front of me and C) can be retrieved without removing my pack. I did also side/down-grade from a Zoom F4 to an F3 for audio. It's unlikely I'll work on proper productions any time soon. The F3's size and 32 bit are great for recording effects, and for production use I'll velcro it to boom pole next to an NPF battery sled (and then hope whoever is using it while I run camera aims it well). It's overall a better fit for what I do now. For 2024, my plan is to make videos of all kinds. Narrative films, tutorials on video game design (my other creative hobby), videos about DIY projects, and maybe some animation. I'm also interested in building a projector-based virtual set--I did a proof of concept, but I'd need to invest in good backdrops to make it photorealistic. Aside from virtual sets, I have all the gear I need. However, I do plan a couple new items. - A couple lights for narrative films. Probably LEDs that can run off batteries when needed. - Switching my video camera to full frame. Maybe a Z Cam F6 instead of my M4. - Considering lens upgrades. I never owned high quality glass, it's always been borrowed or rented by the production. I might get Sigma Arts--I always enjoyed using them. I look at cinema lens sets every now and then, but honestly I won't get much more out of "real" cinema housings vs 3D printed gears, and you have to go waaay up in price before optical quality rises.

I remember your original post and this is still some of the most compelling footage that I have seen on this site. My working theory is that I think less resolution allows the audience to subconsciously fill in that detail in a way that makes sense to them and sum of their life experience. And the very act of this can make a video more interactive and engaging, kind of like reading a book. And one can argue that this active participation is nostalgic in itself, since a lot of us grew up in the era of film projections and standard definition video. To me, the same idea applies to keeping the monster in your horror film in the shadows until the last possible minute. It is always going to be scarier in the imagination. It's also why we gravitate towards keeping half of the face in shadow. It's been proven that humans find symmetrical faces more attractive and very few people actually have them. But if you don't show half of the face, the audience creates their own idea of a face and oftentimes that is going to be more appealing than the actor's real face. This is why I think that some people look great on camera, but not so much in-person; possibly because we never actually see their whole face in flat light, as is more common in the real world. Here's the same video from the original post, without any processing. To me, it evokes a very different feeling than the original:

You've been at this for even longer than I have. But I feel that the lines of "commercial" shoots have blurred a lot. I used to think the category of "Commercial" was reserved for high concept crewed shoots that were intended for broadcast. There are still definitely those that fall into that category. But I'm seeing a lot more single creators with no crew and a mirrorless camera shooting social media spots for some brands (of course, it's all professionally color-graded). I personally do a lot of product videos, usually as a crew of two plus a producer, and never with a storyboard. I've never felt comfortable calling them "Commercial", but lately it seems like I might be able to. They are, after all, designed to sell a product. Curious what your thoughts on it are.

AI will not remain static. It'll continually get better and better to the point where it will stop generating "dubious code" and generate code just as good, or better than what a human can generate.

Yeah that's annoying too! I liked the XC10 when I had it. I thought it was a lot of fun to shoot with and it felt like a point and shoot cinema camera but I felt that way about the FZ2500 and the RX10ii as well. All of them had really nice lenses, good internal preamps and decent internal codecs. And you're right, any one would probably be good enough for more than half of the people that read/contribute to this forum. Every couple months I look to see if there are any new prosumer camcorders on the market.

Although its now discontinued, the camera that still annoys me at holding its value secondhand is the Canon XC10/15. It should be like £150-200 now but it most certainly isn't.

On so many threads, I have to resist the temptation to just say "we should all just buy an FZ2000/2500 and get on with it" but its never far from my thoughts ! Again, its one of those where if they incorporated a couple of things like 10bit and PDAF into a newer version it might get a wider audience. Not bothered about the IBIS because the hybrid stabilisation in it is pretty great.

Welcome to the forums! After almost a decade of trying to wrap my head around gammas, colour spaces, colour management, and Resolve, I think I am finally coming out the "other side" and have a semi-clear understanding on things. As you are starting out, I'd suggest the following: The overriding principle is "if it looks good, it is good". If you're getting good results then (to a reasonable extent) it doesn't matter how you did it. If you just want good results and whatever you did is working, then keep doing that and move onto other things and don't feel bad. Once I finally wrapped by head around Colour Management I realised that much / most of the online content about it is outright wrong, or potentially misleading. It was only once I had a professional colourist explain it that I realised that even the way that people talk about it is wrong. To this end, I recommend the video below - it is a step-by-step explanation of what colour management is, what it's for, and then how to go about it. It takes a bit of effort to sit through and learn things properly, but I find that it's the best strategy long-term if you want to grow your skills: In order to build your skills in colour grading (not just colour management) I recommend ignoring all colour grading content online, except for Cullen Kelly (the presenter in the above video) and Darryn Mostyn (link to his channel), who are not only both working professional colourists, but are also very good at outlining the concepts as well as the tools. If you're willing to pay for content then that's also a good way of getting high quality information. Once you're feeling really comfortable and have watched a lot of their content then you can start watching content from other colourists, because you'll see that what they're telling you might be only half the picture, might be bad advice, might be flat out wrong, or might not even make sense. When I started learning about colour grading and colour management, I read and watched a ton and I think it actively hurt my journey and just filled my head with a bunch of half-truths and confusing tips that I then had to un-learn once I realised how bad the information is. Good luck!

Our host isn't the biggest fan of that particular person and has requested previously that his content not be shared.