hmcindie

Why do people have different sets of rules for different manufacturers? The RX10 does not shoot 4k. It shoots a shitty Sony image (tm). Claiming that Sony will come out with a 4k model at some point (what the f?) will suddenly make the comparison ok? Well maybe Canon comes out with a mark II in two years? The media costs are more for the XC10? Yeah, it does shoot a bigger and better image (duh). Why are you comparing like children? This is like reading a ps4 vs xbox one fanpage for christs sake. When Sony comes out with a shitty camera (sony fs100, ax100) people go "WOW look at that shit" just because it's first in the market. Yay? Even funnier considering none of you have used the XC10 (or probably even the Sony variants).

I was watching Daredevil the series from Netflix and this thread sprang to mind. Why? Well because it has pretty horrible highlights. It's graded into a pretty stylistic looking show though and I think it looks awesome but I could just imagine kedbear going bonkers if he saw it. And they shot it with the Red Dragon.

​I've measured the Red Epic and Alexa together in RAW mode and the Alexa was way better. Does that mean if someone makes a shitty video with a Red Weapon that Weapon is equally "bad"? You continuosly keep comparing Alexa to a camera you have not used based on a video. I know a professional color grader who thinks Red Dragon is WAY better than Alexa. I don't know, I've only compared the Epic with Alexa but I'm not gonna jump into conclusions based on graded videos...That's just amateur. He was showing me a shot from the Epic Dragon (sunlit scene with buildings and reflections) and he was as excited as kedbear about the highlights. "Look at the highlights, the highlights!". Of course, if you ask Roger Deakins about that he'd just probably be "meh, I'll use an Alexa thanks".

​Yes, that is my suggestion. There are loads of deluded DoP's out there with very weird ideas about what constitutes image quality in a camera. They can still make a great looking image though. Claiming that you can see from a graded image what camera is which is just bonkers. Did you ever see the Zacuto shootout? It was quite difficult to tell certain cameras apart especially when no one told you before hand. You've been saying two specifics things. 1) Over sharpened. You can turn sharpening down on a C300, you can also disable it completely (of course, that means you have to dig into the menus). The image is also 720p on vimeo and the sharpening can come from grading and rescaling (Premiere sharpens with default settings for example) 2) Highlight roll of. You say this several times. Lets take a look at the first shot of the film. It looks badly graded. It looks like someone took some curves adjustments and whomped them up and called it a day. Like every post you've made has been about "highlight roll-of". Yes Alexa has good highlight roll-of but come on now. Is that the only thing your looking at because it does sound like it? Did you even look at the behind the scenes where you can clearly see that those highlights are not burned in, but they did it in grading?

But you are comparing them like you have shot both. You haven't. You are comparing an imagined benchmark (if you have indeed shot with the Alexa, you have not shot it in the same environment, with the same color grader). In this benchmark the Alexa is super smooth and retains all highlight details. Then you compare it to a graded C300mkII video that was shot with another crew who may have added sharpening and even burned highlights in the grade. You may not need it, but I need straight on benchmarks. I read a lot of computer articles (benchmarks with different GPU's etc) and I never assume that one CPU/GPU is better than another if someone plays a completely different game with different settings on and doesn't do a straight up comparisons. Science trumps feeling. Imagine how ridiculous it would be that when Nvidia releases a new graphics card, I would just say "I've used the newest Radeon and it has better anisotropic filtering because of this clip I saw from youtube". That would just be insane.

​No you are not because there are no straight comparison shots with Alexa right there. You are using a "mental image" of the perfect image of Alexa as a benchmark, not actual reality.

The other woman made one facebook post. It's hard to gauge how badly anyone has been "abused" as they don't really say it. Philip might be a complete dick in a relationship but does he actually hit women (any bruises? Nope, not even any clear allegations of violence, everything is "he is abusive!" which can be anything.) The only actual proofs of violence is still the police report of Sara Collaton + her own words of throwing stuff around. Funny isn't it? You think you're gonna provide actual evidence in this thread? Are you gonna provide is with photos or investigative reports? If you will, my hat is off to you. But you won't, you will probably just keep rehashing the same points over and over again until you grow tired of it. Question, who is worse, Randall Miller who protected his wife by taking the plea for involuntary manslaughter...or Philip Bloom? Atleast Randall was a GREAT HUSBAND!

​Agreed. Especially the Fusion part was crazy. People have no idea how powerful Fusion is. AND IT'S FREE!!!

So if Bloom would've come out earlier (like when they broke up) and said "Sara is a crazy bitch!" it would've been "putting himself on the line!" So you advocate just flat out shaming other people before the other people shames you? That's "putting themselves on the line!"? What a load of bullshit. If Sara actually put herself on the line, she would've called the police. Now there's nothing. There's a facebook post years after marriage, and only as a reply to a tweet Philip sent (which was about the abuse of Oisin) + immediate screencaptures ready. IT REEKS OF REVENGE!

​I think these kinds of comments are wrong and just show how much the writer doesn't know what makes a cinematic image. Yes, the video was Not That Good but you completely forget that these cameras are tools. If you light a bit shitty and grade it with your left hand, it will look like it. An Alexa would not save you. Or it might if you like the milky image the Alexa gives you right away, but usually those are graded too and you can mess that. A contrasty, saturated look is "videoey" and if the makers don't know what aspects constitute a "cinematic" image then they won't achieve it. This doesn't just apply to the C300mkII but every single camera that comes out. There are shortfilms done with a t6i that look more "cinematic" than that video.

Canon batteries! YAY! I'm gonna keep my eye on this beast.

Use a Nikon

There are different levels of good right? If this was posted into the Screening Room and someone said "Shot on the GH2!" it would be praised to hell. Post it as an advertisement for the C300mk2 (which does aim way higher) and it just comes off slightly 'meh'. That said, I liked all the outdoor shots! Indoors and the directing / blocking / lighting was slightly amateurish. You can basically see how it's been lit which usually gives me the "cheap" feelings, eventhough it's not really about money, it's about skill in grading / lighting. Is this like an "official" Canon thing? The promos shot for the original C300 were even worse, they were all, really, really bad.

But you do cause emotional abuse. That's what you're basically doing to Bloom with all these threads (which also read like "Hey, I'm Ed and I'm a great guy on the internets!"). There's now THREE ED DAVID posts on Google when you type in Philip Bloom abuse (or is it just my google?). That's just absurd but I guess it goes to show how much some people crave attention. ​You don't even know the extent of the alleged abuse. Saying something like "Shut up dear" can be considered "emotional abuse". I read her google post and the only violent thing there was when she herself broke a picture frame. She's constantly saying stuff like "how could he do this to me?" without specifying what this "this" is. Great that you are also there commenting her but lets keep an open mind on this one. " +Ed David I appreciate so much what you've shared. This hasn't been easy and every once of support has made all of this easier to handle." You'd really make a kick-ass judge who has already decided what's true and what's not. And just for the record, physical abuse is horrible and that's why WE SHOULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS UNTIL THERE IS EVIDENCE. That's just how it goes, you can comfort her and go and talk to her but don't make a witch hunt until you are 100% sure of what happened. Of course in this social media age, there will thousands of Ed's in every case.

​Yes. They are seriously angry. I think Sulinh is taking a brunt of repressed anger. Now that someone openly lied and got caught (and disrespecting the actual stunt drivers who did those shots) the stunt community went a bit crazy for her.

What's wrong in white knighting Philip Bloom? I mean, until there is evidence to the contrary? It's not about being right or wrong, the police could come up tomorrow, arrest Bloom and claim he was a serial abuser and it wouldn't affect the issue of: 1. Not guilty until proven. Even the UFC (who are pretty strict about these things now) didn't cut Thiago Silva for abuse until a video came up showing him holding a gun and threatening his wife.

​The statement also provides the only thing of evidence yet. The police report. If Bloom did call the cops on his wife (and she was holding a knife) there should be a record. Ed could take his self-righteousness and go search for it. Would Bloom lie about calling the cops and hiding in a neighbours house? Probably not because that has paper trails. Bloom has NEVER been a very good writer. He writes over long blog posts and corrects them as he goes. In another news, the stunt community is roasting a woman for claiming she was a stunt driver on Furious 7 and she wasn't. My feed is full of angry stunt people. What does it matter to Blooms case? Nothing, only that people do lie and "misremember". http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3033091/Actress-publicly-said-female-stunt-driver-Furious-7-unmasked-FRAUD-extra-set.html

Oh and here's Philips own statement. I'm not gonna take sides in this but how can Ed continue talking and not link this? http://pbloomstatement.com/ Even good journalists can get stuff wrong really badly when people decide to lie. Night reading for Ed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus

Yes you are. You are literally completely quiet when it comes to real issues. There are literally thousands of abusive people on Twitter who are actually really, really abusive towards females and I bet you are not doing anything about them (and they're not "he said, she said", they are actually really abusive). There's a country called Saudi Arabia which literally will not let women drive cars and I don't see you saying anything. There are literally NO OTHER topics about "abusing women" on your blog. That's strange considering your "I'm not gonna keep quiet!"- attitude. When there is actual domestic abuse happening, your not posting pictures and names of those people. Typing in philip bloom abuse into google and your thread comes up as the sixth link or something. That's just funny.

​No it doesn't. What it does is create audio files though and waveform infos.

I have both and I enjoy the 5dIII personally way more. RAW is great. A7s looks...weird color wise. It seems like it lacks hues. The best stuff I've shot have all been on the 5dIII, even the h264 versions. Everything I shoot on the A7s just tends to look slightly odd. Maybe it's just me?

In the meantime, we see that the moral high-stand will quickly disappear if it threatens business interests of countries. http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9481542/swedens-feminist-foreign-minister-has-dared-to-tell-the-truth-about-saudi-arabia-what-happens-now-concerns-us-all/ How does this concern Clarkson? It doesn't. I just find it funny that important human rights issues like this are swept under the rug because they are too difficult. Twitter storms wont affect anything real.

​They would take the children aside, talk with them and then continue as usual. Maybe the bullied (not the bully) would change schools. That's about it....

I'm gonna defend Clarkson here a bit. People think that Talent is just something everyone has and you can replace anyone nilly-willy. Well you can't. Sorry but Talent IS important. You can't just sack them because they "almost" said something bad when cameras were rolling or because their joke was not conservative enough. Clarkson is CLEARLY a pretty good guy, behind the scenes too, otherwise the other presenters would not stick for him this much. You can't be a complete asshole and make something this entertaining and keep getting guests on. Yes, Clarkson did have a ragequit that day, that went overboard. He unfortunately touched a producer and that's usually crossing the line. But that thing could've been solved quite well. There are many shows where rages happen all the fucking time especially if there's pressure and they are usually solved. If your doing a shitty show where no one cares, obviously there would be no pressure. And pressure combined with alcohol and low blood sugar can cause all kinds of shit. They could've easily solved this in-house as apparently anything like hadn't happened before during over ten years of work. p.s Clarkson isn't a physically imposing man. I am constantly amazed how badly people can manage "violence".

Too many examples on the internet? Well that's truly horrible. What are we gonna do?