Germy1979

[quote name='QuickHitRecord' timestamp='1350489879' post='19854'] What do you think this is, Personal-View? ;-) Thanks for the workflow. I have Premiere on my work machine so I'll give it a shot. [/quote] Haha, yeah.. I post at arms length anymore. Lol

No one will be able to afford it. Lol... They'll price it for rental and put all of us in the friendzone again. Which at that point...4k, i dunno. They all have their perks. I wouldn't bat an eye using a Scarlet over a 1DC, F4, Whatever.. If i had to rent, i'd say those are all good options. It's the cameras real people can afford to "buy" that need weeded through... My vote's still on the BMC.

I've seen so many arguments against transcoding GH2 footage, like it's a waste of time. I use Premiere and do the gamma adjustment, then i transcode it to prores 444, 601, at gamma 1.8. It pretty much puts the footage in "log" space. Then I grade it in AE at 16 bit. Sounds like crazy overkill, but honestly I do see a difference. I have no banding issues once i take those files and edit them in 16bit. I tried 4:2:2 in 5DtoRGB and 4:4:4 was far better. It might be a bigger pain in the ass, but i've never "lost" anything in doing it. It cleaned up the bullshit, and let me add my lut and worry about grading. So lest my eyes have deceived me, using 4:4:4 in 5DtoRGB at full range shows significant results for me... I think you just have to do the gamma fix in Premiere first. Let the chastising begin, lol.

[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1350203971' post='19729'] LOL! My favorite is when someone gets ahold of a whatever the latest amazing spec camera and shoots at 30fps at the lowest quality settings... ARGH! Actually another thing that kills me are those 'first look' camera reviews that are basically just a hand holding the camera and a guys voice listing off the names of the buttons the most basic of features. "So, here we have the click wheel and over here is the menu button where you can access your various menu options." Really? You do realize there are press photos along with the press release right? Again, I just wanna say to them, "Stop right there! put that camera down. You are unqualified." Alright, Sorry guys. I'll stop talking about this now. I just had to get that off my chest. ;-) [/quote] That's hilarious. This is exactly my problem... Some D-bag points a Red Epic at a wall for 15 seconds and posts "NEW RED EPIC FOOTAGE!"... Two weeks after it comes out. The 30fps bit is another one.. He somehow manages to take cameras designed for cinema use, and makes them look as video as possible. Mainly just to get hits on his page i'm guessing.

I agree.. It's a great plug in. I like grading too. But what's funny is that it almost adds that "mastering" sheen to the footage even after it's been graded that makes it sing. Sure you can probably use a plug out there to match it.... But hell. I like what it does so that's the point. I wouldn't have known what i liked until i saw what it did in the first place, so maybe they should just sell the trial so people have a reference point to color off of, lol.

[quote name='Xiong' timestamp='1349948933' post='19596'] That hurt my head reading it.. [/quote] No one stopped to think, "why are all these muppets in my tub?!... Why are all these people lookin at my balllllz!?....... Oscar you filthy muthaf-cka it's about time you took a bath!.... You can stay."

Log type profile, super awesome highlight rolloff and a kickass S/N ratio.... Annnnnnd no moire. Should be good for most of us:)

I saw that. I wondered the same actually. I figure i'll leave this up until somebody debunks it...

To me, this may be the first video that shows a difference from the Gh2 in an improved nature. Looks a lot better in shadow gradation imo. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dS8q8RzXTFw. Footage is popping up randomly as it gets into people's hands now.... But it's all video looking amateur crap that hasn't showcased anything different about the Gh3... I'd like to think i don't have to hack a damn camera to get a good one. Hopefully the moire in the dumbass hoola girl video was a bi-product of typical sterile Panny glass and that won't be an issue on final release.

[quote name='chauffeurdevan' timestamp='1349792555' post='19529'] I don't know. Are they really doing it ? Without any problem ? Here is the footnote from the official Canon 1D-C page : [url="http://cinemaeos.usa.canon.com/products.php?type=Camera-1DC"]http://cinemaeos.usa...type=Camera-1DC[/url] [b]* This device has not been authorized as required by the rules of the Federal Communications Commission. This device is not and may not be offered for sale or lease, or sold or leased, until authorization is obtained.[/b] If Canon cannot deliver this high level DSLR camera I don't see a lower end from anybody going in that territory anytime soon. [/quote] Well..... That sucks. But, that looks like it's just a legal issue on paper. Technically, they're doing it, whether the world lets them sell it is another thing. That could be anything, plus the camera is announced... Sure would be a kick in the taint if they couldn't produce a camera that's been announced.

I can't believe the Mark ii is still kicking ass like this! I love that camera's image. I think it still looks better than the "C" offerings, the mark 3, the 1-DX, etc.. (I do like the C-100 though.) - buy a mosaic filter and this thing rocks. The problem is it has to do all of that awesome full-frame 5D2 stuff, with the same poor little processor my T2I has..:( if only it had a better processor.

[quote name='ronjbase' timestamp='1349751749' post='19507'] I've tried various sharpening settings and didn't see a difference and I registered at personal view. trying to figure out that site, it's layout is confusing [/quote] Most videos I've seen are done in Adobe with an Unsharpen Mask applied. I'm not sure this helps since you're in FCP.. But that's the only plug i've seen used as an example of how to clean up a 5D3 image.. It's nothing crazy either, just slide the bar until it looks right, & doesn't draw attention to itself... You know the drill:)

[quote name='chauffeurdevan' timestamp='1349755040' post='19509'] I do not expect to have better video quality in a DSLR anytime soon. The concept in itself is far from perfect. To process those high resolution sensors, you would need better DSP chips. At the same time those chips generate so much heat to process all that data that this heat cannot dissipate out of those small body. They are just not created for that. The easiest solution would be to put in them a low megapixels count in them, kinda 4k, but as they are marketed as DSLR, it would not be a good success as it will not generate enough sales on the photo side (where most the sales are in DSLR). So I will forget a breakthrough in the video quality of DSLRs for a few years. By now, I thought that we would already have some camera likes the C300 from the competition. I really think this is where the future belong as it is the best form factor of any camera I ever saw. [/quote] The 1-DC can do it. I wouldn't even say this if Andrew hadn't interviewed the Canon guy that confirmed it was just a badass 1-DX. The sensor has to be downplayed to a lower megapixel count to be optimal for video, but it's supposedly the same 18mp sensor as the 1-DX with a different firmware telling it to work a different way... Which it does:) Without breaking a sweat apparently either. It's not RAW, but it's not moire ridden avchd either... It's 4k for crying out loud & it doesn't look bad at all... So if they can do it with a firmware, (maybe not bump the price $9000 though in the process,lol) - then these other cameras shouldn't have a problem. I honestly think anymore, it's just a rush to get something with a higher model number to the masses and THAT is the primary concern... Whether the technology is a let down or not.

I took a recently shot montage of greenery on a cloudy day, named it "Overcast" and CC'd it with Color Finesse. Recently, I downloaded the trial version of Film Convert and just threw Kodak Vision Stock 3 on it, and I love it. The original: (With a hipster Sufjan Stevens song) [media]http://vimeo.com/50270960[/media] The "Film Convert" version (With James Muthaf*ckin Newton-Howard) -forgive the watermarks. It's $250. [media]http://vimeo.com/50958831[/media]

So that was awesome... I'm thoroughly convinced Sigur Ros is like bacon. Put that shit on anything and it becomes at least 36% better... This should win a contest though.... or has it already.

wow, fuck.. 30 seconds in this looks amazing.

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1349719677' post='19490'] I agree. The 5D Mark ii was introduced in September 2008. 4 years later, and the video quality, in DSLRs, is exactly the same, albeit some minor, cosmetic changes. Also, the XLR Adapter for US$800 is INSANE. Sony seems to be going the Canon way, producing DSLRs with lousy video quality, at exorbitant prices. Maybe, they should just scrap the video, Altogether, instead of consistently trying to fool consumers. Also, the Canon 5D Mark iii and the Sony A99 are double the price of the Panasonic GH3 (or more). If video is a necessary governing (factor for) price point, then, they should offer a $1000 discount, without any fuss, on both the Sony AND the Canon. [/quote] Yeah, I actually think out of all the video offerings Canon has given us at the cost of appendages, the only 2 that have impressed me image-wise, are the C-100, (no...not the C-300) - and the old Mark 2... Nobody can afford a C-100 though, so it's just disheartening as hell to the whole community. Especially since it plays that whole side of the market at face value... until you see $6500 and you're suddenly not surprised. That's 2 BM cinema cameras that shoot Raw, & a 512gb ssd, or a full tank of gas, whatever $6500 gets you these days...

So this has kinda gone in a different direction.

Those handles... (Snicker) Hey alright. They look like they belong on the nickel plated .45 of a midnight rape vigilante... ....who wears aviators.

I double all of the above.. I'm also glad you posted this here instead of Personal View... It's good to see you still have a good self-esteem:) A GH2 with the 64gb, 95mbps Sandisk Extreme Pro card... Others will disagree, but this is the only card that has "never" stopped recording on me from 2 years of personal experience.. So don't skimp on that... Get it if you can afford it and plan on using patches with bit rates around 150+ A GH2 with a set of old fast manual Nikon AIS's or Canon FD's (especially the older 'ssc' ones) - will make it sing. Then buy the proper corresponding adapter for around $30. (Sorry.. I'm sure Novoflex is awesome for $200... But come on.). Get a variable ND, and make a movie man.

[quote name='Chrad' timestamp='1348891730' post='19161'] See Skyfall while you can, folks. The producers will pull it from circulation before too long to save themselves embarrassment. [/quote] Lol.. Yeah.. Ugly as sin.

I'm from the states. I like 24p footage with a slow shutter... I don't get it often on camera releases, I get video with no motion blur most of the time. Sometimes they do 25p. You'd think 25p wouldn't really show a discernible difference in the aesthetic, but I see it. Not much of a difference here in image though with this cam, feels detached. I wonder if this is the one that brings closure to the production of the 5D2. Seems like most of these new boys don't hold a shot long enough to appreciate all the hard work the companies put into them. I wonder if any of them brought a final product to the table this year! haha! I can't justify pre-ordering something if I don't know what I'm going to get in the long run.

One more thing... I grew up learning the film look from the 80's before the defacto was high res, super saturated. Those classic scenes, campy as they may be... for instance, "Romancing the Stone". (yeah i just quoted that.) - the dance, then the anamorphic kiss. (Alan Silvestri helps a lot too.) The overstretched scene of the boat going down the road in New York as the credits roll. Ghostbusters? The very last scene stretches further to close the curtain on the movie.. I love that stuff. Those are examples.. But they're dated and nostalgic. Thus, why when I think of the film look, my mind subliminally goes to a cloudy day in NYC. Or a sunset that looks nothing like Michael Bay shot it... It sets a tone, but doesn't draw attention.

[quote name='Speediakal' timestamp='1348640693' post='19059'] To everyone that's complaining of the price point, were you ever going to use a 4K camera? Do you even have the hardware to do so? The computer to process all that footage? The hard drive space to store all those files? Do you even have the 1D X? No? They even said it's aimed at Hollywood. It's not aimed at the average consumer. You aren't a customer of this product, why are you complaining? Canon doesn't care. If the film makers in Hollywood were complaining, they would care since that is their target customer base. But they're not since it is one of the cheaper cameras available to them that does 4K and is a good form factor for tight spots when needed. The 1D C isn't part of the photography market, it's part of a whole other market, cinema/film. It's a strategic marketing strategy done by Canon to make exclusivity to high-budget film makers. If you're not making movies ,even 4K movies, then stop complaining. [/quote] How much bigger is a 1DC than a Scarlet X? (This is a legitimate question, not being a smart ass:) I only ask being that at the Hollywood level of production, the highest of quality is generally the least taboo.... though the least amount of money spent is also. And there we have Act of Valor. (I swear if I find myself using this movie as an example one more time, I'll troll myself.) - 5D Mark ii. Which oddly, in my opinion, (And that means shit, but some may agree with this..) - still has the best looking image out of them all... (Canon's...though the 1-DX is pretty solid too.) It looks better than the 5D3, The C300 in all of its perfectly downscaled 1080p image glory, is too sharp and draws attention to itself. The C100, actually impressed me more, lol. The C500 looked artificial in a lot of shots too. The 1-DC, eh. Sharp. Sadly the 5D2 has moire/aliasing, no slow-mo, piss poor codec, lalalalalaaa. But it worked on screen and I hate to say, I love the way the 5D2 handles 8 bit color. not so much the highlights, though. lol

[quote name='OzNimbus' timestamp='1348864952' post='19151'] If that scares you, use ProRes.... it's still better than 8 bit video. [/quote] Don't understand why companies are still doing 8 bit. I guess it must be the fear of back orders, or the apocalypse of skater/cat videos that would ensue. No one would have an excuse to pixel peep anymore...They'd have to get off the computer. They could buy a GH3 with a Hyperdeck for a couple grand, and have 10 bit, 4:4:4, or even 4:2:2 out of the cam uncomp'd. Might not be raw, but I agree it's a damn site better than 8 bit... Which isn't terrible I guess, until you A/B it to a 16 bit file in AE and see how much more information is there to fill in the shadows from dark to light. For those of us who don't have NASA mainframes, and don't want to spend all of our time gamma fixing in Premiere Pro to 16-235, then converting in 5DtoRGB 4:4:4, it'd be nice to have that info from the get-go... What is Panasonic protecting? If I recall, an old interview at NAB regarding the GH3 was stated that "We're tired of playing second-fiddle to everyone else." Which to me translates to "Hey, no more AF line right now. No more Hacks. We have nothing left to protect, so balls to the wall." Still.. I'm probably just being a cynical asshole, because honestly, there's no footage out there hardly to give it a fair shot. Bring on the Cat vids!