Axel

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351673532' post='20693'] Very interesting read, but that is exactly why I don't like to seat up front. Moving my head and eyes makes for an unpleasing experience for me. (...) Now I need to go see it in upscaled 4k [/quote] Then you are not the 4k-type. Your own eyes' resolution then is below that of the film. I didn't ask you to sit too close. Just sit in the middle of the auditorium, so that the borders of the screen are just outside your field of vision. Often the tickets are cheaper, another advantage :)

It's A= 'Er' or 'uh', the emphasis is on this first syllable. rr-= like the 'j' in spanish [i]mejor[/i] (better), not soft like the americans pronounce it, but also not rolling as the 'r' in spanish [i]rapido[/i] (fast) i= ee (short, like in english, two consonants make the following vowel short).

[quote name='jgharding' timestamp='1351618918' post='20639'] I've just started daydreaming because of this... I love cinemas and theaters... [/quote] It's never been so easy to convert a video to a DCP, with [url="http://opendcp.org/"]OpenDCP[/url]. Self-explanatory. Put it on a USB stick, load it to a local cinema server, and there you go.

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351588107' post='20597'] row three? why so close? You don't get o say the full frame from row three do you? [/quote] That's the idea. In the 1990's, there was a test with audiences, where people were asked to make a detailed summary of the film they just watched. It turned out that those from the first rows, even if they suffered from a distorted image, could describe more plot points than those who [i]stared[/i] at the screen from a greater distance. It was assumed that the screen was so big for them, that they were forced to move their heads and eyes, and that kept their attention. In layman's terms, as I see it, there were just more surrounded by the film and therefore more involved. New cinemas were often built with much bigger screens, relative to the floorplan, as a consequence. Stanley Kubrick once said: 'A big screen turns small when you watch it from the last row'. There is a more profane reason: You can't distinguish 4k, 2k or 1k from the back. Other findings: The louder the sound was, the better. And a film projected in mono caught much less attention than a surround film. [color=#222222][font=Helvetica Neue', Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][quote name='Germy1979' timestamp='1351586510' post='20596']Mathematically, somebody will simply reply that no, it can't be increased 3x it's native resolution without a significant drop in image quality.. What program would, (or could)-uprez a 1080 file to over 4000? Something like Cinnafilm?.. [/quote] The misconception here is, that the quality changes with the upscaling. Upscaling just does what the term implies: It allows for a bigger screen.[/background][/size][/font][/color]

Very good. One thing I find distracting: He looks as if he not really sings. Either a bit out of synch, or, more probable, he didn't playback aloud. Looks fake. Loved the racing car shots.

@sanveer Upscaling is what a 4k DLP does with normal 2k films. And guess what? The difference is hard to see, although the resolution of, er, [i]true[/i] 4k means four times that of 2k. 'Overly detailed images kill it, for me.' This is no longer about detail. It is about no longer [i]seeing resolution[/i]. And a very well defined image looks more organic, not desperately sharp. 'There is a certain charm in soft dreamy images.' In comparison to the [i]unsharp mask[/i] blockyness with which the details crumble into focus with the DSLRs. You really should go and see the film. In 4k.

[quote name='ronjbase' timestamp='1351527913' post='20542'] I'm hoping too, Panasonic has done such a good job in listening to the users. [/quote] Listening and then not respecting the demands is even more ignorant than Canons sleeping beauty policy. We are getting slapped in the face and say thanks? Until now, there are more setbacks than improvements. What about the banding? They didn't get it fixed, judging from the footage available so far. Higher dynamic range? Where does this show? Let's not support this. Panasonic deserves to have a shopkeeper here. I didn't expect the GH3 to have 4:2:2 or 10-bit, but I surely expected the expert crew to test the camera with the video community's wishes in mind. Imagine: They must have [i]seen[/i] the moire, the muddy image, and they said, okay, enough for them. It's not, Panasonic. Wake up.

[quote name='KarimNassar' timestamp='1351495870' post='20528'] never seen anything in 4k, I believe there is one screening room equipped with 4k in a neighboring town from where I live. Really want to see what it is like![/quote] > talk to the projectionist. The DCPs are all 4k, but the projector needs to have it too. > sit close to the screen. In this german floorplan ('Leinwand' = screen), the true cineaste's choice would be row three, seat eleven: [img]http://www.eden-homburg.de/images/staticsites/saalplan_164_big.jpg[/img] I have my own opinion regarding 4k, but I am curious what you think.

Not format! You should copy the card to your harddrive. Then all the metadata FCP X needs are there, and the card is found as 'camera'.

Check [i]>movies >FinalCutProEvents >optimized media[/i] - or so, for the already imported files.

Maybe the very long recording wasn't saved in-camera. Then the video data were stored, but not completed and not indexed. This way they are orphaned and can't be found. [quote name='craigbuckley' timestamp='1351373023' post='20450'] 1. Is there anyway I can recover these files? I know its confusing but I am going to try the geek squad.[/quote] I hope for you somebody knows. [quote name='craigbuckley' timestamp='1351373023' post='20450']2. What should I do in the future to import files into final cut?... (Final cut pro x freezes a lot so maybe importing through that isnt safe?)[/quote] • Importing files into any NLE is the safest thing on earth, if you make the backup [i]first[/i] (for which there is another reason, as described above). • FCP X is not supposed to freeze at all.[i] [/i]Given your mac meets the hardware requirements, you have updated FCP to current version and run either Lion or Mountain Lion. And given you don't try to play a 45' AVCHD clip with high bitrate from your camera via USB. This has not to do with safety, because you work with a copy of your card. The only difference can be to work with 'optimized media' instead of mts originals, the default option of FCP X with AVCHD and done automatically when you hit import. Optimized means easier to edit (ProRes). Maybe you accidentally did not record AVCHD at all, but motion jpeg. Then your files will be movs in the DCIM folder. These files will not be converted.

I don't know what happened, but you needn't conform the mts in order to play them back in QT. Did you try VLC?

You didn't really record an uninterrupted 45' clip with a high bitrate hack? You did read all the warnings on thoroughly testing hacks before using them in real life? That - hacked or not -, after the recording of a longer than 5 minute clip, you should record a one second clip to force the camera to store the previous (which can take a few seconds)? [b]> if you know you must record big chunks, unhack![/b] [quote name='craigbuckley' timestamp='1351308578' post='20418']When I look on my camera it says no valid picture to display, but I never deleted the footage off my camera...[/quote] This sometimes happens with hacks. I can't explain it, if it was on an unhacked GH2, one were entitled to call it a bug. Most times it helps to put the camera off and then on again, sometimes not, depends. But stay calm. I wasn't able to play back a lot of clips in the camera, but they were on the card. Unless you deleted something intentionally, probably nothing is gone. Only, if it wasn't stored in the first place. [b]> never use your camera as card reader![/b] [b]> use the card reader to make a copy of the card in a new folder on your hard drive.[/b] If you plan to work with the native AVCHD, this folder, named i.e. [i]show oct 25[/i], should better be on a partition or a second drive (not just USB-connected). There is a simple reason for this: FCP X allows you to skim through all your footage diagonally. Since this is a file-based workflow, the computer needs to have quick access to all of the files it must display. At once. Poor USB 2.0 is the bottleneck here. It will cause FCP X to crash.

[quote name='jgharding' timestamp='1351244027' post='20338']If I receive as just a word file I have to do it manually either way, whether making SRT or pasting into titles. However, if I can get the person transcribing to write into a different format, Excel sheet etc, perhaps we can save a huge amount of time? Any thoughts as to what I should ask for? [/quote] We did this with five languages for an eighteen minute interview last weekend (185 subtitles, some languages needed more, some less, hard to automate if you ask me), Excel columns, also with a chinese version. Stupid copy&paste affair. The first version took five hours. Then we saved the project as archive and pasted the corresponding text rows into the existing title, three hours for the second version. The last version that made the biggest headache, chinese of course, took only about 90 minutes. Chinese looks so condensed, astonishing. Everything already checked and okayed. I guess for someone with little experience this was yet the fastest way. Anyway the safest. What takes most time is timing, and for that you need to see the text together with the video, at least once.

Watch the making of Musgo: http://vimeo.com/33456753 At 51" he shoots with the Hague MMC without focussing issues because it's bright daylight. At about 2'26" the actress is tied with a rope around the waist to the cameraman. I would choose a black material and much thinner, like a black shoelace. However, I am afraid this could be too complicated for your purpose. You better train yourself to keep the focus by keeping the distance. Very difficult. But all steadicam operators, even those with the real ones, get their beautiful shots by muscle control. All this has more to do with jujutso than with howto.

On a sfeadicam, once balanced. should be printed 'Don't touch this!' In a bright place, you can be lucky, and the continous autofocus works. Much better of course is the so-called 'hyperfocal distance' with more tolerance, again, in a bright place, where you can close the aperture. If you want to keep a talent in focus while performing 'Don Juan', and have shallow DoF at the same time, you can use a black thread as distance-keeper. But first, as mentioned above, train yourself. Aim at a point with the crosshairs as guides, then move the camera with the point nailed to the crosshair. Pan and learn to ease out the pan at a predefined point. Watch online-tutorials. Be patient and get better.

Best shoot high contrast images to check the allegedly better DR and banding. Once with and once without iD and iR. iR responsible for more moire? As recently someone pointed out, iDynamic with the GH2 causes noisy shadows. True. You are much more experienced, at least talented, than I am. You will know what to do.

[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1351118364' post='20250']I also saw another video yesterday, and I found the video quality pretty impressive. I am not really sure, why he's shot it at 50fps, if he's shot it at 720p. He could have done that on the GH2. But,great resolution, (...) Here is the video: [media]http://vimeo.com/52005342#at=0[/media] [/quote] First of all, there [i]is[/i] moire. Watch the red wall. I admit it's not very prominent. And then, I don't know at what time of day these kids were filmed (the autumn sun in the hazy sky we have here in our little european 'indian summer' is similar also at noon), but I think there hardly can be a more perfect light, even the shadows don't cause big contrasts. This is nature's flat style, and it is very becoming. Then there is total DoF (complete sharpness, aperture closed) and tripod shots (no degradation of detail through jittery handheld camera), together with a [i]28 Days Later[/i] short exposure time (fast shutter). A camera that failed to look acceptable under these circumstances would be, er, [i]un[/i]acceptable.

Very interesting aspects. Thank you for answering.

[quote name='MaxAperture Films' timestamp='1350999129' post='20162']Edit: John Twigt's Vimeo comments seem to say he did not notice any aliasing in his test shots... perhaps it was just the downscaling used for the side-by-side grading comparisons that gave that appearance in the corrugated metal backdrop. I'm glad to stand corrected on this. [/quote] That's what I thought as well. Maybe the Voigtlander (and the Samyang, the SLR magic asf.) won't show moire. I#ll stay tuned.

[quote name='Dale Campbell Films' timestamp='1350942496' post='20137'] I don't use a Steadicam/flycam in any of those shots, handheld is either a shoulder mount or more recently a manfrotto 561bhdv monopod. [/quote] The monopod is a good idea. What I didn't get is why you apply film grain. Can you elaborate on that?And a few workflow questions: Where do you see the advantage of 5D2RGB, when FCP can do the conversion to ProRes during L+T and Cinema Tools can batch-conform your 720p to 24 fps? You neat when? What are your experiences with nostalgic for night shots?

[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1350919321' post='20121'] @Axel: Most of the original clips shot at the fairground aren't blown out, there may be one or two.. But I added more contrast in post and more yellows in the highlights, thats why it looks and sometimes is overexposed... I just felt like playing with the clips a bit, I'll show more original footage (properly exposed) for sure! [/quote] I apologize. The weather didn't fit.

@Julian The ghosts might come from some frame blending during frame rate conversion. I want to personally thank you for your effort, the information you shared with us is first-hand and precious. Let me give you a tip in exchange that is hopefully received with good feelings. Your fairground clip is overexposed. You can watch the histogram in the EVF / display and prevent the values on the right side to be cut off by deliberately closing the aperture and / or using an ND-filter, ND-fader. In a situation like this, when the sky is ten times brighter than everything else, this will lead to an overall underexposed image. But with the right film mode (which for the GH3 has yet to be found) and the right dose, the shadows will hide a lot of useable midtones that can be drawn into the middle i.e. in Resolve. Whereas highlights, once having crossed digital Jordan, are gone forever and a day.

Lens flare is something you see during recording. The expensive and ugly way to prevent light rays falling in in an awkward angle is of course a *mattebox*. If we are talking about the dear [i]sun[/i], it happens to be a single light source, the light can easily be held off with 'the poor man's mattebox', your hand. Be inventive!

[quote name='Dale Campbell Films' timestamp='1350825783' post='20078']For reference this is my wedding showreel with which cameras I used for each shot - [url="https://vimeo.com/50939906"]https://vimeo.com/50939906[/url][/quote] Well done. Hacked? Nostalgic or vibrant? Lot of post? What audio solution? What are your comments on the discussion above?