Axel
-
Posts
1,900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Everything posted by Axel
-
I agree. All the clips on youtube show moire *in selected shots*, I remember some really bad things with overhead power lines and chrome strips on cars. Also, disappointingly, the DR was seemingly not very good. What help are cinegamma and 4:2:2 when you have to deal with this? Almost every video from the FS-700 looked much better, and I don't care for slomos.
-
Then why don't you use the native codec? I don't like Compressor, but you can finetune your presets there to your needs (excuse the german names). [img]https://dl.dropbox.com/u/57198583/Compressor.jpg[/img] Choose the desired flavor of ProRes (highlighted in the preset-list). Click on the 'plus'-icon (1) to duplicate the preset, allowing to edit it. Double-click on the preset copy (2), which opens the preset's properties. Then go to the filter-icon (3) and adjust the gamma, using the preview window (in my screenshot, since there was no clip loaded, it shows color bars). Save the preset as 'jpeg-mov2ProRes' or so. Now you can batch-convert all your clips. Did you know? You can use in- and outpoints in the preview window to trim your clips before transcoding. And: You can rename them, of course. You can of course also correct the AR in the preset. You can also make the preset a little program for the dock by creating a droplet from it that you save in applications. This way you never need to open Compressor anymore for the task. Just drag your clips on the icon in the dock, and a background process is started (define a default target folder for the ProRes). Works with batches as well. Actually not bad, I never understood, why you can't drop droplets into the FCP browser.
-
This is very impressing. In fact, very.
-
[color=#222222][font=Helvetica Neue', Arial, Verdana, sans-serif][size=4][background=rgb(255, 255, 255)][quote name='galenb' timestamp='1349202502' post='19327']P.S. I find it funny sometimes when people say that full frame cameras are more cinematic because of their larger sensors. I mean, it's true and all but actually a frame of film on a super 35 motion picture camera is actually closer in size to an APS-C sensors. So, with a FF camera you are actually getting a "Vistavision" frame. [/quote][/background][/size][/font][/color] While we type and read, a huge shift is underway. Digital cinema is growing up, and a change in perceiving the spirited images we call [i]film[/i] has already begun. Sunday I watched a doc in an arthouse cinema that was obviously shot mostly with DSLRs. Despite all efforts to mimic the analog 'world' (RIP), digital cinema, and 8-bit video in particular, never looks like [i]film[/i]. But I, a projectionst and almost an analog fundamentalist, found that I felt completely happy with the clean, videoish look, and that it did not weaken the impact of what was to be - er - [i]transported[/i]. If there [i]is[/i] something to be transported and not just the travesty of a look of the past. I say, let's stop comparing film to video. Perhaps we should eliminate the word film from our vocabulary and invent something else. Something that lets us love our stuff as it is, forget about stupid looks and start telling something. This can be great times for independent _ _ _ _makers.
-
Purchasing the GH2, need help finding a lens to go with it..
Axel replied to craigbuckley's topic in Cameras
In FCP X, there are no 'issues' with the GH2. You also won't need 5D2RGB. Just skim through the import-window with patience, in order not to crash the program by to hecticly hopping between AVCHD files, choose your desired clips, hit 'import' and leave the 'optimized media' preset at it's default (ProRes like with 5D2RGB). Then meticulously tag and rename the clips in the event browser, avoid too fast skimming movements between clips. Once you are finished, the selected clips have been transcoded in the background and you can create a project. With this workflow and disciplin you won't see the beachball even on slower macs and will be faster than with every other NLE. -
Well said.
-
[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1348991299' post='19224']It sounds so much better when I have no idea what they are saying. ;-) [/quote] Make an educated guess ;)
-
[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1348989982' post='19221']The last thing I wanted to add was, if you have money burning a whole in your pocket, think about investing in some of the other tools you might need. Like a really nice tripod or a follow focus rig ( [url="http://www.amazon.com/Camera-Shoulder-Support-Handles-Standard/dp/B008MTRGJY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=2JCTXBQZ88F4F&coliid=IXXSDLH9NRU1G"]I've had my eye on this[/url] ) or a nice veriable-ND filter with some stepper rings. Reflectors, lights, soft boxes, etc, etc...[/quote] Another advantage - if you think about it thoroughly - above classic VDSLRs is the GH2s EVF. In most respects, it works like a Zacuto EVF, which costs almost as much as a whole GH2 body. The small size and weight of the GH2 enables you to use the most basic rigs. Certainly you can forgo a follow focus. Without the need for a follow focus, you won't need rails. Without rod support, you can buy (or DIY) the most basic shoulder support for under 100 $/€. This all sounds naive? I had a Letus rig once, with follow focus, external monitor and everything. It was a pain in the ass, because there is no such thing as a perfect rig. Look at my avatar, I do the same with 3-point-stabilization (right hand on grip, rubber eyepiece on eye, left hand on lens, focussing). Reduce to the maximum.
-
To the limit? No. But a very solid job. The song, however, is not very original. Sounds like generated by a computer, and imo this vocoder shit is for music what the cheapest effects are for video. To tailor visuals for this music is so much arbitrary, it is a waste. If you are not trying to prove something with your work, all your efforts will be overseen, a pity. However, if you enjoy doing this, go on, it looks quite good.
-
Will do, but if you are willing to spend 400, you get more. Buy old, manual lenses. A 50 mm is a 100 mm on the GH2 and a 260 mm also (EX-Tele mode). It doesn't need to be f1.4, because who ever heard about a 260 mm f1.4.? Too hard to focus. Buy a used 50 mm f2.0, from Nikon, Canon or Minolta. How much can it be? 50 bucks? Note: Not every lens will be a good allrounder (a good allrounder is the kit lens), find recommendations here or test yourself. With the GH2 you should embrace the idea, that it has a good sensor and that you can adapt almost everything.
-
[quote name='Julian' timestamp='1348952443' post='19202']The GH3 will cost 1299 body only, the GH2 is already much less, I don't think it will get much cheaper.[/quote] It's officially not produced anymore. Many sellers report it as sold out. Prices for new GH2s rise. People are wary about the GH3s possible shortcomings.
-
You are talking about Premiere [u]CS[/u]6 ? Now, the Adobe Media Encoder was tested to be among the best encoders for H.264. Encode for small file sizes in two steps: First export with high bitrate (~30 mbps for full HD), maximum render quality, maximum bit depth, [u]C[/u]BR (because at high bit rates, VBR makes no sense), high profile, everything best under the tab 'video'. Load the - hopefully perfect - master again in AME and go down with the bitrate to ~10 mbps, as high as possible without the file size exceeding the limit of the site you want to upload to (they encode again, in [i]very[/i] low bitrate). Philosophy is, the better the original, the better stays the quality when you export for web etc. Classic MO was to first render uncompressed. [url="https://dl.dropbox.com/u/57198583/jib.mp4"]This[/url] (right click save as) was exported from ~ 20 mbps GH2 to ProRes @ ~110 mbps, then exported with maximum 2 mbps to H.264, level 4.1, VBR 2-pass. No great quality anymore, but still okay. Had I exported with this bitrate directly, it would have fallen apart.
-
Test footage from the pre-release Panasonic GH3 at Photokina
Axel replied to Andrew Reid's topic in Cameras
[quote]'DE: Speaking of the HDMI output, can you confirm that the GH3 can stream uncompressed HD video through the HDMI port, for use with an external recorder? Panasonic: Yes, it isn't compressed. You can turn off all the on-screen indicators, so you can use the GH3 like a video camera with uncompressed 1080/60p HDMI output.'[/quote] This was possible with the GH2 as well. The video is uncompressed, but it suffers from all artifacts the compressed version has minus -haha- those related to compression. Meaning: No higher DR, still banding, ISO noise, if the GH3 will introduce moire, it won't disappear in a ProRes or DNxHD file captured externally. What uncompressed video renders obsolete are the high bitrate hacks. -
Muy bien. Why did the dog shiver? Stage fright?
-
I like it.
-
Very good. To sharpen the point dramatically, you could have made the killers movements more cinematic. The take where he circles the victims face and finally hits in the middle doesn't look right. Wrong material, wrong foto, wrong pen, too feeble movements (slomo would have been an option).
-
[quote name='FilmMan' timestamp='1348616801' post='19047'] Must see: [url="http://blog.iamron.com/general/nikon-d600-nikons-worst-best-camera-ever/"]http://blog.iamron.c...st-camera-ever/[/url] [url="https://vimeo.com/49862540"]https://vimeo.com/49862540[/url] Clean HDMI, buy the Ninja and use as external monitor and for clean HDMI and 422. [/quote] Then explain this: [url="https://vimeo.com/50199647"]https://vimeo.com/50199647[/url] What does clean HDMI output mean? I think Atomos as well as Nikon are promoting something here that isn't actually usable .
-
[quote name='OzNimbus' timestamp='1348864952' post='19151'] I respectfully call [b]"[/b][b]BULLSHIT!"[/b] sir. BMC footage has been the easiest thing I've ever graded. Including DSLR stuff. It's riduculously simple to work with in Adobe Camera Raw. If that scares you, use ProRes.... it's still better than 8 bit video. [/quote] Well answered.
-
[quote name='kirk' timestamp='1348816699' post='19133']Shallow depth of focus has its place of course, and it doesn't always have to be extremely shallow to work well.[/quote] Director Sidney Lumet has a strong opinion on the use of shallow DoF. He says in [i]Making Movies[/i], that the background of the set should be as important as the main motif and that there were many other means to point to the latter, lighting, framing, following (adding motion blur to the background), the charisma of the actor (Al Pacino needs no vignette to draw attention). Shallow DoF should be an [u]effect[/u] to be used with caution, and sparingly. In cinema, it was first used excessively in [i]Die Hard[/i] and [i]Alien³[/i], all the films before tried to avoid it most of the time, and they were not "bad". Another director who seldom used shallow DoF was Stanley Kubrick ('If something is really happening on the screen, it isn't crucial how it is shot', The Stanley Kubrick Archives, p.425). What I was trying to say is, that without shallow DoF there are other cameras to shoot a report with that will make your life easier. Instead of buying an additional lens (I didn't follow how much the Pana super zooms cost), you should think about buying a second [i]camcorder[/i].
-
[left][url="http://www.n-joy.de/leben/nachtschicht165.html"]Nachtschicht[/url] (nightshift), filmed in 720 50p (because of television frequency). There was no hack at this time. The author, an experienced operator, wanted to be as mobile and [font="Arial, Verdana, sans-serif"]inconspicuous as possible. He used a mini tripod as a grip. He often used the very shallow DoF to blur faces, in order not to hurt the personal rights of the people.[/font][/left]
-
[quote name='galenb' timestamp='1348779923' post='19120']I've always heard that when shooting documentary, you sometimes don't have time to switch lenses so a really high quality zoom lens is better then a bag full of primes.[/quote] Depends on what you define as documentary. Reporting from an event like i.e. the photokina would best be done with an old-fashioned camcorder. Some time ago I used to shoot wedding films, first with the DV-cam Sony VX2000, later with the HDV-cam Canon XH-A1 (forgot the american name). Although I used both mainly in manual mode (with the exception of AF), I had no waste. These cameras are so much designed to produce usable video, you can't imagine how easy they are to handle. I am afraid that with your high quality zoom lens you might lose the charme. The images will look clean and sharp and have a big DoF, you really could as well buy a normal camcorder. If on the other hand you have time to think about your shots and are experienced enough, you cover almost every situation, also lowlight, with the Voigtlander 25mm alone. The Voigtlander 17,5 mm then would be the real run-and-gun-lens. A very good doc about people working nightshifts in Hamburg was almost entirely shot with the Nokton @ aperture wide open (and Beachtek XLR-adaptor). The ability of the cameraman (and author) to hit the focus precisely every time (in a nightclub, in an occupied taxi, in an emergency room) was stunning. This could never have been done with any other camera or any other lens.
-
Test footage from the pre-release Panasonic GH3 at Photokina
Axel replied to Andrew Reid's topic in Cameras
I know, but I bet, with any EOS you'd get moire with the organ pipes. Moire [i]is[/i] a scaling pattern. -
Test footage from the pre-release Panasonic GH3 at Photokina
Axel replied to Andrew Reid's topic in Cameras
[quote name='sanveer' timestamp='1348733415' post='19099'] One complaint I've always had about the GH2, was the mediocre still photo quality. I saw this on Imaging Resource, and I feel, that the GH3 may have noticeably better photo quality. Some of the pics are seriously amazing. [url="http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/panasonic-gh3/panasonic-gh3GALLERY.HTM"]http://www.imaging-r...-gh3GALLERY.HTM[/url] [/quote] Someone should take the GH3, frame this [img]http://216.18.212.226/PRODS/panasonic-gh3/THUMBSVAR/YPROTO0096.JPG[/img] and pan left and right. You see the moire already in this smaller format. Fuckers. [i]Are[/i] in Cologne, [i]have[/i] the GH3 and [i]don't[/i] shoot the right video motifs! -
Teflon covering on the sliding block as on the Igus sliders?
