jcs

There is a psychological war going on between the powers that be and this is the fallout. If each of us people can refrain from being unkind, no matter what anyone says to us, while still kindly stating our views, and having empathy for those who don't realize they are victims of programming, we can start making progress to having better relationships with each other. We are not separate beings on this planet, we are not separate from our environment, we are all one continuous living being. Separation is an illusion: this is nature and quantum physics. What good is the hand yelling at the foot? Creating another process in your mind, another level of awareness, that watches all your thoughts and actions as a separate being, is how to get started. Another way is to imagine there is always a camera pointed at you, and watching the camera is your ideal self, your significant other, your best friend, God, a jury, whatever construct works for you. Then start meditating every day for at least 5 minutes.

True CLog uses a log gamma curve using low-level camera data so maximum dynamic range and highlights can be preserved. A picture profile doesn't have access to the low-level data, so true log is not possible, and thus there is no actual increase in dynamic range. Boosting the shadows with the gamma curve in a picture profile can do bad things to skintones, which shouldn't happen with true CLog. A log-like picture profile might be helpful in high dynamic range shots such as outdoors by boosting the shadows before compression and Highlight Tone Priority to help with the highlights. Would test skintones in this case before an important shoot.

Hey Jon, that's a good start- you might want to try again at night with only these lights by themselves for interesting effects.

Why haven't you posted your 2 hour feature film yet?

As long as they are listening, how about tweakable Canon Log 2? I've gotten nice results from tweaking Slog2 on the A7S II, and love Canon Log 2 on the C300 II, would be nice to have something similar for the 1DX II (tweakable means we can tune the curve somewhat to make the best use of the 8-bits available. Unless of course they'll give us 10-bit (might be 8-bit hardware though...)). I'll bet they could improve the full frame modes too if they wanted to.

I created a Clog emulation in May 2016, right after purchasing the 1DX II. Along with Highlight Tone Priority (HTP) it appeared to be useful at first. However it became clear in production that skintones became challenging so I stopped using it (still use HTP). Actual Clog which isn't just a picture profile could be useful (highlights and preserving skintones), especially for matching other Canon cameras quickly. I was able to quickly grade GH5 log footage so a convergence on log formats that can be graded similarly is very helpful in production.

Thanks! Color is about mood for story so sepia or supersat can both work here- since you know story sepia must be right TV/phone are good tests when Red and Alexa footage end up with artifacts too. That said I wonder if it's possible to get less NR on th GH5 to keep more noise as it's really needed for 8-bit material as a form of dither (400Mbit 10-bit will help capture- delivery to 8-bit might need some grain added)

Interesting end result- kind of reminded me of a CGI scene (as a cool effect). Perhaps too much grain/noise was removed; tried adding some back and tweaked the color a bit. Specular on lip was oversharp/digital, fixed. I dig the super color of the 60's... It's harder to make a super-saturated image look good if the color science is off. This looks decent full size:

This looked pretty good until I clicked full size- lots of artifacts and loss of detail in the background, blurry then solid edges, like cards, etc. Is this green screen and an artificial background or compression artifacts?

Plastic explosives could be hidden inside a working LiPo battery (Lithium by itself can explode and burn just by contacting water). Checked bags get heavier screening for bomb chemistry via high-energy devices: http://www.sds.l-3com.com/products/explosivedetect.htm. Additionally, checked bags are stored inside more resilient containers in the cargo hold vs. the relatively thin airframe where passengers sit. A bomb might also be used to gain access to a locked cockpit. These directives come from intelligence agencies and were also implemented on various levels from the prior administration, only now becoming politicized and amplified by people unable or unwilling to seek the truth, unaware that they are pawns in a much bigger plan. The programming is brilliant as the victims aren't even aware of what's been done to them, where their first unconscious reactions are typically expletives, irrational behavior, silliness, ad hominem, and complete inability for calm, rational, and polite discussion when their programming is challenged. How effective and deep does this unconscious programming go? Does Shaq really believe the Earth is flat, or is he just trying to get traffic for his podcast? http://gizmodo.com/some-photos-of-earth-for-shaq-who-thinks-the-earth-is-1793422926 I've been studying the comment sections on MSM sites (all sides), comments on this forum too, and most people don't realize how close we are to nuclear annihilation. Everyone is acting like children insulting the previous and current leadership and each other. No one is trying to get along or solve the bigger issues. This is what the people behind the curtain want- everyone fighting each other! If the rumors of alien overlords here to protect us are false*, we're in big trouble if we don't start working together to live in harmony with each other and the planet. It looks like a highly advanced civilization on Earth was destroyed about 12,000 years ago. Are we going to repeat it? Will the iRock and iStick become the cool new gadgets? * UFOs look more like advanced terrestrial vehicles from everything I've seen. 99.999% look like hoaxes (nice job decorating your "UFO" like a Christmas tree). Truly alien or interdimensional vehicles could be invisible to us.

It's a team review with Shane's input: http://www.thehurlblog.com/cinematography-panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh4/ The GH5 is looking a lot better so all good

Shane's test was pretty fair and reflected what he looks for in a cinema camera: http://www.thehurlblog.com/cinematography-panasonic-lumix-dmc-gh4/ The most important thing he said was rent or test the camera for yourself after explaining his viewpoint. The GH4 can look cinematic- use a diffusion filter and do the necessary gamma and color tweaks in post to give a more film-like response, but that's extra work not required for an Alexa or C500 (or 5D3 RAW), for example. I think that's the big missing link in camera reviews is the amount of effort required to make a camera look filmic or skintones to look pleasing, and why there's so much variance in footage online. Canon and ARRI are popular because they require the least amount of work. The GH5 appears to be moving closer to being able to get straight out of the camera (SOOC) shots looking nice- that's good progress (log with a simple LUT is fair to call SOOC if no other grading is needed since that takes less than 1 second to apply).

What made the 5D3 (h.264 and RAW) so useful, and all Canons, especially the C series for paid work, is the ease at getting good skintones regardless of lighting. The GH4 can create nice skintones (and so can the A7SII for example), however in general, it's a lot more work (we have all these cameras). The reason ARRI is so loved for paid work is the same reason: great skintones (and highlights) with the least amount of effort (and more forgiving if for example exposed wrong, which happens to everyone). I just tried grading some GH5 footage in log: What's impressive is I was able to quickly get decent skintones using ARRI LUTs. For that brief test I also noted some 'edginess' with green and magenta, which is a common problem with cameras (and much less of a problem with Canon and ARRI). This means that if I correct for the face to look good, some other part of the scene goes too magenta or too green. This is also a problem with multiple faces in a shot- I noticed this issue in RED Dragon/Weapon shots with otherwise excellent skintones in the Netflix series Into the Badlands. A group shot had some faces looking correct, and some looking too magenta and others too green. From my brief GH5 grade, it looks like a nice improvement in color science up from the GH4. All of the clips were in natural light, which is basically a black body source (as is tungsten, etc.), which is a continuous spectrum light and the easiest/best for skintones. Indoor mixed lighting, as well as 'global illumination' reflectance from the environment (colored bounce sources in the scene) separate the best cameras from the rest of the pack. This is where Canon and ARRI still have the lead (Red, BM, Sony, Fuji, and Panasonic are catching up). A good way to really know how the cameras perform is to shoot with multiple cameras at once, as Zacuto has done in the past. Ideally the grading should be done be the same person or 'eye', otherwise as with the Zacuto shootouts personal tastes/experience level adds an unhelpful bias. The fairest test would be to set all the cameras to the correct WB, set them all to the same Log or Rec709, expose them correctly, then compare the results. One shouldn't need some sort of 'magic' camera settings for each camera to produce a good look. Again, Canon and ARRI skintones can look great with little or no tweaking if desired. That's the true test of a camera- how many people can get great skintones, which means default settings that just work and are forgiving of exposure variance (meaning colors don't change with exposure very much, another common issue that makes grading a challenge or time consuming).

Very quick 60-second grades using ARRI LUTs and Lumetri in PP CC. Skintones look decent in daylight. Only adjusted WB in the 'from below' medium close shot to get skintones looking better. Late 2013 MBPr struggled with this footage- older machines will need to transcode or use proxies. Thanks Neumannfilms and Panasonic for the clips.

Until Edward Bernays effectively created 'Public Relations' based on concepts from his uncle, Sigmund Freud, marketing was based on people's actual needs. Bernays changed everything and marketing evolved into emotion and fantasy-illusion based and thus the world has been changed. Now marketing is based on emotion and desire, and not actual need for daily living or survival. The Universe Loves Drama, so combined with the emotional-fantasy-based social reality we now live in, explains the current behavior of social interaction, especially in social media. It's enough of a challenge for logical thinkers to effectively communicate with emotional thinkers (and neither side being able to communicate with the other). It becomes a deeper communication challenge with the added fantasy layer, which affects everyone at some level (including me: for example I too used to believe in the 'Full Frame' look until I studied the math and performed my own tests). What we really 'know' changes with time and it's important to remember that. Another interesting social element is that most of the people discussing cameras, and all gear for that matter, spend far less time creating with the tools than focusing on the tools themselves. The tools become a form of entertainment in and of themselves: playing with them, doing 'tests', debating online, discussing deficiencies in the current model(s) and yearning for the new model(s), buying and selling, etc. And for perhaps the vast majority, not actually creating any content other than writing, discussing, and debating the tools in social media. This is not a judgement, rather an observation of another form of creating and fellowship of like-minded enthusiasts: people who focus on the tools themselves for entertainment vs. using the tools to create content, for entertainment or for a living. Every now and then someone will post, "get out and shoot people!", but that's not why most of the people are on these forums. The GH5 of course is a major improvement and is an excellent content-creation tool. Is it a baby ARRI? Who knows, let's see some side-by-side tests as were done with Canon 5D3 RAW, which with 14-bit Canon color is indeed like a baby Alexa as shown by various tests done over the years.

That's a great point: 8-bit 420 at 100Mbps needs to be matched by 10-bit 422 at 280Mbps, yet only 150Mbps is available right now. So shoot 8-bit until the 400Mbps firmware update is released.

Again, having all those features in ONE camera (or two in this case if 4K slomo is absolutely required). Want everything in ONE camera, C700 (and of course it's very expensive). There's good stuff coming out from Panasonic, Fuji, and Sony. They each have their own pluses and minuses.

Who makes a better camera at any price vs. the Canon C300 II with all these important features in one camera: Excellent color and skintones, excellent DR, excellent low light, excellent autofocus, excellent/low rolling shutter, excellent XLR audio, excellent battery life, large selection of very high quality native mount lenses? Absolutely need 4K slomo too- add the 1DX II. Even ARRI can't compete with this combination. Canon charges a lot for this combo- they can because there is no competition right now. Is this combo perfect- no, these are big, heavy, (relatively) expensive attention-attracting cameras. On the lower end the closest is perhaps the Sony A7R II (we use the A7S II- AF barely useful, RS is high, skintones can look good but takes work, battery life is poor). If the A7S III has less RS, upgraded AF (better than A7R II), and better battery life, improved color science, that will be a very compelling camera. There may be politics / agreements in place between manufacturers however and that's why no single manufacturer has everything in one camera. There are so many great cameras available the camera isn't the issue anymore for creating excellent content. While tools go hand in hand with content quality, content is king... Instead of pushing each other to upgrade to better gear, maybe it's better if we pushed each other to create better content (with constructive criticism :)).

The Arina looks pretty cool, perhaps using similar LED elements as the Punch Plus (made by CREE). The Aadyntech Punch Plus uses 539 Watts vs. the Nila Arina which uses 800 Watts. Punch is about 50lbs and $5700, Arina about 70lbs and $7000. Nila states CRI and TLCI (85 & 80 at 5600K), Aadyntech doesn't list however would expect similar if both using CREE LEDs. Driver circuit is different: Punch is flicker free to 12,000fps vs. Arina to 5,000fps. Punch 29,110 lux at 15', vs 32,290 lux at 20' Arina (3,823,266 vs. 7,303,825 lumen). Same warranty (2 years) and lifespan for both (60,000 hours). Again, probably same LEDs with different driver circuits, power usage, light output, and cost. Pretty cool to have this much light power that exceeds 2500W HMI and is lower cost too!

These are IP65 rated: http://aadyntech.com/products/the-jab-hurricane/ (close to the output of an 800W HMI bulb)

If you are shooting at night those lights could work fine. In daylight you need really powerful lights (or put light right next to subject face etc.). Reflectors can work well in daylight and are light and cheap. Something like these might be the lowest cost right now: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1259265-REG/intellytech_173004_fresnel_bi_color_high_output.html/prm/alsVwDtl The F485 is about 3095 lux at ~10 feet at 20 degrees (https://www.intellytechusa.com/products/light-cannon-f-485-bi-color-high-output-485w-led-7-fresnel-w-dmx). The most powerful on the market appears to be this guy: http://aadyntech.com/products/the-punch-plus/, at 64,090 lux at 10 feet! (~$5700. About 21x more lux and only 3.6x the cost, so actually a very good value). That light is pretty huge and heavy. It's good to know ranges of lights available as many manufacturers vastly overstate the light output of their lights.

Some people will maintain certain views no matter what and no amount of logic, reasoning, or real-world evidence will change their minds. Perhaps it's marketing, politics, drama, negative attention, ego, who knows? The best you can do is put information out there that everyone can use to find the truth for themselves and move on to the next puzzle. In the thread below folks argued with the inventor of the Speedbooster, one of the top lens designers in the world. As a cognitive scientist I wonder how these folks would argue in person with everyone physically present vs. the isolation and extreme dissociation created by the internet: When the GH5 is released you'll have your opportunity to refute Cinema5D with your own tests and evidence, and if you provide instructions for doing a proper test, your readers can replicate your tests and decide for themselves.

Whoops I misspelled Shane's last name (it's Hurlbut not Hurlburt). Met him a few years ago in Hollywood, very cool guy to share his knowledge with the community. Some folks asked in another thread about the cinema look, here's his take on it: http://www.thehurlblog.com/set-badlands-night-interior-set-lighting-using-mixed-sources/ (from what he says and shows in the free video, you can watch it on Netflix and get a lot of ideas. His Inner Circle deal looks interesting (I purchased Peter Hurley's videos in the past for stills ( https://fstoppers.com/product/peter-hurley-art-behind-headshot ), it was worth it).

.

'Equivalence' is well defined, simple math. Not following instructions is like setting up a chess board where one player arbitrarily moves the pieces. If the other player is expecting a game of chess, they'll let the errant player know they are making mistakes. If the errant player says, "so what, I make my own rulez haha!", then what's the point of playing 'chess' or in this case 'equivalence' and what does this say about the errant player?