Remsy_Atassi

Here is my one light through AE to premiere as a log type look. It was very processor intensive and not really recommended so I don't quite think this is a suitable workflow, though it is definitely lossless. https://vimeo.com/48101730 I think roundtripping through resolve is going to be the way we want to do this, but the shots John provided don't really offer a good naming convention. Since these are broken into individual shots, the name that resolve automatically assigns is "framex-x" while the source is in bins labeled by shot. There has to be a better way to this. I'm also not sure how to sync back with an XML in resolve. If anyone has any insight it would be appreciated, but maybe we just need to see how the camera actually labels the metadata.

Most modern video cameras (the non cinema type) have a 1/3-2/3 inch chip which is smaller than the bmc. Not that it actually matters at all because you are trolling, but just wanted to throw that out there.

[quote name='JHines' timestamp='1345749750' post='16308'] RIP wide angle with faster aperture than 2.8. [/quote] lol it's been done to death. it's not like anyone is forcing you to use the camera. unless you are shooting a dystopian scifi feature where everyone is supposed to look kinda like an alien I don't think it matters.

Here's a question... When I try to import the files into AE it prompts me to use Camera Raw for every single frame. There has got to be a better way to apply those settings to an entire folder or sequence, right? The Brawley clips come out as Folders for each shot containing the individual frames inside. This has also presented a challenge when I work on these clips in Resolve, because the naming convention makes Proxies very tough to create. Can you explain your import workflow in a bit more detail? Really want to play around with these in Premiere but it has me stumped.

Did you ever use Canon APSC or are you just complaining? I'm as disappointed as anybody that they haven't improved IQ of this line but isn't this a bit of a dramatic title given you mostly shoot on a GH2 and 5Ds? Is there a new point here? Rehash browns?

I just went to the Chicago shootout and it was more interesting than I expected. Unfortunately we were watching only a 1080p ProRes timeline and there was a strange screen split artifact that appeared whenever cameras panned. It didn't prove too bad because the test shots were relatively stationary, but Steve Weiss didn't seem pleased that they couldn't run the 2K DCP. Apparently there were some issues with the facility we were at. That said, the shootout still provided a nice measuring stick for the various cams. The format of the shootout was as follows: first every camera shooting a wide scene with an open window as described. Every camera was shown and labeled. Next they showed every camera lit specifically by experts for the individual camera, and also graded in post under the direction the master cinematographers for each cam. This is where there was a lot of room for interpretation. Finally they re-screened these shots with the cameras labeled. In between each set of shots there was a discussion. The only two I could identify with confidence were the Alexa, which had noticeably better skin details and insane dynamic range, and the F65, which had a strange magenta cast. In my blind test the best cameras I picked were Alexa, Red Epic, and the F3 curiously. No one else mentioned the F3 much at the screening but I thought in terms of DR it was on par with Alexa. It also had great noise control and skin detail. Killed the C300 in most regards, and that's usually my go to rental camera. Ungraded Epic was questionable - too contrasty and oversaturated - but after post looked amazing. 7D was definitely the worst in my eyes, but I think it had a lot to do with the Cinestyle picture profile which IMO is garbage. Introduces tons of noise and artifacting after the grade. The GH2 was almost unanimously heralded after the blind set of shots. I argued that it looked too constrasty and oversaturated, but have to admit that I mistook it for the Epic! This was mostly because it looked so much like the Epic from the first set of shots. The F65 was apparently a first release model and honestly did not look great to my eyes. The DR and noise control was there but there was a strange magenta like cast over all the shots that was noticeable. At the end of the day I think the point that Zacuto was getting at was that any camera in the right hands makes the difference. It seemed that there was a lot of variance in the post and shooting processes, so this wasn't as scientific as last years test.