jgharding
-
Posts
1,831 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Articles
Everything posted by jgharding
-
https://vimeo.com/18743558 After completing a few fesitvals, we've made this short film public now. It was shot a couple of years ago all on 550D. That was before I used Magic Lantern, mosaic filter, knew half of what I do now! We're still pretty happy with it now, though we're also confident of doing better on the next one. It was also way before Black Mirror ;)
-
Has anyone noticed just how many grey importers there are now in the UK for camera gear? This is the latest to appear in search terms. The stylish Union Flag at the top and stock photo of businessmen really inspire confidence... LOL jeez... 20% VAT really is taking its toll http://www.igadjit.co.uk/about-us-1-w.asp
-
I dunno, I shot a couple of videos on the FS700 and at 24/25p it still had the electronic feel. It's either low bitrate AVCHD or the way Sony sensors are implemented I reckon, neither of which you can fix in post.
-
This was pretty cool. Ron Perlman was boss, yeah the blood looked really silly! Cinematography was cool. The anamorphic looked quite mad though, made a tad distracting TBH!
-
eBay dealing in lenses is becoming ever more cynical. Lot's of stupid prices with no relation to the quality of items. Broken things sold as "minty" what ever the f**k that word is supposed to mean. Engineering rarity and status , and you can track shops buying up everything so as to sell them on one by one at unrealistic prices. It's just madness out there now. I'm thinking of making the next film on EF-S glass just to make a point... R@RE L@@K CANON EF-S 18-55! LOLZ
-
All the After Effects fellows here use Mac, does it work in AE at all?
-
Agreed on APS-C. Full frame is very bloody shallow and harder to deal with. Similar codec, light sensitivity and so on to the 5D MKiii would be cool. Plus it'd likely easily Magic Lantern, which is pretty much vital.
-
Yes I'll give em a blast soon and post some examples. I don't have the 100mm though no, It's quite common to mix anamorphic and spherical so it's not something to worry about I don't think. They're not the most practical things, even the super expensive ones, and getting the shot is more important than having everything anamorphic. Horses for their courses etc... Ah Russian engineering... I swear whenever I touch a screwdriver something somewhere breaks and I develop new injuries. But maybe even I could fix these...
-
That's why I bought the mosaic filter rather changing camera ;) I wanted the "look" but not the aliasing! And I did try out a lot of cameras. Next on the Canon SLR list will probably be an aliasing-free video focussed APS-C similar to the 5D3 in terms of quality. Probably a 7D MKii or similar. That's my guess. If so, that's be cool.
-
Cheers for the link, I'll give the a blast tomorrow on some current projects and report back!
-
Madness! I'm using a different anamorphic to you, so it's likely it varies with that too! Buggers. Actually I've not tried my 85mm 1.4 yet... I'll let ya know...
-
Yes, that's precisely my experience. It's not the quality of the copy I'd say, I have many Zeiss lenses I used for years before getting an anamorphic. They're amazing alone, but can't focus well with attachments. At one point I had an MM and an AE 50mm 1.4 and neither worked till closed down My theory is that the coatings and makeup just aren't conducive to "shooting through". They're amazing when you shoot spherical though. Obviously not everything requires the extra level of detachment anamorphic gives, so they're great for this.
-
Yes I'd definitely like to beta test in a commercial environment and also on some freelance bits. We use Premiere. I have a lot of footage to deal with from Red to 5D to C300 (lots of the latter) and use Premiere almost daily when I'm not out shooting or in Adobe Audition. Lots of talking heads. I'm sure I can give you constructive and technical feedback on practical everyday use from my POV. It seems like a brilliant idea to me, as I often don't have control of the camera or footage, and some people are pretty poor with a histogram... Please inbox me if you get a moment, JG
-
Hmmm... it has been a long time since i tried... maybe it didn't support it then...
-
^ That's pretty cool, but buying all the tools and learning to use them would cost me more than buying a 600LED light from China!!! ;) Also, as he turns it up at the end it starts brighter on one side and brightness spreads across unevenly. Maybe they're all in series or something. I know nothing about electronics TBH...
-
Spotted this on Twitter, first shoot I've seen from the new Alexa at high speed. Not that I'll own one any time soon, but hey, it's nice to look And if someone gives you a budget, hire away! https://vimeo.com/61256446
-
Ah thank you! I was just wondering, as sometimes I've uploaded a 2.39:1 clip (1920 by 802) and it's played back stretched to 16:9 :wacko: Is your final video 3.55:1 and Vimeo just keeps it that way?
-
Just out of interest, if you don't mind me asking, how did you get it on Vimeo without bars? Just upload it straight or with anamorphic pixel ratio?
-
It's odd because even with the sharpness off it looks like video, much more so than the Canon. I tried to ignore it, but it bothered me... I recently watched some videos with Iscoramas, hacked Panasonic GH no matter how high the bitrate, and they still looked like very electronic video to me. Same with most Sony camcorders. I was recently shown a film without being told what it was shot on and said "AF100 or GH2" and the fellow was surprised that I knew, he probably expected me to say "film" or something silly! But it looked really flat, and I didn't have a doubt. Poor fellow... There's so much involved in CMOS, AD conversion, gain, readout methods so on and so on, then codecs too, that despite the statistics two cameras can feel completely different. Canon give you piss takingly poor stats, but as long as their final image is lovely, they can get away with it. :S Yes, the codec falls apart under motion, and motion is the most useful thing due to steady shot... Anyway, technology only gets better. Even though I didn't stick to the RX100 in the end, it's a good sign, and a great piece of kit for most purposes and less fussy tastes than my own. I dropped my HX9v in the sea. If I hadn't I would've kept it for b-roll, but in the end I could always spot the shots too easily, and that really annoyed me after a while. I thought "just be less lazy and do it all on the Canon with a rig".
-
Maybe there's life in these little things after all... It's always fun with something you've written off comes back with a vengeance!
-
I still think it's a technological marvel though, and exceptional for many uses, and easily the best compact ever created. I may re-buy it when they're cheap ;)
-
I did get used to setting it fast with custom assigns, and I always felt it was reasonably solid, (though the battery door was annoying) but in the end the image matters most... I can shoot 85mm 1.4 at ISO3200 with a Canon and Magic Lantern, and get a clean image. It was good for holidays though and run and gun in daylight, but that's not my main use (as you can see from my web site.)
-
I'm out of the club, I sold mine! Lack of low-light performance when not at full wide angle amd the destructiveness of AVCHD at low bitrate and high ISO, didn't suit my dark style! ;) Til next time! I suppose in the end I just wasn't feeling it, despite the great stats. I'll miss the tiny size and SteadyShot most. On reflection too, when watching back my footage I had the same reaction as GH2 when it was cut together with Canon, yes it's sharper, but it feels a bit more... electronic... especially with people in the frame Call me fussy...
-
Isn't that one of the benefits of CMOS? ADC and processing and the like on sensor?
-
Basically it's really expensive because it's now popular, but no-one has yet made new products to address demand. In classic eBay style some big far-eastern shops are buying up everything then releasing them one by one at exploitative prices that no one is actually willing to pay. Same with some legacy stills glass. These shops are trying to artificially push up the price by engineering rarity and legend, and some people have more money than sense and encourage it. Luckily, many people get bored of playing with anamorphics quickly unless they're very dedicated, since they're hard to use, so stuff appears from time to time. The sad thing is that these are often snapped up by the aforementioned stores who are going to charge twice as much for it, or just leave it on a shelf. If you look at the difference in price between lenses that actually sold at auction and what some shops charge for buy it now prices it's startling. There's some really greedy and rather silly stores on eBay. Sometimes other shooters sell on forums, that can be a good way to do business.
