andrgl

8bit log produces banding. This must be for recorders.

Yes about Resolve, and the 290X is sorta? Workstation cards seem to net better results. Plus DualGPU cards and crossfire/sli setups run laps around one card. Anyway, it's not unusable by any stretch. I leave NR on its own node and disable it, until I need to render the clips. Then it's pretty much real time, even with secondaries on.

Gonzalo, quando crear version para steadicam? Haha. :P Es increible, awesome work. And what a massive monster! Cyclops es nombre perfecto. (Sorry for my bad Spanish.)

Resolve needs high-end GPUs. My R9 290X can't do 4K + NR + medium grade at full 30 frames.

Essentially, yes. While there are some studies that establish references for different skin pigmentation. They are culturally biased. Your expectations of what someone's skin colour should look like will likely vary from someone else's on a different continent. Ultimately it's the client who determines what looks best. :)

Looked pretty good to me. Anything I didn't like was very easy to iron out in Resolve.

FFmpeg has a bunch of front-ends. I use WinFF to encode.

Just be aware about setting the iris. Only the fotodiox one has a manual iris, but it doesn't have any glass inside to reduce the crop.

Both the BMPCC and 5D3 can be used with just a lens. Additionally:BMPCC weight is 2/5 that of 5D3: 356.4g vs 859g.BMPCC volume is 1/4 that of 5D3: 19.7in vs 83in.So, when you have to rig up a camera, the BMPCC will lighter and smaller. Which is an ADVANTAGE. Why? Because a rig that's smaller and weighs less is easier to put on:gimbalstabilizertripodslidercar mountetc, etcIt also translates into your rig weighing 1.1lb less. Or another way to look at it is being able to attach an additional 1.1lb to your rig.

max hit basically everything, but: 1) Even with the BMPCC Speedbooster and a "dumb" mount, you're spending far less than a 5D3, while getting the benefit of being able to use both sets of glass. 2) I have never had stability issues with my BMPCC. Magic Lantern on my EOSM and a 5D3 I use have dropped frames, crashed and corrupted memory cards. Don't get me wrong, I love ML, but the BMPCC has been more reliable. 3) BMPCC low light sucks compared to the 5D3.

Three cameras? But I only have 2 hands! ;)

Favourite Item: BMPCC The image quality is fantastic. The footage is very forgiving but time consuming to work with. I shoot mainly small products and this camera hasn't let me down yet. It's weight, size and mount makes it incredibly adaptable. Least Favourite: Wondlan Wireless Follow Focus Loud and limited. I hate it. But it does the absolute minimum and there is no alternative for the price. Not much more to say, if I could justify spending the money, I could be more creative. One for the Future: Gimbal & Vest Currently limited by a slider. I'm interested in the Varavon Birdy but will need upgrade to a 60 fps camera. Wish: Red Epic Mysterium Three, four words? HDR slow-mo RAW.

A processed image has less flexibility to manipulate. However, you might not be good at manipulating the image, or you may think your camera does it well enough. Ultimate, you must as yourself this: do you have the time and effort to make decisions your camera would make otherwise? If yes: shoot Raw. If no: shoot compressed. RAW vs h.264 Raw footage is uncompressed. Therefore its fidelity is greater than h264. Scaling Up Because h264 footage is compressed, it will scale worse than RAW. Grading RAW footage grades better because of no compression. 8Bit 10Bit, 16Bit etc Has to do with color depth. The greater the number, the more colors are captured. Scaling Down By definition you're losing resolution.

And it doesn't breath!

Same problem with my 14-45mm f3.5-5.6.

I bet you could get away with a minor faster or slower change. Best thing to do is try it out with your camera. If you have time, you could even try a variety of lighting situations and movement. At the extremes you get something like: Fast - Saving Private Ryan (movie clip)Slow - Public Enemies (movie clip)... what the **** was Michael Mann thinking?

Shouldn't this go here? http://www.eoshd.com/comments/forum/6-screening-room/ I'd learn to use SpeedGrade or Resolve, if you're serious about grading. (Resolve is awesome because it's completely free!) Now the following is totally my opinion, grading is highly subjective: You were too aggressive and broad with your contrast adjustment. Tonality was lost and your colors became blobbed(for lack of a better word,) together. Obviously expanding the contrast is a style thing, but because there is so little contrast between the foreground and background (no duh, you had one light source, the sun!), it doesn't work and you're only losing color. Anyway, blah blah blah, I think there was a yellow cast in there too.

The lighting and grade were killer. But man does the BMPCC just LOVE to kick out that shitty magenta grid pattern when exposed to flares. :/

Génial! It's so obvious but I had no idea light could roll off that gradually. Merci beaucoup.

These are probably all the reasons you might not want to go EF/non-Metabones: None of the other focal reducers (that I've seen,) have an aperture ring.You'll need a spare Canon body with you at all times if you want to set the aperture on all non-manual EF lenses.You can mount Nikon lenses on Canon bodies, but not the other way. F-mount lenses can be more flexible.None of the other focal reducers (that I've seen,) have a tripod mount. Mounting the adapter to your rig provides increased stability for long lenses.As much as I would recommend you buying the Metabones and Nikon lenses, choose free EF lenses.

Ryan, I've followed you without knowing it for the last year. (Thanks for all the stuff you posted with the ML 5D3.) I think your grading chops are starting to reach critical mass. Psyched to see what you'll do with a Dragon.

How did you light the background so evenly? It's fantastic.

Shit, Mike, I actually took a look at some youtube videos of these things and I have to say the focus "stepping" lacks smoothness. (What's the point of pulling focus if it looks bad?) Plus I saw one with QC issues. I did watch a video claiming that Canon USM lenses work great but there wasn't any footage backing it up. :/ I took the plunge on a "remote" follow focus. The problems I encountered were: 1) I can't use a focus-by-wire lens. (Obviously.) 2) I can't use a lens with a loose focusing ring. (Obviously.) 3) My camera needs a cage. 4) My lens mount adapter needs to be mounted to a cheese plate. 5) My camera cage needs to be mounted to that same cheese plate. 6) The #@!$ing lens still wobbles, I need a lens support. 7) The follow focus servo has too much torque. 8) Break down, buy a cine lens, enjoy my new setup and the nirvana of pulling focus remotely. Anyway, I own this (that's just the remote,) a Wondlan. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, it's loud, finicky, and I had to swap out servos and solder a new wire to "fix" it. But now it works beautifully and I'll run it into the ground before I buy something else.

Possible solutions: use a wider lens, turn on IS, and/or get a ton of practice. If you're using EF lenses with auto-focus (pretty sure that's a canon zoom you have in that picture,) then you should look into a USB focus controller. Just a thought.

This may be a silly question, but are you physically turning the OIS on, on your lens?