maxotics

I agree, that if you bring the contrast of RAW video down to H.264 levels they both crush the shadows. My problem is I can't bring the H.264 back up to the nuanced contrast I want, and can get, with the BMPCC or ML RAW, for example. The only way to get good shadow detail with H.264, is to light it in a studio. Whenever I shoot H.264 on a cloudy day all is nice enough. However, once the sun comes out everything goes to crap, excuse my french ;) And yes, i agree with you about skin tones and backlight. Yet, my experience with H.264 is the lack of color information and high contrast means you end up with a very cartoon-y image. Ugly to me. As a point-and-shoot video camera, talking IQ only, I can't see how the GM1 would be in the same league in anything but scenes with 2-3 stops of dynamic range. Bottom line for me, there are scenes I shoot with the BMPCC that I know would be just as good with the H.264 (and with so much less pain!). Yet for any scene with more than 2-3 stops of dynamic range, the BMPCC, right out of the box, with little grading, just muscles its way past those other cameras. It powers through 10 times more data than an H.264 camera, and when I hit a hill, I notice ;)

I'm hooked on RAW and the BMPCC because I can get more natural skin tons and more detail in the shadows--right out of the camera. So in my experience, though I see how the GM! is a "pocket cinema camera", because of the features you pointed out, I wouldn't compare it to the BMPCC in terms of dynamic range and color depth. So can you clarify, Andrew? I can't find any setting on H.264 camera, where I can get the skin tone and shadows to my liking (with minimal grading). Something always has to give. I can believe I just don't know enough and if Andy were shooting side by side with me he could get the look i want. If I could get the same look out of the GM1 that I get from the BMPCC then I'd switch cameras. Can you elaborate more on the differences? Thanks!

Another way of looking at the BMPCC is a 2 megapixel, 24 fps, digital camera. I took some quick clips and then converted random dngs to jpgs.

The book focuses more on his career at what is thinly disguised as CBS (way back when). There are many kinds of happiness you can buy, or enjoy through success. You can't buy or succeed your way into a happy marriage--in my opinion. You're either lucky or you're not. I was lucky, and I think the character in the book similarly so. I didn't think I was lucky at the time. Anyway, it wasn't the Ace I wanted but someone I had the presence of mind not to throw out the one dealt to me (though again, I had not idea it was an Ace at the time!). Even if it's possible to have a happy marriage where you might board a jet at a moment's notice for business, do you want it? If you have someone you want to be with (and I mean this in the simplest way), why would you leave? My wife and I share few interests yet I'm always happy if she's just doing her thing and I'm doing my thing and we're in the same house. Can I, or anyone, have both? This is all extremely relevant to Zach's question. No one works alone. Whether married or not, we all have, and seek, relationships. Deciding who you want to be with answers many of these questions. I agree, that movie is nothing great, here are some more, than I think worth watching. "A New Leaf" "Pete N' Tillie" "Razor's Edge" "Brief Encounter" "Dodsworth" On divorce, this, to me is a masterpiece: "Shoot The Moon" Interestingly most of these movies don't have high reviews at IMDB.

QuickHitRecord comparing "freelance" to "corporate" work is "6 of one, half dozen of the other." They have different pros and cons; net-net, they are equal. It's really a question of what fits your personality, as dbp said. It seems to me, that everyone I know has pretty much gotten the career they've wanted. Not 100% of course, but closer than i would have expected. When I worked in Hollywood in my 20s I saw that though "successful" people seemed to really enjoy what they did, they weren't any happier than me. The simple fact is, the more success you have the more time you have to spend with other people and the more political stuff you need to deal with. And of course, the pressure. It's easy to go up, most people can't deal with going down, which happens to everyone. Every level of success, so to speak, has its relative scale of "good as it gets." My acid test is simple. Whose job and life do I want? That's what you have to ask yourself before making changing anything. If you think the life of a hot-ticket commercial DP is better than yours, then you have to have evidence that it is so. Do they have the same personal relationships. Time to do what they want, etc, etc. All this is the same for all fields. I suggest you read (or watch the movie, which has a slightly different slant) "The Man In The Gray Flannel Suit". That movie is about exactly the questions you raise. As true today! I went through a similar process and made the same choice he did.

Yes, PatrickN is right! I was a bit misleading. If you charge less they often think you're worth less. If you split up your time as 30% marketing, 30% administrative, that leaves you 40% say, so that would be, say 8 days a month, and you need $8,000 a month to live, then you need to charge a day rate of $1,000. If you factor in equipment and profit even more. I would say that like PatrickN I did too many jobs cheaply that I thought would turn out into something. Usually they didn't. Maybe they NEVER did. I don't want to think about it ;)

There is no free speech anywhere. One only realizes this when they try to get anyone's attention. Let's say you want to go into the video business like Zach. Where can you put of a "free" post of your services? No where. You can't put it up on private property, say a store (unless the owner gave you permission). You can't put it up in the public square; they take it down if it's not non-profit. You can't put it up at your library--same rules. The fact is, when you want to say anything you have to deal with the person who owns the web-server, bandwidth, store-front, or even message board. Everything you look at, touch and see, is owned by someone else where you have to play by their rules--this site included.

I believe all independent "creative" project work suffers the same business/financial limitations. 1. The ratio of clients to advertising dollars will be too low to justify advertising/marketing your way to a profitable business. This is why so many buy a lot of equipment and advertising and soon you see their stuff for sale on Ebay. 2. All businesses succeed in either two ways. "Right place and right time" (like you got into music videos when MTV started, or slow-mo video when it became hot, etc). Or two, you are persistent and focused for a enough years to establish yourself. Word of mouth is what gets you clients and it takes time, always more than you expect/want....need ;) 3. You need enough skill to be competent, but after that, too much effort in the art, versus, marketing, it detrimental financially. 4. Ultimately, you're going to need a large client that pays your nut. It might be a Church at a corporate level, or a local utility company, etc. Or maybe a powerful wedding planner, etc. As they say, you'll put in the same time for a $20,000 client as you will a $2,000. To really answer your question, there is no one way corporations or any potential client does things. I don't work in video, but in a similar way. What it took me years to see is that I can't "structure" my services to what I think clients rationally want. Often, if I can do 10 things, and I think item 10 is the hardest, most accomplished, and 1 is the easiest which anyone can do, often the client values 1 the most and 10 the least. You have to let the client pay you for what they value. If the client wants to pay you $10,000 to do 1 and you bill $1,000, hoping they'll do 10 one day, you'll learn the hard way as I did. Charge what the client will pay for what the client wants. Do NOT negotiate their end of the deal. After you determine what you need to charge to stay in business charge that at minimum. Naturally, you'll take jobs where you're paid 1/10th of what you're worth, because you love it. That means you have to let clients pay you 10x what you're worth sometimes to do something that you know a simpleton could do--again, listen to what the clients wants, not what you think they need. Ultimately, your job is to free up the client's time to focus on something else. Yes, you need to do a good job, but you have to keep in mind you're always a part of a larger goal. Well, dog has to be walked so I'll write more later if this thread goes anywhere. Set aside 5 years to build a video business, keep an open mind as to how that my evolve, who your clients may become, what you may end up specializing in, and you'll get there. Just keep in mind you'll make less money than in a corporation. So you have to really value your independence.

FYI Mark Rosenzweig just shot a lot of footage on this BMPCC that shows how well the camera handles shadows and wide dynamic range shots in NYC.

What ISO, shutter speed f-stop are you shooting? Are you shooting RAW? Did you know that at very high f-stops, like 22, the quality actually deteriorates? Anyway, what level photographer are you? No zoom lens is going to match a prime lens optimally set up. Using your 28mm at say f8, at 100 ISO, 60th/sec+, on tripod, shooting RAW should give you excellent results.

Do you have any recommendations, Andy? I have the 14mm/2.5, the Fujian c-mount and a 50mm. I would love to keep the camera small so was thinking of that 14-42 Vario, whatever it's called. It seems to have mixed reviews. In canon I have the 10-20mm Sigma, but no adapter yet.

Although I love the BMPCC, as Paulio said, RAW video requires time and a way of thinking to make it worth the extra storage and cost, etc. You won't know if it's right for you until you try it. You can run Magic Lantern on your 5DII. I would experiment with shooting some RAW on that to see if you like that look. Or rent a BMPCC or BMCC for a day. Otherwise, if the question is selling the T1i to get a GH3, for video, that seems like a very good idea. Lights might be good too.

They're both $1,000 cameras. The GH3 is the maturation of mirror-less hybrid photo/video; the BMPCC is the RAW future of video. Who wouldn't want both? Ignorance is bliss ;)

Now if only we could get RAW on the G6 :)

You asked for opinions but sound like someone who already knows. You say you are a photographer at heart. Most photographers I know want RAW, as RAW as they can get. Naturally, you can't shoot hours of documentary interviews in RAW, but you weren't clear about what you're looking for. Everyone was polite about that. But since you think I, at least, read your mind, then no, I can't read your mind. Exactly what do you want to use the camera for? What things would make a difference between the cameras you mentioned? They're all basically the same thing. Get the cheapest. And when you say, "I bought a BMCC and sold it, not useful for my work at all." Why? Other people have that camera here. Maybe you know something that would be helpful to them.

I can attest to that! I saw that film in a small film-house in Denver, when it came out in 1982. I've easily watched 3,000+ films since then. most forgotten, and yet I can remember watching that movie as if it was yesterday. At the time, documentaries were a fringe area, almost all ending up in H.S./College classrooms. So there was Hollywood, and French cinema. That was it. So when that film was being made, with a no-name composer, they couldn't have expected that more than 10 people might watch it. Again no Sundance, no film-festivals. NO video cameras! Usable digital cameras were still a decade and a half away. And yet that film is still fresh! On the debayer thing, Photivo has very good Amaze de-bayering and you can run it in batch more. Though took me a while to figure out. RAW Therapee has UI issues with large amounts of images.

Ditto, and I'll elaborate. If the footage is important to you, archive/save the original files. Then develop a workflow from there, always considering you might have to go back to a certain step and start again.

You should also keep a lookout for a cheap 50D and run Magic Lantern RAW on it. I've owned a Nex 5N and 7, both great cameras, but in the end, to me, H.264 is pretty much the same for all these cameras. There's only so much you can do with 3-6MBS bandwidth. Another camera to consider is the EOS-M, which I've worked a bit with. Here's a RAW shooters guide http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=8825.msg82944#msg82944 If you have any Canon glass below 20mm, you can get, in my opinion, awesome high-dynamic range 720p out of the camera. No internal audio. ML is in alpha, and though buggy, if you stick to using one card for RAW, is very reliable. On the NEX's, the 7 had higher res, but I couldn't see any difference, which makes sense, because you're taking such a small part of the image. Some things about Sony are irritating, but overall, I have to say they exhibit a greater love of consumer imaging equipment than the other manufacturers. On the full-frame question, I don't get that. You can can get shallow DOF using say a c-mount TV lens ($30) and if you don't mind the edges softness, I think, create very stunning images.

I've had the BMPCC for a couple of days now. Some footage on vimeo.com/maxotics I don't know if it's too sharp (Lumix 14mm btw), or there is line skipping going on. In any case, it succumbs to moire/aliasing very easily. Don't know whether I'll leave it alone, soften it, stop using ProRes (and use cDNG with better de-bayering)...anyway, something to deal with. As much as I'd like to say it is, it is not a H.264 killer. I have to admit, for many types of video, the file size/cost isn't worth it. Nonetheless, I am very happy with the camera. The dynamic range is my main desire and the camera fits easily in my pocket. I don't think it makes sense to compare it to the 5D3--that's a big camera. One should compare the BMCC to that. The BMPCC is in a class by its own. For someone who is just going to shoot short clips like me, photographically, this camera is a God-send. The stills aren't half bad either, going to play with them some more. I would say that if you're a filmmaker, and plan to attach a bunch of stuff to the camera, with the now declining price of fast CF cards, the 50D, 7D and 5DII are just as good.

If you get the GH3 don't try the BMPCC :wacko:

I wonder if Black Magic will see the first few frames and send someone to take it away from me :) They worked so hard to build a popular camera and I'm stinking up the joint :) https://vimeo.com/80162950

I didn't pick up on the steel toed boots like Zach! That's what you're dealing with here ;)

Hi. No, it's not too late. Though I lent my 50D to someone who is teaching a friend how to use it and maybe that friend will buy it. I have a Toshiba 1000x 16GB CF card. My biggest problem with the 50D is not getting a proper frame size showing on the LV during crop-mode recording. Do you have a trick for that? I probably shouldn't sell it because it will be even more useful as the high-speed CF cards get cheaper.

Just did some quick calcs on the ProRes that came out of the BMPCC and it's around 22 MB/S. When I shoot 1280x720 on the EOS-M, using 14bit RAW, it's around 36 MB/S. On the 50D, 1080p is around 80 MB/S. (Can't shoot continuous 1080p on the 50D. I can around 72 MB/s; others say they have been able to do it with 32GB cards). Of course, there is no compression, not even the crudest sort, on ML RAW. You still have to go out of your way to buy an SD or CF card that records over 40MB/S. So even if Canon released a camera today they'd get tons of supports calls, my guess. I'm not excusing their wimpiness. Just saying there's a lot to what Damphousse is saying ;)

I can only go by what I've seen in the past 30 years. I've seen this over and over again. Most of the employees at Canon have probably been there for years. They're used to high salaries and being treated like royalty at trade shows, etc. I bet Black Magic is young and most of their employees are more worried about making a winner, than putting their kids through college and parents in old age homes ;) I know it sounds mundane and simplistic. But again, what I've seen over the past 30 years. You may also underestimate what BM has accomplished. For example, the cooling system for the sensor may have taken years (and is still in development). No matter how powerful a company is, some things just take time to figure out. If you were right, it wouldn't have taken the Android phone screens years to catch up to the iPhone glass (if they have even). Anyway, all this is good for your career Chrisso. Take it from an old fart ;)