fuzzynormal

There ya go.

Still kind of amazing that the notion of buying your way into image quality with a camera is a thing these days. What others have said. Don't ignore the craft. Swap out an ARRI with a GH1 in certain production environments and you'd be, like, "Holy shit! That looks awesome!" Three or four stops of DR does not a good image make. It helps, but it doesn't make it. A decade ago a bunch of cinematic heavyweights, Coppola and the like, did a popular test screening of hybrid camera tech at the time. They were more than pleased with what the products, like a 5dII, were delivering. If it was good enough for them in 2010's, what the heck are we worried about? Also, who remembers that one talented dude guy filming in 720p on a canon rebel? I think his name started with a "Z"? Beautiful stuff because he knew how to use it. Would it have been better if it was an ARRI? Of course, but would that really affect the narrative? Anyway... And then, yeah, add in a bunch of YT knobs playing with the gear without any deep wisdom about gaffing, camera moves, and storytelling --of course the video examples of hybrids'll end up looking like crap. Here's an anecdote: I'm currently editing a documentary with a decent budget. The cinematographer on the shoots sucked balls. He filmed with an ARRI and two different REDS along the way. The ARRI has a look. It comes out of the cam with a lot of "thickness" to use, you know? Regardless, we recently had to hire a different guy to do a half day of pick up shots and he used his lowly GH5. He knew how to find the right light, frame an interesting composition, and (thankfully) knew how to hold a mother-f'ing-shot longer than 2 seconds. Grrrr. Guess which footage looked better and was more useful? We can (and should!) chase the tech if that's what floats our boats, but real creatives don't really give too much of a rip about the tech. "Is it working? Good. Let's tell this story." They make it happen with what they got.

Ah. Yes. you're right. What was it then? There was some reason audio related, I think. It's been a few years. Maybe it was a videographer couldn't live monitor the audio recording? It was something "audio" that held me back. I also remember the EM5III didn't have 60p 4K, and that bummed me out. Trying to grade Oly is always a bit of a let down too. Doable, but you don't get much leeway with, say, a GH5.

We could only be so lucky. I was really rooting for Olympus/OM because I enjoyed the EM5II and EM10III, and always wanted a PenF when it was released, but could never spend the $$ knowing I'd never have a use for it when it came to video.

Yeah, but they also removed the ability to record audio directly into the EM5III cam. It's not like the EM5II was awesome for audio, but for recording voice it was fine and that worked for me. Just really bummed the EM5III was ham-strung for video folks like us. Ultimately, I just got the EM10III (refurbished for $300, so cheap) that had the same video capabilities as the EM5III. (but still no direct audio) And the weight of hybrids never mattered to me. I used to shoot 3/4" video tape. Everything is easy compared to that. On my EM5II I used the OEM battery grip and a tank of a 55mm FD lens as my main video rig. That mass helped. As it happens, I'm still using my modest EM10III a lot. It's just not my daily driver. For that I rely on the GH cameras. Once you have high speed frame rates at 4K, such as you get with the GH LUMIX'es, it's hard to not to have that production flexibility when shooting run 'n gun. The GH cameras deliver a purty picture and cool abilities, but using them leaves me a bit cold. For some reason I just like holding and using the Olys, even though they were, and are, subpar IQ-wise.

FWIW, the EM5ii was my favorite camera ever to hold and shoot with. Shame the IQ was poopy. If only they would've engineered it to do 4K I'd probably still be using it.

With 3rd party apps I can actually get some rather awesome IQ video outta my Xiaomi 12S Ultra. That's kind of neat, right? What I can't get is an app that let's me film motion pictures without a lot of unnecessary difficulty and fiddly nonsense. Thus, I do not use my Xiaomi 12S Ultra to shoot rather awesome IQ video. Imagine trying to use a hammer and the handle is a jug of milk. Pretty freaking hard to strike a nail. It can be done, but...annoying as hell.

Oly fans have been begging OM for an update of the PenF. Ain't gonna get it. Such is Japan management.

f me. I'm over here shooting a doc with an EM10iii I bought used for $300 and thinking, "Dang, this looks pretty good!" And yet now I want an SL2. Damn you all.

Well, look, always has been. Trains are cool.

You joke, but I spent this summer getting my old Amiga 2500 back up and running and playing around with the VT. As for FC7. The best looking movie I ever made was cut in FC7 and shot with a LUMIX gx7, so....

Or if you fart within arms length of the rig. Looks cool when it work though.

Yeah, if a move isn't motivated, then...why do it? On the other hand, it's a lot of fun to actually and effectively realize motivated movement; movement that helps tell the story. When that happens you're now not just getting coverage, but doing things that start to get cinematic, imo. Been working on two documentaries this year and I've literally wanted to shake the camera-people that shot the footage and ask them how they like it. Spaztic shooting, very amateur hour. For the most part I don't use tripods these days for my own stuff, but I try to stay as quiet with the lens as possible. Still, I would have loved a heavy duty smooth-as-silk-Sachtler for some recent wildlife work where I was over (ffeq) 1500mm a lot. Had creative solutions to get me through, but something with excessive MASS would have been the exception to my typical "stay-mobile" attitudes.

I only have to assume you're editing this stuff too. Once you're trying to edit footage from an inexperienced shooter using stabilization, it'll drive you mad. So many good shots wasted by the false stabilization shift. "Oh! This looks like it's going to be nice pan to the... [image does an ugly shift/hitch] ... ah fuck!"

"The media completely lied about the election forecast" Yet I was out here voting and worried about Harris winning. Why's that? All the reported polling forecasts I was reading about had it at a statistical tie. All polls were within the margin of error with many polls showing Donald trending to a slight lead. I was incredulous about it being so close going into election day because it's Donald, and, you know, all he does, how he behaves, and all the ridiculous authoritarianism he represents, but never thought for a minute the election wasn't a toss up. After all, eggs cost more now. All MSM I saw was reporting these fact. Lo and behold, look what happened. So, friend, where's the lie in that? What media do you consume that implies otherwise? And, bare with me here, could that particular narrative potentially be what is not true? The stories we tell ourselves. Ever curious. I suppose a good story always needs a bad guy?