fuzzynormal

Hey, I'm shooting a doc film with the GH5. It's a really good camera. If you can't utilize these tools nowadays to actually make great looking things, then you got bigger issues. The gear is ridiculous. Honestly, I can't think of any decent upmarket consumer camera that's come out in the past year or so that I wouldn't be able to shoot good looking video with. As an older guy that dealt with film and tube cameras early on in his career, this stuff nowadays is so awesome --I still can't quite get over it.

Anyone take into consideration that Disney's reasons for firing is simply an ulterior motive, and they just want to get someone else in the director's chair? I'm not convinced that Disney/Marvel really wants true creatives in the hot seat. Is there anyone in the USA who has cultural prominence that doesn't do this?

I made an initial effort to edit 4K source footage with Resolve using their proxy workflow and it was a crash-and-burn for me. Wanted it to work and it just didn't inspire confidence out of the gate so I bailed on Resolve. This was 2 years ago. Can anyone vouch for Resolve in fixing this aspect of their software? If yes, any explanation on how/why it's robust would be appreciated. I'd like to get off of Premiere moving forward, but would like some assuring testimonials before doing so.

40, 000 men and women everyday

It's not recklessness. At a certain point it's just a lack of F's to give anymore. It's hard to explain until you actually start to see the guy with a sickle waving it at you. As it should be. As it shall be ever thus.

Well, if you visit the American midwest, it's pretty obvious and embarrassing. Corporate food, man. Cheap and low nutrition. New Zealand is next!

Google is insidious in our modern digital culture. The CEO could get certainly fired for bad PR, but too many people would forgive the company overall. So, the owner of YouTube is safe in that regard. Political tension exists, but I doubt it would ever rise to civil war. Who's in enough shape in America for that sort of labor?

The owner of YouTube could start the next Nazi party and topple a western democracy, and they'd still be able to stick around.

I'm gonna guess that the owner of YT is going to be around for awhile...Like P&O'while, TwinningsTea'while, or StaffelterHof'while.

I think I found your real issue.

I'm not often a Sony shooter. I've only ever rented Sony video cams. However, that said, I understand wanting to move to an "inferior" camera because that's where your lens dictates. I'm in the M43 camp and now have the lenses I enjoy. And while I like my GH5 a lot, I do expect to move back to Olympus my next camera purchase. As mentioned, so many other things inform the right gear for you to use. Those things aren't always listed on a spec sheet.

This is what many folks leave out of the equation regarding the "film" look. Unless you were at a premier, (and even then) you were going to be looking at some pretty crusty film print IQ back in the day. I saw most of my films at the local $1-"second-run"-theater, so I was watching projections that were laughably beat up. Anyone from a smaller town Midwest USA can tell you what those prints looked like at their local theaters by the time they rolled around. Digital may be inferior to film in source acquisition in some ways, but digital projection is pristine through the distribution chain. ...and I haven't even mentioned regional TV stations that broadcast their "Movie of the Week" through a one light 16mm telecine projector, hooked up to a tube camera, and transmitted to home CRT television set with 240 horizontal lines of glorious NTSC RF resolution. What people did with analog film and electronic tech was pretty wild looking back on it.

I don't recall the max stops the Zomei says it offers, but with my Voightlander 42.5mm I can easily shoot 60fps/f0.95/200iso in midday sun using that VND. At a certain point in the rotation it will literally block almost all light from going through it. The EM5II is just a lot better at stabilization. It's smoother and very forgiving. It also doesn't "correct" as obviously as the LUMIX does, if that makes sense. However, for a shoot like the one I posted here, having a little more random movement is okay. LUMIX cams give me a sort of handheld-stabilization hybrid look. With the EM5II, that thing is so good I can move my body and the camera in such a way that it looks like it's on a dolly. Which is fine, but not always what I want. I'm nit-picking, but I do look forward to the day wherein different algorithms and intensities of stabilization can be selected on a cam. The GH5 sort of does this ad hoc, but not in a way I'm terribly fond of. After shooting with the GX85 and the GH5 following my EM5II phase, I still miss that camera. In a practical 'get-it-done' way (for me) it can actually do more than the 4K LUMIX cams. I don't tend to go crazy regarding superior IQ (which the GH5 offers, btw), so I suppose I make excuses for the OLY cams. Sure they have flaws, but what the do well, they do really well.

If you saw light being projected through film running through an actual film projector, then yeah, it's a lot different. I always have to remind myself that many people in media careers these days never saw that sort of stuff.

You got to love it. The modern world. You can you get it right IRL, but get chastised for failure by random internet strangers.

Can confirm. It's not. FWIW, I put the GH5 IS on par with the GX85. Fuji lens IS is good too. But then again, with body internal stabilization you can apply it to any and all lenses.

Good to know! Thanks for the useful information. Hey guys, nobody will notice! I can get rid of my ND's now. Better sell them on ebay quick before word gets out about this one new trick to expose video on your camera. You won't believe what happened next... [draws a red circle with a red arrow pointing at it]

The state of Denial.

Still some homestead properties out here, for sure.

A fast manual 24mm on M43. (with a dumb speed booster and a regular dumb adapter)

Pfffst. The one thing in life to NOT get pretentious about should be beer. Can't just agree that cheap beer is actually kind of good thing? Can't we agree that good beer is also kind of a good thing?

San Diego county actually ends about 10 miles from my front door. It's a big county that stretches farther east than people realize; from the ocean to the desert. Yes, there are numerous springs all over the mountains and Desert Bighorn Sheep (aka: "borrego" in Spanish) use them as a water source. The springs also create waterfalls in the canyons. Yes, it snows often at higher elevations numerous times during the winter. We can see it from the valley. White mountains with warm and sunny weather. Not so bad. In the summer I go swimming at the local pool when it's 120° outside. It's surreal. You hop out of the pool and the water evaporates so fast you actually feel like you're freezing...in 120° weather. That last about 30 seconds. I once had to dig a trench in my back yard during an August monsoon to prevent flooding from entering my house. Exciting! DYK, BS is a dark sky community? The mountains shield us from SoCal light pollution. During new moon you can see the Milky Way with your naked eye. Astronomy is a big deal out here. You guys probably can't imagine what's it's like out here right now. Perfectly quiet and gently warm now that the sun is shadowed. Light dappling the distant mountains and few magenta clouds wisp'ing through the sky. I'm sort of hoping that the BSFF will become popular simply as a fun vacation spot for filmmakers in the middle of the winter --for L.A. filmmakers and also for those from more inhospitable climates. I mean, I think we're a neat little fest. You can't really get more unpretentious than what we do. Our winter community is a bunch of earnest cinephiles. We aren't a festival for doing deals and networking per se, but we let filmmakers get their film viewed, always, with a full house and it's just a neat environment. I mean, our "snow birds" come from all over the world during January, so the audience is surprisingly a mixed bunch. Also, we don't pre-program our festival. All submitted films run through the gauntlet of our selection committee. We've only pre-programmed TWO films. And that's only because those films were shot here in town. All other films are rated by our committee and pulled directly from FilmFreeway submissions. It's a very egalitarian process. If a filmmaker submits, they have a good chance getting in. Based on passed years it's essentially a 1 to 5 chance. Basically I'm saying people should submit their films. p.s. "No one really knows" sounds like a Donald Trump quote!

Exactly this. The film festival I work with, "The Borrego Springs Film Festival," has pretty much decided our efforts are going to be basic, old-fashioned, and filmmaker centric. We know the viewing experience is evolving away from four-walls and tub of popcorn --but damnit, there's still no better way to watch a film. And there's no better way to watch your film being watched than in a dark room packed with a bunch of people. We successfully offer this. Simple and effective. Some "festivals" can't even offer that fundamental experience! If you're an aspiring filmmaker, getting into festival like ours is worth the effort. Why bother with the projector? The last festival I got into was "online screenings only" (totally missed that on the submission, but they got my dang money) ?

Oh, I don't disagree, but it's an ingredient in a successful recipe. I view it analogous to using a great spice in a dish, but it's not the main component. Rely on it too much over the more important stuff and you're gonna ruin the meal. Anyway, don't mean to hijack a thread. Glad to see budget gear can be used for big-time images. We all know this, but to see it in such accomplishment is always cool.

Well, I'd say it could've looked better with someone more adept at grading, tbh. Obviously, a 5D RAW hack or other RAW cams look freaking awesome when in the right (very patient) hands, though. I wish I could remember the title of the film. I just remember seeing it and thinking it was harsh, sharp, and just ... odd. So much detail, clarity, vibrance that people looked botchy and unnatural. There's a few post-production recipes I use to make people look flattering in interviews and other shots --and this footage was absolutely doing the opposite of that. I do recall reading the filmmakers efforts on the post-process in an interview article. They were dealing with tons of data, eeking out every last drop from the 5dIII, futzing with post for a year, and then when I looked at the final result I felt like they dang near killed themselves for pretty much no good reason. Any chance anyone knows the doc movie I'm thinking about? Point is, RAW's great. It'll help you do a lot of things and give you room to fix mistakes, but if you get what you need in camera, you're pretty good.