fuzzynormal

Amen to that. Include 4k for a little post-cropping and things just keep getting better. Fun times.

Nope. I'm watching the trailer and I've read a few think pieces about the film's content. Also I know the guy's MO. He's a fabulist. So what? Look, it's kind of funny when the trailer features a shot of a proxy Clinton stomping down the hallway while an intern cowers in fear as she walks by. Say what you will about seeing or not seeing the movie, but it's obvious it's a film catering to political ideologists and it's not objective. And again, I can't fault the guy for trying to make a buck. It's nothing that Michael Moore doesn't do, but let's not kid ourselves here. We're better than that.

I think it'll be very good for those of a certain sensibility, no doubt. Not a complaint, just acknowledging. BTW, what exactly is the big "secret?" All the stuff in the flick is American history I remember from 8th grade high school. And then there's the American history and political shift that starts in the 1960's that apparently the film seems to ignore. Which is rather odd considering Clinton was, ironically, a Goldwater Gal. Anyway, much like Michael Moore stuff, it looks like cherry picked facts dramatized for an extreme ideological narrative. Well, melodramatized and reenacted actually in this case; certainly not objectively journalistic. At any rate, what I just wrote is way too wonky for this blog. Apologies.

As a documentarian, I've totally let go of big rigging. While I love to shoot on an Alexa, if I'm rolling through the day with a subject and need to keep a low profile, these stabilized M43 cams are just so incredibly practical. No, the IQ isn't as perfect as other cameras. But, as seen above, it doesn't really need to be. Shoot wise and your footage will look great.

Naw, but I was in the USA mid-west (Michigan) visiting family and the local multiplex had the lobby card displayed. Which sorta reminded me as to why that place has always annoyed me through the years. The management has never ran it like they actually care about cinema. You can just tell there's no serious consideration for the medium, just the business. For instance, the damn preview screens above the concession stand have always been set at the wrong aspect ratio and the freakin' frame interpolation is turned on. There's literally more than a half hour of commercials projected before the film starts. Endless other nits and picks too about the place that bug me. Basically I'm saying this particular business is kinda lame. And running a D'souza movie just confirms it. More power to 'em, I guess. Just ain't my thing. I don't know... I do know there's always a niche market for that sort of ideological rhetoric movie that gins up the wingnuts with propaganda (much less one from this D'souza dude that pleaded guilty to a felony violation of campaign finance law) -- but on the other hand, this local muti-plex has never run any Michale Moore flicks, so there's probably just a political bent with the owner/manager. And who knows? Might even be some sort of corporate thing. So there you go, you now know my inconsequential gripes about my local theater. Oh, and the skin tones in the film look great. Love me some skin tone.

I like slow shutter, so much so I often shoot 24fps 0°. I believe in the "slow" magic too --but so what if someone wants that high frame rate look? There's no rules. Besides, modern TV's do that frame interpolation BS thing by default, so folks are getting used to it.

But just look at that dynamic range and skin tone! Totes on point. What more do you need? That's what it's all about, right?

Personally, my main concern is EVF. I really like using a good EVF. When they work well it makes manual focusing a breeze and fun. And since I shoot manual glass, it makes sense to covet such a feature. Besides, I actually enjoy utilizing manual lens focus hunting in my edits. I don't really know how to articulate that bias. Maybe because it makes things feel more organic and connected to a human shooter? At any rate, Panasonic's GX series EVF's have been very frustrating. And, yeah, having on board audio recording is a blessing. I miss it now that I'm shooting with my GX85's. Still, it's a kick-butt little cam. One can't have every solution in a piece of kit that cost less than a good ND filter set!

Not really sure how this would be a practical concern. At least not for the aerial footage I shoot. For instance, Aerials don't tend to be shot with longer lenses and at right angles from the subject. Nor do they usually involve rapid pans across the frame. Most aerial footage would be perfectly fine. Unless tons of close up horizontal movement is what you're doing while flying the camera in a drone, I don't think rolling shutter is going to be a big issue. Of course many drones are set up for stabilization already, so it's all sort of moot to worry too much about how a gx85 handles things. But, if you're shooting handheld in a helicopter the stabilization sure would help, yes.

I think Oly might get locked into throttling the video side of the sensor tech because of who they're buying 'em from. Some sort of competitive clause, perhaps? At any rate, Oly is rumored to be adding 4k to it's next gen of cams. And I'm a fan of their models. I'd rather shoot with an Oly than a Panasonic or Canon, fer instance. But it's a nuance. I like Oly's viewfinder and ergos, but I use 2 GX85's because the 4k is a good fit for a production I'm doing. Personally I think it's all good at this point, going forward. If you pushed me out the door and told me I had to shoot with any upmarket consumer stills/video camera that came out this year (or next), I'd be fine with that.

Yeah, I'm totally guilty on some of that stuff myself...

Vimeo is the target of a lot of consternation these days, but I do appreciate their ability to curate some amusing stuff. Maybe they're like me and have become burnt out on the millennial twee... https://vimeo.com/177375994 That is all. Good day!

FWIW, the basic technique of match-cutting has certainly been part of the craft from the earliest days of montage editing. Now, since the tempo of modern editing is so frantic and kinetic I'd call this evolution of the style "hyper-match-cut" as it's over and above even the fast paced stuff we're used to in more "standard" edits. Also, the craft to aggressively accentuate the blend of movement is obviously such a huge priority it becomes the prominent aesthetic and the entire justification of the video. Cool, to be sure. Enjoyable in short doses as it's style above substance and fun to look at. Perfect for impressionistic travel films. How well does it work for fictional narrative though? I suppose it depends. Alright, so this is going to be a bit of a tangent, but I must say since this thread has me thinking about it, after watching "Jason Bourne" last night, I felt that the fast cut style was pushed beyond my tolerance. Your mileage may differ, but for me it became unnecessary distraction rather than an effective technique. However, it was interesting to note how incredibly short the editor/director was willing to make a shot and still attempt to maintain narrative cohesion. The answer, as much as I could tell, was about a 4th of a second. For me, it was like this: visual mess, visual mess, visual mess, okay I see a knife falling to the ground, visual mess, visual mess, visual mess, he landed a punch there, visual mess, visual mess, visual mess, okay I see a gun, visual mess, visual mess, visual mess, his wound is a liability, etc., etc. --And all that happens in about 2 seconds. I'm actually not being dismissively critical of the "mess" part, (flying elbows, CU's of motion blurred faces) because I realize it's designed (or tolerated?) to be a sort of impressionistic din and then the incredibly short but important visual clues let the viewer connect to the unfolding sequence. I'm just fascinated by deconstructing the technique and the limits they were willing to push. So, it works for me when it's short and highly stylized as in these travel videos, but kinda annoying when looking at it for extended action sequences.

Yes. Seems like you have a handle on things. When it comes to small productions, unless you have a good reason (story) to actually use a camera and film something interesting I really don't see a reason to put the cart before the horse. When you're finally really excited about what's on the page, then take time to worry about the tech. If your film was on a budget wherein you were the DP and your main concern was the camera, then you could burrow into the rabbit hole. Otherwise, just get what you can with that 8K and you'll be fine. Personally, I sometimes wonder if too many production people feel like the subjective issue of skin tone/color is something that'll make or break a movie. I mean, I care about it too, but it's waaaaay down on the priority list. That's me though. I tend to do work wherein I'm the beginning and end of everything, so my priorities need to take into account much more than just camera... The first one being, would a viewer even find this story interesting?

If all you're trying to do is add eye/face fill during daytime shooting, want it to be easy to use, and are shooting with a shorter lens so the camera is close to your subject, wouldn't a dim-able ring light be an option to consider?

And things roll on. As you know, I'm a Oly fan for the ergos. Rumors are floating that their next model is definitely 4K. Pretty great. It's still amazing to me how these consumer still cameras have become so awesome for motion pictures.

There ya go.

I like the 20mm lens. Small and unobtrusive, as you say. Video looks good. Er, lots of depressing rubbish/trash though at that event...

You can encode the offending clip/shot into an edit friendly file (ProRes422, for instance) and once you use that newly encoded shot instead of the original one it will probably fix the issue.

Bug in the app, I think. Looks like it's a wholly different camera for that shot, so I'd consider that whatever codec you're using for that footage might be an issue for your editing software. What app are you using to create the effect?

iZotope Rx.

PC: i7 6700 3.4 GHz. 32GB ram, GPU GTX1080. Premiere 2015.3. I also downloaded Resolve for any in-depth color work. Tried to make the editing work on Resolve, but it couldn't meet the demands of what I needed for my doc work. "Optimized" (aka in-app proxy creation) editing was flaky and incredibly unreliable with long GOP footage. And Resolve couldn't handle real time editing with native h.264 files. Premiere is...okay. It behaves pretty close to FCP7, so that makes things relatively painless. It cuts through h.264 4K without issue and if I need it the proxy workflow has been solid. Seems a bit bloated and unintuitive in places, but nothing that's a deal breaker. My wife is also doing assistant editing so I'll soon put together a less "juicy" PC build for her. Ultimately we'll be NAS editing between the two PC's. All in all I'm comfortable where things are at. Spent a good chunk of change, but not a ton, so that's good. I don't really like Win10, but it's not horrible.

Bubbie! Where's the white knight in this mess?

I thought I did read in a recent post that Zach was banned, but I sort of thought it was an off-handed joke, not really the truth. Truly, his worst sin, if you even want to call it that, was that he was wildly naive and earnest; dash in a heap of ignorance. Quite honestly, after three dozen pages of this thread I think we all deserve some of his sort of youthful alt-reality. I'd welcome some of those types of halcyon days at this stage of my life, believe me. The wonderful insane messiness of all this stew we read here is why this site is actually interesting. Banning Zach seems like a bit of a take-away from that vibe. You don't get this sort of juice from sanitized corporate curated websites.

Well, better DR at any rate.