fuzzynormal

Hey man, what do you think you got out of that camera that you would't have gotten from a f35? Just curious how things are evolving/have evolved over the past handful of years. I appreciate the color grade on that piece, BTW. Cheers.

Excitement for new technology can certainly manifest into creativity. I'm pretty sure we've all experienced it. You can do a lot of fun NEW creative things with light (if you know how) using something like an A7s. You wouldn't have that particular opportunity until that camera was released. But let's also not lose sight of the fact that you can still do a lot of fun creative things with light (if you know how) using something like a GH1. I do think buying a new camera will also highly motivate you to shoot stuff if you're a camera geek and enjoy fiddling with knobs, just like getting arbitrary shots, and worry more about the best IQ than story. If that's you, then great. The camera/lens manufacturers are going to keep your playpen stocked with great toys. Pull out your camera charts while you're at it. The reality is, and we all know it, some people clamor for the latest and greatest, acquire it, and then don't really do a heck of a lot with it... random motion picture city shots backed by a music cut from some indy band is fine and dandy if that gets you going. Congratulations. You'll be able to do that all over again when the next new camera goes on sale. And again. And again. Just talking for myself --I'm kind of over the technology arms race. I'm concentrating on making stuff for clients/myself and using whatever tools I have access to within my budget to solve my problems; real or imagined. I'm grateful that clean flexible imaging tools are cheap and easy to get and use. I don't want for great IQ anymore. It has arrived. I do want for a deeper skill set at impactful cinema, and the ability to nurture my creativity in other regards --not necessarily associated with cameras. But, if you have a job where you're tasked with comparing and reviewing the more and more subtle nuances that exist between new cameras, then by all means, do that. Nothing wrong with it. Do it. Make it work for you. There you go. Thoughts from a somewhat hypocritical corporate video guy served with more than a few grains of salt. Got my daily procrastination all taken care of. Now, back to work... Once I check out M43rumors....

I'm a guy that doesn't have any qualms shooting images with a crop more than s35, so the G7 looks like it'll be a great cheap cam to get regardless if I ever put a speedbooster on it. Good to hear about some of the details with the adapter, however. Always nice to know what the options are.

​Oh, it's just a jokey post taking the piss out of Canon. Not something to worry too much about. Besides, I only know of Swift, not anything about her material, so I didn't understand much of the blog entry anyway.

Well, hey, we're still reading books, right? uh...right?

Whoa! No John Ford for you? Get ready for some iconic American movie images...one of the best and most influential movie ever made.

Just remember that lenses can't defy the laws of physics. They need more room and space to bend light in extreme ways. There's a necessary reason that broadcast lens is the size of a mountain lion. As for the OP question, I'd love a sharp f0.6 30mm for m43! Not gonna happen, but a boy can dream.

Maybe your guy's problem is that you don't know what's available over in the broadcasting realm of motion pictures... ;-) Now. Now, that's sufficiently bad-ass, right? Obviously, that's as goofy as hell, but don't tell me you couldn't use such lens effects for at least one cool shot in a narrative movie.

​Thanks for liking the modified idea. It's always fun to collaborate. As for writing/filmmaking, I'm neither, really. Got a broadcasting background. My handful of film ideas never seemed to have reached orbit; don't really run in those circles. Got a few close, but ultimately it's the corporate work to pay the bills. Still, storytelling is always interesting to me. Always drawn to stuff with minimal dialog and more cinematic. Good luck on whatever shakes out. Hope you can pull off the more intense production and make a winner! BTW, off topic, but I just saw an indy doc from Egypt this morning. Crazily low-fi and incredibly rough around the edges, (maybe shot on an iPhone?) but it had this inherent tragedy built into it and was quite compelling. Anyway, looks like that corner of the world has some cool cinema coming out of it, need to pay attention more... Cheers.

It's all good enough for me at this point. I came up in the days where if you didn't have pro gear it really showed. You had to buy-in to get great IQ. That was high 5 (into 6) figures, easy, now it's in the low 4's. The fact that's there's two less zeros between these cams with pretty much indistinguishable IQ to all but the most discriminating viewer...well, I'm cool with that. You whippersnappers and your expectations! Why, when I was young I had to film uphill in the snow! Both ways.

We can't think about everything. Americans got enough on our plate (that's literal, not metaphorical). For instance, our Olympians are changing their gender 40 years after they were in the spotlight, so you shouldn't expect us to concentrate on lesser issues.

You got the idea. I'd tweak the structure. This would be more work, but... think parallel editing and more intensity. No dialog. I'd even go straight up melodrama, over the top sort of stuff. This technique will work good with creating short advertising length commercials. Also, keep it non-linear. So: the scene of a lifesaving drama unfolding in a hospital intercut with the scene of the guy rushing to the hospital. Our main characters: "Hero Guy" and "Saved Patient." Secondary characters: "Similar Guy" "Similar Patient." Start with CU of a blinking red light. Sound of medical drama and intensity, cut to action and an emergency in the ER. Lots of chaos and attempted lifesaving going on as doctors try to help "Saved Patient." Meanwhile intercut with this "Hero Guy" wakes up receiving a phone call, we absolutely DON'T hear what it's about. When he hangs up, he looks to his bed/wife, takes a deep breath and then makes the decision to leave. His journey begins as you say. Rushing, no taxi, etc. We then see a similar guy pick up a phone in a similar way... Never sits up in bed though. Doesn't even put the phone to his head, just looks at it. At the ER, the chaos continues, instead of seeing one team of doctors and nurses working hard, we eventually see that it's two teams/doctors/nurses both working on serious injury victims. Similar guy putting the phone back on the receiver. Hero guy arrives, and as he does he passes a nurse who reaches frantically for a phone and starts dialing. Our hero jumps into the chaos and docs start the transfusion process. We see the other docs getting frantic and desperate. The nurse on the phone places it back on the receiver and she returns joining the more desperate doctors. Hero guy looks over to Desperate Patient girl. He reaches out and holds her hand, the doctors lean back as they realize she's stabilizing. Congratulations, smiles, slaps on the back and such. Other Doctors have the opposite reaction, they loose their patient. Sadness, clerics enter as doctors leave. Crying parents in background. Long beat. Cut to shot of phone at "Similar Guys" home. It sits unmoving in the foreground, dolly or tilt down to see red message light blinking. We see "Similar Guy" roll over in bed, hold for a beat. Cut to end-slate. I like your initial idea. Thats' my twist on it.

​I don't think Andrew Putschoegl is exactly the next best Vince Gilligan, but maybe the dude has a darker side.

​Anyone in marketing that would think this is a good idea probably shouldn't be in marketing, but that's corporate culture for you. If it were me, I'd be hiring Kendry (for the same budget they spent on this mistake) and just let him do his thing. Whatever he came back with at the end of a month would get people excited. Not only what he did but how he shot it. Heck, spend a day on Vimeo and you could track down hundreds of talented filmmakers. This particular movie strikes me as the perfect example of a talent challenged film maker* devoted to the tech and the idea of making a movie --while not having enough well rounded artistic talent. The film is amusing to me in the sense that It does illustrate how the fundamentals of making a good film has pretty much jack-squat to do with the camera. *full disclosure: I consider myself as such so I recognize the limitations.

Good idea, but...yeah...unfortunately not so great for talking head interviews is it? Can't hide the thing. If that does't matter to you, then no problem. Make a version with an input for a high-quality lav mic and I'd certainly be more curious.

Well, doing "this" certain look or doing "that" certain look is nice and all (and you should strive for a cohesive aesthetic--even if it's just doing the whole thing on a cheap 50mm lens) but you should really save more particular image considerations for the bottom of the want-to-do list. Ultimately, nothing is going to make your film more viable and successful than a good bit of considered pre-production planning. And most of that stuff has nothing to do with lenses or cameras. Also, it's free. Arguably, you could shoot the whole thing on an old VHS camcorder and if the story was solid, people will watch it. Heck, I'd argue that the IQ low-fi quality of such would be a helluvalot more compelling than contemporary electronic imaging. Obviously, good IQ is great for a film, but certainly over-emphasized here. An old NEX and a kit lens is more than good enough in capable hands...IMHO. Especially for a western where the limitations of a "softer" camera fit the rustic quality of the setting. Would great dynamic range be nice to have? Yes. Is it a necessity? Well, I guess that's for you to decide. Again, the most solid advice I can offer since you're on a time constraint, is definitely do the storyboard. If you're real ambitious, slide-show your story board and then do a real time edit with a dialog comp/music track. This can be fun if you have willing and eager players involved to do their voices (it's even a sort of rehearsal) and it'll also illustrate any camera-shot holes you might have...before you're on set. Recently I made an experimental short film wherein I attempted to film actors on-locations in a documentary style. While successful on certain levels, ultimately it didn't hold together as too many shots where absent, the production went way too long, and the talent floundered too much. A director with more tenacity and skill probably could have tied things together better and artistically, but I definitely ended up stretched beyond my capabilities. So, knowing what to do going in is the best bet. At least it was from my experience. If nothing else, all that pre-pro that helps you stay on task. Ironically, it seems like you have the initial insight and (most important) helpful crew, that'll allow you to be more accomplished at this --more so than some aspiring "pros" like myself would be. Obviously, come back here and post your results when you're finished. I would love to see it. I wrote a Western script last year that made it deep into pre-production before the investor pulled out...and I have a soft spot for that genre...hope it goes well for ya!

​Looks dated and middling. Since it's unlikely to garner serious web traffic what would be the point?

Oh my, one can be too old for this shit? I may be in trouble. I'd say the big thing would be to storyboard it.

You want a professional or prosumer camera? I used to shoot a ton with Canon's XH cams, and that line has evolved into Canon XF300. Although, the 300 is not 4k and the build of the camera does look a little high end. Still, I was always able to make my XH-A1 look pretty good on documentary shoots. I have stuff from years ago that easily rivals stuff I've done recently. Maybe Panasonic's HC-WX970 would be a good stealth cam? It looks very unassuming, as does the Sony AX-100. Not sure how you'd stretch things to a full day of recording, especially with 100Mps 4k shooting. Still, swapping a card would only break shooting for about 5-10 seconds...assuming you have a camera operator doing that. You could rig a external battery without too much trouble to run all day.

​Then again, an accomplished race car driver in a modest sedan could easily lap a kid in a Ferrari. It's not always what it does, but how you do it.

Well, there is improved light sensitivity too. Personally I'm not enamored with the FF extreme DOF look anymore, but it does offer advantages. The shallow DOF at f1.4 is pretty useful for interviews, but (IMHO) not for other shooting.

​So true. Which is why I don't tend to sweat it too much if I'm not using the latest and greatest imaging device.

​I'm on a selection committee for a film fest. Honestly, we see a lot more creativity from people working with a lot less. Point is, this film is lame. I'll agree with ya. Anyway, a good aspiring film maker will recognize that it's not the camera failing here. Of course, many aspiring film makers don't always know what the hell they're doing, so they could be swayed negatively with lousy films. I mean, "Reverie" wasn't exactly great narrative, but at least it used light in a good interesting way. Yvonne's cinematography is sterile and ... well, just bad. Samsung should've pulled the plug on this film and left it alone. --And putting it on YouTube with an open comment section? Whooo-weee....good luck with that.

Well, you should know that lots of other cameras have better quality than Canon or Nikon right out of the box. But, you should also know that a Canon ML (Magic Lantern) hack will give a Canon camera some of the best image quality on the market. You have to work a bit harder in post to deal with that footage, however, but it's probably the most affordable way to get some awesome motion picture imaging. Ultimately, I went with M43 gear, but it was't just because of IQ (which was pretty impressive from Panasonic).

Wow. Talented stuff on display there. Good editing. I appreciate your style and understanding that small can be a huge advantage. I shot a doc in November with a GX7 and GM1. No problems. Great images and very nondescript.