elgabogomez

Is it just me or those mini hawks don't seem to have "enough anamorphic look"? the 35, 40 and 50... the fact that they don't breathe, don't flare and don't have 2x anamorphic blur unless super close focus, they almost look like what you get with a filter with oval bokeh cut in front of a spherical... On the other hand, what a great focus puller work at display on that promo!!

What "prosumer cameras" where available when 5d ii, 7d and T2i where the rage??? There where no cameras that gave you the "cinematic quality" of the Canons... Super35?? Interchangeable lens?? 24p??... There is a reason people in the video business have EF glass, and it was BEFORE the c300... how quick and easy we forget!!

It isn't windows, it happened in the director's computer and also on mine, in different hard drives, his is an AMD processor, mine is an i7. I was able to replicate the issue with one file at the 29, 30 seconds mark, I re-rendered that file with after effects from the camera file (wich doesn't lag or drop frames if used in Vegas, but is not "processed" cc-ed, grained, etc.). The problem appears to be that Vegas doesn't like mp4 h264 files for whatever reason so I'm converting everything to prores. That seems to solve the problem, we'll see. Now I have to replace EVERYTHING in the timeline... Is there any way to make Vegas to do it automatically?

Yep, I tried to render to xavc/mxf, to avc and to mp4 with same results. The files I'm rendering are mp4 h264 at 50mbps, 1080 23.976 the final output pretended is 1080 23.976p at 35mbps. The timeline is 23.976 as well so I'm at a loss here at what is wrong.

Hi, i'm not experienced in vegas pro but I have a project that is edited in it and I am having a problem where the rendered file is dropping frames inexplicably every few minutes/seconds, completely random. Thus making the cadence almost like slow motion, it is a long project so re editing in another NLE is not an option. Any of you has had this problem?

Stick to only one "brand" of lenses, either the kit zoom or the fd lenses, at least in the same scene. Color and contrast matching can get very tricky if you use something modern like the kit zoom in a wide shot and then cut to a close up with an fd 50mm 1.4 for example. If you already have a shooting list, try doing your scenes as pictures with the lenses you plan to use and then watch them in your computer and see if you can match the image from one lens to another. Matching light on narrative in the sun is quite the challenge, if you don't have it yet, get a reflector board ( the ones that are gold, silver, white...). Good luck

They are right in certain aspects, and even if they are the PROS and the highly respected DPs, it is their opinion, doesn't have to be mine ;) However, i surely think there is a disconnection between what the tools we now have can do and the medium we have to deliver can show to an audience, after all, this is what film/video/audiovisual is all about, right? show a cohesive piece of work to an audience, say something to someone/others (ie. not just yourself). The granny tvs of old are what the medium of moving visuals goes to in the end, and even the latest samsung 4k display is an 8 bit display at its core; a few years back i was obsessed by getting the best picture quality tv for the least amount of money to watch blu rays and hd dvds at home (being a cinefile and a movie collector) and started reading sites about display calibration and black levels and plasma vs lcd and ire and 2.2 gamma, and, and, and... And it all boiled down to the same 8 bit per channel rec709 you media makers know well and long story short, the most innovative "technologies" rendered a "wrong" less accurate image (sharp's quattron, sony trilumminous, panasonic full range, etc. and i'm not even touching the 60,120,240 hz refresh soap opera interpolation stuff.) So the cinema is afaik the only consumer place where bigger than 8bit colour is presented to audiences and there you depend on the theater displaying it right, with a good lamp, etc. so, in many instances, movies are still looking better at home, on blu ray, in 8bit colour space. So, in terms of high DR, higher colour space we (as expectators) are far far behind and there is a real disconnection between what an image looks in the DIT bay and the final outcome and that's what these 3 DP's are really complaining about, they are seeing the original work of art they do transformed to 8 bit nintendo alike dopplegangers. And it is sad :(

You should hire Sacha Baron Coen to ask those questions to them :)

It says "some" lenses on this new prime pl line are anamorphot compatible, so the logical question is: Is THIS lens compatible with the slr anamorphic adapter?

Hi Andrew, how big is the vignetting with the cookes in fullframe? Do you use them in apsc only or play with the digital zoom option?

A speedbooster that can fit Sony fz mount would be apreciated :) I know, wrong thread for rambling :)

How would you mount a pl lens on the speed booster? Most have elements that go far behind the mount...

Cinema 4k as in 4096x2160? Cause that would be neat. Getting back to the consumer angle of 4k, i went to bestbuy and fry's and they had settings with lg and samsung tv's with 4k and similar inch size 1080 next to each other and... First of all they had them with the 60p fluid motion/soap opera setting... Second, side by side 50 and 60" tv's with the same content, they look the same (mind you they were both showing a blu ray which is 1080, so)... Third, price and image appeared more appealing in the 1080 sets... In certain scenes the 1080 set looked better, with the 4k one looking more "plastic" as it was interpolating frames for the smooth motion effect AND upscaling to 4k from the blu ray, adding up to the fakeness/video game look... Who knows, maybe the Hobbit will look nice there ;)

I was at NAB at the sony theater, where they had a fairly large cinema proyection screen with a sony 4k top notch proyector and they were showing snippets of 4k proyects made with sony cameras, from theatrical (fiction, documentary and animation), and tv series (the 1st episode of the blacklist and another i don´t recall) and live pop and rock concerts... And while the image was good, very good technically, i wasn´t "wowed" by it. That is why i don´t understand the "nothing compares to 4k" attitude. If in a theatrical presentation there is no real "wow" in 4k compared to 2k, there is no way a smaller screen will show that much of a difference. On the other hand, i can swear most movies look better in my 50" plasma at home via blu ray than at the movie theater so i will reserve judgment untill a high quality delivery médium for home consuming in a 4k screen and a 4k player with better bitrates or better compression comes along. I don´t trust bitstream for 1080 let alone for 4k.

A little perspective would'nt hurt... In the stills world, every single int. Lens camera does raw, and yet not every person with such camera can take good pictures. Move up a notch: not every photographer with a 5d3 or a d800 is a "pro" or "prosumer" or what have you and the camera by itself doesn't equal getting a job or taking good pictures. Up another step and a 1d X or a d4s won't make you better, they are just better built. Now, very few months back Andrew posted about Kendy and his aproach to video creation with "basic" equipment and in several ways the same creations might never be possible for him had he were using an Amira (as i think everyone here agrees is a better camera with good ergonomics for that type of shooting and has a "beggining of the end" image compared to a t2i) as it would have cost him a kidney, and be extemely dangerous to go out and shoot with one alone in many parts of the world.

If looking for autofocus it might be a good idea to look into contax g lenses and an electronic adapter, there is one that covers fullframe and the lenses are zeiss made. It's supposed to be almost as fast AF as native E mount lenses.

You should watch the atomos video about using the gh4 with the ninja blade, in it they talk about options to output 10bit or 8bit... It could be that or another option where i think you can change the output to NOT do 24p, there is a thread here in the blog or you can search the atomos channel in vimeo

That is wierd and sad at the same time... What is it with mts Panasonic files that makes them more worthy of bmd implementation and not Sony or canon c100 for that matter?

I just downloaded the lite version of resolve 11, as it claimed to be now able to decode .mts files natively... So far i've tried to open Sony avchd files without luck. In the documentation for the beta software it says: "Panasonic MTS files" so what i'm wondering is, is it able to open mts files from say an af100 or a gh2, gh3, gx7? and not sony's mts files? or is it a bug in the beta and it will be able to read them soon? If anyone has had any luck with the ingesting of avchd in resolve, please do tell :)

It is highly likely it can be the monitor, other "stills" cameras are known to send out 24p as 60i through hdmi. I don't own a gh4 but in the hdmi or out settings is there an "auto" option?

Kinda off topic, but i have seen this noise in my Sony a3000 and now i know how to call it. Funny enough it shows mostly at iso100 and is not exactly in the blacks, it's more like in the dark grays. I use the a3000 as a backup camera and when i want to shoot longer shots (it doesn't overheat) and i avoid iso100 alltogether, iso1600 is a big mush with no detail so i basically have a camera with 3 exposures for video: 200, 400, 800.

A quesadilla is made with only one tortilla, with two it's called sincronizada (because the two tortillas are in sync)... Believe it or not :)

After the most recent article Andrew posted about a very talented filmaker making a T2i look like million bucks, i thought about sharing my work, recorded in a Sony A3000 of all cameras :) I've learned so much from this forum, it's administrator and you fine folks, that any opinion would be extremely helpfull, even if it is to tore the video to pieces.

Hopefully that price is wrong. same price as gh4 and you appeal to much more people. If i could i'll buy both, a7s and gh4, with lens adaptability being the greatest thing these 2 have in common, just think all you can do with a 35mm lens and fullframe, apsc, m43 2x and 2.3x crop factor: In ff 35 is slightly wide and very usable for steadycam shots, in apsc it becomes "normal" angle view and great for many compositions, then you go 2x and you have good close ups (not in 4k and talent will like you for less face detail) and then 2.3 4k macro in an hypothetical 35mm lens that can focus up to 1 feet. Then you are mostly set with one good lens, for argument lets say a zeiss 35mm f1.4 ze, zf or cy and two cameras for an easy camera department day :)

I went to NAB to see the A7s, and i went away with the impression that apsc crop is 1080... At least thats what i was told there, still the possibility to use cine lenses is there in the crop mode, for the 4k in fullframe mode you would use photo lenses, either adapted or sony's e mounts. The 70 200 e was attached to the little low light monster and was looking pretty good, i bumped the iso to 25600 and there was no noise in the image (not only in the flip screen, but in the monitor they had through hdmi in 4k. Seriously, NO NOISE.