Ed_David

Violated federal law.

The alligations are not just alligations Henry. These are violations of new york state law that your company acknowledges and wanted to settle for cash that new york state refushed. Your company is getting sued by new york state. Your company was written up in the new york times and you declined to comment in that paper. Also a photo of some sales clerks who are women. Thats great. But how many executives are women? And im not asking you to reform...I have taken 70 percent of my business already away from you. I dont expect you to reform. And thats fine. There is adorama, film tools, barn door outfitters, omega broadcast, and so many more camera and grip stores that seem to not violate labor right practices with its latino employees.

So adorama seems likes it is different than b and h. Seems like they have a woman pr person at least. https://m.reddit.com/r/Filmmakers/comments/3oqp2j/nytimes_reports_on_bh_labor_issues/

I respect you keep your call centers in the us but i do not think this negates charges set forward by the us department of labor that b and h attempted to settle as referenced in the article. I do hope b and h does reform. Especially since this is the 2nd time in 12 years. Curious if adorama has these issues?

agreed completely!! You want the best camera and lens and lighting and bla bla bla, for the job, but whatever you have or get, make that sucker shine! Don't just say, "oh I suck, I give up, no way." just figure it all out. Maximize the strengths, minimize the flaws.

Cameras do matter. Deakins fought for the alexa on hail ceasar and the cohens insisted kodak film. Have you seen hail caesar? It looks amazing. The camera is as important as the lighting lenses color etc. A lot of top dps say the camera doesnt matter but of course it does or they would not be risking it all to shoot on film when digital is so much safer for a production. How it renders motion and sharpness and smoothness. The camera is really important. Everything is important. And yes deakins could say he would shoot on an iphone because that's baller to say. But how many top DPs have "slummed" it on shoots with less-than-good cameras for major feature work? Pretty much no one except Rodrigo Prieto who likes the Sony F55 for night exteriors. Pretty much every other DP I can think of only shoots Alexa or Red.

Well said guys. And yes i do state my opinions as facts. Im trying to become conscious of when i do this.

All well said. I also think motion cadence is related to true frames captured vs compressed motion. My nx1 and fs7 tests with sharpness on minus 10 or as off as it could be w leica r lenses still has that digital feel. But yes always w digital sharpening off. The f35 has a beautiful buttery feel but the pocket camera has more dynamic range. I would be curious to do a test. Also pocket camera vs 1d c. Digital bolex....my issue w it is native oso feels like 200 asa and only 12 stops dynamic range plus just a fischer price like build. No offense to those who own it. Same poor build found in the original pocket camera. That lcd was hvx200 bad. Robert bressom shot an entire film on the 35mm lens. What was the film called. And chivo...did children of men with just wides. No need for any type of lens. There are no rules. Just make the film look good to support the story.

Thanks for this. Now the department of labor is involved. B and h wanted to do a settlement admitting guilt. And henry is acknowledged in the article. Hmmmmm. Maybe the hispanic workers arent lying? Especially now thay the department of labor is involved? Or maybe the department of labor and the unions sre working together and are corrupt as henry may say? But b and h wanted to settle. Does that acknowledge a wrongdoing?

ha. that was good

I love it - a non-sequel non-action movie franchaise about the environment is the number one movie in China. There is hope for the world.

Now seeing the blackmagic micro camera in the "micro" spot - that looks really beautiful and smooth as well and sharp - for some reasons these cameras are getting it right. I think the blackmagic cinema pocket is better than the 1d c, cause of raw and higher frame rates. This may one amazing little $1k camera.

Above shot on the new micro camera. Loving this look. And the camera, hopefully has a better form factor and battery life than the original BMPCC. Sorry this link is from Cinema5d but anyway: It seems like there is a smoothness to the image in the Canon 1D C - and has meatiness to the image. I saw some clips from the Ursa Mini and it again has that blocky, FS7 or F55 feel. Just doesn't feel as good to me, nor does clips from the C300 ii - just blocky motion: Here's another beautiful quick clip with the 1D C - t feels organic, smooth, and pretty. I gotta start messing around with this guy. Thank you Andrew. Is it the inherient resolution in the 1D C? How it interpolates the frames? From the little I've seen - I think the blackmagic new pocket camera has nice motion too - who knows what's going on with all this - Maybe I need to see more test videos.

all great points. But opinions are based on knowledge in art. There is no right or wrong. It's emotional. The dialogue is indeed in our heads, between doubt and belief in ourselves. I still think the concept of competitive awards giving out for art is bizarre. I can understand an award for a scientific project - but to say "Crash" was a better film than Lost in Translation, both competing for best picture - and being such different films is a bizarre fact of our modern "filmmaker" community. Apples and oranges. What people value at the time vs what people later value. For instance, Schenededty, NY, by Charlie Kaufman I think is a masterpiece. And look at the reviews of it at the time. They made it seem as if the film was total trash.

This is amazing, Andrew!!! Great work - you are literally improving a camera!!! No many people can say that!!!! The FS5 is a damn fine little camera and after you are done, even better!!

I don't know if you are in the minority, Policar. Be proud of your tastes. Also, how many features, commercials, and episodics shoot with the Alexa vs the Red? You are in good company.

I’ll admit it, I use camera forums a lot. Too much, probably. I use them to check out the latest cameras and lenses and lights and accessories. I waste about two hours a day on them. Time I could spend watching “the View.” When I started out shooting part-time in 2005, I got a DVX100 because a juggler who was a featured extra on a tv show called “Sons of Saddam” told me to. “Cause it does 24p.” I didn’t know what that meant, but I plunked down $3,000 - all the money I had in savings on this camera. The camera could have been a bust. But I did it because a juggler who played one of Saddam’s sons goons said so. That’s how easily influenced I am. Then I bought a HVX200, not even testing it first. “Cause it can do HD.” I bought the Redrock micro adapter because I watched the work of MacGreggor and some other DPs back then do stuff on a Gorilla 35 lens adapter that hadn’t even come out. I hadn’t even tried it first. Just sent in my credit card info. Rinse and repeat. All these periods of time I bought things just based on videos I saw shot on them. No tests - I didn’t understand tests. Just videos shot with them and the opinions of people I respected. I could look at screen grabs but just scroll down to their opinions. Well finally 11 years later, I am seeing what I was doing - buying based on people’s emotions. Based on the emotions of people whose work I liked. This is fine to do, but it’s not always the smartest thing to do. There are several, maybe twenty influential figures online in the cinematography world. David Mullen, Shane Hurlbut, John Brawley, Art Adams, Geoff Boyle, and of course Andrew Reid, come to mind as leaders who people follow and listen to. Even the opinions of the above people and the other influencers are, in the end, just their opinions. When someone says, “this to me screams filmic” or “this looks digital” - again, that’s all an opinion. If they say, “that grade is terrible” or “man you nailed the skin tones” - again, that’s all opinion. Even looking at test charts and camera tests, the results are subjective. Aesthetic is subjective. There are scientific tests, but they lead to opinions. This isn’t pure math - this is an art form. There is no such thing as filmic. Everything is digital. Film emulsions see the world differently, but they go through a digital intermediate. They become digital . And I think that’s probably about 99.9% of all films shot on celluloid. Maybe a few hipsters shoot film and use a steinbeck, but they still upload their results to vimeo, which converts this to a h.264 file. I have very strong opinions, and a lot of people have very strong opinions. That’s why we work in film. It’s an art form that is full of passionate people. But I also have low self-esteem. My whole nature of existence is based on others approval. I’m getting better at trusting my own self, but this is my basis. I think maybe most artists have low self-esteem or why would they want to share their art? Is it ego? Or the attempt for others to connect? Yes that’s part of it. But whether you want to admit it or not, we love when people love our work. We live off the feedback, or why would we check vimeo 5 times a day to see if someone commented? Why else would we have awards? Especially in an art field where awards are just based on opinions of a community who may or may not get your work? Something is beautiful if you think it is. You don’t need an oscar in cinematography to be happy with your lighting or camera movement or angle, or have your opinion mean anything less if you aren’t in the ASC. Everyone brings something unique to the art form. Everyone brings a new perspective that is needed, especially now, when everything feels pretty much the same.

I don't think anyone looks that beige naturally. Again, this man especially, since he seems like he is a motorcycle type-guy would especially have a lot of red in his cheeks. We all have red in our cheeks and our skin reflects blue highlights as well, as well as pigments of green and just blue in there. It is never this monochromatic in real life. Below a big biker dude. Look at the red and blue highlights and shades of green in him. The image below is more stylized, but again, more of what we expect from a color photograph and of course, how our own eyes see the world. below again no separation. is it the grade? Well I just spent 16 hours grading a piece with dragon mixed with MX footage and again, the beige - and I couldn't get rid of it. I tried to shift the hue which helped slightly, but still couldn't get natural secondary grades. Until red solves this (and maybe they have with the OLPH) - then any advantage of the dynamic range in the dragon vs the red mx chips is not valuable to me. Here's Shane that shows tests with the standard OLPH vs the others: https://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2015/11/reds-game-changing-olpf-filter-cinematography/

Yes it is sharp - but look at the beige skintones - he looks like he's as tan as Donald Trump. And not secondary skintones on his face, no blues, or greens. This is more what we expect from a still, with lots of color in the face - red, blue, and some greens hitting in the face.: This is what we need from cameras - natural skintones. After that, then yes, resolution is important. Need it circular and round feeling so it pops, so it shows the organicness of an image like film. That feels, in my mind, how we see the world. But skintones should always be the number one priority. That's what Arri and Canon have figured out. And to many extents, Blackmagic is right there behind them.

I love the style - the feel - it feels fresh and unpredictable. The camera movement is lovely. It feels alive. Great job Matt. Very beautiful!!!

Thanks for coming here, Phil! It's a really beautiful video. I like what you did. But now talking about the red weapon - since it's kind of a showcase test video. So nothing personal intended. Just technical question. The motion feels odd. Is the shutter is at 180 degrees - did you have it locked to this or multiples of this when you overcranked? I noticed this too on those Taylor Swift music videos. Did you do this so you could later ramp it? The skintones have that red dragon "beige" look. That is what kills me about the dragon - the beige. I tried to color it out, but it's hard to do. Maybe switching to ACES would help? What was your coloring workflow, Phil? And the dynamic range is limited - the highlight blow out looks pretty bad of the smolten lava. I know it's smolten stuff - but the highlight roll off is not smooth. How was it when you recorded it. Of course, I've seen a ton of film footage shot on red weapon - King Kong, Age of Adeline, Better Call Saul, all shot on red dragon, that look gorgeous! But not all of us can use a top Hollywood colorist. For the beige look, I think Shane Hurlbut said using the standard OLPH filter is the way to go. I want to test that out. What OLPH did you use? The beige look is why I think the red one mx and red epic mx are better cameras. They don't have this. But anyway, let me know. Thanks. ___ also a funny thing has happened in the TV world - the OLED may just take off. And maybe people will start to care about color and dynamic range, over resolution. I love 4k - it has a beautiful inherient resolution. But I always want skin tones first, to be as natural as possible. And smooth highlight roll off and good dynamic range. That's the priority. Not the number of K's a camera can do. I also thought the Reverent looked bad. But that was mostly shot with the Alexa M, I think.

Thanks Interview was the f35 x 2. The A7S was some overhead shots - they actually look kind of soft - probably should have shot 4k on them. Didn't test at the time. Yes the slow motion underneath was the RX100 iv. Had the camdive housing for it I got off of amazon. worked very well. some of the shots with the family in the tube had weird shutter issues - looked blurry - I don't know what camera this was and what shutter me or Mikko used - oh well.

The real suprising champ is the RX100IV - the slow motion out of this guy is beautiful. I am shocked by how good it came out. Mixed F35, A7S, everything - especially at the waterpark.

Game of thrones success came from piracy. Its horrible but its exposure. And if the goal is to be seen...maybe theres a positive. Out of those 12 million who stole whiplash...how many would buy it? I remember reading about this 10 years ago in esquire....that piracy help launch the careers of a ton of smaller acts. Now spotify is essentially a free pirate service that pays it's artists pennies. And tentpole movies are made not because of piracy....if anything these are the number one movies pirated. Because demographics are to boys who steal. Tentpole are made because they are the only safe bet. Why so many tentpoles are sequels. Thats a whole different debate.

that piece I don't know what Paul did. In general I use gorilla grain, low level and about 60 percent opacity. I have started to upload to vimeo with pro res LT so it's not h.264 getting recompressed as h.264. seems to work better.