EduPortas

Just saw a video of Matt Granger reviewing the new Nikon power zoom. I couldn't believe my eyes. This man probably lost 100 pounds in the last year (hadn't seen a video of his in that time, at least). Without any sense of irony I honestly wish he's ok and it's just a bit too much ozempic and not some sort of health issue.

They are just another type of movie. Realistic animation is still animation, no matter how much AI power behind it. We still respond best to other humans. Evidence is all around social media. Even in the very small screen of your iPhone most watch-time goes to humans in such "boring" activities like talking head podcasts. It's not a question of being "acceptable", it's more what people actually respond to. Unless our natural is fundamentally changed, humans still prefer to connect with other humans.

Al I'm saying is that 1% that humans recognize as fake when observing an AI human will exist. Animation has had this problem for decades now. Artists go to great lengths to make humans more and more realistic and people still criticize their work as fake. Hand-made + CGI production has been a staple of cutting edge animation studios for a while now and most artists have stopped searching for that "perfect" human imitation. It's so hard-wired into our brains that AI makers will inevitably stop searching for 100% real human impersonation.

Al I'm saying is that 1% that humans recognize as fake when observing an AI human will exist. Animation has had this problem for decades now. Artists go to great lengths to make humans more and more realistic and people still criticize their work as fake. Hand-made + CGI production has been a staple of cutting edge animation studios for a while now and most artists have stopped searching for that "perfect" human imitation. It's so hard-wired into our brains that AI makers will inevitably stop searching for 100% real human impersonation.

There's always this uncanny-valley when I watch even the most realistic CGI. After a while it becomes clear that's not real human I'm watching on the screen. Long takes make it easier to identify. Maybe it's the natural movement of the human body we're accustomed to from millions of years.

The advertisement industry created its own problem by allowing minus 1 second cuts to be the norm in most ads. For short stuff like most ads AI is fine. For a feature film with long takes of real human emotions not so much. The recent passing of Lynch should help us keep that in consideration.

That's absolutely beautiful, thank you. Talk about raw talent from Badalamenti. Now Lynch and Badalementi in the same production? That's really special. It's not an exaggeration to say that the music of Twin Peaks is another character of the series, equally as important as every other character.

Nikon has built their cameras outside Japan for quite a while now. Don't if other manufacturers did the same thing, but Canon saying this outright means they see a bleak outlook for the camera market. They are the last "Japanese-pride" camera manufacturer in my book.

Cost-cutting had to come somewhere with Canon MILCs. It's pretty well-known that Canon DSLRs from the 7D upward are practically indistructable (maybe 6D is the exception but I've never heard a 6D failing in the shutter mechanism). Ths also brings up a good point: 7D, 5D and of course 1D are heavy cameras. That's because the shutter mechanisms on these models are built tougher than most other cameras, and of course the bodies are mainly magnisium alloy. You can read about it here: https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-7d-mark-ii/canon-7d-mark-iiA.HTM So maybe there are still good reasons to own a 7D or 7DM2 (I re-bought a 7DM2 just a few months ago. Can't subsitute everything with Canon MILCs. At least not with my R8).

I'd suggest 99% of color correction is correct white balance and then adding or subtracting contrast in the midtones and blacks. As you said, a good standard codec allows these changes in post without the nuisance of using any log profile. Yes, log is very useful for extreme DR situations, but other than that I think ppl are complicating things by choosing to shoot in that profile when a very chunky codec is compulsory to make any sense at all of it in post.

I get you, man. For me, Nikon APS-C fills that sweet spot right now. Smalish yet high-quality results and great AF. I can't say anything negative about the tiny Z50 OG for the price point. Full frame MILCs and lenses are just a tiny bit better in overall quality when compared to current smaller sensor, yet the lenses are three times bigger and as expensive. Not a fan, really.

All you said is correct. Unless your James Cameron et al. for the newbie artist the only real way to survive is by "comercial ideological alignment". That's my term but I'm sure others have used it before. If you wish to live by art and art alone you better make an ideological statement (which includes politics of course). Once you convince others to back your art by this "comercial ideological alignment" the sky's the limit thanks to digital environments. Social media has absolutely catapulted these artists into the stratosphere even if their art is "mediocre". Your reach will be massive, you'll get the eyeballs, but you need to find that specific group that sees the world as yourself and convince them to send your money. Movies, pics, anime, drawings, songs, stupid comments on camera, it's all the same since you can put it on a small screen.

Thank you, you're correct. I'm 100% sure can add an option on the menu so we get a similar experience as the Nikon EVF. I have no problem focusing at F5.6. I do however have a problem with the Canon method bc the whole screen moves in and out of the focusing plane. It's very annoying and makes the EVF unusable in the most advance option (Exp+DOF simulation) IMO. On the second you mentioned I do believe DPReview strived in the past to make good journalism writing 20+ pages on a camera review. We have a good example in Andrew's fantastic write-up on the GH4. Quality stuff.

Yes, I have no way to prove this but it seems the major brands have a digital troll army ready to attack anyone who questions or even remotely criticises one of their products. They'll hound you until you give in. I can understand that. Big companies will do almost everything to protect their markets. What's incredibly disconcerting is the unholy union of a journalism site specializing in photography and those electronic brands. It has now become clear the "mods" take orders from the Marketing Department. And yes, I checked a bunch of sites if reviewers had mentioned this particular problem on the R8's EVF when taking photographs. Nada. Nothing. Exactly zero profesional reviewers mentioned this obvious problem. It is a very good video-camera, though.

I'm talking about a purely economical perspective since the 40mm came out first. Both are fast and small lenses.

We all know about Andrew's problem with the site. A damned shame. What I never thought I'd see would be censorship in DPR's forums. I've posted hundreds of times and created almost 50 threads since 2013 (lurked there since 2006, by the way). And yet, last week my post was taken down in the Canon EOS R forum for petitioning Canon HQ in Tokyo to fix a Canon R8 EVF bug through firmware. My petition was very respectful. I dotted all my eyes and said thank you at the end of my text. The problem? The R8 does this weird "micro-juddering" when focusing through the EVF at any apertura other than the brightest aperture of the lens. This happens in the DOF+Exposure option in the EVF only. I'm no expert but it seems the focus planes are moving and that creates image movement in the EVF. It's incredibly distracting and sickening. I'm sure Canon can fix this easily. My basic Nikon Z50 works fine when focusing through the EVF and displaying both aperture and exposure changes in real time. Focus is rock- solid. And yet this subject was deemed too controversial and infringing on the rules of DPR's forums. IMO it's a been a steep decline after the new administration took over (and Amazon was not exactly a gold standard in the editorial industry, btw)

Problem is their own 40mm FX came out before the 24mm DX. I'm guessing most Z DX buyers like myself were starved for a small, fast and light lens for our Z50s. Having a 40mm F2 made buying a 24mm F1.7 almost redundant. The 40mm is very good for the price.

There's a huge difference between 12-24 fps. As mentioned here various times a great deal of experimentation was requiered to place the exact number of fps for something to look "right" at 24. 8-12-14-18 look very dreamy for sure yet no quite "right". The other and much higher fps you mentioned from the article look sharper = more real = more prone to danger.

Better than most DSLRs, though.

Nope, not there. I'm referring to high-contrast scenes in the last third of both films. Dialogue heavy, so the camera lingers on the subjects and the noise really becomes apparent. Just watch the films and you'll know what I mean. It's impossible to miss. Great pictures both of them.

No, watch both films. It's jarring and, as I said, you just can't ignore it. "Noise floor", "mosquito noise", "photon entropy". Poteito, potato. Called it how you prefer, it's there.

I don't know, I'm just looking at the final product on screen. Clearly someone in the final edit made a choice and decided to keep all that digital noise after lifting the shadows.

No bro, it's the digital noise that creeps up when you lift the shadows in a violent fashion and all kinds of artifacts show up. Blue dots, green lines, random pixels everywhere, you've seen it.

That's interesting, thanks.

Slow weekend. Watched "Anatomy of a Fall" and "The Zone of Interest" on streaming back-to-back. Both were nominated for a ton of different awards, including this year's Oscars. Now I understand why. They are truly fantastic narratives produced in creative poles other than Hollywood. And yet, I couldn't help but notice that BOTH films feature scenes full of mosquito-noise in the last third of the narrative. You cannot not see it. High contrast scenes in both of them. From extreme shadows to extreme brightness in the same frame. A good amount of time of on-screen mosquito noise, not a second or two. The director just said to the editor "fuck it, lift the shadows as much as you can and we'll show it that way, with all this digital noise. Who the hell cares". Just saying guys. Maybe we're just too close to the trees.