Zak Forsman

over time, you develop an ear for this sort of thing. as a trailer editor, it's pretty much mandatory to be a good music editor. rather than relying on some plugin, looking at the waveform can help you make a picture or audio cut (or cuts) to the beat/percussion/etc. personally, i don't need to place markers because the waveform is right there.

most broadcast content is mixed that way. having neighbors, you're forced to ride the volume on a lot of shows. does your tv have a "late night" function? sometimes they use other names for it. it basically compresses the dynamic range of the audio, boosting the quiet moments and attenuating the louder parts.

Focus travel is only 1 centimeter.

With my 3FF-W set, i have threaded coupling rings from Rectilux that attach to the front of a Kowa Bell & Howell and an ES Cinelux. both are designed to attach to each according to the frontal design of that scope. both coupling rings provide a 75mm outer thread for mounting inside the 3FF-W. so you can use one of these coupling rings to mount the Core DNA to the front of whichever scope you intend to pair it with. More importantly, I see that the description mentions it has 6 bolt threads at the rear that allow you to align, attach and clamp it onto any lens you want. No step-up (or down) ring required. for the front thread, it remains to be seen if it would vignette on a wider lens, but a step down from 86mm to 82mm would get you to a common filter size. Again, I have the 3FF-W and use a 95mm to 82mm step-down ring for my Hoya ND filters.

same ballpark. but has some differences. for one, the front element on the Rectilux Core DNA doesn't rotate so you can use a variable ND, if i'm reading the press release correctly.

I have the Rectilux 3FF-W and have considered it money well spent, but woke up this morning to this press release in my inbox and... well... looks like I'll need a little more money to spend well.... http://transferconvert.co.uk/cinemania/PressReleaseRectiluxCoreDNA.pdf

a 256gb SSD card will hold 40 minutes of 4K ProRes HQ.

IndiPro makes this... http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1019817-REG/indipro_tools_ipgrid_pksony_dual_sony_7_2v_battery.html/prm/alsVwDtl

I've been keeping an eye out for a deal on one of these. Don't know how long it will last but the coupon code PSWBH15 will take $40 off the $99 price tag at B&H Photo. Davinci Resolve users will find it particularly useful. I'm hoping with enough testing and tweaking, I can come up with a custom LUT that will neutralize the GH4's unique color issues. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/651253-REG/X_Rite_MSCCPP_ColorChecker_Passport.html How to use it in Davinci Resolve to balance colors. This gives a general idea despite the fact that the guy in the video screws things up a bit (like setting his ProRes footage to sRGB instead of Rec 709). And I think he's comparing an unbalanced tungsten shot to a balanced fluorescent shot. I think if he'd balance both, they'd be close in the end? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onom8tpiof8

nope. but I would enjoy watching someone try.

yes with everything set to infinity, the Rectilux will focus closer. but both can focus very close if you adjust the scope and taking lens to something other than infinity.

i keep saturation at -2. for me, the GH4 has somewhat been a return to the "get your look in camera" days. i've had a chance to play around with v-log and those days might behind us when they release it later this year. the flexibility looks promising.

yeah, I tend to keep contrast at 0 in camera because there are things that the GH4 does to the colors in the image when you try to flatten things out that are permanent and kinda ugly and better handled in post. I like a low contrast image and have better results dropping contrast in post than i do in camera. with the GH4, that is.

I've bought two Kowa B&H lenses off ebay in the last four months. I'd say I see one pop up on their every 2 weeks or so? just make it a habit to check every morning, like i did. : ) There's one listed right now... http://www.ebay.com/itm/391222518710

Yeah, that Alexa LUT does make for a nice look. It's little more contrasty than I'd like to go, personally. But an excellent starting point overall. Here's some more clips shot in the Natural profile (0, -5, -5, -2, 0) that I've applied my own custom LUT to.

okay, here is the LUT I made for clips that I shoot in the GH4's Natural profile, applied to the "Portrait" camera original that Aaron sent me this morning. From here I would normally continue to tweak based on the needs of the scene or shot. But this gets me closer to the look I like by cooling things off a bit, especially the shadows, pulling the yellow out of the skin and balancing the skintones, and making the highlights a little creamier than straight white. this isn't meant to challenge the look of the Alexa LUT that Aaron used earlier. it's just an ever-evolving starting point. I see things in it I would nudge here and there already. EDIT: took some of the intensity of the blue in her outfit away.

I'll definitely give Standard another day in court because it's been a long time since i did my tests of each profile, but I haven't had any issues keeping reds red in Natural. And I found it produced the best skintones.

sure. zakforsman AT gmail DOT com

yeah, i shoot in the "Natural" profile. The only difference between that and "Portrait" is one step plus or minus in color saturation (i forget which). but the Alexa LUT i have is a nice tool to have for GH4 clips. Lately I've been using my own LUT generated form Davinci that used the Kodak 5207 ImpulZ LUT as a base with a bunch of my own adjustments on top of that.

yes, the resistance is inconsistent, but only slightly so, on mine. but like the softness and the chromatic aberrations it introduces, these are the minor sacrifices you make for something that is half (and potentially one-quarter) the price of The Rectilux -- the optics of which are far superior and don't introduce any additional image degradation beyond what the taking lens and scope would have on their own. In fact, I was able to easily disassemble my Rectilux and grease it to a resistance level of my liking. I would have no hesitation recommending the Rangefinder to someone who is looking for a balance of price and "good enough". For that reason, they will likely sell a gazilion of them. But if price is not an issue and you want the best, get the Rectilux.

holy shit, Uwe Boll spammed this forum?

The Rectilux is nearly half the weight of the Focus Module. The Focus Module alone weighs 850 grams, Rectilux alone weighs just under 470 grams. I don't own a Focus Module, but i can say that breathing aside, The Rectilux is a neutral addition to my scope and taking lens. By that I mean, the taking lens is not restricted any more than it would be on its own in terms of shooting wide open. Chromatic aberration or blooming is not further exacerbated by the Rectilux. It is definitely more costly, but in my opinion, it's money worth spending for a piece of gear that doesn't degrade the optical chain in any way. And the breathing is nearly identical to what you see with this old Russian Lomo anamorphics. And you can keyframe it out via horizontal scaling in post if you need to.