mercer

Looking nice Jon... unsure if a matte box would have made that much of a difference. If you get a few minutes can you do a side by side between the G85 and the GH5 with a Veydra lens? And if you’re feeling really generous, I would love to see a side by side of the external ProRes on the G85 vs the internal GH5 video.

@kidzrevil please update with how you like it. I was quite fond of the camera when I had it. And I would have kept it if I didn’t get the overheating warning in 40-45 degree weather after shooting a half a dozen 20 second clips. It never shut down, but it scared the crap out of me. I loved sLog3 and sgamut3cinema (or whatever it’s called) I felt that it had the closest look to Raw from any compressed video footage I had seen or used prior to it.

Ain’t that the truth. I am in no place to tell someone how to spend their money, god knows I’ve spent a small fortune of my own but as a hobbyist that is also interested in the conveniences of cinema cameras, I cannot rightly say that I could ever justify a $4500 price tag just to have 4K, when the majority of viewers will never see the benefits. In my opinion, if Arri hasn’t felt the need to release a 4K camera, then I don’t see why anybody on here really NEEDS one. So with that being said I feel the OP should get whatever he wants for whatever reason he wants, but I would still suggest either an F3, a C100ii or C300 or I guess an LS300 or FS5 if he really wants a 4K camera. And if he wants one on the cheap then get an LS300 but he should be fully aware of the build quality before just hitting buy it now.

Well, now that you have added 4K to your list and $4500 cap, then it seems an Ursa 4.6 or FS5 may be the way to go. But you will need a little more accessories for the Ursa. What are you shooting with now? And what are you planning to shoot with the cinema camera?

Not necessarily, even if Leica outsourced the design to Sigma, they are most likely using Leica glass and materials... so... It’s like the Leica 35-70mm f/3.5 that was a Minolta design with Leica glass.

Cool set up and great idea. Nice looking footage too.

I don’t know, I would say they’re comparable or actually Canon is better because they’re at least consistent. Plus every single model when updated, gets DPAF. It’s arguable that Canon’s DPAF is a comparable feature to Panasonic’s 4K 10bit because both are very desirable video features and the most important feature either company offers. Of course, I don’t think you can expect Panasonic to give everything and the kitchen sink, but the G and GX models should at least get a higher bitrate 1080p. But I guess 1080p doesn’t sell 4K TVs? Hell, there has been numerous replies regarding many GH5 users planning on purchasing HDR televisions due to the GH5 firmware update. And I would guess that the G series gets HDR before it gets high bitrate, all-i 1080p.

Maybe the Sony F3? And the FS5 could give you a little future proofing if you want to shoot 4K or Raw in the future. A C100 Mk ii could be good as well if you ever invest in EF lenses and want to use DPAF in the future.

I’ve been watching some C200 videos on Vimeo now that the camera has been out in the wild for a little while. So I figured I’d link to a few that look pretty good. Actually every one I’ve seen looks pretty good. Wish I had an extra 6 grand lying around. Here’s another with some lowlight footage...

Interesting... those 5 extra degrees made a difference? Did you test that on the Micro, when you had it, with similar results?

It is my understanding that there is little money to be made from zero budget features. It may lead to a bigger budget for subsequent films but often the creator is forced to self-distribute their first film. We already know that production companies are always looking for material and talent. They even comb YouTube, Vimeo, maybe even the Shooting section of this site. Writers and stories are discovered on Creepy Pasta as Kaylee mentioned earlier. I may have not written, “Creepy Pasta BS” but I guess that’s debatable. The point is that many people will argue that a web series could be way more beneficial to get your name out there than a feature would. And I don’t think Kaylee is planning on having any budget, so cost is probably not really a concern. A bigger concern/question is... how do you get the project seen? How do you publicize it so you’re not just uploading it to YouTube and hoping for the best? This is where money should be spent with banner ads and paid reviews at micro budget film sites. But I do agree shorter is better... my gut tells me 10-13 episodes at around 3-5 minutes a piece and the timing of release is probably critical as well.

But to add, and more to the point, the 3 act structure is not dead. It is inherent in all storytelling. You cannot tell a story without a beginning, middle and end. They don’t have to be in that order, but it is a fabric of any well written story. It lives in every movie, it lives in every act, in every sequence and every scene. A writer can choose to use one act, two acts, three, five, ten, 20 acts, to structure(verb) their story, but in the end it will always be a three act structure(noun).

With all due respect, that sequence is one of the most important story beats in the entire trilogy. Michael never wanted to be part of “the family business.” He was supposed to be the chosen one that legitimized the family name. He was to be a lawyer, a senator and maybe even one day President. There is an anti-parallel with the Kennedy family inside the first installment. But obviously fate, family had a different path for Michael. In the third installment, Pacino even had a line of dialogue that verbalizes the entire story/theme of the trilogy. It is often mocked for the delivery... “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.” The climax of the Sicilian sequence was another beat that pulled Michael toward his destiny as the reluctant anti-hero.

I haven’t watched the short yet, but I’ve been at my BS job all day and wanted to reply to a few things that were written. I think Luke’s original post about thinking how you want to market the web series is the only way to go. I cannot even begin to imagine how one would go about making a narrative piece at our level without some forethought and planning. So with that said, I believe you are one hundred percent correct in thinking about episode length. I also think you are correct in wanting to keep them as short as posssible. Back in the day when Warner Bros. made all of their famous cartoons we all grew up on, they surmised that the perfect length for their animated shorts were between 7 and 8 minutes... so a 7-8 page script. It fit well in their programming and they learned that it was the perfect length for keeping people’s attentions. Today, with people’s even shorter attention spans, a YouTube web series episode should be even shorter. I would try to not go over 5 minutes per episode, especially for the first few. Now that isn’t to say every episode has to be five minutes on the dot. Perhaps your first is three and your second is five and your third is seven and your fourth... your story beats should guide you. If you write a well written piece that respects the genre, everything should fall into place.

I would say make your episodes 3-5 minutes long and then base the number of episodes on the structure of the season/series arc. The soulless children is a great reveal for an episode... is it the first... or the last? From reading your previous posts, you seem to understand story structure, so let the structure of your story dictate the number of episodes... write the entire piece as a long short film or short feature and then it will be pretty obvious where the episodic breaks should be.

Thanks Marty. It's starting to come together. This whole project began as a 5 minute test short back in April but then I've been so pleased with the results, I just kept going. Now I need to start casting some more characters so I can finish the thing. And yeah I agree about the second one. It looks fine but lacks maybe the depth one can achieve with ML Raw. But for now these are all just color tests that I will finalize at a later date... when I learn how to color grade. Anyway, hope all is well with you. How is your short going?

And here's another one. I used that Hunter's LUT with this one.

Still plugging away on my film. And still could not be happier with ML Raw and the 5D3. I went out on Saturday to to do a couple pick up shots because my first attempt was a little noisier than I wanted and I wanted to get this scene before the water gets too cold. So I took out the Canon 35mm f2... what a lens. Anyway here is a screengrab from the shoot and a test color grade after I processed the footage. I'm still hoping to test the 3.5K builds soon, but right now... for my needs... the 1080p is more than enough.

Is there any way to see who liked a comment?

Obviously, I am no expert on his work since I first heard of him an hour ago and only looked at a couple dozen of his photos, but there is an interesting beauty to that series. It's definitely visceral but from the few photos I did see, there is a faded memory angle to it but also perhaps a distaste for rural America. Of course, I just like dem pitures.

Yeah... this is great! Thanks for this. I'd love to pretend to be more cultured and discuss how I've always loved the surrealism of Crewdson's work set in a realistic world... but I'm not. Never heard of him until now and now he has an exhibition on my Instagram page. But yes, the imagery is fantastic and right up my alley. His take on the familiar and the mundane creeps me out. I have to do some research now. I need to know the camera he uses?

In your opinion, does the GH5 give you half the quality of the Ursa? More than half? Less than?

Do you still have an Ursa Pro?

What's interesting about this is that the people who would benefit the most from DPAF or PDAF are still choosing the 10bit over the 8bit with the better AF.

The cat steals the show every time.