mercer

Thanks for that. I finally found the owner's manual online and I have been reading up on it. It appears with the XC10, C-Log is non customizable, which is fine by me because it looks gorgeous as is. When the XC10 came out I had a list of reservations about picking one up. With the top of the list being that video and filmmaking is really just a hobby for me... Well it's a potential outlet for my short and feature scripts to get made, but I am of no delusion that I will hit it big. All of its issues that many have noted before was also on the list. But then I picked up a Panny FZ300 and although it's not in the class as the XC10, I found it to be probably the most fun camera to shoot with... But with the worst picture quality. And then I sold it to buy the BMMCC, which is probably the least fun camera I have ever owned to shoot with... But with the best picture quality. So, with all this in mind and passing time I came upon Andrew's revisit of the XC10 and from all my research and videos watched, it seems to be Canon's version of the pocket cam with the added benefit of run and gun capabilities... Which the Micro is sorely lacking. I will probably keep the micro since the IQ is undeniable and it is great for controlled micro short films, but I can see the XC10 becoming an important part of my kit as I move forward. Thanks again for your help.

When Field cited exact page counts for the opening image and the inciting incident and plot point one and the midpoint and plot point two and the climax and the resolution, it was never meant to be rigid. It was only meant to be a guideline that showed what almost every successful and critically acclaimed film had done before. Even a strangely structured film like Memento or Pulp Fiction falls within this paradigm. Now I don't subscribe to the notion that everything Field wrote has to be strictly followed, but for a beginner, his film breakdowns did hold a truth that every writer should at least know. And without a doubt STRUCTURE is the most important part of any screenplay. It holds the story together and propels the plot forward... Regardless of the genre or the budget. Where it becomes difficult, with every single screenplay written, is exactly how the writer will structure their screenplay. There are multiple forms, but the basic principles, or basic beats are the same... And they have been the same since Aristotle wrote "Poetics." Which is why I highly recommend that beginner screenwriters read up on Jungian theories. He recognized this "collective subconscious" that was evident in every story and myth written. So, as a writer, if you believe that all humans inherently understand and feel how stories are supposed to progress and be told, to ignore that basic tool, to me, seems like an exercise in foolhardiness. And to understand his summaries of human characterization as he simplistically outlined with his archetypes is a perfect starting point to understanding character... Which is the second most important part of any screenplay. Any beginning screenwriter could easily write an inventive and original screenplay, their first time out, by following the basic structure outlined by Field and the simple character summaries outlined by Jung. Then they can read up on David Mamet's dramatic theories which are really the most pragmatic concepts of all, especially since he is considered to be such a thoughtful, artistic writer, and those theories can be implemented into the tools in every writer's arsenal. To not understand, or study, these basic principles equates to one of two things... The writer is too lazy to learn them, or they are too stubborn due to some preconception that they are creating art and they don't need rules or craft. It's like that old cliche... Success is 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration.

The last paragraph in that Facebook response is the most telling... "But you already know that you're powerless right now to do anything to regain your money from someone you know nothing about his/her name, whereabouts, age, occupation, phone number, nothing, and that's why you're freaking out" It would seem as though this person is admitting that he is not Ebrahim, I think I believe Ebrahim... What would he have to gain? Unless he came onto this board years ago with every intent of playing the long con to swindle a relatively small amount of money. Unlikely.

We have talked briefly about this stuff before and it wasn't my intention to call you out on anything. I just wanted the OP to have multiple sides to the debate. You are correct, nothing is keeping you from writing a script without following the "rules" and breaking these rules would have zero effect on the quality of the script... But like it or not, there are rules for the way a professional screenplay is formatted. There is craft and tools to help a writer tell a compelling story. And there are writers that break those rules and still manage to write a great script. For instance, Shane Black wrote Lethal Weapon and broke nearly every "rule" of how a screenplay should read. He used asides and crazy description, almost in an editorial fashion and, at the time, it was the highest selling screenplay ever. So there are always exceptions to the rules. But there is a reason why most colleges who have a film department graduate their students with a degree in communications. Stories and movies are communicative in nature and honestly I don't see the point in breaking the rules you abhor just to break the rules? Learning the craft of screenwriting and storytelling is actually about communicating your ideas to the viewer. The creativity is inside the ideas and the craft helps you explain those ideas to a viewer. Again, I am not calling you out, I just enjoy the debate. Obviously, write the script you want to write, and how you want to write it. I'll be happy to read it and interject my ideas into it... ?, but more importantly I want to see this short of yours because in the end, the script is meaningless and the finished film is all that matters... That's why screenwriters are usually banned from the set. Of course, there's an old Hollywood story where a producer tells his director that the screenplay is the most important part of a movie... "Just don't tell the screenwriter I said that."

I don't know... I wouldn't confuse the screenwriting process with the filmmaking process... In some ways they're symbiotic... Without a script there is no movie... Without a movie... A screenplay is just words on paper written in an illogical format. From the first word written on the first page, which isn't supposed to be numbered as page one, even though every subsequent page is supposed to be numbered, to the raising stakes in the beginning of act 2, to the midpoint turn that leads you to the emotional climax and resolution should be crafted in a way to evoke the most emotional response from the viewer. Knowing how to construct set ups and pay offs and that subplots should strengthen your theme and that often your resolution can be a circular event that mirrors your first scene are all valuable tools of the craft. Even a 3 page treatment is telling a story with narrative beats. I think my point was that people shouldn't confuse tools with rules.

I think what a lot of creative people, who are in the earlier stages of their pursuit, forget is that honing your craft is more important than absolute creative freedom. I have written 4 feature screenplays and a dozen incomplete scripts and it never gets easier. Each script brings on its own set of problems and if it wasn't for the time I spent learning the craft, I wouldn't know how to solve those problems, or even how to break the rules. And I am far from being a professional screenwriter. Writing a screenplay is probably the hardest thing I have ever done. Also, you should probably read Save the Cat, by Blake Snyder as well. Back in the 80s and 90s... And even early 00s Syd Field was the paradigm Hollywood used, but I have seen a recent uptick with Save the Cat and the structural moments he defined as a basis for "good" Hollywod film structure. Also, don't forget "Story" by Robert McKee. Honestly, you can go to Wikipedia and search screenwriting and they will give a breakdown of the most famous books written about the craft. If one of them appeals to your sensibilities, give it a buy.

It must be true nobody likes Canon that much.

Ahh the Internet... Sarcasm and humor sometimes does not translate well. I was joking around with that comment... Unsure if you were with your reply?

But seriously, this is a tough one, there is no reason not to believe the OP's claims, but I don't believe Ebrahim and his family should be brought to the town square and stoned to death just yet either. Ebrahim has always seemed like an honorable person. I believe he's a frequent visitor so I'm sure his side of the story will come out soon enough.

Is this your way of saying that Phillip Bloom is involved in this alleged scam?

Well said. Syd Field was a little unpopular for awhile because a lot of writers thought his "paradigm" was to formulaic when in reality it was just a basic truth about screenplay structure. There are a million ways to tell a story, but if your screenplay is not structured properly, your narrative will fall apart. Of course, not all screenplays would benefit from that paradigm... Especially short screenplays, but all screenwriters will benefit from understanding structure. I also recommend reading some Carl Jung, his ideas on the "collective subconscious" and "archetypes" are extremely valuable for a storyteller.

Truby's Anatomy of Story is a good book. Truby is a great analyst of movies. A good primer for screenwriting is Screenplay by Syd Field. Another great, quick read is by American playwright, screenwriter and director David Mamet called Three Uses of the Knife.

Slightly off topic, but not really... I have been messing around with some downloaded C Log files from the XC10 and I am really impressed. It's a blast to grade with so much color latitude for an 8 bit small sensor camera. But I was wondering... Is C Log customizable or is it like Raw and ProRes from BM, flat and as is?

I don't thing downscaling them from 16:9 1080p to 4:3 480 is helping you either. Try going to 720 to keep the same aspect ratio as the 1080p. Or do a custom number, closer to 480 that is still 16:9. I think the smallest 16:9 aspect ratio is 1024x576.

The guy who made the short Lights Out that catapulted him to a Hollywood directing career, always ADR'd his shorts. I don't think he even plugged in a mic for a scratch track.

I like ADR. I have done a little acting and it is pretty easy to listen to the scratch track and mimick the cadence and tone of your lines... Especially when broken down into smaller bits.

Can you change the Luma range in the GX85, like you can with the G7?

Yeah, the Micro is a cool little camera. It has taken me a little bit to get used to the form factor... I still don't love having the external monitor and the battery life and the inherent inability to quickly grab shots, but the IQ is undeniable. The Raw 3:1 is amazing and then I try the ProRes XQ and I fall in love with that image just as much.

Really nice!!! That's what I was thinking. That lens pops.

Yeah, it's a nice lens. I have the MD version and the Rokkor-X. Am actually selling my Rokkor-X copy on eBay.

Yeah, I just saw this over at BMCuser. Definitely the best design I have come across for the micro. I've been using a half cage designed for the pocket cam since both cams share the same height. It's been working nicely for me, but that preorder price is almost too good to pass up. Of course I am really surprised no company has come out with a hinged design so you can mount your monitor directly behind the Micro and have it tilt up and down like a regular LCD would on mirrorless cameras... Or even better yet, a battery/monitor in one that slides directly into the battery slot of the micro. The cam is so small, it's a shame to have to rig it up into some monstrosity.

Thanks I'll give that a go. It seems like there is not enough distance from the inside edge of the inner mount to inside edge of the outer flange. Does metabones notoriously make their adapters a little tighter than the average adapter?

I downloaded some c-log from it and I was surprised how easily it graded... And I am not good with color... Especially 8 bit. Also from looking at videos on Vimeo, it seems like Wide DR is pretty decent, but the other profiles seems like you take a hit in highlight DR. Of course, with the c-log being so good, there seems to be little reason to use anything else. I have owned a couple 4K cameras in the past and I always converted the footage to 1080p ProRes before bringing it into FCPX, but with these files, the c-log 4K played well with proxies on my computer. And it seems if I was going to use my old method, I may as well shoot in 1080p, cause it's gorgeous and you get the benefit of 5-Axis, SD cards and 60p. Anyway, thanks for the info.

Is the photo with the Minolta 28mm the f/2.8 version or the f/2? I have the f/2 and it's one of my favorite lenses of all time and coincidentally, or not, that was my favorite photo you posted as well. Very nice. The ibis really is stellar. What were your settings and post workflow?

Very nice, it worked great. I am contemplating picking up the XC10. I recently bought the BMMCC, which is an amazing camera except for anything run and gun. I miss being able to have the camera in the passenger's seat and pull over to grab some shots. I also have an opportunity to shoot some small events as a B or C cam to some C100s. I watched a few of your other Lynn University videos and loved how seamless the XC10 footage integrated with the rest of the footage, even with the BMCC 2.5. So I would use the BMMCC for anything small and controlled... Micro shorts and the XC10 for larger, run and gun pieces. Are there any quirks you have encountered?