mercer

I think here in lies the problem. As no/low budget filmmakers we are forced to wear a lot of hats. It requires a jack of all trades mentality. The professionals spend years honing their craft, in their respective fields, and we're expected to have the same level of quality? It doesn't make sense. I'm not a colorist. I don't want to be a colorist. I just want my footage to match and have a filmic look. I have recently started working with color correcting and it is like a goddamn mystery. I'm not trying to code a video game. I just want my highlights and lowlights to match, from shot to shot, and then... maybe give the footage an overall look... Depending on the project. So, I like these consumer based products. iMovie is s fantastic little program, for what it is. FCX is an amazing step up. Now if somebody would make the iMovie of Resolve, then I'd be happy.

Oh okay. I picked up the 50mm 2.8 a couple weeks ago after watching your 35mm Flektogon video and then, even though it was a budgetary stretch, I got a good deal on the 35mm too. Great lenses. The 50mm, I bought, has an aperture issue though... It works fine until I put it on an adapter and then it doesn't want to open. I figured the pin wasn't engaged, but my adapter is hitting it. I never really took a lens apart, but I figured I'd have a go of it, and maybe declick it while I'm in there. My 35mm is declicked, so I might as well have them match. Do your lenses have similar iq's? I mean, does the c-mount Zeiss's iq blend well with the M42 versions? Which 28mm do you have? I also saw they have a 29mm, I assume it is identical to the Pentacon 29mm. I want a 20mm as well, but they are pricey... That lens would probably double the price of your Zeiss collection.

Just picked up a Cosmicar 75mm 1.9 c-mount. I have heard some good things about the lens, has anybody ever used the lens? I have the 12.5mm 1.9 and the 25.5mm 1.9 and they are both excellent. Right now I use them with my Pentax Q7 but I hope to have a BMPCC to use them on.

I, personally, love vintage glass... So I would go with the FDs but to be forward compatible you may want to go with the Nikon because they will adapt to any mount, making them essentially future proof depending upon what camera you go with but to get a really good set of Nikkor primes, you will probably spend a bit more than you would with the FDs. As long as you stay mirrorless, you can't go wrong with FD lenses. I have a set of the earlier FL, which is the same mount, and they are amazing. But, you could look into and M42 speedbooster and get a set of Takumar lenses... Great lenses, buttery smooth focus, the 50mm 1.4 should be in every filmmaker's arsenal, but even the 1.8 is a nice lens and the best part is the most common focal lengths are dirt cheap... like less than 50 bucks a lens in a lot of cases. The 1.4 will be about 75 but still if you use the lens, you would probably pay more, that's how good it is.

Very nice. Are they all c mounts? If so, what other focal lengths did they make? I assume the bolex is a s16 sensor? With the 10mm, the 16mm and the 50mm you really only need a 25 or a 35 and you'll be set. Unless they make a 7.5mm?

That does look nice. I am about 2-3 months away from getting a new camera. I have been eyeballing the fz1000 for run and gun reasons, but after seeing this footage, maybe the gh4 is the way to go. I have a couple vintage cosmicar c mounts that may go perfectly in anamorphic mode.

Thanks Axel, I really appreciate your input. Yeah, I have to read the manual... I am usually a jump right in and tinker kind of person, but this is just too complicated for that. I am at a stage where I am trying to figure out my entire filmmaking workflow. I am not a colorist, never will be, don't want to be one, but this filmmaking racket requires us to wear a lot of hats. I would like to keep everything together... Editing, color correction and titles. Being familiar with the new iMovie I should probably just jump to FCX but... Money is tight right now. I see the potential of Resolve... it's just a little, or a lot, beyond my depth. I wish there was a quality program that just matches the look of all your shots, to me that seems to be the hardest part. Anyway, thanks for the tips...it gives me a good starting point.

Hey Celli, thanks for the response. Unfortunately, I am your typical male, so I try to figure stuff out without directions... So I thought to myself... What the eff is a node? But that makes sense... Use nodes for different versions. My other issue, which I have googled the shit out of is... The top right panel of the program, where the nodes are, is cut off. I am using a new 11" MacBook Air, so I assume that's why, but most programs I have dealt with lets you reposition windows. The strange part is that I can see the entire bottom panels. But my real question is, how do you get different shots to match? I guess that's where LUTS come in? In the tutorial I watched about scopes, the guy used the histogram and primaries to balance and adjust blacks and whites and his rgb, but in my version of Resolve, the scope looks different and you can't see much of any blacks or whites on either end of the histogram. I do shoot dark footage, so I would assume there would be a good portion of blacks... Idk, maybe I'm not reading the histogram correctly. Back to google. Anyway, thanks for your help.

Well, it looks great. If I was a wealthier man I would pick up a digital bolex in a heartbeat. If they drop the price of the bmpcc this summer I am looking into those Zeiss lenses... Effing fantastic!!!

Hi, I have a couple questions pertaining to Davinci Resolve 11 Lite, but first I'd like to give you a little background info. I am relatively new to this forum, so I figure I would properly introduce myself so you guys will understand where I am at. I'm an amateur screenwriter with a desire to direct a feature. I have worked on a few low budget indie films that are in various stages of production... My on set roles have included, but not limited to... acting, camera operator, audio, and lighting. By no means am I an expert in any of them but I have learned a lot over the years. I filmed a short film about a decade ago on mini dv and have recently started working on a couple scripts that may lead to my first feature. Before I delve into the production, I want to do a lot of visual tests so I will know how to obtain the look I am after. So, yesterday I tried my hand at Resolve. Having never done any form of color correction or grading, my knowledge is limited to theory at best, and even that is rudimentary. What I am really trying to grasp, with the program, is a basic color correction. I have googled tutorials, but there are so many... I'm not even sure where to begin. After messing with the program, I can see it's benefits over the other two editing programs I have... iMovie and Premiere Elements 12... both are fine for basic edits but I know I need more. So, I took a simple shot that had mixed lighting... daylight through the windows, and florescent light. I have read that scopes is a good starting point for a color correction, so I watched a tutorial and attempted using the histogram scope to balance my video. But due to my macbook size, it was very difficult to fit everything on the screen and utilize the workflow. While in Primaries, I then tried the basic "A" function... which I assume means auto? That seemed to work, not perfectly but way better than I was getting on my own. Do any of you guys use the auto function as a starting point for you color correction? If not, can you help me with a quick and easy workflow? Or suggest a good tutorial series. I am not a colorist. I try to get as close as I can in camera but obviously that is not always possible. Any guidance would be much appreciated... in return I can answer any questions anyone may have on screenwriting... or I'll give your comment a "like" they may be of equal value. Ha.

I have the M1 and absolutely love it... Of course I am poor so this is my main camera for the time being. I found the M1 to be a no budget filmmakers wet dream, especially if run and gun is your style. With that said, it is missing some key things that I wish it had... First and foremost... Focus peaking so I am happy to hear it is integrated into the new model but the problem is... If I upgrade, I am not going to upgrade to M3... Why would I? But Andrew, I would like a little clarification. When you say that it goes to auto exposure mode... Are you saying from still mode? Or is there no manual exposure in any movie mode?

I guess you need a loupe. I think there are some inexpensive ones on eBay... like that cowboystudio loupe. It gets pretty good reviews for a low budget accessory.

I gotcha, yeah that must be annoying not to be able to see the changes on the screen as your changing it... Didn't think of that.

Sounds awesome I love wide zooms. I have a Tokina 24-40 and a Minolta 24-35... I have only ever used them on an aps-c but the convenience of two primes in one is very good for run and gun. With the Sigma, I guess it's 3 primes in 1.

Of course the lcd is a major issue and you aren't the first person I have heard who have had issue with it. Like I said, I don't have one... So is the issue it is just too dark in general or due to the angle you hold the camera makes the screen too dark?

How often do you change the shutter angle, ISO and wb? I get the inconvenience of sub menus... My main camera right now is an EOS-M, everything is touchscreen menu selection and my NEX has horrible menu controls... ironically my Pentax Q7 is the best with buttons on the camera body, but I rarely find the need to change too many of those options anyway.

It sounds awesomely annoying. I have been mad at myself for the better part of a year about not jumping on the BM pocket last summer.

Matthias, that is one sweet piece of Zeiss. My question is... Do you find the lens or the bolex has more to do with the look of that video? Did you do any grading? The reason I ask is because the video looks so filmic. I would almost believe it was film if you swore by it. Very nice.

That's what I was thinking.

I commented on a couple of his posts, but the man acts like a child, or a politician that changes their statements and facts to support their narrative. I don't debate children or politicians, so I stopped commenting, and stopped reading... It was liberating. Nobody will change his mind. He is convinced he has some form of justice, or righteousness on his side. I am glad I spoke up against him because he didn't have the right to smear people without iron clad, proven evidence, but to continue is just an exercise in futility. Of course, he didn't use my PMs against me, so I cannot blame Neumann for wanting his story to be told.

Andy Lee is the person to ask, but I assume he will say the Bourne lens. I just got a good copy of the Tokina 28-70 in MD mount. The day it arrived, my dream zoom, the Tokina AT-X 24-40mm 2.8 constant became available, so I bought that one too. I did test the 28-70mm and it is a nice lens. Part of me wants to keep it, but I have too many lenses already. To ebay it will go.

I'd take it all down to 1080p.

I remember a great video you shot with MD lenses and a rebel, look forward to what you can do with an ursa.

Okay Ed that is what you would do... Bloom reacted differently, but honestly you can only surmise what you would do... You would not know for sure until put into the situation. Honestly, I really think this entire argument is getting stupid... It's no longer about Bloom or his Saras... It has become a pissing match about semantics. I believe you are guilty of self-righteousness, but honestly... I really don't care anymore. When I first heard of the story I was saddened by the entire affair... For all parties involved. I knew I didn't know the entire story, but also knew it was sad whatever the truth was. But your inability to look objectively on this issue has forced me into ambivalence ... Which is probably the opposite effect you were attempting. This whole discussion reminds me why I stopped talking politics.

I read the first two paragraphs and stopped there. This is the most unfair conclusion You could have drawn from your self-righteous rant. You drew conclusions based on your opinion and whoever didn't agree with your assertions you labeled as someone who does not care about domestic violence, when in fact I did not read one statement that supports your thesis on this blog. You are creating false narratives and unfairly labeling people as sexist, pro domestic abuse, or whatever nonsense you want to believe. The only thing I have really read, other than a few jokes, are people who are trying to be objective to your subjective rants that hold no basis in truth because the truth is only known by 3 people... None of which you are. If for some reason at the end of your self-righteous diatribe, you apologized for putting words in people's mouth and forcing your opinion on others, then I am sorry for my beginning statement.