HockeyFan12

I'm assuming the latter.

I hate to say it, but I agree. Only maybe 5% of tv and 20% of theatrical features (I'm guessing, but it's along these lines) are shot on RAW. Because it's not worth the extra expense on productions already costing $250,000/day to get that last tiny little bit of image quality. And yet it's a huge omission on a camera that costs $8000? You can't expect everything. Or you can, but you'll be disappointed.

Most of the "micro jitters" and unnatural motion you get with a smaller camera body goes away when you fully rig up even a small cinema camera, so I don't see it as being as important a feature on a larger-bodied camera like this. Most union camera ops would laugh at the idea of using any image stabilizer because the behavior is too erratic and they'd rather just use a very balanced handheld rig or proper steadicam, but for wedding videographers and hobbyists I can see the appeal. I use OIS all the time, but I'm a hobbyist. I still don't think IBIS is much of an omission, also for the reasons you mention. The question is, what does the C200 lack that the C700 has and what does the EVA1 lack that the Varicam has? The answer is... not much. Even if you can only afford to rent one of these and a few light panels, you have all the tools you need to produce gorgeous content. The barrier to entry is shockingly low. I'm not sure if that's a good thing for aspiring DPs or not tbh.... Either the best or worst time to get into the market, depending on how you look at it.

Wow, pretty awesome. I prefer the Varicam's image to the F55. Cleaner, better color. Seriously, this and the C200 are 98% of an Alexa for $7500. There's no more excuse for bad looking footage. (Except the lighting and art department budgets lol.) Amazing price/performance. Content to see a lack of image stabilization, though I'm sure some people would appreciate it. It's a heavy body and most pros (this looks like a professional camera) frown on IS of all types. I don't think anyone was really expecting it in a full-sized camera body, even if it was on a few wish lists.

Apparently Canon has promised to add XF-AVC for free down the line, but if someone with more knowledge than the rest of us here knows that the DV6 chip can only process 8 bit, then it seems it will be the 8 bit version. I wouldn't get too worried. I have NEVER seen banding on a C300, C500, C100, etc. and have used them tons. I mean... if you shoot at 320 ISO and overexpose a flat blue sky with noise reduction turned on to maximum maybe you could get a little bit? But never objectionable. And Canon Log 3 is designed not to be as flat as Canon Log 2, so perhaps its exclusion in favor of Raw Light is to avoid the banding you would get with 8 bit Canon Log 2. Neither Canon Log 1 nor Canon Log 3 is as flat as Log C or SLOG2/SLOG3 or Canon Log 2; instead, it's "pseudo-log" designed to retain DR while also minimizing banding. I don't think banding will be an issue for anyone using this camera. The color profiles on cinema cameras do not suffer from the same problems you get on mirrorless and dSLR (or with Sony's profiles, which are far too flat for 8 bit). Then again, I'm not the Canon expert here!

Yep. But by the point you're having this discussion, you've signed a contract with Netflix. And the budgets they provide for their originals are high enough that you can take your pick. Even for content financed elsewhere and later acquired by Netflix (even as a Netflix original), 1080p deliverables are fine.

If I were still shooting, I would probably buy what my clients wanted me to buy. If I started getting asked for 4k, I'd buy a 4k camera. Otherwise, I wouldn't. And I'd shoot in whatever the lowest spec'd format they'd accept is. As a hobbyist, I would just buy whatever I wanted and not care about what other people are doing with their money one way or the other. To this extent, I think debates about 4k are a bit absurd because our needs all vary so much. We should just be doing our own research at this point and not question what others are doing unless they specifically ask for advice. I think the low end and high end will adopt 4k before anyone else. What separates Netflix and Youtube (and Amazon) is that their distribution is all digital, whereas many networks are still getting content delivered in HDCAMSR tape. There's so much 1080p infrastructure in television. And the cost of shifting vfx (in particular, but editorial in general) to 4k is massive, potentially millions of dollars for tentpoles. But they can afford that. So I see Netflix, the ultra low end (where you don't need to buy and maintain a large gigabit ethernet network for post because it's all done locally), and the very high end leading the way for 4k. I think bread and butter stuff, shooting for tv and ads and whatnot, that's gonna be 1080p for the near future. What is funny is seeing content shot at 4k or 6k that goes through the whole post process like that only to deliver in 2k. Your resolution is only as high as the weakest link, usually a vfx house that doesn't have the horsepower to render CG at 4k.

Believe me, I know. I'm working on a few Netflix series now and YouTube and Hulu series, too. (Well, not at this very moment but this year.) Netflix is pickiest about cameras. YouTube will accept 4k Alexa footage and most of their content is shot on 4k-upscaling Alexas. Netflix won't accept Alexa footage so I'm mostly seeing Red and F55 and I think there's some C300 Mk II mixed in, too. My preference would be Alexa but it's their choice to make. But yes, they'll buy rights to anything even if it's in 1080p, even if they later release it as an original. I'm only saying that at the low end of the industry where I work, only Netflix really cares about 4k, and even they will accept 1080p content for their originals (if used sparingly or if a show or movie is produced before they acquire it). I don't think that changes too much until you're working on tentpoles. The features I work on are all 2k DCP deliverables even if they're shot on 4k. I guess my only point is, if you need 4k, you will know, because your clients will tell you before you roll a frame of footage. So speculating about it is a bit foolish. Whoever needs it knows they need it from the get go.

As you said, it varies by client. I don't work on the high end. Because of that very few of my clients work in 4k. Only YouTube and Netflix, I think, want 4k. Everyone else is 1080p ProRes or 2k. The network tv shows and ads I work on are 1080p ProRes, same with made for TV movies (with the occasional 2K workflow instead). Most theatrical features I work on finish in 2k, too. But I would say at least 5-10% of my work is 4k now and again I am working on the very low end stuff. So there clearly is a market for 4k, just above the Alexa (Alexa65 stuff) mostly and for a few online distributors who use the F55/Dragon/F65/Varicam etc. because they stipulate 4k acquisition. But most blockbusters have gone to 4k and/or RAW acquisition even if they're finishing in 2k, it's true. That said, even Netflix allows for SOME 1080p content to be mixed in. And with the Revenant, for instance, the Alexa mini and 65 intercut seamlessly. Netflix's requirements are not as strict as are claimed. It's only for original content that they actually produce where they require 4k and even then you can sneak in some other cameras to "get the shot" for like slow motion or whatnot. Having the option to shoot both certainly doesn't hurt!

Yeah this makes a lot of sense. I think the C200 looks like a market segment killer in the same way the original C300 and Alexa were. If I were starting a career as a shooter today I wouldn't look elsewhere. But it should be no surprise that you can get a good image for $8000. To that extent, I found the site's coverage of the FS5 sort of underwhelming. It might beat out an A7S but it also really ought to for the price. :/ Hidden gems like the BM 2.5K, various anamorphic adapters, and even the 5D RAW are much more interesting topics. There are plenty of websites devoted to vlogging and low end video already.

What was the budget again for how many days of shooting? I thought it was low, like $50k/day or something. $250k/day is the normal figure I hear for a high end day on set (low budget studio feature/national tv/national ad). If it's below that, they did pretty good. But if you can get the same result for less, get into line producing. You will find yourself flooded with work. If you can budget better than the big league, that's your advantage. I worked somewhere that did ultra low budget features and was asked by an A list producer (I think his biggest feature grossed over $500 million) how they did it. This guy is one of the most profitable producers in the industry and even he wanted to know. Budgeting high production value for cheap is an amazingly valuable skill. Or... there are plenty of people here who can great production value on their lonesome for next to nothing, too. If you can do that... Then that's your advantage, using your talent rather than budgeting to maximize others, then great! Use it! (And there are people with none of those skills but with amazing stories to tell. That's the most enviable asset of all.) I'm dead serious. I started my career by looking at what was on tv, thinking "I can do better for cheaper" even though what I was doing was just a hobby at that point and then.... doing better for cheaper. I'm still pretty early in it, but still working on a lot of the most-viewed shows on tv, national ads, wide release studio features, and usually in a senior role (yes, I did take some low pay work along the way and yes I sort of regret it, but life goes on, sue me). If you think you can do it there's a really good chance you can! A friend of a friend started a vfx company out of a garage with a few iMacs and they focused on beauty work. It's now the boutique company working for A list directors, billing many millions a year, and it only took a couple years to get there. A family friend is now worth six million due to the success of his YouTube channel and crowd-funded content. It really can be that easy but you won't get there unless you go for it! (I should take my own advice lol.) You have identified that you have the talent to make a Cannes-worthy short for a vanishingly low budget, or at least do some things better and cheaper than the studios. How is that a negative thing to realize? It's only negative if you don't act on it. Let it motivate you, not frustrate you. If you think you can do it chances are you can! If you want to, you should. Identify your advantage(s) and milk them for all they are worth. Which it sounds like is a lot!

Wow. Dream machine. Hats of to Canon!

Shocker, I know. I just find there to be some tacit misogyny here and disrespect to actors, too. About ten years ago, I had a long talk with one of the directors of Mad Men. Back when he was working as a DP on the Sopranos and I think directing some episodes, too, I'm not sure. One of the lead actors on the show directed an episode and it was the first thing directed. And this guy was DPing it and was pretty frustrated at first that the actor/director didn't know much about blocking or lens choice and left a lot of those choices up to the DP. But later, he realized that the actor was getting incredible performances out of everyone, and ended up contributing a lot to the episode, just in a different way from someone with another background. I don't know if Robin Wright knows her stuff technically, but I won't assume she doesn't. And if she doesn't, I wouldn't assume she's a bad director for that reason alone. Being on set is the best form of film school. There are plenty of great actors turned directors. Anyhow that's just my opinion.

Yeah, the 4.6K is nice but the other black magic cameras have worse DR than the 2.5k, by quite a bit, as you've noticed. I believe the Epic MX has worse DR, too. If you want the same DR, then it's A7S (but I am not a fan of that camera at all) or Dragon or C300 Mk II or FS7? The 2.5k has incredible DR. I don't think you'll find anything much better for under $10k. Is there a PL speed booster? 4.6k Ursa has got to be the cheapest thing. :/ Alexas are down to under $20k used now and the price/performance on that is unbeatable. But that's a big investment and a difficult camera to use with a crew of two. Not 4k, though, either.

I'm bowing out of this discussion. I agree that free labor is abused in the industry, but everything else here I find rather offensive.

That's true. You'd be shocked how often top of the line post houses, like the very top of the line, work either for free or way below cost in order to secure more work on lucrative contracts from the same clients. And if you're making $400k/year as a DP, a few days unpaid to help with job security is more than worth it. The unpaid PAs surely see it as a networking opportunity (and it can be one, I've seen people go from PA to a producer on a TV series or tentpole in a few years). But that's where things do get a bit dubious... money is money. Cultural capital and networking are what you make of them only... so it's an easy way to abuse newcomers and a real problem in the industry. You can reassure yourself that talent still matters and you neither have to work for free nor hire people to work for free to succeed. But there's nothing wrong with free labor if you make the agreement in good faith and don't use anyone or let yourself get used. In many ways, free labor is less abusive than low pay labor, because the understanding is still one of respect where the expectation is you'll get something else in return. Low pay jobs are always what end up worst for me. But I hear you.

There's capital and then there's cultural capital. People will leverage their names to get cheap labor. It might not be right, but it's their right to do so. I also strongly doubt everyone worked free. No one is being forced to donate or forced to work. It's all voluntary, even if it's frustrating. I hear you, though. I have worked on high profile festival projects for cheap mostly because I wanted the credit, thinking I could exchange cultural capital for actual money down the line. We'll see how it works out. It definitely really sucks but I only have myself to blame if it doesn't. If anything, it should inspire you. If you can get better results for free than the House of Cards crew can get with $50k and tons of favors, you'll be doing so well soon enough that you needn't be jealous of them. Let it inspire you! Whenever you see something made by high end pros and think "I can do better," the only injustice is that you're not giving yourself the chance to prove you can. It's not like anyone involved in this had upsetting you in mind, they don't know who any of us are and don't care. So maybe it's not that their work is sub-par for the money, maybe it's that your work is better than you realize and you already have the skill to be in that upper echelon. If you do, then you owe it to yourself to prove it. Or admit to yourself it's not your priority. If you have the talent and want to do something with it but don't, that's the only injustice, you being unfair to you. (The Cannes shorts program isn't very competitive, either, but yes, nepotism plays a major major factor in the festival scene. Think of it like a social club trying to maintain an image and a guest list, with the films as the entertainment for the club. The social and branding components are more important than the quality of the content. But it makes sense, each festival represents a brand, and a brand is cultural capital.)

I'm really curious to hear about how to monetize on streaming, particularly with bit torrent, etc. getting in the way. Can you PM me?

Brilliant, thanks. I'm going to try that! Yeah the timecode stuff and drop out stuff is really making this super difficult! You might want a black magic intensity for all that stuff maybe... it's what everyone on reduser is recommending.

Even if no one is really enthusiastic about Canon Log on the 5D Mark IV (I'm not sure why, the crop factor is only 1.08 compared with an Alexa, and that's not all that much) it signals the recognition by Canon that they need to push 4k downmarket and improve on specs if they want to compete. This could be a pretty great deal, exactly what FS5 owners wanted but didn't get. :/ The silly part, of course, is that most high end productions are still 1080p/2k and only the very highest and the low end are 4k. 4k almost makes more sense on point and shoot than it does on the C300 Mk II, which sold well possibly specifically because it was so conservatively spec'd. Arri doesn't give you true 4k unless you're shooting 65mm!

Lol yeah about what I feared.... it's funny that this is such a known issue. I posted on reduser and received similar replies. I have an analogue capture device somewhere but sort of like the idea of the copy being bit perfect (minus drop outs). Not sure why. I'm starting to suspect that houses digitizing tapes are using analogue cards instead of firewire. I'll try Premiere. Maybe iMovie 6 might be the ticket if I can get it to run.

I'm actually looking forward to the new Alien movie, but what I'd be looking forward to 10X more is Ridley Scott directing something similar to Alien but without the weight of lore and franchise continuity, a really scary original body horror film. Something, ironically, more like... the original Alien. There have always been remakes and it's always been "the same but different" but when it's more same than different I get bored and most blockbusters feel roughly interchangeable within the same IP, or even outside it, now that the IP is becoming a bigger selling point than story, actor, or writer/director. That said, it's great to see so much talent and craft being enabled by hitherto unavailable tools. It's a shame the craft is all there is to be appreciated unless you're a fan of the original IP seeking some sort of weird nostalgia. Feels very impersonal and forgettable. That said, I get it. I'm sort of looking forward to the new Twin Peaks. :/

I want to capture and archive some of my old tapes and I’ll be using a miniDV camcorder and Digital8 (yup) camcorder to capture them via FW800 to USB3 to USBC adapters… I just want to capture the tapes without worrying abut timecode and even if there are drop outs that’s okay, I don’t want capture to stop. It’s just for archiving home movies. Either one file per tape or one folder. And I want to capture the whole thing without audio drifting or having to restart capture at every time code discrepancy. FCP7 was what I used to use but it aborts capture on drop outs and is… too old. What software today is best for this? I’m just making an archive of old home movies. I am assuming Premiere Pro? What settings are best for this to make it as easy a job as possible? (I’d considered outsourcing but I sort of enjoy the process.)

That's fair but most DPs I've worked with have spent years operating or ACing or shooting with anamorphic lenses at AFI or somewhere and so when they rent a set, they know what they're getting into. But it is a very different experience, that's for sure. But from what I've seen they're a rental-only option traditionally. I don't think you can even buy the C series and that's just about all I see people use (occasionally Kowa or Lomo on very low end work, or I worked with the Hawks once). IP concerns aside, the more the merrier. I'm not gonna buy these but I might rent them.

They probably do.