kye

Addendum, I got my keypad working with some custom software to enable macros and it's a great compliment to the Speed Editor.. Post here:

WINNING! TLDR; The combo of a eBay keypad and the USB Overdrive utility (for Mac) is a winner with Resolve, and likely other NLEs too. Longer version.... My portable editing setup now includes the BM Speed Editor, the Beatstep controller and Beatstep Resolve Edition software, and now this little custom keypad. The keypad and USBOverdrive allows macros, so you hit one key and it sends the computer a string of keyboard commands. In combination with the keyboard shortcuts in your NLE, you can make it do pretty cool stuff. In the Cut page, the Speed Editor works in a certain way which creates limitations, and Resolve has a few bugs (in my version at least) that also limit things. I have set keys that highlight the current clip, trim start/end to playhead, then unselect all clips. Or similar but splitting the clip. Or similar but ripple deleting the clip. These are mostly workarounds to the peculiarities of Resolve and the Cut page and Speed Editor, but I think it's an excellent addition to using it. I can navigate using the wheel on the Speed Editor, hit a key and trigger a macro, and then fine-tune on the Speed Editor if further refinement is required, and then keep going. I had some, let's say, distracting, workarounds that I had to do in order to perform these functions involving not only having to take my hands off the controller, but also triggering my frustration with BM at not building things in more flexible ways, which really took me out of the zone!

I'd suggest that you investigate controller options for FCPX. I say this because: You tried Resolve before and it didn't take The Speed Editor is designed for the Cut page, and while certain things work in the Edit page a lot (most?) functions don't work there, or don't work in the way you'd predict / want The Cut page seems to do rather odd things sometimes (maybe this will be fixed in future versions, but I'll believe it when I see it) I have a love/annoyance relationship with Resolve and with BM. On the one hand, the power of the colour page is unquestionable and the sheer quantity of features in the other pages is undeniable. On the other hand, BM are a very take-it-or-leave-it company: they have a way they expect you to work and even though they could alter features to let you work a different way they keep the features so they work their way and make zero sense any other way they are a hardware company first and "cripple" Resolve to push you down the path of buying their hardware they are focused on the big studios and the "little guys" are the poor cousin who isn't well catered for I'm starting to really get acquainted with the controller and my work workflows and editing style now and I'm actually contemplating starting to hack together a controller setup of my own to "bypass" some of the Resolve restrictions. Specifically, Resolve has a number of UI features that can't be assigned to Keyboard Shortcuts, or are usable in one page but not the other (eg, Cut page vs Edit page). I'm pondering if it's worth my time to look into developing custom macros or whatever to get around these.

People who buy petrol definitely include a subset that would riot in the streets. I'm not sure if the same can be said for anamorphic lens owners! I'm once again reminded of the saying "what the market can bear".. it's not what the market would like, it's what the market can bear. ie, it's the absolute edge of whatever you can get away with!

Zero focus anamorphic is the easiest number of focuses (can that word be a noun?) but sadly the GoPro is definitely letting the side down in that combo! It really depends on how you're using it. If you're shooting a thing and then offloading that footage immediately before needing to shoot again then it's fine. That's how most people use cameras, but not how most people use their phones, which seem to gradually just store more and more footage and photos as they take them over time. People like anamorphic for different reasons, but just like anything, you should focus on what you value and let others do the same. So in that sense, if you like the look, then 1.15 might be fine. I don't really care for anamorphic flares myself, but am attracted by the stretched bokeh as I find it gives a slightly surreal feeling having the background blurred more vertically than horizontally. It's another factor in getting more depth and background separation. For that reason I'd prefer a 2X anamorphic setup that didn't have the horizontal flares, but to each their own, as they say. I have been monitoring my bank accounts and noticed that you weren't depositing large sums of money into them. Come to think of it, it seems that NO ONE is doing that. Can you return bank accounts as well as crystal balls? 🙂

More playing around.... CineD -> CST 709 to ARRI Alexa / LogC -> ARRI Alexa LUT (worse match) CineD -> CST 709 to ARRI LogC -> Fujifilm 3513DI LUT (worse match) CineD -> CST 709 to ARRI LogC -> Kodak 2383 LUT (worse match) CineD -> CST 709 to ARRI LogC -> Kodak 2393 LUT (worse match) I also tried a bunch of CST / LUT combinations, but none yielded any promise.

"Version 3" Started again, and used a few global tools to get closer, before employing the selective tools. I also backed away from accuracy to get the "spirit" rather than an absolute match. I smoothed out the grade, trying to ensure it didn't break the image, like the last one did. Here's that grade applied to some real footage. At first I thought that maybe there was some luma vs sat action going on, so I used a node in HSL mode and using the channel mixer I tried mixing in the luma channel to the sat, and vice-versa, but neither generated anything useful. Then I tried using a YUV node, which made it into the final grade. YUV is a strange colour space, where the U and V stretch the vectorscope in two directions, and the Alexa is skewed a little towards amplifying one of those directions. This is a great transformation as it is applied to the whole colour space and therefore does not break the image. Then I applied another colour warper: This time paying careful attention to smooth out the transitions. After the last one breaking the image, I also wondered if I needed to desaturate the transition into pure white, but it turned out that it wasn't necessary. This is pretty subtle stuff, and I'm not really sure if anyone would bother with it TBH. I'm happy to share it if anyone is interested, generating a LUT is very easy. Really, it's a testament to how good the Panasonic colour profiles are to begin with, considering that in comparison to straight "correct" 709 they're both massively far away from that.

Does anyone have any tips for securely mounting the GX85 to a tripod? The screw is right at the front of the body, and if I put a tripod plate with a thin rubberised layer on it, the plate just tips up and the plate doesn't get tight, so the camera can rotate loose on the screw. From the manual, the screw is #40: I'd really like to use it with my Peak Design Camera Clip, but that requires a strong mount for the camera. Thanks!

Since my last post in this thread, I now own the Speed Editor for Resolve and am loving it. My earlier statement proved to be correct - the critical feature is the scroll wheel. However, I think there are three main reasons to consider a control surface, depending on what you're doing and what NLE you have. Navigating using the scroll wheel The scroll wheel is super intuitive to use when editing, and for this purpose I think the ergonomics are important. The Speed Editor (BMSE) wheel is heavy and has momentum, so I find that I use it a lot by flicking it and having it spin on its own accord. This means that you can have almost frame-level accuracy and yet be able to quickly navigate the timeline at the same time. A wheel that was just a clicky-control would be far less useful in this sense I think. Editing using the scroll wheel Probably the killer feature of the SE is the ability to hold down a button (eg, to control the out point of a clip) and move the wheel to adjust it. The SE allows you to control in points, out points, allows you to slip clips, to roll edit points, etc, all by holing down a button and scrolling using the wheel. It also has other things like being able to control the size of the viewing window, once again, by holding it down and using the wheel to adjust it. This method of working is super intuitive and a really slick feature. Editing using the buttons The SE has buttons that access functions that you can't map to keyboard keys. This is a bit of a cheat from BM, but its there, so isn't to be discounted. I would evaluate your options above based on those criteria, as they're the ones that really provide the value of a control surface, in my experience.

Great stuff! Lots of attention to detail here, and great casting on the "Walter" actor!! Thanks for posting, I really enjoyed it 🙂

Kind of, as it'll meet some but not all of the criteria I laid out in the first few posts, but it's pretty darned expensive and so doesn't really require any "help" in being recognised for its strengths and advantages. Of course, lenses are lenses and everything from the $10 lenses on eBay to the $100,000 lenses you can only rent but not buy still obey the laws of physics, operate under the same principles, and suffer from the same aberrations (to a greater or lesser extent). LOL.. there's a trap for new players! Another win for kit lenses - they always have coverage of the camera they're supplied with!!

I'm not optimistic about a Chinese company creating a Prores recorder. For a start, Prores is licensed, and secondly, the collective "wisdom" (ie, mass delusion) is that the h256 and RAW codecs are the future and that Prores is the past and is no good. Thirdly, one of the advantages of Prores was that it was a great intermediate codec for editing, but now computers are getting more powerful and so that's less of a concern for things like 4K footage, which the new Macs will eat for breakfast before they've even woken up. I also like the screen on the GX85, the tilting arrangement is the same as on the XC10, which has some of the nicest ergonomics in any camera ever made I suspect. It's great for shooting, but less good for selfies, obviously. I'm curious to hear about how these lenses pair with PDAF, although I suspect that they'll be brilliant. The focusing speed of these is some of the fastest available, and paired with a camera that can reliably direct it that should be a winning combination. Great stuff! Both the music and the visuals.. I've written electronic music on and off since 1992 and appreciate the mix. In terms of the visuals, I'd suggest watching your WB - in some shots the prevalence of green had pushed the neutral colour of the tree trunks towards magenta. However, instead of correcting that, I'd suggest actually going the other way and accentuating it. The music suggests a very "other worldly" feel, and it paired wonderfully with a couple of slightly abstract shots (I'm thinking particularly of the shots taken down low with the flowers in silhouette and the town in the background slightly overexposed). This use of overexposure and pushing the colour balance slightly off is used frequently in movies for places with harsh conditions like deserts or when the sun is too strong etc. The Chronicles of Riddick comes to mind. Also, it looks like you shifted to another more vintage lens when the light was getting lower? or you opened up the aperture, revealing more character. That also lends itself to the altered state vibe too. You could even experiment with blurring the edges of the frame slightly and creating your own slight vintage feel. Keep it up and don't be afraid to push the envelope!

Thanks - that's a really interesting looking package, as it includes things like RS correction and various other issues that modern cameras face. Mocha is another package that might be useful too, but wow, are these things all really expensive! Still, buying one of these would upgrade all my previous footage as well as future stuff, so from that point of view it might be worth it. More research required...

Indeed! I am most definitely a videographer, shooting the travels of my family and friends. I sometimes contemplate about the middle ground between the two. That's where most of the action of the DSLR revolution has been. Personally, I've been trying to learn how more about the artistic elements of film-making so that I can improve my own work, but because I don't follow the normal production process, and because there doesn't seem to be the depth of knowledge associated with videography, I've been struggling trying to find resources for such things. I suspect that I might have to read and watch things aimed squarely at the traditional route, and just cherry pick the parts that are useful to me and throw the vast majority of it away as it doesn't apply. I'm still searching, but I suspect that the people that really do understand the things I want to know are out there doing it rather than explaining it to others outside the industry.

While the lines between videography and cinematography are continuing to blur, there are a number of aspects where the two differ greatly. AF being one, and resolution being another. The responses on almost all Internet forums quickly reveal that the membership are videographers, not cinematographers. This makes sense, as the sheer quantity of video content (social media, weddings, corporates, marketing, most of TV productions, etc) overwhelms the amount of content created for cinematic release, probably by a factor of thousands or millions to one.

A few weeks ago I took a scenic helicopter flight, and naturally I took the opportunity to shoot it as best I could, sitting in the back and shooting out of the open door. As I was limited to hand-holding and knew that getting stable shots at 200kph / 120mph with the door wide open was going to be a huge challenge I used my Sony X3000 action camera (which has impressive OIS) and the GH5 + 12-35mm f2.8 combo for the dual-IS. The GH5 worked really well, benefitting from the three points of contact (two hands and face while using EVF) and being shot from within the aircraft..... .....but the X3000 didn't fare nearly as well. Due to its very wide angle lens, I held it further out the door (to avoid getting the doorway in shot) and limited to only two points of contact (two hands), where it was buffeted by the wind much more (in a rolling motion as I was holding it from below). As such, I have footage that is very shaky. Normal stabilisation in Resolve works to eliminate the shaking, but the edges of the frame wobble around like a sheet of plexiglass in the wind. I tried applying lens correction before stabilisation, which helped, but the footage is still pretty wobbly. I'm sure there are pieces of software out there that can do this. I don't know if I can afford them, but I'm sure they're out there. Does anyone know of anything or can anyone recommend anything? I probably should have asked before the recent sales, but didn't get to this point in the edit until now. TIA... and here are some shots (ungraded), just to make my request slightly more interesting 🙂 The X3000 is great at getting wide scenery shots: The GH5 could then be used for detail shots: X3000 wide: GH5 detail: The combo works really well, and actually the X3000 did great, but most of the movement was in rotation of the camera, which OIS can't really help with, and holding it out the door of a fast-moving aircraft was probably outside its design brief!!

Thanks, and yes, I had figured out the battery similarities - what a happy surprise! IIRC I got a genuine battery with the GF3 and two third-party ones, which died a long time ago I think and are now gone, but to my surprise the genuine one still goes strong and so is enjoying renewed use. Of course, I've been playing with the GF3 from time to time as well, so it's not like it was gathering dust. I will have a look through that thread, thanks for pointing it out. Have you investigated using an external recorder with the GX85? If so, how did it go? I would imagine that you're already aware of this, so this is more of a PSA than a reply as such. It's always good to test resolution and lens characteristics by shooting RAW stills, as well as in every codec you intend to shoot with the camera, plus the post-processing you are likely to do. This is because although a RAW still might reveal a softness to a lens, that might not be visible using the cameras 4K mode which might downscale the image, or the 1080p mode if you use that, and of course the NR / sharpening / processing / compression will obscure considerable fine detail or softness as well. I also suggest that you grade the test clips, render a timeline in your normal delivery format, and if you self-publish (eg, streaming platforms) then upload the output for that site to re-compress your footage as well. Then view it sitting at a normal distance in a slightly darkened environment and see what is visible then. Literally no-one has ever said "I spent the extra $2K getting the top-end glass and even though the difference is completely obscured by YouTube compression so none of my viewers will ever be able to tell the difference I still think it was completely worth it"!

Great stuff! I'm especially heartened to hear you're not in a hurry and will rent equipment before you buy. I've used the Manfrotto Xume magnetic adapters before and they make working with filters really convenient, so I'd suggest that a system based on magnetic attachment is likely to be a positive experience that you'll really enjoy and benefit from.

LOL. There are always people that only take photos of brick walls ready to pounce with bad reviews on things they don't understand! "The A7S3 is a terrible product because it easily breaks when I'm pounding in nails with it to extend my house. I prefer a $5 hammer. Sony are idiots!!" -- Typical internet moron The challenge with photo lenses is that the internet is full of pixel-peeing photographers, and now is also full of pixel-peeing videographers, who have very different needs and priorities to those of us who are interested in cinema, rather than prints.

@Matt James Smith ? I have several pieces of advice.. they're a little controversial, but well intended. Firstly, don't believe ANYONE on the internet, even me, when discussing "quality". Only trust your own ears by listening to samples taken by competent people in real situations similar to what you will do. I produced music as a hobby for over a decade, and have been into hifi ($250k+ systems) for over two decades and made a lot of components from scratch (DACs, preamps, amps, speakers, acoustic treatments, etc), so I have a solid basis in the technical aspects of what is going on as well as understanding theory vs practice vs snake oil vs psychoacoustics. I went through a phase of researching microphones and while I watched/listened to dozens of video "reviews" of various products, I didn't find a single review where the person understood even the first thing about audio, or what is important. Secondly, don't confuse audio quality with audio frequency response. This seems to be a common thing with "reviewers". They compare two microphones, they like the EQ on one better than the other, and declare that the quality is better on that one. This is bullshit. EQ is so easily adjusted in post that it's practically a non factor. Judging the sound from a mic without processing it is like saying the iPhone has better quality than an Alexa because the Alexa footage looked all grey and dull-looking. Understand what matters for your context. If you are making recordings that will be used within a larger mix, processed, and will only form the background to a visually driven piece then obviously you won't need (or be able to appreciate) as much quality as if you are producing nature videos with long sections of straight binaural audio. Best of luck!

Damn - those are great looking shots! Thanks for the feedback on the 12-60/2.8-4. The reviews and sample footage were all quite positive too. One of the main drivers for buying my 12-35/2.8 was as a walk-around lens for the P2K (OG BMPCC), but I've since worked out that the screen is polarised the wrong way for my sunglasses, making it completely black, so the idea of that as a tiny setup has fallen flat. Now I have the GX85 for the tiny setup I'll likely sell the P2K but might keep the Micro, I'll see. I think those kind of shots, walking from one place to another, is really the challenge for AWB. If that shot was critical then it's likely to be salvageable, but it would probably take real work. It might be worth saying explicitly just for the record, I'm not a fan of AWB or manual WB, they're just settings that each have an application, and each definitely have their pros and cons which should be understood to get the best results. I can only speak from my experience, but everyones is likely to be different. I'm also definitely an amateur and remembering everything while out shooting is a real challenge - there are so many things to think about simultaneously. Part of the reason that on commercial sets there are so many crew! Nice. That lens actually has quite a nice balance between modern and vintage characteristics. Plus it's so darn small!

Latest random internet purchase arrived today... Everyone, meet Miranda: Miranda is an M42 28mm F2.8 lens made in Japan, pictured on the M42 speed booster, with the GX85. No clue about anything else about her. Here are some test images, all taken wide open, with 4K CineD profile and SOOC on a 1080p timeline. It looks like the corners are crazily soft. They are soft, but the focal plane is actually very curved, so an object to the side of the frame has to be quite a lot further back to be in focus than something in the middle of the frame in focus. Maybe I can take nice footage of curved buildings, or beachballs. Flares are nicely controlled but aren't too modern... shaded vs unshaded from direct sun: I'm really happy that she's sharp wide open in the centre, which my only other m42 28mm F2.8 lens, a Yashica Yashinon, was most definitely not. This matters as I often use the 2X digital zoom in-camera to punch in for close-ups. I am, however, a little nervous about how 'vintage' she is. I do have a number of other more modern options for similar focal lengths though, so I'm not locked into the look and so it'll be a fun process. I'm also not that familiar with shooting on the 44mm equivalent focal length.

Damn.. I had just talked myself out of wanting one, but now your glowing review has me searching for them again! I don't know what it is about vintage lenses, but it's definitely something... 😆😆😆

@PannySVHS I heard that you have the GX85 and Fujinon 12.5mm f1.4 lens. Is this right? Does the fuji cover the GX85 in 4K mode? I'm eying off an eBay auction, but want to confirm it's a good option before buying one.

Being able to import view LUTs and bake one in would be spectacular, on any camera. I really see the C70 as a Get It Done camera for people who are quietly pumping out projects one after another.