heart0less

That's what I feel, too. Though I have to admit I'm still listening to the content from 2018, because I have lots of catching up to do - maybe the tone for most recent podcasts has changed.

Hmm, it sounds almost too good to be true.. 🤔 It'd cost me slightly more than Godox 60W, but, allegedly, the final output would be higher. Not to mention the ease of use (weighs almost nothing and can be battery powered), transportation, etc. It really got me thinking. Thanks for sharing it, @sanveer!

The trailer looked awesome. I'd never be able to tell that it was recorded with consumer cameras. I don't know about you but to me this goes to show that having an experienced colorist on board hugely elevates the production value. Surely, a well-seasoned DP that knows how to properly expose the camera helps tremendously, too. Great piece.

How do you like the Godox, @newfoundmass?

Great read, thanks for doing this @Mr. Freeze You actually anticipated my question about your feelings about G7 vs BMPCC4K. Those are fair points. Don't hesitate to show off more of your work, it's always appreciated. ( :

Wow, that's really, really wide! The shot @2:17 is so panoramic it makes me a bit nauseous especially when you tilt the camera. The colors are nice and they help setting the overall warm feel - good job. My only suggestion would be: try to make it somehow more engaging, more interesting, more three-dimensional either by adding a subtle movement or by introducing some focal point that we could follow around. Right now those compositions are pretty hectic (to my eyes) and I'm not really sure what I should be looking at. ( :

I liked it. Gave me a really nostalgic feel. The actor's performance is great - he looks confused, a little lost in the present time, while the look of actual film negative and the music bring back the old times. How are those run nowadays?

Hello! For starters, I recommend taking a look at these videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVQpCepQoRk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEFLiwzVy0A And if you want a first-hand experience, maybe @Tito Ferradans will be able to help you a little bit more. ( :

In my case GAS intensity is usually inversely proportional to the amount of shooting I do, so the more I actually use my gear the less I want to upgrade it. Sounds counterintuitive, but that’s the way it is. If I’m grounded and have nothing to do, then I fantasize what piece of equipment would be nice to own, what would come in handy. But then I just go shooting and forget about the whole ‘you-need-this’ thing. It’s definitely in our heads and I think that by clearing our shelves, we clear our minds of unnecessary fuss, too. So – congrats on the decision, it’s a wise one if you feel good with yourself. I think I’ll be letting go of one or two lenses, too..

Cool! It's nice to see 5D2 getting some proper love.

And what we mean is PROPER anamorphic mode: Open gate (recording full height of the sensor), 4:3 aspect ratio. Not some trendy 2.39:1 that's made from 16:9 video after cropping both the top and bottom.

I remember reading somewhere that Sony has a patent for in-body electronic variable ND and that's why it's almost inexistent in any other camera apart from Sony FS line. That may explain why Panavision came up with this solution: https://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/32429-panavision-announce-new-electronic-nd-filter-powered-by-built-in-battery/

Noted, thanks! I won't be getting any meter, that's for sure, though I'll try my best to compare their performance in a real life situation.

Hiya! Some time ago I decided to complete a rather simple, but most importantly, affordable lighting setup that would be easy to carry around and to set up. LED panels ticked all these boxes, so I started to hunt for them on a sales and local Craigslist / eBay. This is what I managed to acquire: I decided to gather them all up and put together a short test comparing their light output, since it was the parameter that I cared about most. PART 1 - HOW MUCH LIGHT DO THEY ACTUALLY GIVE? I put all the lights on a lighting stand, my camera on a tripod and took photos of a cabinet that was exactly 3.5 meters (~11.5 feet) away from them. Just what you could call 'a flood mode'. No light modifiers in front, no objects in front. I measured both the lowest and the highest brightness settings and also took notice of white balance. No other lights were turned on, my room was pitch black. The first light I turned on was Neewer Foldable 256 that consists of 256 LED beads. Dozens of positive reviews on amazon praising its mobility and high output. I only got it yesterday, but truth be told, I'm not really convinced by it. Doesn't feel much sturdy and I'm quite confident that if you used it on a daily basis, it wouldn't last more than a year, especially the velcro stripes. What's more, it can only be controlled by a remote included in the package - there are no dials / knobs on the light itself, which is a pity. This one is powered via AC adapter and can't run on any batteries. It's rated at 40 W, which in my case translated to an exposure of: - at the lowest setting (10%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 800 which, according to a smart exposure calculators, equals EV100 = 4.3; white balance - 5550K, - at the highest setting (100%) → f/1.4 , 1/100 s, ISO 160 → EV100 = 6.9; white balance - 5600K. The second light - a cheap cabinet LED bar that I consider as a poor-man's Quasar / Astera Tube. Bought it for 4$ and features 36 LED beads. I plan to combine 3 of them together in some nicer 3D printed housing and use it as a practical light / hair light that could be put anywhere in the frame. Runs on a USB 5V - every power bank is capable of powering it. Doesn't feature any brightness control, it's either at 0 or 100%. With it I managed to get a following exposure: f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 2500 → EV100 = 2.6; WB - 6000K and astonishing +60 tint (don't even ask about CRI). The third competitor - Neewer CN 176. Just like the name says - it has 176 LEDs, rated at 11W. Got it for 15$ and that included a NP-F550 battery. It's quite nice and very handy. Can be powered with a battery or an AC plug. Results: - at the lowest setting (10%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 3200 → EV100 = 2.3; WB - 5800K, - at the highest setting (100%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 250 → EV100 ~ 6.0; WB - 5700K. The fourth light - Yongnuo YN-300 III 5500K The first light I ever bought. Most feature-packed, since it can be controlled with my phone via some app. The original package included an orange card, a diffusion card, a remote and a bunch of adapters, etc. Can be powered with a battery or an AC plug. 300 daylight balanced LEDs, 18W Results: - at the lowest setting (10%) → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 1000 → EV100 ~ 4.0; WB - 5950K - at the highest setting (100%) → f/1.4 , 1/125 s, ISO 160 → EV100 ~ 7.33; WB - 5650K. Quite funny - it overpowered the foldable Neewer. And the last, but definitely not least - Neewer 660 Bi-color 660 LEDs; 330 are supposed to be 5600K and 330 - 3200 K; rated at 40W The most robust build - all metal. Feels very solid and looks expensive. Bought for 60$. Can be powered with a single battery (even though it features a dual NP-F slot) or an AC plug. Results: - at the lowest setting, daylight LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 1600 → EV100 - 3.6; WB - 5900K - at the highest setting, daylight LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/120 s, ISO 160 → EV100 ~ 7.3; WB - 5900K - funny thing, the photo looks EXACTLY the same as the previous one, no WB shift, no color shift, at all. - at the lowest setting, tungsten LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/80 s, ISO 1250 → EV100 - 3.6; WB - 3600K - at the highest setting, daylight LEDs only → f/1.4 , 1/105 s, ISO 160 → EV100 - 6.9; WB - 3600K - slight tint shift - at the highest setting, both LED types → f/1.4 , 1/220 s, ISO 160 → EV100 ~ 8.15; WB - 4600K To get you an idea, how does an exposure of f/1.4 , 1/220 s, ISO 160 looks like, here is a photo taken at 8:10AM (the sun rises at 5:50 AM) with those exact parameters: A bigger picture of this scene, taken with my phone (HDR enabled): To sum up: Neewer 660 is the brightest of the bunch followed by Yongnuo YN-300, which almost matches its bigger competitor at daylight temperature (that's quite a surprise). I'm a bit dissapointed with the foldable Neewer - it didn't really amaze me and I find it LESS practical than any other light. Fortunately, I bought it on Amazon and I think I'll be returning it in the next few days. Neewer CN 176 did quite good; might serve as a nice hair light / fill light. The LED bar didn't win any awards, but it's a different kind of a beast - I promise you, I'll make it shine some day, lol. Hopefully more parts of this comparison will come. I'll put them against some diffusion and test their color renderition. Ideally, I'd like to get a Godox SL-60 or a Weeylite Ninja 400 150W (what a whacky name) to have some more power at disposal. Maybe in the future.. Hope you got something out of this post.

That's the question I was asking myself. You can't really know that unless you buy it. And when you do and it turns out that it isn't any better, then you are screwed, since in many cases it's impossible to return it - I get all my adapters from eBay or AliExpress, because we have no B&H in Poland (nor any close equivalents) and those kind of things are really tricky to get. I guess I prefer to correct them using DIY methods rather than order some different copy from other brands and have no guarantee they would work.

So does mine, unfortunately.. I can't really say that it has evolved - I hadn't used it at its beginnings - but it's very reliable now. My workflow is: I dump all the footage into my PC, open Resolve, import all the media and click 'Generate Optimized Media'. After a while (in my case it usually lasts twice the length of the footage) it's ready to use - I can smoothly operate on 4K 400mbps H265 files. This video is quite useful and thoroughly explains all the features that can speed up your video editing:

DaVinci Resolve is superb, there's nothing I miss from Premiere. It's stable, power-efficient and ticks all the boxes - you can do everything in it, including editing, color grading, sound designing and VFX.

I really liked the opening landscape shot - it felt like an excerpt from some fairy-tale. It took me a while to get used to the fact, that the guitar shown in the shots isn't the leading guitar in the song (at first). Overall, it's a good looking video - a terrific job, considering you had only an hour to capture so much footage. But if you don't mind me giving some words of critique: it felt a little inconsistent (which is mainly due to location and subject constraints). Nevertheless, it's pleasing to look at it and accompanies the track well. ( :

I'm with Spenser on that. Having gone through majority of the systems, I can admit that it's Fuji that really made me enjoy the process of creating. It's simply a big pleasure to use.

@alilo nadhim

Exactly, same story here. I'm a one-man band and I doubt it'll change in the foreseeable future. Nonetheless, I find the podcasts entertaining and educational - a win-win situation, I'd say. ( : Yup, couldn't agree more. Especially now, when some YouTubers put their generic LUTs for 40$ or sometimes more.

So, it took me almost a year to grow into the decision, BUT I started to support Patrick (aka The Wandering DP) on Patreon last month and I wholeheartedly recommend doing so. It's a great way to learn how the different shots were created, what's the idea behind them and how were they lit - spoiler: it's not really about the strength of the light, it's how you tailor it to your needs. Every podcast / steam feels like an excerpt from "The Photographer's Eye / Mind" by Michael Freeman, except it's a video and you can follow along DP's way of thinking. Right now it's my e-learning site of choice, lol.

Great images, Panny. The slow-mo sling shots are out of this world, they look very characterized - almost like from a 'Sin City' movie. ( : /OFFTOPIC: I love the fact that those kids still play outside and seem to have a ton of fun just being together. This is proper childhood - not being glued to a tablet screen.

Please do. I'm quite interested to see how it looks like. What was your motivation to remove it in the first place?

I opted for the most versatile option - Canon EF to Fuji X, since you can adapt almost everything to Canon EF and that's exactly what I do (I have M42 lenses, Nikon F, Pentax K, Olympus OM - all of them work okay). There is some little screw in the back, which you can loosen up and then rotate the element as you wish. Just like on this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQ_PFMLonpU Unfortunately, I heard that some copies of LT II doesn't feature the above mentioned screw and have to be taken apart in order to make any adjustments. What's more, it's quite difficult to mark your default setting before you try to even do anything, because there are no retaining rings (like in Metabones) or anything like that - just bare glass.