KnightsFan

Hmm, as far as I can tell there is no way for me to make it available in Australia, which is very unfortunate. It seems a little odd that that isn't an option.

Thanks! What location is that? It should be available in the US and UK, hopefully nothing went wrong...

Well if anyone wants to watch some content, the web series I worked on "#millcore" is out on Amazon Prime today. https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0837HYJML/ref=share_ios_season There's also a topic in the Shooting & Footage section if you want to give me your savage internet opinions over there!

Happy New Years! After some minor setbacks and delays, the first season of #millcore is available on Amazon Prime. We appreciate any feedback you might have! https://www.amazon.com/gp/video/detail/B0837HYJML/ref=share_ios_season

The main thing with creating a look is to do it with set design, props, and lights, rather than in post. Taking a random, colorful scene and pushing the colors to be teal and orange will look fake, whereas a thoughtful image composed of a nice balance of teal and orange props with lighting to match will look natural but stylized. Just to pull some random examples from Google images: This looks fake: https://images.app.goo.gl/ss12w9oiff1gkoh49 These all look fake: https://images.app.goo.gl/UhkK4WPkANy8ujVv9 This looks natural using natural light: https://images.app.goo.gl/9b5pGmxKUfvB7nMaA This also looks natural using Hollywood lights: https://images.app.goo.gl/VjMp9oaK4JvLUXDN8 The other aspect worth mentioning is that for any complementary color scheme, you usually do not want equal shares of the two colors. Usually with teal and orange that means more teal than orange because then the small amount of orange (which is often human skin) pops out.

I'm trying to watch and comment on as many topics there as I can in the future. Being a tech/gear forum just means that we might consider evaluating each other's content with a special eye for tech and gear instead of just the story and art side.

IBIS can only do so much. IBIS might replace gimbals for low end cinema where you typically have a controlled environment, but once you're talking about running and jumping (think Devin Super Tramp type videos, parkour videos), the amount of shaking is too much for what IBIS could even theoretically accomplish. I could see specialty cameras that have built in gimbals that rotate a sensor/lens module with a compact form factor, but there's no way IBIS and OIS can compensate for the kind of rotation you get by sprinting with a handheld camera. You need to physically move the lens and sensor for that. It's not just the high end cinema that will keep gimbals, it's also the entire action sports crowd, which are typically lower budget even than enthusiast filmmakers.

This is great! I love the surreal imagery. Clearly a lot of work went into this, and also clearly it's the kind of thing that can be done with minimal gear and crew, just a creative vision and some good artistic skill. I love the backgrounds (the clock, the gears, the woods) and color palettes. Were they drawn or photo sourced? If I had one critique, it is that the singer's movements don't fit. He's often shot at an angle, and moves so realistically he seems a bit more like a "person with an effect." The woman is almost always shot straight on and has more controlled, surreal motions that really sell the "moving painting" effect better, imho. Did you shoot normal video and then do the low fps effect in post? It strikes me that for the low frame rate effect, you might have been able to do a timelapse of photos and squeeze more resolution or even raw out of the Z6--not that it would matter much for the end product.

I don't know about gear of the decade, but two pieces of gear I've really appreciated are my Sony MR-7506 headphones, and my Nikon 28mm f2.8 K. The headphones are quite possibly my oldest bit of kit that I still own, and they've been with me on every shoot and every editing session without fail. A few years ago I cut the godawful coiled cable and installed a 3.5mm jack. Paired with a cheap bluetooth adapter for music, or a normal cable for anything serious, they're better than ever. The Nikon 28mm is an amazingly imperfect lens. Just the right amount of distortion and CA paired with beautiful, vibrant colors. Fully manual with a nice big focus throw, which is complemented with a seamless focus ring I printed. There's an EF adapter permanently on the back which has allowed me to use it on everything from a C100 to an Ursa, and of course my NX1 (and +1 for the NX1, mentioned a few times already in this topic!).

I love it! I had to use google translate on the lyrics. The tune is very catchy, and I love the visual gag of being a a wheel in the system along with those gymnastic wheels. It's very engaging, both as a song and a video. The video clearly does a lot with very little, just a couple great performers, a gymnasium, and an eccentric collection of props. This is those projects where Sony's legendary zombie skin tones really worked for the story, they really melted into the colors of the floor. What difference did you see between the Atomos material and the native videos?

I mentioned the video in my post. It's too long for me to watch without understanding the language, I was more answering the general question of whether cameras were ADC limited.

Are the reviews from people who have used both and think they handle the same? How much experience do these people have? The Flycam could be perfect, I don't have firsthand experience. But just because they have similar number of stars doesn't mean anything for quality. If you could get your hands on both and see for yourself that would be ideal, I'd love to hear back if you do because it's always nice to see budget brands increasing their quality.

Image Signal Processor, basically just the processing of the image that the camera does. By applying noise reduction, an ISP lowers the noise floor and thus increases dynamic range, usually at the expense of resolution. but yeah your original statement is correct: There is no inherent reason why raw would improve dynamic range on the same camera. If their log format already captures the entire dynamic range of the ADC, then Raw would likely bring no dynamic range improvements. We'd have to test in the real world to find out (like in the video above, which is in German unfortunately).

I always recommend a mechanical gimbal (Steadicam style) over an electronic one if you have the time and space to use it. It takes some time to learn how to use it, but you have a lot more control in the long run. In addition, the motion produced is much more fluid and natural. I find that most electronic gimbals have sterile movement, especially on pans. The only shots I like better with electronic gimbals are static shots where you really want it as still as possible and can't use a tripod. Another benefit of the mechanical gimbal is that it's a dead simple, durable hunk of metal. You can tear it down into small pieces for storage, you don't have to worry about firmware updates, battery life, getting it wet, or making sure it doesn't flop around and break itself when powered off. In my opinion, the gimbal is much more important than the vest/arm. You can get by without a vest for most shots, it's just heavy and tiring, even with a tiny camera. If you are using a wide lens, slight up and down motion is a lot harder to notice than even minor changes in angle, and inertia keeps bobbing to a minimum anyway. Of course, having a vest/arm is better than not having one, but personally I'd invest more in the gimbal. I have a Glidecam HD 4000. The only other mechanical gimbal I've used extensively is the Glidecam 4000 Pro (lower end model). The difference is night and day. The HD is easy to balance, and just "works" whereas the Pro was NEVER stable no matter what I did. The general consensus on the internet is that cheaper gimbals (mostly from India) such as Flycam are not as good as Glidecams--I don't have personal experience, but I'd get hands on experience comparing it to a Glidecam HD before buying. Especially since I got my HD4000 used for $150, it can be very affordable for high quality.

No one is sure of anything, any info about actual camera specs is pure speculation for now. Sony might not have made final decisions for all we know.

You won't get scopes, but you can get 24" HD TV or computer screens for a couple dollars at a thrift store. I think if you want semi accurate image analysis tools you'll have a hard time finding something for cheap.

Ah man, should have gone with my gut! I was thinking GH5 the entire time, right up until that final boat scene. In my experience, Panasonic tends to have colder tones on everything except skin, which ends up being more orange, which is especially apparent in the scene around 6:40, or the shot at 2:13. I told a director once that Panasonic white balance was always too warm and too cold at the same time lol. But those boat shots look really good, so I thought it must be something like an XT3. I don't have any experience with any MFT lenses. All I could tell really was that they were very modern, based on the lack of CA and overall sharpness. For the gear used, was it just what you had available, or was there any special reason you paired this kit with this story?

No problem! I enjoyed watching it. And for the gear... The thickness of the color and richness of the shadow tones was very good. The blue jacket at 9:55 for example popped out. I thought the last scene on the boat looked a lot like some more stylized film stocks. I thought the boat shots stood out as the best in terms of color. If I had to guess I'd say XT3 with Sigma Art lenses. But whatever you used it was consistent and did the job well.

Not necessarily. It sounds like a scam. The thing is, Amazon would refund a scammed customer, so the customer wouldn't take the hit other than the hassle. Maybe this guy ran the scam once before, and the scammed person posted about it but didn't report it. They didn't lose any money so they wouldn't be out for blood. I found a great deal on Amazon for a monitor. The seller had perfect feedback on a hundred previous sales. It was a scam, and I got my money back, but reading the reviews showed that it was carefully crafted: the guy sold a hundred small items to build good feedback, and then sold a few hundred expensive color grading monitors and skipped town with tens of thousands. They had years of good reputation before pulling a lucrative con. I wouldn't bite. It sounds like a scam.

That was really well done! I liked the unassuming and consistent pace, and the overall production value was quite good. I appreciate how the conflict is introduced in the very first scene, but is implied and veiled. The movie hides the conflict the way Paul is burying his own emotions. I do think, though, that for the runtime, there is too much buildup and not enough payoff. Part of that is that the moment of confrontation between the two men is the weakest part. There is no leadup to Paul falling, it's just a shot of a foot slipping out of nowhere, and then there is no visceral "punch" when Paul hits the ground. And then suddenly Emilie's there. I think that's the part that kind of harms the payoff for me, there's no connection between Paul and Emilie and then suddenly there is, with no story element to explain the resolution (unless I missed something, which is possible).

LutCalc generates LUTs based on the difference between the color spaces you select in the drop downs. You specify an "in" and an "out" and it'll generate a LUT that would transform from one to the other. All you need is to know what gamma and gamut you are coming from (in your case, F-Log gamma and F-Log Gamut) and what you want to put it into. There are several Arri options, I'm not sure which one you want. You would enter this information on the left where it has Rec (in) and Out dropdowns. If you want a straight mathematical conversion, you can uncheck customization. You also probably want to leave the camera as generic and stop correction at 0. Then on the right you can set up the LUT file's options. You'd probably want a 3D lut, 65x65x65, in .cube format. I would use the largest range, and leave it unclipped. I'm not an expert, I've just used it once or twice in the past, so just play around with it. There are some how-to-guides and info on the main page as well that might be interesting https://cameramanben.github.io/LUTCalc/

You can use LUTcalc to make one https://cameramanben.github.io/LUTCalc/LUTCalc/index.html If you use Resolve, you can use a CST node, which should have slightly better results than a LUT. They supposedly added F-Log support in version 16.1 (I'm still on 16.0 so I can't confirm firsthand).

I thought I'd share this crop factor comparison tool I made, which now includes anamorphic options after reading some discussions in the anamorphic topic. It's a simple simulation made with Unity and plays in the browser. http://gobuildstuff.com/CropFactorApp/ Let me know any ways I can update it to make it more useful. I know the UI isn't great--I slapped the original app together a few years ago for fun--but if you mess around with the controls it should make sense eventually.

That was nice! It is a bit annoying that over half the run time is end credits, though.

Here we go again 10 bit, external timecode, external power, and low rolling shutter are the features I'm (still) looking for, let's see how it goes this time around.