What makes a video CINEMATIC?

[webrunner5]

We Ain't taking pictures of trees, we are taking movies of people. Using red in painting, yep you done drank the Kool Aide. The Red type I guess. PT Barnum was right. ?

[kye]

18 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

We Ain't taking pictures of trees, we are taking movies of people. Using red in painting, yep you done drank the Kool Aide. PT Barnum was right. ?

Screw PT Barnum.  I think you're drinking the Trump /MAGA Kool Aide - that both the past is better than the present, and that somehow we can get there by copying random aspects of it regardless of causality.. or logic

1 hour ago, Mako Sports said:

Personally I'm an event shooter that specializes in sports with the occasional documentary. I prefer a sharp clinical look as it tends to look more true life. If I shot short films or was interested in the so called "cinematic" look maybe i'd go for a softer/organic look. 

Makes sense.  Any technique is valid as long as it supports the end goal.

[webrunner5]

So you really think a GH5 looks better than a BMPCC, or a C100, Sony F3? Hmm. A cheap Cine lens better than a Canon L lens. Trying to keep focus @ 0.95. Interesting. Yeah I'll live in the past.

[Kisaha]

I thought this wasn't about equipment?!?

Shallow DOF is overused thought, that is for sure.

If you shoot home videos and you are buying 0.95f lenses, and considering the artistic possibilities of an afternoon shoot at the mall, then I say, take a chill pill, and enjoy your family!

I have half a dozen modern cameras home at most times, and a few dozen lenses, and the tools I use most is a dead cheap Samsung NX3000 with the 16-50pz and mobile phones! Sometimes when I go high end, I use the NX500. I want something really small, and "average", do not want to carry my 16-50mm 2-2.8f S, or a few FD lenses. I want all the modern technology can offer to me, AUTO as much as I can, auto everything, while is the completely oppossite when I ak working. M everything, want to have total control, I want to focus what I want, when I want, how I want, but it is JOB. WORK, the rest are for hobby or entertainment reasons, so do not want to sweat and overthink things.

A a6400 with the incredible stabilized 18-105mm would be also perfect for most families (even though 16mm at the wide end, are all the money for me), and a M50 with the 15-45mm (this is a X1.6 camera, mind you).

I see all the "youngsters" fall for the cinematic look, and produce crap. I helped a new production company last year make a fashion show pilot for a TV station, and they were 5-6 people at their early 20s and a couple guys at their early 30s. Used a couple of GH5 with the 18-35 speedboosted and some legacy 1.2-1.4f - speedboosted, lenses! 80% of the episode was out of focus. 27minutes, and the 20 were out of focus slow motion stuff. I was puking for 5 days straight.

 

[kye]

 

53 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

I thought this wasn't about equipment?!?

It's not.  

Somehow @webrunner5 has added YouTubers saying that shallow DOF means 'cinematic' with cinema lenses are only F2.8 or slower + Philip Bloom is on YT and come up with owning a 0.95 lens means I'm drinking cordial or something.

I think I got bitten by a troll.

[Kisaha]

34 minutes ago, kye said:

It's not.  

Somehow @webrunner5 has added YouTubers saying that shallow DOF means 'cinematic' with cinema lenses are only F2.8 or slower + Philip Bloom is on YT and come up with owning a 0.95 lens means I'm drinking cordial or something.

I think I got bitten by a troll.

do not worry, I usually bite too! Just did actually!

[BTM_Pix]

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

A a6400 with the incredible stabilized 18-105mm would be also perfect for most families

//OFF TOPIC ON//

I know this isn't about equipment but now you've brought this lens into it I have to pipe up

It really is a great lens (especially with the extra reach from the clear zoom) but who the fuck at Sony thinks its a good idea when the camera goes into sleep that it reverts the lens back out to 18mm when you wake the camera up again??!!!

Fair enough it would do this when you switch the camera off completely but, man, I was using it yesterday to do some product shots and I wanted to beat it to death.

//OFF TOPIC OFF//

[kye]

12 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

//OFF TOPIC ON//

I know this isn't about equipment but now you've brought this lens into it I have to pipe up

It really is a great lens (especially with the extra reach from the clear zoom) but who the fuck at Sony thinks its a good idea when the camera goes into sleep that it reverts the lens back out to 18mm when you wake the camera up again??!!!

Fair enough it would do this when you switch the camera off completely but, man, I was using it yesterday to do some product shots and I wanted to beat it to death.

//OFF TOPIC OFF//

Odd, there's normally an option for these things.

I have a Panasonic point-and-shoot with some ridiculous zoom (20X or 30X) and wow was it annoying before I found the "resume zoom on wake" option

53 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

do not worry, I usually bite too! Just did actually!

Are you saying I'm a troll?

Genuine question - it's hard to understand how other people see your behaviour.

[Kisaha]

34 minutes ago, kye said:

Are you saying I'm a troll?

Genuine question - it's hard to understand how other people see your behaviour.

I mean I bite webrunners comment, and took it further!

[BTM_Pix]

31 minutes ago, kye said:

Odd, there's normally an option for these things.

I have a Panasonic point-and-shoot with some ridiculous zoom (20X or 30X) and wow was it annoying before I found the "resume zoom on wake" option

With an integral zoom lens there is a fixed defined range so its easier to implement than on an ILC but considering this is a Sony lens on a Sony camera and they know everything else about it you'd think it would be within the bounds of possibility for them to store and resume the value wouldn't you but no. 

Maybe they think it wouldn't be cinematic or something.

[kye]

7 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Maybe they think it wouldn't be cinematic or something.

OMG - run!  Stop down the aperture!  Shorten the shutter speed!  Disable all slow-motion!  Bang up the ISO!  

Must.  Protect.  Camera.  From.  .  .  .  Vloggers!

[DBounce]

It’s motion. That’s the key. Get the most “cinematic” movie you can think of... enable the frame smoothing... or blur reduction or whatever they call it on the TV  you are using... and... instant video. I don’t care how it was shot, it doesn’t matter what camera or what lens... it could have been shot on film... instant video.

Some cameras pull it off better than others straight out of the box; Most need help by using correct technique. Others are hopeless. The above is an easy experiment to perform. Mystery solved!

[kye]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

It’s motion. That’s the key. Get the most “cinematic” movie you can think of... enable the frame smoothing... or blur reduction or whatever they call it on the TV  you are using... and... instant video. I don’t care how it was shot, it doesn’t matter what camera or what lens... it could have been shot on film... instant video.

Some cameras pull it off better than others straight out of the box; Most need help by using correct technique. Others are hopeless. The above is an easy experiment to perform. Mystery solved!

Now you mention it, I kind of agree.

I was preparing to refute your statement by saying that stuffing up the motion would ruin it - just like stuffing up anything else would also ruin it, but that's not true.
I'm kind of typing out loud here, but you can take a cinematic film and stuff up the colours, remove the slow-motion (many films just slowed down the 24p footage in post anyway, still looked ok), you can crop the framing, etc and you don't have that instant-video kind of effect.  Deep DOF doesn't ruin it, camera shake would put a dent in it perhaps, bad lighting would put a dent in it (although all kinds of natural light is fine).  

What else did I miss?

[DBounce]

15 minutes ago, kye said:

Now you mention it, I kind of agree.

I was preparing to refute your statement by saying that stuffing up the motion would ruin it - just like stuffing up anything else would also ruin it, but that's not true.
I'm kind of typing out loud here, but you can take a cinematic film and stuff up the colours, remove the slow-motion (many films just slowed down the 24p footage in post anyway, still looked ok), you can crop the framing, etc and you don't have that instant-video kind of effect.  Deep DOF doesn't ruin it, camera shake would put a dent in it perhaps, bad lighting would put a dent in it (although all kinds of natural light is fine).  

What else did I miss?

For me the eye opener came from watching some old... really old vintage footage. It wasn’t shot great, but still looked like cinema. Motion is the secret sauce. And that makes sense... it is after all “Motion Picture”... so it’s not a big leap to imagine motion would be the key.

[thebrothersthre3]

5 hours ago, Kisaha said:

 

I see all the "youngsters" fall for the cinematic look, and produce crap. I helped a new production company last year make a fashion show pilot for a TV station, and they were 5-6 people at their early 20s and a couple guys at their early 30s. Used a couple of GH5 with the 18-35 speedboosted and some legacy 1.2-1.4f - speedboosted, lenses! 80% of the episode was out of focus. 27minutes, and the 20 were out of focus slow motion stuff. I was puking for 5 days straight.

 

How were the dealing with focus? 

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

//OFF TOPIC ON//

I know this isn't about equipment but now you've brought this lens into it I have to pipe up

It really is a great lens (especially with the extra reach from the clear zoom) but who the fuck at Sony thinks its a good idea when the camera goes into sleep that it reverts the lens back out to 18mm when you wake the camera up again??!!!

Fair enough it would do this when you switch the camera off completely but, man, I was using it yesterday to do some product shots and I wanted to beat it to death.

//OFF TOPIC OFF//

I think that is a wise decision by Sony. The average buyer of that lens is just the person down the street. It is not pushed as some Pro level lens. More of a "kit lens". And the average Joe Blow takes photos, video in more of a spontaneous fashion. Not really a planned thing. And I would imagine most shots would involve being at the wider end. So I would think you would want that lens to default to the wide end more than stay at the long end. And that is what most normal people probably do,. It is either wide open or zoomed all the way in on average. I think they made the right choice. Now I would Hope they have a way to disable it for more experienced people, but better safe than sorry on Sony's part. These company's know their target audience for the products and act accordingly.

[Kisaha]

17 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

How were the dealing with focus? 

What do you mean? They were changing it by hand, without a focus pulling accessory or anything of the shorts. They were also inexperienced, both in culture, art and technique.

They were mostly out of focus. In the final video had out of focus shots for 3-5 seconds that were never in focus.. but they were in slow motion, so it looked cinematic..

[thebrothersthre3]

7 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

What do you mean? They were changing it by hand, without a focus pulling accessory or anything of the shorts. They were also inexperienced, both in culture, art and technique.

They were mostly out of focus. In the final video had out of focus shots for 3-5 seconds that were never in focus..

Yeah like were they just pulling focus off the GH5 lcd?

I feel like if a production company signed on to do a TV show they'd at least have a system down that worked for them. I guess failing is part of the learning process. I've seen a ton of incompetence with people who do "video" but its all been non paid passion type projects, so its more understandable there I guess. I consider myself an amateur but some of the stuff I've seen makes me feel professional ?

 

[Kisaha]

23 minutes ago, thebrothersthre3 said:

Yeah like were they just pulling focus off the GH5 lcd?

I feel like if a production company signed on to do a TV show they'd at least have a system down that worked for them. I guess failing is part of the learning process. I've seen a ton of incompetence with people who do "video" but its all been non paid passion type projects, so its more understandable there I guess. I consider myself an amateur but some of the stuff I've seen makes me feel professional ?

 

"Pro" is someone that make a living out of a certain trade, these guys do - they shouldn't - there is a certain space that make it doable, between cheap weddings, corporates and a few "connections". The show didn't go on this year, but they are still pulling some strings for next year. It is not always about abilities and worth, connections are more important almost always.

[BTM_Pix]

13 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I think that is a wise decision by Sony. The average buyer of that lens is just the person down the street. It is not pushed as some Pro level lens. More of a "kit lens". And the average Joe Blow takes photos, video in more of a spontaneous fashion. Not really a planned thing. And I would imagine most shots would involve being at the wider end. So I would think you would want that lens to default to the wide end more than stay at the long end. And that is what most normal people probably do,. It is either wide open or zoomed all the way in on average. I think they made the right choice. Now I would Hope they have a way to disable it for more experienced people, but better safe than sorry on Sony's part. These company's know their target audience for the products and act accordingly.

On a full switch off, I'd probably be inclined to agree but not on a power saving suspension.

Ditto if wasn't an internal zoom design lens so there was a chance of obstruction when it was resuming position.

With a fully fly by wire power zoom lens like this, I just don't get why it has to do it.

I'd increase the timeout setting if the camera wasn't such a battery drain/potential fire hazard

Anyway, its annoying and non-cinematic so I'm going off to write a stern email to my MP about it.