jcs Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 FS700, GH4, or A7S? earnesync 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darwich Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Fs700? jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 At first glance I would have said A7s because of this shallow depth of field on a relatively wide lens, but a few seconds in I noticed that there is blur added in post, is that so? It could be any large sensor camera in the world (from 550D to Alexa) and they would all produce very similar result especially for this specific scene and especially when viewed on YT But for kicks I say A7, for the DR. Anyway beautiful image and subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkanah77 Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Love it! No idea what camera but since I own a GH4 I hope it's that. jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxotics Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Doesn't make sense to me; that is, blur doesn't seem to be from lens but in post. When she's walking, a doorway far behind her in focus, which wouldn't make sense if blur/focus is all optical. Or maybe an optical filter for blur? In any case, should be a shot any of those cameras can do. jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnymossville Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 don't know and don't care. I think I'll loop this the rest of the day before I make my guess. jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted July 1, 2014 Administrators Share Posted July 1, 2014 A7S at 120fps? :) jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 iPhone with blur filter? The Depth of Field is enormous. From the front to the back of the hallway everything is in focus... the blur on the sides looks artificial, ugly imo. Could be a tilt lens, but looks more like a fake blur instead of bokeh - correct me if I'm wrong though. jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmBrute Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Doubt a tilt shift would produce such a fake looking blur. The DR looks alright so i don't think its an iphone. Doubt its an a7s due to the deep dof. So I'd say GH4. jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablogrollan Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 I'd say GH4, the DOF is really deep and the girl looks a little oversharpened... jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inazuma Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 She doesn't get darker as she passes by the pillars except at the end. She also has fill light exclusively on her while the floor and walls don't seem to catch any of that. So I'm guessing GH4 with green screen background. jcs 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Nokia 3210 sudopera 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lasers_pew_pew_pew Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 More slow motion videos are required for proper analysis…. you know, for science. Inazuma and johnnymossville 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted July 2, 2014 Author Share Posted July 2, 2014 This was shot on the GH4 at 60p (VFR mode), Natural profile, 12mm (Panasonic 12-35 F2.8, IIRC stopped down a bit to try to make sure model was in focus as we moved), a gen 1 77mm Fader ND with step down ring, and a Flycam Nano DSLR steadicam. This shoot was planned for the A7S after the shipping notice last Tuesday, however the shipment never made it out of the B&H warehouse (some folks got theirs early). I used the new masking features of Premiere Pro CC to bring the sky down to blue and to apply creative lighting and blur to the shot. As some pointed out, I'd need to do more time-consuming variable blur to better simulate camera blur (including roto-like masking of the model and the background). I also applied Neat Video, then added uniform noise everywhere but the actress: after uploading to youtube there was banding in the shadows (the added noise helped reduce it). Thanks for the compliments and feedback! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnymossville Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 The actress really nailed the attitude in her facial expressions and walk. perfect for slow mo. Nice work jcs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcs Posted July 2, 2014 Author Share Posted July 2, 2014 Thanks Johnny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wulf Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 More slow motion videos are required for proper analysis…. you know, for science. yeah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmBrute Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 The actress really nailed the attitude in her facial expressions and walk. perfect for slow mo. Nice work jcs. Yeah, that's totally more important than the blur, or whatever else we were nitpicking. Although what do you expect from nerds: a beautiful woman is walking around in slow motion and we are stressing over DOF, DR and blur :lol: (at least I was). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.