kidzrevil Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Thank you - like I've said in other posts, I find I'm shooting more wide open than in the past. The jump in sharpness from 1.8 to F4 I used to look for, now I'm trying to really push away the sharpness. I think it's time to look into some diffusion, like a glimmerglass or something, been interviewing a lot of ladies lately! I have a set of 70's era hasselblad softs I might test soon, but I expect a modern filter may have a better mix of diffuse and sharpness.a black satin is cool, its kinda reserved but has the benefits of the black pro mist and the black diffusion fx in one. I personally use black pro mists for the better highlight roll off and subdued highlights but you may not like how it flares. A lil gaussian blur helps as well ! Go for one very good card not 2. SLI does not speed up Premiere. I have 2 GTX 960's in my system and Premiere crashes on every render unless I disable SLI.i'll keep that in mind. I figured if SLI works for games it will work for adobe lol guess not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Carter Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 I have this AE plugin but haven't tested it extensively - it is DEEP, tons of features and settings. But I like the idea of tracking a filter and bringing it down a bit over eyes and teeth. I've got two extensive edits coming up that have lots of interviews so I'll likely put it through its paces - http://invisiblechainsaw.com/variablediffusion/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 i'll keep that in mind. I figured if SLI works for games it will work for adobe lol guess notYeah I thought soto, it does not use the extra CUDA cores or processing power except a slight speed increase if you have your monitor on a second screen. I've also had it lead to "out of memory" errors when warp stabilizer is used. For stability I really recommend a single card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Carter Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 a black satin is cool, its kinda reserved but has the benefits of the black pro mist and the black diffusion fx in one. I personally use black pro mists for the better highlight roll off and subdued highlights but you may not like how it flares. A lil gaussian blur helps as well !Posted this in the low con filters thread, but - old hasseblad "soft" series 4x4 - sets of 3 often go for $50 or so. This is the "light" filter (there's medium and heavy in the set). Pardon my aging saggy mug! DPStewart and Phil A 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Posted this in the low con filters thread, but - old hasseblad "soft" series 4x4 - sets of 3 often go for $50 or so. This is the "light" filter (there's medium and heavy in the set). Pardon my aging saggy mug! the end result after grading is pretty good man. Smooth transition from shadow to highlight while still looking contrasty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Carter Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 the end result after grading is pretty good man. Smooth transition from shadow to highlight while still looking contrastyI think I paid $38 for the full set, so not bad - a 4x4 Glimmerglass is $250...I have a pile of 3x3 diffusion filters from the Cokin system, but the problem with filters made for still photography is even their light versions are over the top; I guess it was more of a cheeseball thing for portrait shooters… I do keep my eye out for deals on Tiffens used. DPStewart 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted January 31, 2016 Share Posted January 31, 2016 Hey I started a petition for an nx camera hack. Your support is appreciated !http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/19099-petition-for-samsung-nx1-hack/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DPStewart Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 The newest Premiere Pro version working natively with the h.265 is great - but what is a really good Transcoder to convert them to PreRez of DNxHD/HR? What are folks using lately for that particular task?~Danke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRenaissanceMan Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 The newest Premiere Pro version working natively with the h.265 is great - but what is a really good Transcoder to convert them to PreRez of DNxHD/HR? What are folks using lately for that particular task?~DankeI would also love an answer this, as I'm using Resolve on Windows, which still doesn't have H.265 support (and runs far better with ProRes/DNxHD anyway).Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I would also love an answer this, as I'm using Resolve on Windows, which still doesn't have H.265 support (and runs far better with ProRes/DNxHD anyway).Thanks!Cliptools is my current favorite. Tons of options but can be learned relatively quickly. http://hdcinematics.com/convert-V2.htmlSometime I like to just use Rocky Mountain and throw it into 1440p conversion, that setting seems to work well in Resolve for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M Carter Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Editready is an excellent program, but mac only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil A Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I use Rocky Mountain. It's free, easy and works, I don't ask for more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamoui Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I use Rocky Mountain, too, along with Andrews LOG LUT as the input LUT and I've been getting fantastic results. The only thing that doesn't seem to work is transcoding UHD or 4k files down to 1080p or 1440p. It keeps the original resolution regardless of what I set it to for transcode, which is a bummer because my machine runs super slow with 4k files (late 2011 macbook pro 15" 16GB RAM and SSD) even in a 1080p timeline. I always finish in 1080p so it would be nice to knock the resolution down during transcode with Rocky Mountain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil A Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I use Rocky Mountain, too, along with Andrews LOG LUT as the input LUT and I've been getting fantastic results. The only thing that doesn't seem to work is transcoding UHD or 4k files down to 1080p or 1440p. It keeps the original resolution regardless of what I set it to for transcode, which is a bummer because my machine runs super slow with 4k files (late 2011 macbook pro 15" 16GB RAM and SSD) even in a 1080p timeline. I always finish in 1080p so it would be nice to knock the resolution down during transcode with Rocky Mountain. That works for me without a flaw, I use it quite a bit. Weird. Which version do you use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamoui Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 That works for me without a flaw, I use it quite a bit. Weird. Which version do you use?Do you use the input LUT as well?The folder says "RMMC-0.2.02.0" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil A Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Do you use the input LUT as well?The folder says "RMMC-0.2.02.0"I never use a LUT, I'll check when I come home today if that might be the reason for the not working downscaling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamoui Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 I never use a LUT, I'll check when I come home today if that might be the reason for the not working downscaling.It is the Input LUT that is doing it. Without it the resolution changes fine. With the Input LUT enabled the resolution change does not work. Bummer! Should I post the bug on the RMMC sourceforge site? In the meantime I guess I'll just have to transcode the footage twice. Once with the LUT then that transcoded file again to 1440 or 1080. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidzrevil Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 I started using cliptoolz and it is amazing. I like how it downscales the 4k footage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff CB Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 4 hours ago, kidzrevil said: I started using cliptoolz and it is amazing. I like how it downscales the 4k footage Yeah nobody every talks about it. I've been scaling anamorphic footage to proper aspect ratio 3K with it, works great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homestar_kevin Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 I've used Rocky Mountain with good results since June. I haven't gotten the latest version though and haven't been using LUTS. I didn't really know about cliptoolz, but it looks great too. I'll probably grab that when I get home later 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.