Zacuto Revenge Shootout 2012 Part 2 results revealed - Francis Ford Coppola and audience prefer the Panasonic GH2

[mattbatt]

[quote name='steve zacuto' timestamp='1342480997' post='13997']
Couple of things. Let's talk about the GH2, the hack they used was not stable and crashed a lot. I don't think it would be viable in a real production. One thing that seems to be misunderstood is that the scene was supposed to be very dark. The original lighting was supposed to be a room with a few practlcle lights on in the house and the extreme light coming in form the window. What Colt and Jonny did was to over light the scene and make it a bright room. I think people interpreted this as having the most DR as opposed to being the most pleasing and artfully done. I preferred Polly and Rodney's interpretation, it was more about retaining a moody scene.

There are two tests. In part 3 you are going to see how the cameras look out of the box in an apples to apples test with no lighting changes. In part two you saw what talented DP's can do with these cameras. Together this shows you the comparison of what is-- and what is possible.
Steve
[/quote]

Agree with every word Steve. Thanks for your documentary - it is awesome to see how you guys have evolved. I remember some tests with a lady in a bathtub and different cameras - wonder why I remember that test :rolleyes:

Anyway, now you guys have gone from testing to artfully teaching and documenting the cinema magic that fimmaking needs. Hearing from the cinematographers has done more for me than any resolution test. Thank you!

And here is to the final part - part 3! I'm looking forward to that.

PS: I guessed all the cameras but "E" and "I" - mixing them (happy I was not correct because "I" was on my low list). I felt good knowing my eye is decently trained. I believe it will help me achieve the look I will need oneday on my future feature!

[mattbatt]

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1342451674' post='13965']
I do agree with this. Natural light, or natural looking staged light is what I tend to go for when shooting with the GH2, or any of my other cameras be it 5D Mark III, FS100 or NEX 7. But I still think Colt did a nice job of making people think the GH2 was the Epic :)
[/quote]

My 5dmkII has helped me a lot in this area (in stills mode lol) by forcing me to not just use flash to get an exposure but rather expose for the natural light and fill in or barely use flash as a catch light. The mood is much more dramatic and unique and sculpted.

That said, Colt and everyone on the test is way more experienced than me - I do not know much about setting up a lot of lights for cinema, but I would love to learn more.

They did a great job - it wasn't my type - but the camera portrayed what they gave it very nicely.

[nahua]

[quote name='steve zacuto' timestamp='1342480997' post='13997']
Couple of things. Let's talk about the GH2, the hack they used was not stable and crashed a lot. I don't think it would be viable in a real production. One thing that seems to be misunderstood is that the scene was supposed to be very dark. The original lighting was supposed to be a room with a few practlcle lights on in the house and the extreme light coming in form the window. What Colt and Jonny did was to over light the scene and make it a bright room. I think people interpreted this as having the most DR as opposed to being the most pleasing and artfully done. I preferred Polly and Rodney's interpretation, it was more about retaining a moody scene.

There are two tests. In part 3 you are going to see how the cameras look out of the box in an apples to apples test with no lighting changes. In part two you saw what talented DP's can do with these cameras. Together this shows you the comparison of what is-- and what is possible.
Steve
[/quote]

Steve I think this was a wonderful test. And that it was blind is genius. I understand since it's a test, dynamic range is a big part of it. I think it will be more telling in part 3 to see the differences between "stock" lighting VS "creative" lighting. But the overall tone of this piece is more important - that the creative vision of the cinematographer is the key element. It doesn't matter what you use, the skill of the cinematographer will determine the look of the finished film.

What a difference a year makes. This test last year would be a clear wash, but this year there are more and better cameras. Can't wait for part 3, can't wait for next year! We certainly live in exciting times!!

[Andrew Reid]

[quote name='mattbatt' timestamp='1342485877' post='14007']That said, Colt and everyone on the test is way more experienced than me - I do not know much about setting up a lot of lights for cinema, but I would love to learn more.[/quote]

Would be great to learn more about lighting setup for sure. As long as it also included natural light, which is a big skill to get right - with timing your shoots, weather, locations, etc. Also audio. Sound is half of cinema

[Xiong]

I picked B and F as my favorite, Im really shocked that B was the GH2, so far i'm loving the shootout.

[Simco123]

Some people who was featured in that video were average DP you probably might not have heard of had they not got famous because of video dSLRs. They were given the opportunity to play with a prototype or early production models by the manufacturer and released an early clip. It almost seems like each manufacturer when releasing something new would designate someone for fame, they released a footage benefited by the fact the camera will do well anyway. Vincent Laforet is a photographer but he epitomise someone who became a respected film director due to the publicity surrounding his few minute video clip made from the 5DII. Now we have John Brawley who is a DP whose name we would not have heard of 4 months ago but his name is going be sealed in the videographers Hall of Fame and no doubt soon rubbing shoulders with the likes of Coppola, Lucas, Tarantino, etc because he was given a BMC prototype to play with.

We have manufactured popstars, celebrities and reality TV shows, I suppose manufactured celebrity DP has made it present known in the last few years because of affordable video capable dSLR and the likes that is more accessable to the masses.

[sandro]

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1342451503' post='13964']
Estimated time of arrival, Photokina in September. As with GH2 two years ago.
[/quote]

But will it be announced before this?

[Andrew Reid]

Don't no for sure Sandro but I am expecting announcement at Photokina and actual stock closer to November so a while to go yet.

[Axel]

[quote name='Simco123' timestamp='1342498907' post='14022']
Some people who was featured in that video were average DP you probably might not have heard of had they not got famous because of video dSLRs. They were given the opportunity to play with a prototype or early production models by the manufacturer and released an early clip. It almost seems like each manufacturer when releasing something new would designate someone for fame, they released a footage benefited by the fact the camera will do well anyway. Vincent Laforet is a photographer but he epitomise someone who became a respected film director due to the publicity surrounding his few minute video clip made from the 5DII. Now we have John Brawley who is a DP whose name we would not have heard of 4 months ago but his name is going be sealed in the videographers Hall of Fame and no doubt soon rubbing shoulders with the likes of Coppola, Lucas, Tarantino, etc because he was given a BMC prototype to play with.

We have manufactured popstars, celebrities and reality TV shows, I suppose manufactured celebrity DP has made it present known in the last few years because of affordable video capable dSLR and the likes that is more accessable to the masses.
[/quote]

Exactly. Enough tests, enough techno yak.

The GH2 is approved by Coppola? So there.

See [i]Musgo[/i] and what it should tell you. Action speaks louder than words. Shut up and shoot.

Truism: I rather want to see a film with an interesting story, suspense and spirit made with a smartphone than one more test clip by an Epic!

[Andrew Reid]

[quote name='Axel' timestamp='1342537647' post='14043']
Exactly. Enough tests, enough techno yak.

The GH2 is approved by Coppola? So there.

See [i]Musgo[/i] and what it should tell you. Action speaks louder than words. Shut up and shoot.
[/quote]

FAR too over the other side. You need the techno yak to better your shoot and if you are like me then you are very interested in the technology. Please no more of this BS argument.

[Axel]

I beg your pardon. I should have read the article about the common misconceptions before writing such bullshit.

[markm]

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1342483634' post='14003']
Thank you for coming on the board Steve. For sure the hack is not stable. The extremely high bitrate 'performance' versions are not designed to be the go-to patches for reliability on paid work. Please if anyone is thinking of taking an untested GH2 straight out of the box onto a paid shoot with Driftwood's hack, don't do it. Think about reliability. The 44Mbit image looks almost as good as the 176Mbit version. Driftwood himself gives a variety of patches, some are designed for performance and some for reliability.

Lighting is subjective, it is interesting that people reacted more to the lighting than to the cameras and this is a testament to the job those Japanese engineers did at Panasonic to put so MUCH into a consumer cam. It is crazy! But wonderful. Because it opens doors. Long may it continue.

I thought that with the huge window at the back, it was too much of a stretch of logic to accept a dark room. Colt seemed to be the only DP to question this. To prove this. But your explanation of Colt's lighting makes perfect sense - the audience reacted to that illusion of dynamic range. He did a great job, because cinema, after all... Is an illusion.

I can see why you guys wanted the darker room and brighter window - as a test of the cameras.
[/quote]

I would use driftwoods hack to make a feature film but I'd make sure I used the right card. I've never had a problem with driftwoods latest raft of hacks in fact they are brilliant. But why do it when the BMC is on the horizon!

Sorry Andrew I know you haven't said it but I wouldn't use the 44mb for pro use.

The GH2 may miff quite a few professionals with nice shiny C300's and the like I feel some sympathy for those who spent many thousands on these cameras.

[Kickass]

Only an idiot (if he considers himself a pro) would set up lighting for the camera to NOT look its best, with the available means. Unless he of course doesn't know the camera. It's better to light for the sweet spot of any camera, regardless if it has 8 or 15 stops of DR, if it is possible.

In an artificial environment, lighting is there to be controlled.

In this sense, there was a completely level playing field in the test, regardless of if they used this light or that to achieve something.

[Germy1979]

[quote name='Kickass' timestamp='1342563353' post='14057']
Only an idiot (if he considers himself a pro) would set up lighting for the camera to NOT look its best, with the available means. Unless he of course doesn't know the camera. It's better to light for the sweet spot of any camera, regardless if it has 8 or 15 stops of DR, if it is possible.

In an artificial environment, lighting is there to be controlled.

In this sense, there was a completely level playing field in the test, regardless of if they used this light or that to achieve something.
[/quote]

I agree. It's $700 and in most cases you get what you pay for. It's not an Arri. So they lit the set to bring out the best in it. Part 3 i'm sure will show the world just how much it's not an Arri, Epic, F65 and why those cameras cost $70,000 and such. Renting one of those for a day will buy you a GH2 though. I'd love to just bypass all the digital myself and shoot on film since that's what they all want to look like anyway. So if I make a good flick on a GH2 and it gets my foot in the door with enough money to shoot film, I'll do that. Until then, I'll light the hell out my scenes with my GH2 if that's what it takes.

[Kickass]

I hear some stuff about reliability, the gh2 and the settings used in this particular test. I have used many high end gop1 settings professionally without any issues whatsoever. However, people need to realize that you can't just do it without having thorough knowledge of the pitfalls, which equipment to use (such as sdhc cards, lenses) and how to / the means to fail-safe your shoot.

The high end settings are tested for reliability with only the high end cards (which performs well on the gh2) - expect them to fail with any other card. I'm guessing that Colt and Seman did not have the best performing card in this case, if they encountered errors. (some glitches persist regardless, that has no bearing on the recording).

[Germy1979]

Yeah i've never crashed, or lost any take with my Sandisk Extreme Pro 64/95. That's the only card they say to get if you're gonna run those super high bitrate patches. I've tried the 244mb patch even.. No issues in high detail scenarios. Aside from really not providing a discernible difference in image quality from say, a 176mb patch.. It just took up a lot of space. I think I got 20 minutes on a 64 gb card.

I agree they probably used a lower end card.

[johnnymossville]

I've used a hacked gh2 for paying gigs and never had an issue. I have had a few issues while testing various hacks, but I stay away from those when I take the camera on a paid project.

[Per Lichtman]

Just wanted to emphasize that if you use a SanDisk 95MB/s 64GB and test ahead of time (as Germy1979 mentioned) then you really should not have any problems with a hack.

The best GOP1 settings, shooting with that card, have proven to be completely reliable in any 24H shots I have thrown at them. The version of Quantum V9b that they used was an earlier setting than, for instance, Sedna AQ1 A. I have shot music videos with both Sedna and Canis Majoris Night and found them to be completely predictable in their performance.

The times I had difficulty were when I used lower performing memory cards or used modes I had not tested before. You just need to spend time with a given hacked setting for a while BEFORE you use it on a commercial shoot. Do not take switching such settings (or a memory card or a lens type) as a trivial thing. Do your prep work and you will the results are very predictable and be able to completely relax on the set without fretting about unexpected glitches.

[jonjak2]

I had the iphone last, then the GH2, then the 7d.
The GH2 looked nasty to me personally. Very videoy and not nice colours at all. I find it hard to understand how some people put it up so high, but different tastes i guess. I had the Alexa first because the image had a smoother feel, with very nice tonal range.

The whole 'most people preferred the GH2' feels like out of context fanboy hysteria. Why so desperate to overstate this camera? Granted, it is amazing that such an inexpensive camera can even be close to the more expensive ones, but did it look as good? Nowhere near to me, and i imagine that would be the same for most Cinematographers with a trained eye.

[markm]

[quote name='markm' timestamp='1342557250' post='14056']
I would use driftwoods hack to make a feature film but I'd make sure I used the right card. I've never had a problem with driftwoods latest raft of hacks in fact they are brilliant. But why do it when the BMC is on the horizon!

Sorry Andrew I know you haven't said it but I wouldn't use the 44mb for pro use.

The GH2 may miff quite a few professionals with nice shiny C300's and the like I feel some sympathy for those who spent many thousands on these cameras.
[/quote]

Changed my mind went out on a shoot this morning and lost 3 damn good shots using Driftwoods day hack. Will only use something they say is ultra stable.

Lesson learnt!