|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:i'm guessing the daylight is a close 4 by kino with a grid, using the barndoor to flag off the bottom of that wall. tungsten fill is china ball? Actually, daylight is that great big beautiful ball of light in the sky. I actually didn't use a china ball in this scene, tungsten fill is an overly red fluorescent practical that's a fixture of the location. That bottomer is actually a TV stand. Happy accidents (read: shooting in a tiny hotel room with too many production bodies and no storage space or art department).
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:34 |
|
|
For anyone interested in the comparisons between DSLR and Film cameras, https://www.zacuto.com just released the first part of a three part series objectively testing several different dslrs and film. Very interesting stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2010 02:43
|
|
|
So I did this a month ago using a Flip UltraHD and a Sony EX1. It covers the mavericks event and all the craziness. part 1: The Madness https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrMazfFUYbY part 2: The Surfing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RycSgofuQpo edit: sorry, I should point out it's more of a mini-doc instead of just raw clips. FloatingPoop fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Mar 30, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 04:26
|
|
|
I just finished my website focusing on my directing and cinematography (is there any other kind?). look around and let me know if you find and any bugs or have any thoughts or suggestions. Thanks. https://www.watcinema.com FloatingPoop posted:So I did this a month ago using a Flip UltraHD and a Sony EX1. It covers the mavericks event and all the craziness. I remember when you posted the clips in GBS originally, great footage. I saw it advertised on some kind of "extreme videos!" show the other week. Good job.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 07:27
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:I remember when you posted the clips in GBS originally, great footage. I saw it advertised on some kind of "extreme videos!" show the other week. Good job. Really? Any idea what it was? I haven't been informed of that. G4 expressed interest but never actually told me if they'd use it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 18:45
|
|
|
it on some reality channel. I'm not really sure what channel or show it was because I saw it on an ad while in a hotel, I don't own broadcast television.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2010 19:25
|
|
|
I've been trying to figure out what is wrong with Canon's prosumer video division. With their DSLR's being pretty awesome and responsive to video needs their DSLR division seems to be cooking along in the still and video world. Meanwhile Canon video has announced some lacklustre updates in their line. It could be they are saving up something for NAB, but you'd think they'd take one of those nice CMOS sensors, pop it in a more traditional video body with proper video controls, and they would dominate. Why haven't they done it? The interesting rumour I heard, and please tell me if it is wrong, is that Canon actually makes the RED sensors. If they did then it could be possible that they are in a non-compete with RED for that sensor tech. Highly unlikely I know, but it would explain why Canon video is misfiring so badly. I mean as it is, the Canon DSLR line-up looks like it has taken a bite out of potential scarlet sales. Thoughts on completely unsubstantiated high level DP rumours?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 05:52
|
|
|
Walnut Crunch posted:you'd think they'd take one of those nice CMOS sensors, pop it in a more traditional video body with proper video controls, and they would dominate. Think about the lens in the XH A1. Think about how much that camera sells for right now. Now think about what a lens with those same specs would cost if it could cover an APS-C sized chip. Prosumer cameras already stretch the limits of price/performance when it comes to optics and miniaturization. If slapping a big rear end sensor in a prefab body was all they had to do, they'da done it already. I'm sure they're working on it, and I'm sure they're racing Sony, Panasonic and RED to be first to market, but professional DPs are not actually the people buying these cameras. The primary concern has to be hobbyists, bottom rung broadcast, ENG and videographers, and those customers are already used to a ton of features in their video cameras that just aren't yet possible with a big sensor on the prosumer scale. edit: just for kicks i looked up the A1's lens. The equivalent focal range is 38.9-778mm in 35mm terms, with a f/1.6 to f/3.2 aperture. That is never, ever going to happen with an APS-C sensor for the prosumer market. I'm not even sure it's physically possible. To put things in perspective, the EF 28-300/3.5-5.6L is $2500 new. Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Mar 31, 2010 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 06:40
|
|
|
Isn't part of the reason that those lenses are so expensive is that they are such a small market? A lens with that range would be ridiculously expensive, and physically difficult to manufacture I imagine, but would they even need to try? Why not just move into multiple lenses, lower cost, simpler specs to cover the same thing. I know it's always more complicated than that, part of it has to be an auto-focus system. Professionally it's not needed but in the prosumer world they are relied on. But really the DSLR's are doing it with stock Canon lenses, why can't prosumer cameras go that way? Really in there is no pro market any more for secondary cameras from the prosumer range. Everyone seems to be shooting with the 7d or 5dmk2 when they need a low profile, cheap camera. They really are cannibalizing their prosumer cameras. I like watching it go back and forth. Truthfully I thought Nikon was going to be groundbreaking with video, because they don't have a video division to protect.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 07:22
|
|
|
Walnut Crunch posted:Really in there is no pro market any more for secondary cameras from the prosumer range. Everyone seems to be shooting with the 7d or 5dmk2 when they need a low profile, cheap camera. They really are cannibalizing their prosumer cameras. If you're a live producer and you're buying a DSLR to use as a B-roll cam on location, you should probably be loving fired. They're wonderful cameras, but good luck shooting sports events, concerts, ENG, cable access, frankly anything on earth you would need a prosumer video camera for. They're great, cheap alternatives to film cameras for shooting narratives but they are terrible, terrible video cameras. Think about what a remote video unit consists of. These days it's 4 people maximum: a shooter, an audio guy, a field producer and a host. You're a production manager and you've got 4 grand in the budget for a second camera to hand to the field producer as a backup / B-roll. Are you going to spend that money on a kludgy DSLR rig that the field producer has to build and operate without AF, IS or audio on location, or are you going to spend it on a tiny, rugged, handheld video camera with a fast, built in superzoom AF lens, built in switchable ND filters, an XLR you can plug a shotgun or cardioid into for interviews, variable servo zoom speeds, etc etc? Plus, the B-roll video camera shoots the same format as your big boy camera and can jam sync with daddy so your editor doesn't tear his loving toenails out when you give him the footage. The DSLR does not cut it as a video camera. Nobody I know would take you at all seriously if you said "there is no pro market any more for secondary cameras from the prosumer range." We would laugh heartily and beat you with an HMC40. I personally can't wait to get my hands on a T2i, I'm savin up my duckets to play around with one, but it is not going to replace my bread and butter machines. Not until they give us a real convergence device like they keep saying they will.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 07:54
|
|
|
I'm talking narrative or production of high-end commercials. That is where the market has died or is suffering or if you go even more mellow, is threatened. Those big boy commercials have a ridiculous amount of 7d footage in them these days because they are a very useful tool in their arsenal. But, yes I agree with ENG use, even the CMOS sensor is cause for concern and the form factor is really not run and gun ready. There is no way we'd use it. But I would look at one seriously as a secondary camera, even thought we are pretty thoroughly committed to p2. I mean my camera is an HPX-500, that is a pixel shifted, CCD, big rear end camera on my shoulder, with four XLR inputs, an awesome manual focus lens, nice weather protection, big controls that are manual, all the goodness you need for EFP or ENG for that matter. There is nothing out that makes me want to replace that camera yet. Maybe the varicam, but that's a bit out of price range. But yes there is no way I'd consider replacing that with a DSLR.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 15:50
|
|
|
Walnut Crunch posted:I'm talking narrative or production of high-end commercials. That is where the market has died or is suffering or if you go even more mellow, is threatened. Those big boy commercials have a ridiculous amount of 7d footage in them these days because they are a very useful tool in their arsenal. I'll say it again: Professional DPs are not the people buying prosumer cameras. If you're shooting high end commercials, you aren't using an HDV handicam for B-roll. If you're shooting narrative, you are renting everything anyway. The market you're saying has died never existed to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 17:29
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'll say it again: Professional DPs are not the people buying prosumer cameras. If you're shooting high end commercials, you aren't using an HDV handicam for B-roll. If you're shooting narrative, you are renting everything anyway. The market you're saying has died never existed to begin with. I guess you are right on that. No HDV cam is going to be used on high end commercials. I don't do commercials. I sure as hell don't do narrative so I don't know. I did reality for a long time and I don't know, other than not being able to run time of day timecode, there is a lot one of those DSLR's could do that the various secondary cameras we carried around could not. If I was doing one of those shows now I'd certainly geta DSLR on set for low light alone. You could be right and the market really isn't threatened anywhere by these cameras, but it seems to me with narrative, commercial, and EFP, the need for a specialty camera whether it is an HVX-200, an avchd cam, or lord help you an HDV camera, is substantially less with the introduction of the DSLRS. Now the wedding market, and ambulance chaser, community cable market might be where the Canon bread and butter, hell what do I know. I don't sell cameras. I don't rent them to people either. All I know is that from independent drama types, to commercial production houses, these cameras are getting used a lot, and it has to be hurting someones product line doesn't it? I still don't understand why they aren't putting that sensor into a proper video body. Just because their prosumer cameras have ridiculous range lenses because of traditionally small sensors doesn't mean they'll have to have ridiculous range lenses with large sensors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2010 18:29
|
|
|
Can you guys recommend me a quick course/run me through some things I should know if I'm going to be shooting? My uni has a "TV Station" society, and I appear to be the only one up for learning how to film. They don't really seem to have anybody to teach me, though, and I don't want to miss anything major if I turn up at a shoot. I can figure out most of the controls on the cameras, just looking for some do's and don'ts and things not to forget.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 00:50
|
|
|
Pantsmaster Bill posted:... just looking for some do's and don'ts and things not to forget. Best advice ever - make sure the red light is on when you think you are recording. Especially if things start moving fast, that will save your rear end. I've seen so much footage where shooters have double pumped, or become otherwise reversed and ruined whole chunks of a shoot. They end up recording when they think they are off, and off when they think they are recording.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 04:59
|
|
|
rule of thirds, expose for faces, 180 degree shutter, avoid gain, watch your headroom, keep it steady and in focus and don't get fancy.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 05:05
|
|
|
no one is shooting tons of stuff with the 7D in the commercial world. There are dumb exceptions by morons but I guess they like terrible looking footage that can't resolve 720P line chart and has one of the worst codecs ever imagined for a native format. (wonder why AVCHD gets laughed at?) HDSLRs are for weddings, morons, indie garbage and C-Roll edit: I will admit the have a great form factor. A sensor with a lense mount is the future of digital cinema, but it can't be putting out this.  When real money is on the line, poo poo like this doesn't cut it. Still, it looks pretty good on vimeo for you shallow DoF clips of your dog. Mozzie fucked around with this message at 05:31 on Apr 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 05:25
|
|
|
Ya know, I don't shoot charts all that often. DSLs have their place, it's just a tool. If you're into that look it's an easy way to get it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 06:06
|
|
|
Posting this again because it seems like it was missed. I really appreciate any thoughts on my newly finished website. Let me know if you find any bugs, have any suggestions or critiques on my reels and what-not. Thanks. Except for you ButteryPancakes, I know you've already seen it. https://www.watcinema.com
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 07:06
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:no one is shooting tons of stuff with the 7D in the commercial world. There are dumb exceptions by morons but I guess they like terrible looking footage that can't resolve 720P line chart and has one of the worst codecs ever imagined for a native format. (wonder why AVCHD gets laughed at?) The moron and their beer company producing a spot for the 2010 games would like to have a word with you... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aQkrV3ppAw&feature=player_embedded Aerials not 7d, everything else 7d Your attitude is fairly making GBS threads and old school. DSLR's are in the professional production process, and rigid thinking is on its way out. The new video DSLR's are phenomenal tools for specific uses. They have their weaknesses but it all depends on what you are trying to do. To say they are just for pictures of dogs because your chart says so is missing the point. That commercial was shot mostly on a directors scout of locations and it was the perfect tool for the immediacy and and energy of the spot. Talking to people in the know, just the light issues alone are going to change a lot. They think in the next few years commercial crews will be dropping from in excess of 40 people to 9 or 10. The creatives will remain but the grip trucks, big rear end generators all that will be on the way out. There are severe limitations with the current crop of DSLR's, and shallow depth of field is going to be abused like never before, but they enable some amazing things in the right situation. Also I think their form factor is freaking awful
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 18:44
|
|
|
I just worked on a shoot for a narrative with an AFI graduate DP with nearly 15 feature length films under his belt. The production could only afford to rent a 7D and the DP had never shot on a DSLR before. Obviously he would have preferred most any other film camera or even the RED over the 7D but he shot it just like it was any other camera and it looks great. It's just another filmaking tool, an affordable tool.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2010 19:04
|
|
|
Walnut Crunch posted:Talking to people in the know, just the light issues alone are going to change a lot. They think in the next few years commercial crews will be dropping from in excess of 40 people to 9 or 10. The creatives will remain but the grip trucks, big rear end generators all that will be on the way out. Nope, No, and no. I don't even have to justify my argument because the HDSLR crowd is almost as stupid as the red crowd. P.S. that commercial looks like poo poo. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 01:31
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:Nope, No, and no. I don't even have to justify my argument because the HDSLR crowd is almost as stupid as the red crowd. Do you have some stories or experience or anything interesting to add to this thread other than pointless bickering? What point are you even trying to make? I'll agree with one thing though, that commercial does look like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 01:54
|
|
|
Mozzie posted:Nope, No, and no. I don't even have to justify my argument because the HDSLR crowd is almost as stupid as the red crowd. Which is almost as stupid as the film crowd, which is almost as stupid as the DV crowd, which is almost as stupid as..etc. etc. etc. Seems like you're just as stubborn as someone who wants to exclusively use an HDSLR. I guess what everyone in this thread (other than you) keeps saying is that all of these cameras are just tools in a toolbag. They have their place in certain situations, circumstances, budgets, and creative vision.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 02:13
|
|
|
True, true.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 02:16
|
|
|
SquareDog posted:https://www.watcinema.com I guess my only other critique would be about the lack of a reel on the first page. Your front page looks nice, but has no real content. Maybe work those images into the header, or just make them smaller and put your main reel on the front page. Setting up Google Analytics and seeing how many people click through to your other pages might influence your decision.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 02:18
|
|
|
Thanks for reminding me! I had set up Google Analytics but forgot to "activate" it when the site was finished. I'll do that now. I'm not one to make excuses when I've made a bad design choice but I think I'm justified in not including a reel on the main page. Of all the professional portfolio sites I seen, none of them have video content on the main page. http://www.samuelbayer.com/ http://www.ryansmithdirector.com/ http://www.marcwebb.com/ http://www.hypewilliams.com/ etc. However I was told very recently that I need to "make my choice" between putting 'director' or 'cinematographer' on my card, so to speak, but not both. Perhaps if I decided between the two I would put a video on the main page. Based on the material I have posted, would you guys say I'm a better director, or cinematographer? Of course, just starting out I'll take other jobs too, but I need to represent myself as one thing, between the two what should that be?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 03:30
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:I'll agree with one thing though, that commercial does look like poo poo. John Adams...true You're going to judge the quality of look off that encode? Really? That commercial looked loving phenomenal during the Olympics, and it created a huge buzz. By all accounts that commercial was a triumph. Also it goes to saying, use the tool for what it is good for. They wanted a rough look to it, and got it, but the footage they shot on the frozen lake is pretty iconic. The point of the link to the commercial was to show that the largest beer brand in Canada, with pretty close to the largest advertising budget, with the top tier production companies and ad agencies, had no problem using a 7d. Kind of going to prove the point, that DSLR's are in the pro workflow. Seriously asking though what's so lovely about it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 03:54
|
|
|
I think that beer commercial looks great.. And besides, if the client is happy and the bill is paid, who cares? "I can't accept your money for this spot, the moire effect at 00:00:10;21 is just personally and professionally embarrassing."
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 04:11
|
|
|
Walnut Crunch posted:You're going to judge the quality of look off that encode? Really? That commercial looked loving phenomenal during the Olympics, and it created a huge buzz. By all accounts that commercial was a triumph. Maybe it looked way different for broadcast, but the exposure in the video in that link is horrible. It's the same problem with pretty much all consumer video, you just don't have the latitude to keep sky detail without pushing the blacks so far down they look like blocky crap when you try and bring them back in post. These guys did what most people do, which is just crush them beyond recognition and try and make it up in the mids. It doesn't fool anyone. I have seen some stuff shot with a 7D that is genuinely breathtaking but that commercial looks like crap. They should have hired Philip Bloom: http://vimeo.com/8100091
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 04:17
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Maybe it looked way different for broadcast, but the exposure in the video in that link is horrible. It's the same problem with pretty much all consumer video, you just don't have the latitude to keep sky detail without pushing the blacks so far down they look like blocky crap when you try and bring them back in post. These guys did what most people do, which is just crush them beyond recognition and try and make it up in the mids. It doesn't fool anyone. It did look way different for broadcast. You can't really make those calls based on youtube. At least I don't see how you can. Even a one step compression process is bound to mess things up, even if done well, then hand it over to youtube and hope for the best from there. Pushed, pulled and twisted, it all happens in a largely uncontrolled and often haphazard manner when it gets sent to the web, especially youtube. We send our stuff to youtube in a variant of flash 9 video because we've had great results with it, but man all kinds of things happen in that process. That's why guys like Bloom (i think) and laforet post the untouched camera files so people can see for themselves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 07:14
|
|
|
That may have been true a year ago, but I put up a 1080P file the other day from a 2-pass, high bandwidth h.264 encode and the end results were pretty god drat close to the original. It's better looking than a lot of digital cable HD channel feeds I've seen. By the way, if you're encoding to Flash first, you're doing it wrong. Transcode as efficiently as possible, with as much bandwidth as possible. It's going to transcode it again no matter what you do, you want to feed it as much information as you can. Anyway, a bad transcode still doesn't affect the latitude as much as the resolution. They must have seriously hosed up the encode in some bizarre fashion if there was really supposed to be detail in those blacks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 17:42
|
|
|
I have no idea what was "supposed" to be in those blacks. I can say on my youtube it looks lovely, but it looked nothing but awesome during the olympics on TV. The wanted a user generated feel to the video, shot in the moment, so they might very well have trashed the video even further. As a final piece though it was powerful and cohesive, and watching at home, nothing jumped out as "what the hell?" Just shows though, a commercial director, with a 7d, on a scout, shot the majority of the footage for a huge budget, signature ad, for a beer company and no one complained or called him a hack. Happy accidents, or flexibility with the tools available. I still hold that DSLR's are changing the business. On the encode tip... we've been doing a flash encode for about a year now to great results. Youtube does transcode but since the switch to official HD youtube, it handles flash very well, and a lot of people choose that as their upload format. I should look again and run some current tests, but truthfully our uploads look pretty drat good. I was a doubter on the high bandwidth flash, but it looks pretty good. Everyone has a different recipe and I'm sure there are more than a few good ways to achieve nice results. It still holds true though, you send something to youtube that you cooked up, and hope they handle their end well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 18:25
|
|
|
I wouldn't go straight to VP6, YouTube can handle that for you. H.264 at a few Mb/s is the way to go. Especially since Flash video beyond version 8 can be done in H.264, like YouTube and Vimeo's HD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2010 20:32
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Philip Bloom: http://vimeo.com/8100091 Thanks for linking, that was loving awesome! I think the only bad shot in there was the water splashing into the pond of the fountain. It was just too blurry and on the verge of turning into a blotch of artifacts. Other than that I really loved it, especially the tiltnshift stuff. Beautiful place and well captured. Edit: Did he even use tiltnshift? The shots at 1:18 and 2:29 look like it, right? I find nothing about TnS on his blog. Frost fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Apr 3, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2010 13:55
|
|
|
What windows program(s) work best to edit together .mov files? What do you use?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2010 15:29
|
|
|
I'm getting paid to edit a piece for a local music festival, but the event organizers did not really specify to the videographers what formats to shoot in, so I've got a mix of anything and everything coming in. I've got the majority of footage from an HMC150 shot at 720p24 and an XL-H1 at 24F, in addition to a smattering of Flip Video footage. I'm kind of lost as to how to put it all together, since it seems like I'm set for render hell with the different codecs and frame rates involved. Shoot myself now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2010 18:56
|
|
|
Yep, sucks to be you. Conform everything to Prores at 720p24 and be prepared to spray doo doo everywhere when the batch monitor ETA comes up. Hope you don't have a deadline! The flip video is going to be the worst, since it has to interpolate frames and motion estimate to get to 24p. If you can trim down a majority of what you think you'll need for the edit, do it before the conversion. also next time have a timecode clock running somewhere the cameras can see it. have the camera ops shoot 5 seconds of timecode at the top of every clip. that way you can stop on a frame, enter the timecode on the screen and everything will sync up nicely. this is known as "ghetto rear end smpte" Dr. Fishopolis fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Apr 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2010 19:05
|
|
|
quote does not equal edit
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2010 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 14:34 |
|
|
I have 30 days to prepare a 5-10 minute piece, which doesn't seem to be that bad. I'm going to be very selective about the clips that I capture because there's just way too much material (9 stages worth of performances in addition to all the random poo poo captured at the event). edit: How would you manage SMPTE sync when the festival is set up like this?  Click here for the full 950x734 image. 1st AD fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Apr 4, 2010 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2010 19:13
|
|