[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/p/ - Photography


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Pre-summer 2024 edition

All video related questions and discussion is intended for this thread. Here we discuss techniques, gear and anything else related to capturing video footage. Please don't pretend to be an expert if you don't know what you're talking about. Kindly leave your ego at the door.
Posting short films/scripts or other work you've done is encouraged.
We tend to use and recommend DSLRs/mirrorless cameras because they provide phenomenal picture quality for their price, have large sensors (ie the same size used in high-end cinema cameras and higher) and have interchangeable lenses.
In contrast, consumer camcorders often have much smaller sensors and a fixed lens.

>STICKY - https://text.is/QZ1J
>Helpful guide, additional books and more in-depth FAQs - https://web.archive.org/web/20200926115310/https://pastebin.com/kG0gRmTZ

>NO ONE CARES WHAT AN EXPERT YOU THINK YOU ARE. IF YOU’RE ASKING BASIC-AS-SHIT QUESTIONS, YOU CAN’T BE ALL THAT GREAT. SEE ABOVE

Previous thread >>4294741

Quick FAQS
>what’s the best camera available on a “budget”?
The blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k
>what’s a good beginner video camera?
Anything that works, shoots at least 1080p and preferably has interchangeable lenses. Any recommendation beyond that will cause arguments so read the fucking sticky if that isn't satisfactory.
>What's a good sound solution that won't break the bank?
Zoom h1
>Can I use a zoom lens for video?
Yes
>Do I need cine lenses?
No
>Do I need 4k?
No. It will make your footage look sharper if it’s in focus, and it gives you breathing room in post. But 1080p is still absolutely fine
>Can someone tell me if my video is any good?
Yes, but be prepared to receive harsh criticism. If you're going to waste 5 minutes of our time with a shitty out-of-focus montage of nothing then we'll tell you that it's crap
>>
File: IMG_2778.jpg (697 KB, 1571x1178)
697 KB
697 KB JPG
>>4307820

Is the Roger Deakins dream cam. The Arri Alexa Studio with the mechanical shutter (not the electronic shutter) and optical view finder, a global shutter camera. What advantages do you get from having a real mechanical shutter in the camera rather then an electronic shutter? The advantage of an optical viewfinder is it looks cool and what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG) without any lag time to put a signal on an electronic shutter. Why don’t they make more digital video cameras with optical viewfinders and real mechanical shutters. (Is their an advantage that an electronic shutter would offer people?)

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon EOS 70D
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 10.2 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution240 dpi
Vertical Resolution240 dpi
Image Created2023:10:30 12:23:20
Exposure Time1/125 sec
F-Numberf/13.0
Exposure ProgramManual
ISO Speed Rating400
Lens Aperturef/13.0
Exposure Bias0 EV
Metering ModePattern
FlashFlash, Compulsory
Focal Length35.00 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1571
Image Height1178
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeManual
White BalanceAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
>>
>>4307826
>Why don’t they make more digital video cameras with optical viewfinders
Optical viewfinders in a video camera can be done in one of two ways as far as I'm aware. Either you have a mechanical shutter that you sync with/attach to a mirror, much like in an slr, and the viewfinder is showing the image between the camera's recording of frames. This has the downsides associated with using a mechanical shutter and means the image you're seeing is flickering and not technically the same as the image being recorded.
The alternative way is to use an optical splitter, to split the light that comes in from the lens so that some of it goes to the sensor, and some of it goes to a secondary source. This what they do with most analogue video cameras. The problem is that this reduces the amount of light coming in from the lens, thus making picture quality worse.
Instead. when the image fed to the monitor/evf is identical to the one being recorded, delayed by a couple of frames, most DPs and camera operators find this to be a much preferred solution/
>and real mechanical shutters
Mechanical shutters are moving parts. Moving parts break. If you have a mechanical shutter, your camera will need servicing a lot more frequently. When you're on a large film set, that's potentially millions being lost if the camera shits itself in the middle of the day.
One of the advantages of digital cameras is that they don't need to use mechnical shutters
>>
>>4307828
> millions of dollars lost if it shits the bed because of problems with the mechanical shutter

I guess it is for autists that lust after gear and not Hollywood dops. Is the fact that Roger Deakins loves that camera a fact or is it just a meme?
>>
>>4307826

The Arri viewfinder isn't very good, at least not the one that is on Amira and Mini. Genuinely hard to pull focus with it if you are doing work without a 1st AC. I'd love to test the optical viewfinder.
>>
>>4307835
> viewfinder isn’t that good
I thought everything arri made would be of the highest quality given what it costs to buy.
>>
>>4307844
Some companies are very aware that if they charge more, it will be perceived to be of higher quality.
The entire cinema camera market relied on this for decades until canon accidentally fucked up their business model when they flippantly put 1080p video into a dslr meant for photography.
>>
>>4307847
But Arri’s lenses the master primes and ultra primes are top-tier quality and their zeiss/arri macro lenses are also top-tier quality.

The real company that shook everything up is Blackmagic Design. If you wanted your old canon camera to work for video you needed to hack it with magic lantern to make it into a video making beast.

I heard that the color science on the arri is the goat is that true?
>>
>>4307826
OVF isn't WYSIWYG, lol
>>
>>4307867
When I said WYSIWYG I was talking about the colors that the camera is capturing from the lens because I am a colorist. EVFs will always distort the colors. Without an Optical Viewfinder, you’d need to rent something from FSI or buy something from FSI and have your Flanders calibrated to make sure that the colors you were seeing were accurate to what was on-set. If you aren’t a colorist, you probably wouldn’t care. But if you want to grade the image it is helpful to know how the colors actually looked when the scene was filmed and an optical viewfinder would let you see the accurate colors getting captured by the camera.
>>
>>4307858
No shade towards arri's lenses or cinema lenses in general.
HOWEVER
Vintage photography lenses used to be cheap as piss until about ten years ago when everyone realised how amazing they were, combined with the blowup in "content creators" using dslr/mlcs. Those vintage lenses produce great images. They aren't cinema lenses because they aren't optimised in a way that DoPs would prefer.
The same goes for normal stills lenses. The canon nifty 50 is still a great lens. It's cheap as fuck.
Cinema lenses are the price they're at because that's what people expect them to cost.
>The real company that shook everything up is Blackmagic Design
Everyone has shook things up since. The point is that canon accidentally opened pandora's box with the 5dii.
But yes, blackmagic has consistently been proving that cinema shit can be a lot cheaper without sacrificing quality. Their 17k camera should embarrass the shit out of arri
>>
>>4307872
So, I’m 10 years too late. I could have gotten a set of super baltars 10 years ago for a few hundred bucks not the price of a car. The image quality of the 40mm macro kit lens from Nikon gives my expensive cinema lenses a run for their money. I heard rumors that the glass from that lens was rehoused and turned into a cinema lens by one of the major players either Arri or Panavision—is that rumor true?
>>
>>4307872
>Their 17k camera should embarrass the shit out of arri
Overheard at work: "Maybe Nikon will make them stop chasing K's and work on IQ for once."
Not that I know anything, I'm in the engineering department here.
>>4307878
You don't even need a re-house, 3d printed focus gears are a thing. You can stick enough plastic on a lens to make it *look* re-housed.
>>
>>4307880
Unrehoused without a mount and without good optics you’d spend more then $5,000 for a set of super baltars with some lens that have fungus. If you wanted copies without fungus and proper mounts for modern cameras they’d cost $30,000 for a set and if you wanted them rehoused with proper cinema gears they’d cost you $70,000 or more for the set. So you are saying I could have gotten good clean super baltars that worked on a camera for less then $5,000 for a set of lenses. I started looking for lenses 10 years too late.
>>
>>4307882
>super baltars
Get in on Soviet glass while you can.
>>
>>4307884
I collect Helios lenses. They cost $60 per lens and I love the bokeh they produce.
>>
>>4307880
>Maybe Nikon will make them stop chasing K's and work on IQ for once.
I'm very curious. But this is a sensor they say they developed themselves (compared to the other sensors in their cameras that they bought off the self essentially).
They rate the Pyxis sensor as having 13 stops of dr. CineD rated it at 12.9 at snr1, and 11.8 at snr2.
They claim the new sensor has 16 stops. If the same logic holds, that would put it above 14 stops for snr2, which would put it above every other camera aside from the Alexa 35 (including the alexa lf). Now that's obviously a huge if but it's at least very realistic to assume that the dynamic range will be considerably better than the one in the Pyxis which is already pretty decent.
>>
>>4307886
The only reason why Blackmagic can deliver usable 12k or 17k. They make Resolve an NLE so they can make sure that the 12k or 17k raw file is handled properly so it can be edited without bogging the system down.
>>
>>4307844

Outside of the viewfinder being mediocre, I agree. But it just isn't very good. It is better than what most competitors have, but the problem for me is that if your eye isn't pressed "correctly" in a very specific way to the viewfinder, you can't tell for sure if your focus is absolutely correct or not. The viewing angle on the EV is not great, which sucks if you want to do handheld and use the viewfinder. I don't know if they fixed it for the S35, unfortunately I have not shot or assisted that camera yet.

>But yes, blackmagic has consistently been proving that cinema shit can be a lot cheaper without sacrificing quality. Their 17k camera should embarrass the shit out of arri

Their hardware is unreliable, especially the lower end cameras. That is the downside of them keeping their prices so low.
>>
File: dune2-helios.jpg (42 KB, 639x330)
42 KB
42 KB JPG
>>4307885
OH yah I heard about dune2. Picrel.
>>4307886
I didn't get into the details. There's hardware and software in the workflow, and I'm only involved with the software part, which has been problematic. Some projects won't have us using the Red GPU accelerated debayer, for example.
>>
>>4307892
I got them way before dune 2 was around, they used to sell dirt cheap on amazon. I haven’t looked for them in a while but I but the price is going to go up because of dune.

I also got a lomogroaphy bokeh control lens and a modified 100 year old petzval lens because I just love the look of swirly bokeh.

I shoot music videos so I am after crazy bokeh to make my music videos unique.

I love my lomography bokeh control art petzval lens because you can dial in the strength of the swirl in the swirly bokeh and I find that awesome.

I am looking for a lens that makes totally round bokeh so it looks like a circle of bokeh forms something that looks like a black hole around the subject. I haven’t found a lens that does that effect yet.
>>
>>4307835
If the viewfinder is hard to use. How do pros who use arri cameras pull focus on sets that cost over $10,000 usd an hour to shoot on where getting proper focus is critical. What tricks do they use to pull focus?
>>
>>4308358
>What tricks do they use to pull focus?
The camera operator doesn't pull focus on large sets. The first ac is typically in charge of pulling focus.
They have a special wireless external monitor with a focus ring attached to its side that lets them precisely adjust the focus without interrupting the camera operator or bothering the director.
>>
>>4308358

The 1st AC aka focus puller pulls focus. Nowadays wireless transmitters & monitors are the standard so the focus puller pulls away from the camera with a wireless follow focus unit. All good focus pullers & especially old school focus pullers don't rely just on the monitor, they know distances just by looking/with instinct and they can nail focus even without looking at the monitor. Which is sometimes the only way to nail focus, even with a zero latency monitor you can sometimes be too late/your timing is wrong if you are not monitoring the action with your own eyes.

Operator/DP if he's self operating doesn't usually pull focus unless the production is really small. And really small productions don't usually shoot on Arris. From my experience documentaries are the exception and on those you often pull your own focus because the budget is so small. It is a shame that the EVF isn't very good, because form wise Arri Amira is a really good body that is made for handheld documentary work.
>>
>>4308373
>>4308377

So on large sets the cinematographer uses the EVF to frame the shot not to get focus on the shot. Does the cinematographer even set up the lights to light the shot or does the director do that? It seems like they have specialists to do everything on larger sets.
>>
>>4308406
>Does the cinematographer even set up the lights to light the shot or does the director do that?
Pretty sure the gaffer is in charge of that.
DP tells the gaffer and grips what to do. Director talks with the dp in advance about what they're going to do. On set, the director's main job is to guide the actor's through the scene properly. But they'll also converse with the dp, camera operator and 1st ad about shots and set ups in general.
>>
>>4308406
Oh also, unions are a thing. So you're kind of right about the specialists for everything.
To give an example: because of unions, a hollywood production literally isn't allowed to have anyone on set playback any recorded footage except for the DIT. If you don't hire one, you're fucked because pissing off the unions will basically end your production in an instant.
And yes, I literally mean the act of pressing the play button on your camera or external monitor. An act that a literal child would be capable of performing.
>>
>>4308410
DITs do a lot more than that. They're responsible for data management on set. It's an important role, if not very high up the ladder.

Rules are strict on set but for good reasons. It's not like forbidden for one department to help another necessarily, just isn't commonly done because everyone is on top of their shit. That said, there is the saying among gaffers and DPs, "the heaviest thing we carried today was... the art department."
>>
>>4308377
What would you recommend for a documentary?
>>
>>4308429
I'm not saying DITs aren't important. But that the director or DP literally isn't allowed to press the play button on the camera without the DIT's expressed permission (or at all if there's no DIT on set) is fucking retarded and a perfect example of why unions cause costs to balloon and impede production.
>>
>>4308503
This explains why a film me and my friends could make for 10k or less costs 100k or more if Hollywood makes it.

I always thought it was the costs of permits but the costs of hiring union workers to press play also explains why costs are so high too.
>>
File: 1712783477046730.gif (3.25 MB, 336x480)
3.25 MB
3.25 MB GIF
How does this look for a beginner lighting rig for interviews:
1x Aputure Amaran 200x S
1x Matthews medium duty stand
1x Aputure Lantern 90
>>
>>4308513
Blumhouse manages to do well shooting low budget union
>>
File: 1256046354014.gif (942 KB, 320x240)
942 KB
942 KB GIF
>>4308523
I forgot to mention that I plan on getting:
2x Amaran 100x S
1x Light Dome II
2x Light Dome Mini II
2x Matthews medium duty stands

for traditional 3 light interviews. Eventually.
>>
>>4308527
How? Don’t Unions try to get as much money as possible from filmmakers.
>>
File: 1584654851000.gif (1.72 MB, 666x716)
1.72 MB
1.72 MB GIF
>>4308582
Yeah, I'm sure it's the grips dragging production down lol. Producer hands typed this.
>>
>>4308503

This must be a Hollywood thing, there are definitely DIT's where I work but of course the operator, DP, or one of the camera assistants can push playback if they want and need to.
>>
>>4308474

Recommend what? A camera for a documentary?
>>
>>4308678
Yes.
>>
>>4307885
I'm seing the Helios bokeh on literally everything I watch these days. It's a big meme.
>>
>>4308523
Seems fine, you probably could've gone another cheaper brand because the chinese cine lighting market is flooded and they're all basically copying eachother.

Same with the stand, really, I gambled on neewer light stands and they're incredibly solid.

Stick with Aputure at this point so you can control them all with the app.
>>
>>4308999
it was all over dune 2
>>
>>4308474
Depends on the budget for the documentary, and how large the crew is. Can't go wrong with Sony FX line though, there's something at every price point basically.
>>
>>4308523
>>4308528
Those lights are a little anemic if you're planning on shooting in/around natural light. If it's a closed set or only ever indoors, that could work.


Why the lantern over a softbox or octa? Lanterns are typically used as overhead sources, like if you're shooting a dinner table type of scene. The skirt can only prevent spill if it's rigged like that. You can slap a cloth grid on an octa or a softbox, and they're easier to flag off.
>>
post piece of art cinematorgraphy pics
>>
>>4308685

Depends on the style of the documentary and budget. Pick the best tool for your specific documentary and what it requires. Demands of a "stereotypical" Netflix talking head documentary are different from a documentary that is doing run and gun style shooting in middle of a riot or a warzone etc.

I would also argue documentaries are the kind of films where most audiences are very used to and receptive to all kinds of different visual approaches and varying image qualities. Most documentaries back in the day didn't have budget for 35 mm film, many were shot on 16 mm. Then lots of great documentaries have been shot on tape or casette and other kind of "low" quality recording materials.

But to roughly recommend some cameras:

>High budget

Arri Alexa Amira:
Good ergonomics for long takes, XLR for audio, internal ND's. Arri built quality = can take a beating. Downside is that the EVF is not great if you are single pulling focus, isn't as big of a problem if you are using an external monitor, but that also means you'll most likely using a Easyrig or Cinesaddle or something similar, so you lose the shoulder handheld method of shooting. Amira is also pretty heavy which can be gruelling if the documentary is doing long takes and is otherwise physically demanding.

Arri Alexa Mini:
Same technical reasons as Amira. Different body, lighter than Amira. Depending on style of documentary and operator preferences, the Mini might be preferable for some people. Big downside compared to Amira is that no internal XLR, no preamp, no gain control or phantom power etc.

>High to mid budget

Canon C300 Mark III:

Internal ND. Good audio ports. A bit odd design but still ergonomically quite good even out of the box. Good build quality, though not Arri level obviously. Good codecs and flexible overall. Workhorse.
>>
>>4309019
I try to shoot with natural lighting whenever possible, but I need to be capable of shooting a standard indoor interview. I thought that lanterns are good for giving indirect light for an entire (smallish) room. Things might change, but I should only be able to afford the 200x S, stand, and lantern for the month of May. I need the proper light diffusion for a single light setup. Would I be better off with a softbox or octa if I want to mimic a 3 light interview with only a single light in a purely indoor environment?
>>
>>4309041

>High to mid budget continued

Canon C70:

Basically a mini C300. Depending on shooting style, demands of the production etc. the smaller footprint might be beneficial in some situations, but also can be a pain in the ass. Depends on the style of shooting and demands of the specific project.

Sony FS7:

Was a staple of shit ton of documentaries, ENG stuff etc. for almost a decade for a reason. Was very capable camera for its price. Surprisingly durable also despite all the plastic. Pretty good ergonomics even straight out of the box. The most obvious downsides are bad low light and Sony's earlier not so good color science, which needs a good colorist in post to make it work. XLR ports, internal ND etc.

Sony FX6 and FX9

The ones that followed FS7. Improved color science, better lowlight, internal ND, XLR. Very good workhorse cameras with a terrific price to quality ratio.

There is also the FX3 which is basically Sony's C70 equivalent, except I think the FX3 is worse, especially lack of internal ND sucks and the boxy design is not good. bUt yeAh they sHot The Creator on it, so obviously it works if you want to.

I do not have enough experience with Nikons to recommend anything, from what I understand they do not have a "dedicated" cinema line, which is most likely why they just bought RED. Speaking of RED, I would actually not pick their bodies for lots of documentary work. They still have problems with expensive propretiary equipment that isn't as reliable as Arri's. The cameras still are slow to boot up, the bodies need lots of rigging etc. V-Raptor XL has internal ND but the V-Raptor doesn't etc. I am not just a biggest RED fan, not in fiction, not in documentary context.

Don't know enough about Fujifilm to recommend anything from them. I think that is pretty much most of the big players. In all honestly like I said, the camera you choose for a documentary is based on mutltiude of factors.
>>
>>4309049

Continued

PIcking a camera for a documentary is about the style of the documentary, the style of filmmaking, budget etc. I honestly would not fret about it too much. There are so many terrific documentaries that have been shot on absolute potato cameras and I know it is a cliche to say it, but story triumphs everything. And now you can actually spend quite a little of money for a really good camera with 10 bit color etc. that absolutely mogs most cameras that docs were shot 20 years ago for example.
>>
>>4309052

Oh and one more thing, this might cause some butthurt, but I personally stay away from Blackmagic because of quality control issues. Brands like Canon, Sony etc. are much more reliable with their cameras in the same price range. Image quality on Blackmagic is good, build quality isn't and most of their bodies aren't so good for doc work
>>
>>4309044
4' Octa up close is real nice and the eyelights will be more circular. Invest in some white and black vflats, whether that's buying new, used or diy. You always need negative fill, and a white v flat can double as a fill source in a pinch.
>>
what's the digital equivalent of film? meaning color depth, luminance, etc
>>
>>4309053

Actually sorry for spamming, one more reply, if anyone is interested about Sundance documentaries of the last couple of years and what they were shot on.

>2024

https://www.indiewire.com/gallery/sundance-2024-cinematography-documentaries/and-so-it-begins-bruce-sakaki-cinematographer/

>2023

https://www.indiewire.com/feature/sundance-documentary-cameras-lens-equipment-sony-canon-1234801323/

>2022

https://www.indiewire.com/features/general/film-cameras-documentary-sundance-arri-canon-blackmagic-1234693570/

>2021

https://www.indiewire.com/feature/sundance-documentary-camera-lens-cinematography-1234612955/
>>
post pics you absolute subhumans
>>
>>4309077
Of what? Spiderman?
>>
>>4309078
kek, spidermans are fine too, but make them cinematographic
>>
I finally got the used arri alexa studio camcorder I ordered. That thing is built like a tank. It looks like it can be used for shoulder mount because it comes with a shoulder pad. It’s so freaking heavy. Who could carry that camera on their shoulder for a whole shoot day? Hercules or He-Man!
>>
>>4307828
I just looked at the users manual and the image you see in the viewfinder is not the image that gets recorded to the sensor. You see the image in the viewfinder when the shutter is closed and when the sensor is open it records to the sensor. Genius design! Does Roger Deakins really love this camera or is it just a YouTube meme that this is Deakins’ favorite camera.
>>
>>4309155
lol the dp doesn't have have to deal with the foibles of the camera, the 1st ac et al deal with it.
>>
>>4309291

Deakins self operates, which is something not all DP's do, especially in Hollywood
>>
>months spent trying to convince myself to download and learn blender so I can do the vfx for a film
>can never get over the intense pain and anxiety associated with trying such a thing, spending tens (if not 100s) of hours only to know that the results would look worse than the shittiest vfx shots from something like Sharkboy and Lava Girl
>look for a tutorial/stock effects on youtube to achieve the result with compositing
>zero help since all the tutorials are geared towards "content creators"
>have a think and decide to experiment if I can do it with just basic 2d image edits, tracking and compositing
>it fucking works
Jesus christ. Is there a greater editing feeling than finally solving an issue you'd been scared about doing for months?
>>
>>4309326
That’s why I respect Deakins. He always cares about image quality. That’s why I pay attention when he recommends lenses and cameras. That camera looks as boss as fuck. Given that YouTube compression killed quality I could get away with a Blackmagic or gh6 but you look like the fucking boss of it all if you are rocking an arri on set.
>>
>>4309388
Deakins is a visual genius and one of the best working today no doubt. But I'm honestly more impressed when someone like Greig Fraser can jerry-riga few fx3 cameras on a relative shoestring budget for the sake of quick and effective production while still producing a gorgeous image that's imax ready.
>>
>>4309400

>80 million
>a relative shoestring budget

Also it wasn't Fraser personally who rigged the cameras, it was his AC's and grip team
>>
>>4309409
For a hollywood film of that scale, $80m is absolutely tiny.
Also, saying Fraser didn't personally rig the cameras is like saying Spielberg didn't personally set up the machine guns in the beach scene of Saving Private Ryan.
>>
Got me a GoPro, gonna get my happy ass outside and make a short film. Fuck me.
>>
>>4309533
You are lucky. I have so many lenses and cameras but I can’t make shit now because my wife is sick. Hopefully when she is better I can go out and start making stuff. Having too many lenses makes it hard to make stuff because of being too worried about choosing the right lens. Just go out and make stuff and it will probably look better then what most of the gear-autists on here make.
>>
>>4309541
>my wife is sick
What's her affliction?
>>
>>4309326
>Deakins self operates
that's just code for being handed the camera once it's set up. sure, he decides aperature, exposure, lighting, etc. he's not menu diving, swapping batteries, his time is too valuable for shit like that
>>
>>4309591

I know, but he specifically wanted Arri to build the optical viewfinder because he self operates and he doesn't want to use the EVF and he doesn't like operating from an external monitor.
>>
>>4309595
So basically Arri built the optical viewfinder into a digital cinema camera because Rodger Deakins asked them to do it; I wish more camera companies would listen to the people who used their cameras. I love the optical viewfinder because it looks so cool—analog+digital—it is super awesome and super sweet.
>>
>>4309561
Just typical nagging stuff. She doesn’t want to eat and is wasting away to nothing. I think it’s anorexia and a cry for attention. So until she is able to get by w/o all of my attention, I won’t be able to film anything unless I like through my teeth and make it sound like it’s all about her when it’s really not about her. As long as she thinks it’s about her she’ll let me film stuff. I just want to be able to film stuff w/o needing to be deceptive.
>>
>>4309631
>is wasting away to nothing
Better than being obese I guess.

What does she do when you go out anyway?
>>
Is the r5c worth it? I heard it has shit battery life. I mostly shoot 1080p tho so should I get the r6 instead?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 23.0 (Windows)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width5000
Image Height3750
Number of Bits Per Component8, 8, 8
Pixel CompositionRGB
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution300 dpi
Vertical Resolution300 dpi
Image Created2022:01:13 10:42:07
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2100
Image Height1286
>>
>>4309595
it's because EVFs are gay
>>
>>4309666
I haven’t found a high quality usable EVF yet. From what I hear even arri doesn’t make one. I guess using a Flanders on set with a sun hood on it is probably better then using an EVF.
>>
>>4309657
Yes?
Great cinema cam but if you're only shooting 1080 then it's pretty huge overkill
>>
>>4309657
the i/o on this is horrible, it must be for wedding photogs
>>
How overkill would it be if a wedding photofag videographer wanna be cinematographer showed up to a wedding rocking an arri alexa mini and some cooke mini s4 and super baltars?
>>
>>4309786
That wouldn't be overkill, it'd just be bad optimisation. The alexa doesn't even shoot proper 4k. You'd be maximising image quality while significantly lowering ergonomics and usability for a one-man-band, while also risking a very high investment, for a an output where they probably wouldn't appreciate the added image quality.
If you want really decent image quality for a wedding, use a canon c70.
As for lenses, using expensive cine lenses without af for a wedding is just stupid to me. But to each their own.
>>
Is anyone else just constantly frustrated with a desire to film something?
I keep flip-flopping between wanting to shoot basically b-footage of a punk/goth girl against a cityscape backdrop at night with neon lights, and wanting to shoot a historical epic scene with a huge scale. It's the weirdest frustration.
>>
>>4309831
Any photos of said punk/goth girl model?
>>
>>4309835
There's not a specific one. There are girls I've shot in the past, ones i see on youtube/films and then artwork associated with that general vibe. I guess like Billie Eilish but more heroin chic
>>
>>4309807
>replying unironically to low-effort shitpost b8
cmon anon
>>
>>4309845
>There are girls I've shot in the past
How about photos of them?
>>
>>4309627

Arri and Panavision listen to the high end cinematographers who use their cameras and lenses.

Deakins got the prototype Mini LF's for 1917, Arri and especially Panavision (and particularly Dan Sasaki of Panavision) detune and tune their lenses based on the wants and needs of cinematographers.
>>
>>4309807

You can blow up the Alexa 3.2K to 4K and it holds up & looks great on a movie screen. Resolution is one of the biggest midwit things in cinematography. I blame RED.
>>
>>4309864
>and it holds up & looks great on a movie screen
That's because 1080 looks good on a movie screen. That one of the supposedly best cinema cameras on the market (and still stupidly expensive) can't even do native 4k is kind of pathetic.
>Resolution is one of the biggest midwit things in cinematography
Going from working in 1080p to 4k was such a ridiculous leap in quality that I can't take this opinion seriously. Additional resolution gives you so much extra breathing room and produces a much sharper picture.
If my computer could edit it properly, I would be all in on 8k if not 12k, even though I'd still only deliver in 4k.
>>
>>4309867
I think arri cares more about a high dynamic range and not as much about resolution or k because images can be upscaled in post but you can’t add more dynamic range in post.
>>
>>4309870
>because images can be upscaled in post but you can’t add more dynamic range in post
This is honestly one of the stupidest things I've read recently. How do you think upscaling works? Do you think camera sensors just secretly have all this extra resolution stored in the video file that you can extract with a good program?
>>
Will the Helios 44-2 hyper die out soon? I'm tired of seeing all the circle jerking. The prices have skyrocketed on eBay and everyone has *rehoused* or *cinemodded* theirs on eBay as well
>>
File: IMG_2817.png (947 KB, 1600x1344)
947 KB
947 KB PNG
Trump’s Special Child just used a really special lens attached to a bmpcc 4k to make a new video for y’all. A arri master prime 32mm with the typical 2x crop that a bmpcc 4k gives that lens was used and it was shot wide open at t/1.3; enjoy the video, anons!

https://youtu.be/YRzderhXk84
>>
>>4310098
Why does it look like the aspect ratio is screwed up?
>>
>>4310098
The person in that video looks like she's going through a lot. Did the person who videoed her took her to the hospital like she asked?
>>
>>4310107
No! Because she never wants to do. She just wants to whine and complain about going, but she never actually wants to go.

I don’t know why the aspect ratio fucked up so badly. I edited using the Resolve app on my iPad and the new Bluetooth color controller that works with that app. I was focusing on color grading the braw footatage, not on the aspect ratio of the footage.
>>
>>4310113
Does it at least look correct in the app if not Youtube?
>>
>>4310122
It looks awesome on my iPad color wise. I don’t know why it has black bars. I was playing with a vazen anamorphic 1.8x lens and a Sauri 1.33x an anamorphic lens on my bmpcc 4k before I made it. Maybe I forgot to turn off some setting in resolve, but the image still looks great. I love the grain but YouTube probably killed off the grain.
>>
>>4310143
The lens was sharp and clean because master primes are fucking as awesome as fuck but I passed it through the cst into rec709 in cineon film log and then used a Kodak lut to make it look like film (resolve has film look luts that turn stuff in cineon film log into cinematic magic) and then i used the resolve grain plugin to add 16mm reversal grain because I love the way that grain looks.
>>
>>4307835
>>4309725
>arri viewfinder
I just saw this on r/cinematography. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/52914823044/
Basically the arri's viewfinder's advantage is that it has "looking room". Everything outside of the blue square isn't actually being recorded but lets the camera operator know what's about to come into shot (booms/props/personnel) and manoeuvre their movement accordingly.
(Yes, it's basically just saying that the arri slightly crops the image and the viewfinder shows the uncropped image. Yes you could easily do this in post by applying a 1.x zoom on all footage and plan your shots around that in advance. Camera departments are fickle though. They like using what they're used to)
>>
>>4310204
So basically if you shoot opengate you’ll get what the viewfinder sees so you can reframe your image anyway you want but if you do the full sensor you get a crop into the sensor to make sure you get a sharp image because you are just using the middle of the sensor. Or something like that. I can understand cropping into the sensor in camera because doing that in post on a lot of shots can get very very annoying.
>>
>>4310221
>but if you do the full sensor you get a crop into the sensor to make sure you get a sharp image because you are just using the middle of the sensor
That's not a thing unless you're talking about a 1:1 cropped readout versus a larger aspect ratio having line-skipping - different to oversampling (taking a high res input and producing a lower res output with a complicated algorithm) which would theoretically just provide the same quality. Arri's are doing the opposite of oversampling; they're upscaling a lower res input into a higher res output.
>>
>>4310248
Then why does the image quality coming out of their cameras look so good if they upscale the image.
>>
>>4310033
As soon as some vlogger does a video about a cheap lens that’s awesome. People see it. Buy that lens. The price goes up. Another vlogger does another video on a cheap and good lens. Rinse, Repeat!
>>
>>4310376
Because 3k is enough resolution that you can't see any aliasing unless you blow it super large on a super sharp screen.
(Theatre projectors aren't super sharp. You can watch 1080 on a cinema screen and it will look fine)
The advantage of higher resolution isn't that we need to view in higher resolutions. It's additional sharpness (which can be faked in post with decent sharpening) and the ability to crop and reframe without losing quality.
Arri cameras have insane colour science and dynamic range. They're unbeaten in terms of image quality (and it's even more ridiculous since they developed their sensor over a decade ago). But it's a lower resolution image because of how long ago they developed it. And that means that you lose all advantages of shooting higher res.
Almost everyone in hollywood has moved on from the alexa classic now anyway to the alexa lf or the alexa 35 (both 4.6k)
>>
>>4310493
I am just a hobbyist so I can’t justify buying an Alexa LF camera nor can I afford to buy one. I am just barely able to afford the classic. I got it because it was used a lot of films I admire and it was used by a lot of directors I admire. Right now I am buying expensive lenses. Once I get all of the lenses I want—I will think of upgrading my body. Hopefully, the price of the Alexa 35 or Alexa LF will go down within the next four years once they hit the used market. It might be even longer then that because arri keeps their value forever. I am guessing that 3k would be more then enough for YouTube videos.
>>
>>4310497
Buying an alexa as a hobbyist/youtuber seems like a tremendous waste of money to me but you do you.
>>
>>4310504
I am a colorist and all of the people talk about how amazing arri’s color science is and they sell lut packs to turn footage from potatoes into something that looked like it was shot on an arri. So, I just wanted an arri with arriraw so I could see what all of the hype is about and I can now tell my clients I graded footage shot on arri. They don’t need to know that of the arriraw footage I graded is videos of my cats playing. Hopefully an ad agency will be dumb enough to hire me—hopefully they’ll think I’m a pro because I graded arri and arriraw footage.
>>
>>4310107
She gets angry because nobody will take her to the hospital, but when anybody offers to take her to the hospital, she gets angry at them and says she doesn’t want to go to the hospital. I can’t figure out woman. I am using these videos as a journal to help her vent, and I’m also testing you my cinema cameras and cinema lens so it is basically win win.
>>
File: ocdp4g6t3s8b1.jpg (128 KB, 1080x1271)
128 KB
128 KB JPG
Apologies if I don't use the right terminology here. I need an overhead light. I need a boom of some kind that can hold a 9 pound light plus whatever diffusers I toss on it. I'll need counterweights too, right?
>>
>>4310930
I forgot what type of effect your achieving is called. It's an on going to infinity effect. Pretty interesting to look at.
>>
>>4310945
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droste_effect
also deeply related
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_feedback
>>
I plan on trying my hat at making some short films being director and cameraman, are there any good practical books on cinematography that looks at great shots from classic film and explains how it was created? Does that exist?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width960
Image Height720
>>
File: 42_.jpg (17 KB, 312x445)
17 KB
17 KB JPG
>>4310976
>>
>>4310976
the catch with old school classic studio films is that they were often lit like the surface of the sun and you will have to take a different route and experiment a lot to reproduce similar lighting styles
>>
File: IMG_4157.jpg (1.57 MB, 2592x1944)
1.57 MB
1.57 MB JPG
I got this for free. What can I do with it?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon PowerShot G5
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Lens Size7.19 - 28.81 mm
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 2.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution180 dpi
Vertical Resolution180 dpi
Image Created2024:05:07 10:25:16
Exposure Time1/15 sec
F-Numberf/2.8
Lens Aperturef/2.8
Exposure Bias0 EV
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length20.69 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2592
Image Height1944
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Focus TypeClose-Up (Macro Mode)
Metering ModeEvaluative
ISO Speed RatingAuto
SharpnessNormal
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Shooting ModeFull Auto
Image SizeLarge
Focus ModeSingle
Drive ModeSingle
Flash ModeOff
Compression SettingSuperfine
Macro ModeMacro
Subject Distance0.510 m
White BalanceAuto
Exposure Compensation3
Sensor ISO Speed128
Image Number141-4157
>>
>>4311160
Make a Jackass film.
>>
File: 1229415612046.jpg (72 KB, 744x558)
72 KB
72 KB JPG
I'm digitizing some old media. VHS tapes at the moment. I'm using a VCR with S-Video out, going to a time base corrector/frame synchronizer, going into a Blackmagic Intensity shuttle with OBS. The first tape I digitized was fine, but the tape I'm on now is jittery even with a TBC in the signal chain. Will I be able to "stabilize" the footage in Resolve? The video file is still being digitized or else I'd try it myself. I don't want to interrupt the process.
>>
>>4311160
POV porn
>>
>>4311160
Go outside on a clear day during the blue hour or just after the sun has set to record the otherwordly blues of the sky that the 3CCD sensor is able to capture.
>>4311273
I recently digitized a few tapes myself (albeit using a different setup) and there was one portion of a video that had noticeably more jumpiness, with some frames nearly rolling off the screen. Luckily for me that part was mostly static graphics with only minor transition animations so I was able to fix it by applying motion stabilization filter and setting it to highest strength in my NLE, I also disabled all automatic cropping. The frames no longer jumped, however the image ended up floating around the screen somewhat, not too terrible compared to the original. I also tried stabilizing using several vapoursynth filters, but it wasn't as good. So I guess you can try applying it to the worst segment and see how that goes in your case.
Also, if possible I suggest to get a cleaning tape and do some maitenance on those head drums. Nasty tapes can easily ruin any image.
>>
File: 1226808509666.jpg (10 KB, 478x292)
10 KB
10 KB JPG
>>4311410
Thanks for the advice. These are 20+ year old tapes that have been storage for who knows how long. I ended up stopping that digitization transfer early after noticing that the quality of the image sharpy declined around the 2 hour mark. The entire screen was having tracking issues. These are 6 hour tapes so I don't expect the greatest quality though.
>>
>>4311273
Yes.

VHS is a shitty shitbox of technological travesties. Expect disaster, the wringing of hands and the gnashing of teeth, and probably wear a garlic necklace for good measure. But yes you will be able to spend a lot of time stabilizing and trying to pull detail & color out of a 160p fucking vhs rip, only to turn in like 2 years just feed ai some high quality stills of your subjects and trees and furniture and it’ll just rebuild the entire video down to the finest pubes. Then we can finally see Pink Floyd in Pompeii in 1970 like it originally looked before the filmmakers fucking dipshit studio hand threw all 80 reels of 35mm film in the incinerator to make room on a shelf.
>>
File: fumo5.webm (3.39 MB, 720x576)
3.39 MB
3.39 MB WEBM
>>4311162
>>4311299
>>4311410
>Go outside
Operation aborted
Have a fumo recorded in a cinematic 720x576p 25fps
>>
>>4311727
based, but does it not do 4:3? should result in wider vertical perspective
>>
File: fumo7.webm (3.75 MB, 720x576)
3.75 MB
3.75 MB WEBM
>>4311737
As far as I have been able to figure this thing out, it has 3 modes:
>4:3 interlaced
>16:9 interlaced
>16:9 pseudo-progressive
Interlace in the current day and age is difficult to make look good. Not sure if VP9 even supports it. There is no 4:3 progressive mode which is a big shame.

It's a MiniDV tape recorder from 2006 btw. Digital tape, but you can just plug the camera to a PC via USB (not firewire!) and it shows up as a video device which you can record. Rather convenient.
Supports only 576 line PAL. There is an NTSC variant too.
>>
File: IMG_4144.jpg (2.62 MB, 2592x1944)
2.62 MB
2.62 MB JPG
The viewfinder is shockingly decent for its age.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment MakeCanon
Camera ModelCanon PowerShot G5
Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8
Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color Area
Lens Size7.19 - 28.81 mm
Firmware VersionFirmware Version 2.00
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution180 dpi
Vertical Resolution180 dpi
Image Created2024:05:06 18:41:20
Exposure Time1/50 sec
F-Numberf/3.2
Lens Aperturef/3.2
Exposure Bias0 EV
FlashNo Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length25.09 mm
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width2592
Image Height1944
RenderingNormal
Exposure ModeAuto
Scene Capture TypeStandard
Focus TypeClose-Up (Macro Mode)
Metering ModeEvaluative
ISO Speed RatingAuto
SharpnessNormal
SaturationNormal
ContrastNormal
Shooting ModeFull Auto
Image SizeLarge
Focus ModeSingle
Drive ModeSingle
Flash ModeOff
Compression SettingSuperfine
Macro ModeMacro
Subject Distance0.410 m
White BalanceAuto
Exposure Compensation3
Sensor ISO Speed128
Image Number141-4144
>>
File: 1294318899212.jpg (29 KB, 400x400)
29 KB
29 KB JPG
>mfw new light arrived today
>>
File: 1715209858984542.jpg (46 KB, 400x400)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
>>4311784
>mfw anon's new light

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGIMP 2.10.24
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2024:05:09 12:37:22
Color Space InformationsRGB
>>
File: 1630642912546.jpg (419 KB, 834x945)
419 KB
419 KB JPG
>>4312086
>>
File: 1557376195211.jpg (18 KB, 270x447)
18 KB
18 KB JPG
what's stopping me from using three lights with lantern fixtures instead of three softboxes or domes?
>>
>>4307820
Is that Dan 'Hymen Divider' Schneider?
>>
>>4307885
Different focal lengths or different copies of the same lens?
>>
File: 1687423370833337.png (212 KB, 1080x1431)
212 KB
212 KB PNG
https://www.nikon.com/company/ir/ir_library/result/pdf/2024/24_4qf_c_e.pdf
nikon bought red because it only cost them $85mil lmao. red must have been bleeding out the ass paying tower for sensors considering their 2023 revenue was $160mil.
>>
>>4312682
>red must have been bleeding out the ass paying tower
I wouldn't doubt it.
>>
>>4310098
What is the point of this series?
>>
>>4312682
i'm convinced they did it to end the copyright trolling
>>
>>4312716
I’m bored. I live with an insane wife. I’m getting gear (cinema cameras and high-end cinema lenses) because I eventually want to make an art house film and I also want to use them to make spec ads. I film my insane wife ranting about Trump to do lens tests and color grading tests. That way I’ll know how to use and grade the lenses when I start doing real projects. I’m also doing it for the lulz too because this is 4chan!
>>
File: 1686548394024104.png (571 KB, 819x778)
571 KB
571 KB PNG
>>4312719
With only 220 employees at the time of acquisition I'm more convinced at this point Red was being bankrolled by Jannard for the majority of its existence. The fact that the Helium 8K released in 2016 had multiple FPGAs indicated they had absurdly high BOM costs for their cameras since they likely couldn't afford to get custom asics designed (they don't have enough employees to do it on their own), which also leads me to believe large parts of the camera design and engineering was likely contracted out too. It would make their shoddy support seem reasonable too if most of their shit was contracted out. If they didn't get lucky with Cameron, Jannard being a billionaire, and being one of the "firsts" in digital cinema then there's no way they would have lasted this long.

Nikon probably thinks they could save Red because they already have a decent image processing asic that can compress raws in body so a lot of money on Red's BOM costs could be saved there with some tweaks, and it could be a stepping stone to get Nikon into the high margin cinema glass.
>>
>>4312789
Nikon already makes high-end cinema glass. At least they make the optical elements that get repackaged by other companies to make their cinema lenses. Now that Nikon bought out Red they can make cinema cameras and sell their own cinema lenses. They already make the optical elements other companies use in their cinema primes, now they have the clout needed to make their own cinema stuff since they bought Red’s name and the perceived quality Red has with YouTubers—it doesn’t matter that the quality isn’t real, perception is all that really matters in the high-end cinema market.
>>
>>4312813
>At least they make the optical elements that get repackaged by other companies to make their cinema lenses
are you conflating "3rd party companies rehouse nikon lenses for 10x markup" as "nikon makes cinema glass"?
>>
>>4312816
If people are willing to pay 10x markup to get Nikon glass rehoused in a cinema package then Nikon could just use their glass to make cinema lenses. If people are willing to rehouse old Nikon lenses then Nikon is making cinema-quality glass.
>>
>>4312816
I know right. I bought an old Nikkor zoom lens rehoused into a PL mount parfocal zoom lens to use when I record live bands. I don’t care that it focuses in the wrong direction because I am a one man band.
>>
>>4312836
How many times do you fags need this explained?
Pretty much every photo lens is "cinema quality".
Video resolutions are far lower on average than photography resolutions. It's in the fucking op.
Anyone who makes lenses that are half decent makes cinema quality glass.
>>
>>4312847
I heard rumors that Panavision used to rehouse Nikon lenses to make their cinema lenses. That’s why I said Nikon makes cinema quality glass. If it is good enough for Panavision to use for their lenses—it is cinema quality in my book.
>>
>>4307828
> image is flickering and not what is being recorded

But you could still use the image from the viewfinder to frame the shot. Right?
>>
Since everyone here just argues about gear, thought I'd change things up and share something I've been working on.

Temp audio/Temp grade
Shot on original BMPCC and LG V30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sU7wWyMtrE
>>
>>4311743
is minidv worth the "muh nostalgia" hype? rn i have some old hdd camcorders and im kind of itching to get a tape format camera.
>>
>be me
>buy a Canon DSLR w/DIGIC 5 processor
>install magic lantern
>get a vintage lens + adapter to the camera
>shoot RAW video about flowers, beaches etc
>add a Super8 Dehancer filter to the video
>add a lofi hiphop soundtrack
>become an instant kinographer among kinographers

It's that easy!
>>
>>4313232
nta, but in my opinion it's not. miniDV doesn't actually look that retro and if you get a nice one looks pretty clean. Really the only reason you'd notice was the color and the aspect ratio. If you really want something with an aesthetic look into a hi8/video8 or vhs camcorder.

But I personally don't think that it's worth it. Getting the tapes to your computer is a big pain in the ass. 99% of them will not let you transfer the files over usb unlike that guys. You either get stuck with those shitty usb > component connectors and it looks like shit. Most of them don't do a good job of maintaining the look, adding sharpening or do a really poor job with scaling introducing digital artifacts. Most miniDV equipment requires firewire which afaik isn't supported on windows 10, so you'd need to have a dedicated windows 7 injest machine. You'd also probably want an editing deck or sacrificial camera to save the mechanism on your recording camera because if that dies your fucked and you'll have to get another or use one of those janky direct to sd card recorders.

Unless you have a specific project in mind, I would avoid it. It'll be expensive and a big pain in the ass most of the time.

>>4313236
Can you uninstall magic lantern? I've been thinking about getting an m5 for adapting lenses, but I don't want to make it video only.
>>
>>4313150
>ever wish u were young again
>says the pretty girl in her early 20s
Wat. Bitch you’re young RIGHT NOW, there are no consequences, it dunnot get better than this age ever.

And bro, your guy looks like a fuckibg greek god, he has no reason to be so mopey, everything in ill be handed to him in adulthood over and over, yes thats how raises, promotions, financing cops, women, and court appearances work.
>>
>>4313150
Most of the static compositions are absolutely beautiful, but your framing of shots that have people in them don't feel like they were given the same care, idk if it's intentional or a consequence of the location limitations but the quality difference is noticeable.

A few of the outdoors shots seem wildly over exposed for some reason.

I don't really have any notes on the story, I'm not a writer or anything. But the vibes are sad and nostalgic. It evokes a certain feeling of nostalgia for the immediate moment of the story. Like I'm watching someone else's wistful daydreams about the past and I can feel it. I am certain this is the purpose of those long, quiet moments and it's really effective.

The (your?) band is pretty good. Both of the songs are catchy but I really liked the first song played in the house.

The cuck conversation is really well acted. It was my favorite scene.

Overall I thought it was really good and I enjoyed it a lot. Good job anon.
>>
File: 1676638144449264.webm (1.53 MB, 480x480)
1.53 MB
1.53 MB WEBM
>>4313232
as someone that shot on the sonys for a few years a long time ago i say skip it, just use after effects. you need the right ports to do the transfer from tape and getting good exposure is finicky on the average tiny sensor consumer minidv with no dynamic range. it's better to use an easy camera and get more shoots done in less time and effort
>>
>>4313299
damn that sucks ig ill call it quits then. also are there any decent prosumer hdd camcorder from the 2000s that isnt overhyped? i want something that has better handling and ergo than the normal consumer stuff.
>>
File: IMG_2074.jpg (1.56 MB, 4032x3024)
1.56 MB
1.56 MB JPG
>>4313304
i was gifted one of these and its been really fun to use

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
>>
>>4313240
>says the pretty girl in her early 20s
That's already half her fertile years used up.
She's middle aged as far as reproductive biology goes.
>>
>>4313249
Thanks I was going for an Ozu/Ernest Haas kind of feel.
The handheld shots were the main ones we didn’t have a lot of control over especially at the house show.

I’m always looking to improve, any specific shots that didn’t work for you?

>>4313240
Hehe fair enough.

>>4313239
Magic lantern is install on the sd card so just pop in a new card if you want to use the stock firmware
>>
How do I go about getting child actors for a short film?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Image Width680
Image Height1024
>>
>>4313351
To answer your question about child actors, I'm going to get you to think about child labor.

How would Mcdonald's hire a teenager? If you're running a restaurant that serves alcohol should a child be serving it?

Of course there are gray areas to all of this. But think about child labor when using child actors.
>>
>>4313351
Entice them with candy.
>>
>>4313351
Definitely make sure too that the parents are fully aware of what you're doing all the time with the child actor.

One of the biggest mistakes some movies make is they hide things too much.
>>
>>4313397
What I meant by hiding things too much is that everyone should be fully aware without hesitation what all your scenes are.

If you're going to make a film about a teenager running away from his abusive father make sure everyone is aware of every scene in the film instead of being secretative like you're being deceptive.
>>
>>4313351
The government doesn't want you to know this but children are free. You can just make one anytime you want and there is no limit to how many you can make. I have 437 children.
>>
>>4309807
>ergonomics
This. You're gonna miss moments if you kit is a pain in the ass to set up.
>>
>>4309867
>can't even do native 4k is kind of pathetic.
Yet, all the high end commercials, movies, documentaries use the same camera, what does that tell you? Get gud, as the boys in /v/ say.
>>
>>4313441
Uhhh clearly those producers are fools and they should have used a linux g9ii
>>
>>4313453
Everyone knows the Fujifilm X100VI is the superior option.
>>
>>4313351
anon, that's not what they mean by "short film"
>>
>>4313232
MiniDV is just digital so zero aesthetic comes from the fact it's tape.
However, at least that specific Panasonic GS400 camera looks quite like mid 2000s broadcast TV, it looks even professional to my untrained eyes. 3CCD sensor and the perfect quality digital recording probably are responsible for this.
Some random vids taken with the GS400 I found
https://youtu.be/KyjvIL1WsbI?feature=shared&t=46
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8vO1SzGtRc

Quite a niche look I doubt anyone actually is after, but might be fun if you just happen to end up with a quality MiniDV camcorder like I did.
>>
>>4313441
>Yet, all the high end commercials, movies, documentaries use the same camera, what does that tell you?
That DPs value systems they're familiar with that work well with other equipment they have and that come from companies with a great reputation for customer support in the worst case scenarios?
(Also, lmao at "all")
>>
>>4313631
The takeaway is that image quality is borderline irrelevant to video and workflow is more valuable for getting shit done efficiently and on time.

When do audiences pause, zoom in, and expect tack sharp screengrabs? That is what you do with a still because a still scene is to be admired as is. Video is to be watched as a sequence.
>>
File: Ventoux4.jpg (11 KB, 250x198)
11 KB
11 KB JPG
I pity the fool who signed on to shoot video of an action packed weekend when his camera has shit autofocus and the lenses are by-wire. I am that fool. Will I be ok if I just set my camera and lens to manual focus, with focus at infinity?
>>
>>4313660
Just because it isn't valued, doesn't mean it isn't relevant.
All art is subjective. Personally I like being able to take any frame from the shit I shoot and know I can print it off and frame it with higher resolution that I had from my stills camera from 2008.
It's all subjective. But for a high end super-expensive camera to not care about resolution is weak. And arri themselves recognise this which is why every camera they've released in the last decade is 4k+
And most DPs tend to agree which is why barely anyone uses the alexa classic anymore.
>>
>>4313663
Stop down to f/16 for perfect autofocus at all times.
>>
>>4313663
learn to hyperfocal distance and do the math
>>
>>4313663
Quick, switch to sony and you wont have to manual lens cope
>>
What is a good travel video camera?

Thinking about a travel video camera for hiking and camping and that kind of thing where I might be out for 8-12 hours or even several days. I want better quality and more editing headroom than what I'd get out of a camcorder or gopro.

I think the top priorities will be
>compact size
>battery life
>efficient video codecs as storage will be limited

Any suggestions?
>>
>>4313670
Only the Alexa 35 is true 4k all other Alexa’s are upscaled 3.8k not true 4k
>>
>>4314026
>all other Alexa’s are upscaled 3.8k not true 4k
Incorrect.
The normal alexa is 3.4k.
The Alexa lf and mini lf (which are more popular cameras than the classic now) are 4.5k
The alexa 65 is 6.5k
>>
>>4313909
Sony fx30 or fx3 duh. Bonus points the AF actually works.
>>
>>4314084
hope anon likes hiking with a bunch of batteries
>>
>>4314483
Anon needs to buy one large v-mount battery and a v-mount battery plate. That way anon can take one battery with him when he hikes. The only issues is that that one battery might cost more then the video camera it is powering.
>>
>>4314483
china batteries are $12 each, weigh nothing, and can be charged via usbc same as a phone
>>
>>4314084
I have been looking at the Sigma fp. It is very compact, it records to SSDs which would solve my capacity issue if I don't use the 12bit raw. It also seems like it has great low light performance. One problem with it is the battery life. One problem is that the EVF is so expensive, and would be necessary (a reason I'd rule out the fx3/0).

I think I may just end up with a camcorder. I saw there are some newer camcorders which can do 10 bit 4:2:2
>>
>>4314505
i just assume most anons asking questions don't have v-mounts, monitors or recorders.
>>4314510
bargin basement china batteries swell and warp, hopefully not in the camera. we literally had a drone battery hiss and shoot gas at my job last year and it wasn't even the std 3rd party garbage
>>
>>4314594
When I got my bmpcc 4k. I bought a v-mount battery and a v-mount battery plate since I wanted to be able to shoot for a whole day without needing to swap batteries. The batteries costs just as much as the camera did but it let me record for the whole day so I could record live bands to a 2tb ssd without needing to worry about swapping media and/or batteries and missing something at the music festival. Plus, I was so high I wouldn’t be able to change a battery at that festival even if my life depended upon me doing it.
>>
what do we think about ca. 2010 consumer grade camcorders? picrel is a canon legria hf r16 in lp-mode with the vivid picture style.
>>
I wanna do some b-rolls and spontaneous videos with my iPhone 15 pro. The standard app doesn't let me chose any settings so I downloaded blackmagic camera app. If I shoot 25fps and 1/50 shutter speed it's way too overexposed. Now there are ND filters for the iphone but then again it makes it less spontaneous to shoot. What if I crank up the shutter speed (auto). I know the 180 degrees rule to make the motion blure nice but is it really that much of a difference? Seems like there are ways to add motion blur in post (premiere, etc).

Another option would be to get something like the DJI Osmo Pocket 3 which even comes with an gimbal. But then again.. another camera to bring with me on trips, etc. And quality seems not dramatically better than the iphone
>>
>>4315516
The 180 degree shutter rule is just a guideline.

If your footage looks good you are free to break that rule.

That rule is more for human actions looking natural. If you are just filming landscapes without much movement in them that rule wouldn’t be as important.

If you want to get into serious filmmaking and not just videography, get used to needing things like ND and diffusion filters. It’s part of the game if you want to get the image to look the way you want it to look.
>>
>>4315516
If you want to play with anamorphic lenses, you can get them dirt cheap for your phone. Lenses that cost over $1,000 or more for larger cameras can be gotten for $200 or less for your phone.

Enjoy shooting on your phone for now. It will save you a lot of money.
>>
>>4307820
Who ended up picking up the Blackmagic Full Frame on sale?
>>
desu people without cameras shouldn't be posting
>>
File: yikers.jpg (53 KB, 620x349)
53 KB
53 KB JPG
>>4315863
>mfw there are people who have never even tried to make a short film in these threads
>>
>>4315868
Do troll videos make to piss off liberals for the lulz count as short films?
>>
>>4315868
you need friends for that
>>
File: 2808.jpg (11 KB, 465x349)
11 KB
11 KB JPG
>>4315868
>mfw the short film lacks
>starting with an alarm clock
>character talking to a mirror scene
>a bag of money
>a shaking hand dropping pills/bottle
>3 different made up production company intros
>the main character was dead the whole time
>the main character was the killer the whole time
>foreign language just because
>black and white for no reason
>something about a dog
>long credits

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width465
Image Height349
>>
>>4315881
no you don't, ask how i know
>>
>>4315882
You forgot about the cinematic masterbation videos. Nothing looking for cinematic then a sperg jerking off while being filmed by a vintage cinema lens!
>>
>>4315918
h-how do y-you know..?..?
>>
File: file.jpg (149 KB, 1200x630)
149 KB
149 KB JPG
>frames dropping on a take, luckily noticed it during the take

fuck bros what do you do about dropped frames? Is there any way to fix it with software if you have to?

I'm using a blackmagic 6k with a t7 shield ssd. On the first day of shooting we were inside, and I shot at 400 iso Q1, never dropped any frames.
On the second day we shot outside and I used iso 100 Q1. I think it only started to drop after the camera was hot, so I changed it to Q3 at that point.

Any experience you guys can share? this shit was scary.
>>
>>4316301
I don’t know about your situation but my bmpcc 4k will stop recording if starts to drop frames. I had better luck with cfast 2.0 cards; ssd drives tend to drop frames a lot.
>>
>>4316305
I had it set to continue recording, but have switched it back to stop.

Yea cfast seems to be the only option, I just didn't want to drop a grand on it. Thanks anon.
>>
>>4316301
Only time I've ever had a camera drop frames was recording 4k mjpgs on an sd card that was literally right at the minimum write speed needed. Even then, it wasn't many frames.
Maybe one every minute or 2? I just deleted the frames that didn't record properly since they were so few and limited the amount I used those sd cards.
>>
>>4316301
you should be able to set it to stop recording if it's going to drop frames. make sure you have fast media and decent cables if going to an external
>>
>>4316320
I've tested the cable and drive with the blackmagic tool and it's supposed to work.
On the camera, it works most of the time on Q1, and all the time on Q3. It seemed to only stop working on Q1 when it got really hot outside + the camera had been going for a few hours.

I saw a software that is supposed to fix dropped frames on DNG files, is there anything like that for braw?
>>
>>4316325
I was also using a slider in these shots so maybe the fast movement could have affected it too? just guessing based on what I've seen in forums
>>
>>4316325
do you have the same issues using the ratioed bmraw settings instead of the q modes? on the q modes the processor has to work harder whenever there's more pixel changes in frames, so dynamic moves or things like rain/smoke would definitely do that when the camera is stressed
>>
>>4316355
I will test it out. I thought the Q mode would help with frames dropping since it could change the bitrate to lower it when possible, but I guess I understood it wrong.
>>
>>4316356
i remember having a few frame drops back when i first got my camera, but i can't confirm the cause and that was several firmwares ago. just tossing out an idea. you make me want to swing my camera around when i get home. also the cameras are keeping track of gyro data now, that could also affect it
>>
File: 1551198840878.jpg (885 KB, 3000x2607)
885 KB
885 KB JPG
Are super35 sensors only made to match historical lens standards?
For the longest time, I thought super35 was 36x24mm format with the top and bottom cut off to about a 16:9 aspect ratio.
Does this mean that a full frame DSLR/mirrorless camera has a larger imaging area than super35, even with the widescreen crop?
>>
>>4316386
>Are super35 sensors only made to match historical lens standards?
No. Smaller sensors are easier and cheaper to manufacture and use.
>Does this mean that a full frame DSLR/mirrorless camera has a larger imaging area than super35, even with the widescreen crop?
Yes
>>
>>4316394
>Smaller sensors are easier and cheaper to manufacture and use
Yeah, but the bodies cost at least twice as much as similar hybrid cameras.
Are even rolling shutter sensors that much more expensive or is this just gimping?

>Yes
So what are the benefits of a cinema camera over a hybrid besides ports/connectivity, provided it doesn't overheat and can capture raw output?
>>
>>4316401
Cinema cameras of today have more dynamic range than FF stills cameras and had global shutter years before sony released the a9iii. Cinecams = the western camera industry hence it has all the innovation. Stills cams = japan hence nothing ever changes and there’s no performance difference between a d700 and a brand new nikon zf besides the finally non-defective lens mount spec.
>>
>>4316401
>Yeah, but the bodies cost at least twice as much as similar hybrid cameras.
Bodies of what? Ff cameras? Or are you saying that aps-c cinema cameras are more expensive than ff hybrids?
>So what are the benefits of a cinema camera over a hybrid besides ports/connectivity, provided it doesn't overheat and can capture raw output?
If you need to ask, then you don't need a cinema camera.
>>
>>4316403
japanese stills cameras be like:
we added video but the hardware didnt change we just arbitrarily restricted video for as long as we could. third party firmware on our old cameras actually does more codecs than out newest camera. gib yens pls!
>>
tech wank is for homos
>>
>>4316403
>had global shutter years before sony released the a9iii
Aren't they still a minority of current offerings though?
>>
>>4316406
Wanking is for homos.
>>
File: WM3X0.jpg (67 KB, 1080x594)
67 KB
67 KB JPG
>>4316410
absolutely catholic
>>
>>4316404
>Or are you saying that aps-c cinema cameras are more expensive than ff hybrids?
This one.

>you don't need a cinema camera
Probably not, but I need to buy a video camera anyway and I see some of the older cinema cameras are within my budget so I thought I'd investigate.
>>
>>4316301
It's probably the usb cable. Also, a sabrent nvme enclosure with a good quality pcie 3.0 nvme is probably better.
>>
>>4316422
>This one.
The bells and whistles of a cinema camera add considerable expense due to build quality and stability.
A hybrid is just a stills camera with decent video. It isn't expected to be anything more. It's not designed to do 12 hour work days, 5 days a week, with a camera department of 5+ people who all need to tinker with various details.
Additionally, cinema cameras are a smaller niche so the cost is subsidised less by consumers than with a stills camera. This is why the canon 5dii came out of nowhere and was such a game changer because the stills market had essentially come so far from consumer investment that it was genuinely catching up with the cinema market. And in turn, this allowed companies like blackmagic to make very cheap but capable cinema cameras by approaching the problem from the other end.
And finally, there's still the old assumption that things that cost more are better because they cost more. Combine that with plain ol' gatekeeping and there's considerable motivation for a company like arri to want their cameras to be ludacrously expensive.
>>
>>4316424
So you're saying that, if I want to use my current SLR lenses, my best option is a hybrid, as long as it has the other specifications that I want/need?
>>
>>4316424
So if you are a run and gun documtary film maker who doesn’t work with a crew you don’t really need a cinema camera. You could get away with a mirrorless camera. You only really need a cinema camera if you work with a larger crew. I thought that a cinema camera had nice things like SDI ports rather then HDMI ports and XML audio jacks rather then 3.5” audio jacks ; now I take it their is a lot more to it.
>>
>>4316480
the only real way to get a sense of needs and limitations is to shoot a project start to finish
>>
I got my hands on a used cine rokinon 85mm EF, but something seems to be a bit loose. The focus barrel makes the internal glass wobble a bit. What could this be and could I fix it on my own?
>>
How is the quality of my video stream? It's a bird nest livestream. Using a gx85 and been tweaking the broadcast settings to see what kind of quality to expect.

Pretty sure at this point I am limited by my max upload bitrate, capture card, and camera (to a small extent)


https://youtu.be/Lf59uf_8ebA
>>
If I filmed my self jerking off using a cooke lens or a rehoused super baltar lens or an arri ultra prime lens or an arri master prime lens would it magically become super kino and ultra cinematic. Or would i need to get an arri alexa + the PL lens to make the video of me battling with the one-eyed snake a cinematic masterpiece.
>>
>>4316852
I can literally smell the cheetos you sprayed over your keyboard from laughing too hard as you wrote this
>>
>>4316962
Can you also smell the tendies my mommy brings to me too?
>>
>>4316847
Looks pretty sharp anon. What aperture are you using? seems a bit shallow / focused on the nest and not on the bird. other than that, looks great!
>>
>>4316988
Aha glad to hear and thanks for responding

During day been going down to f/7.1 and opening up to f/3.5 at night

Messing around with autofocus as well, it generally focuses on the baby bird inside the nest now but doesn't always have the mother bird entirely in focus. I guess I could stop down to f/11 but I'm trying to keep shutter speeds up as motion blur ruins any semblance of sharpness. Doesn't help that above iso 400 introduces visible noise (viewer side) on the gx85
>>
>>4314084
>fx3
The AF on that camera is insane. Was doing a lacrosse game for highlight purposes and the camera was able to keep focus on a player, loose it when he ran behind 3 players and then quickly regain it when he appeared from around them.
>>
Is the pyxis just the ff in a new form factor? Was going to wait to get a pyxis but this sale is pretty tempting
>>
>>4317147
What lens were you using? The speed and accuracy of the autofocus depends on that too.
>>
>>4317228
Sony 70-200 f/4
>>
File: 1462236408618.jpg (51 KB, 700x441)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
How can I tell if a specific model of camera uses pixel binning or line skipping during video capture?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width700
Image Height441
>>
>>4317517
I'm just repeating something Gerald Undone said, but it made a lot of sense. He said he took a photo for a full resolution baseline, then dropped that video on a 4k timeline, which effectively creates an over-sampled image, meaning that if your footage looks identical than it's over-sampled, if it's soft it's line skipped or pixel binned. You would obviously know if it's cropped.

But I have no idea how you would tell apart a line skipped vs pixel binned image.
>>
>>4317521
Interesting.
The model I'm looking at is probably too old to use oversampling so it's one of the other techniques.
Line skipping seems like it'd result in dogshit and I'd like to avoid it.
>>
anyone got any got any good programs for firewire porting on windows? if you say kdenlive i will break your fucking knees
>>
>>4317517
>>4317521
Pixel binning doesn't mean throwing out individual pixels. What it means is stacking several pixels together during readout to produce a single pixel with less noise than you would otherwise get. Best example is stacking 4 pixels, that yields 1 pixel with two times less noise, e.g. scanning a 4K sensor to produce an HD image with less noise. Better noise response can then be used for better sensitivity under low light conditions albeit with less details/pixels. One drawback to pixel binning is potential ringing artifacts in the resultant image. I see pixel binning used most in low size sensor scenarios, i.e. smartphones, professional camcorders, don't think any mirrorless use this. Compared to oversampling this is a cheaper and less power hungry operation but requires sensors to be specifically designed.
Line skipping is most apparent with choppy diagonal lines or excessive moire. This is a cheap operation to perform, especially when handling high resolution sensors and their processors that would otherwise overheat or lag if doing full oversampling. Most high resolution mirrorless cameras employ this unless they have additional cooling or expensive processors.
Here's a good thread to read more about this:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3922435
>>
>>4317594
Not him but for years no one has used the term pixel binning to refer to the actual process of pixel binning, they use it to mean line skipping.
Literally everyone does this out of laziness. The amount of popular youtubers who do it is basically 100% of them. It's because the name sounds like it means binning pixels to get a lower resolution.
You can inform people what the term actually refers to but it won't change the way everyone uses it.
>>
Is it weird to give a client my raw footage? I shot and edited an interview for this band and they are requesting the raw video files despite being satisfied with the edited final product. I feel sort if iffy about handing over my raw files for them to do whatever they want with.
>>
>>4317740
I wouldn't but I also rarely shoot for clients.
If it's in your contract, then do it. Otherwise, tell them that you don't provide that service. Same as how photographers don't give their clients every raw photo they took on the day.
>>
>>4317740
don't do it unless it's in a contract where they are paying for asset ownership
>>
Opinions on the Sirui Nightwalker lenses? I am pretty new to making videos and people seem to say good things about these lenses and shoot some pretty cool footage. Right now I just have basic lenses, Canon 50mm 1.8, 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 and the 55-250mm 4-5.6 which I do like to use but I don't know. Maybe I need to git gud and use these first before spending 5-600 dollars on a lens.
>>
>>4318008
>Maybe I need to git gud and use these first before spending 5-600 dollars on a lens.
maybe...
(Buying fancy lenses is just another excuse to avoid making shit. Gearfags do it all the time. Be someone who wants gear to improve the stuff you make, not someone who feels tempted to occasionally make stuff to justify the gear you bought)
>>
File: 1574381610983.jpg (98 KB, 1487x1104)
98 KB
98 KB JPG
>>4318023

Yeah you are right, I have barely even made anything yet....I went to one big race/drifting even near me and shot like 500gb of 4k footage and could barely sort through it all. I tried to make one little video of some stuff, but it's not that great. This is it, my first video really and one of the first times I went out and shot any video with my Canon R10, it's all filmed on a Canon 55-250mm 4-5.6 lens. Tell me what you guys think and what to improve probably everything, please no bully.

https://youtu.be/OBlHAR_e7ss?si=3lVdaPyq6u1mNcHc
>>
>>4318008
it sounds like none of the lenses you have are really inspiring you. If that's the case it is absolutely the time to buy gear. If you don't enjoy using the gear you have of course you're not feeling inspired.

Do not listen too much to people who claim that gear is 'just a tool' and you should "never spend money on gear because it won't improve your shots", while it's true it won't improve your shots it will make you excited to get out and increase the amount of fun you're having while shooting. Which directly leads to more time spent shooting video which does improve the quality of your output

Just relax and stop overthinking things. This is a hobby, it's supposed to be fun. Spend some money, enjoy yourself.
>>
>>4318038
I thought it was fine. I feel like it could have been shorter though and just used your top 3% of clips. It sucks that you couldn't get a better vantage point though I think your camera work was good it just sucked that you were constantly panning into people in your way and I think that really hurt the video. Some shots lingered too long. There were a couple points in the video, as a non-car person I thought "Why is he showing me this?" -it not being obvious what the focus was. But overall it was good. I think you should edit down a 1 minute short of the video and make it punchier, faster cuts figure out how to do speed ramping and make one of those phonk edits just as a way to practice editing more and to help you cut around all the people in your shots, It sounds like you have a lot of footage, see what you can make out of it.
>>
>>4318038
https://youtu.be/ZxOdaIt60RI?si=pHSyuACNBDDTd3Pa

wtf, why did you not share this? It's beautifully shot and the slow push in on the yugioh card made me laugh. I didn't realize massive spergs were so well represented in the car community
>>
>>4318046

Yeah I agree, It has a lot of the similar clips with no breaks in between. I will try to make something similar shorter and more action packed but yeah I have seen people do speed ramping before and things like that would make it more interesting. Yeah the vantage point did suck, there were so many people and the bleachers you see in some of the clips would be a much better vantage point but that was VIP only.

>>4318049

I do like that video, it's a lot more...cinematic I think and I made it after that long video and I think since it was so much shorter I did not get as fatigued looking through so many clips to make the longer video. So shorter ones are probably better for me right now. I didn't post it as when I made it I was disappointed most of the shots could not be stabilized and at that point in time I was under the impression that non-stabilized=bad or looks bad but now I think many times it looks better and more natural really. I tried to take more cinematic stuff for that video and a couple other ones as I could get obviously much closer and things were static as that was another part of the race track where it was all just a carshow/show cars.
>>
>>4318051
That was a great job. Helpful criticism, which is minor, you did great, is make a story somehow. A talking head, or if your really good, just images. Also, be careful because speedramping can be like the hdr hole. It's cool, but then that's all you do and you lose all other elements of the film.
>>
>>4318040
This might be in contender for top ten stupid posts I've ever read in this general (and it's a very competitive list)
>if you don't know what to film or are only making shit, just spend more money and it will fix everything
>>
>>4318152
If you don’t know what you need rent it and test it out. You can pay for one day to get gear to use for a weekend.
>>
>cut on the ACTION
>match the motion direction between shots
>zoom / match color between shots
>pan
Need I know more
>>
File: Civil war.png (3.67 MB, 2398x1238)
3.67 MB
3.67 MB PNG
I recently saw Civil war and wanted to copy the visuals of picrel.
I'm shooting on a bmpcc4k using a shitty Canon EF 75-300mm 1.4 thanks to my 0.64 speedbooster.
I understand it's a huge lens and light diff but how can I get closer to picrel using the gear I have?
>>
File: test shoot.jpg (1.41 MB, 1920x1080)
1.41 MB
1.41 MB JPG
>>4318300
this is the result of my first test shot
please ignore the color as I am new to davinci

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1920
Image Height1080
>>
wtf lol
>>
>>4318300
>>4318301
learn how to colour grade? there are like a million youtubers who have tutorials on matching colour
and resolve literally has a built in match-grade feature
>>
>>4318152
>lack reading comprehension
>call post stupid
Let me try with your post
>Don't ever broaden your horizons if it costs even a dime because then you are a hopeless gearfag
>>
>>4318311
sure thing, can we ignore the grade and get to the question? Is it a lens diff or is there something I'm missing?
(there must be a billion things Im missing)
>>
>>4318300
>>4318301
Sorry Im a retarded esl, my question wasn't about the look (color grading) but the look as in compressed tilt shift like
>>
>>4318312
>seething after being called out for encouraging mindless retardation
To be fair, we haven't had a new dumbass act like a knowitall in one of these threads in a few months.
>>
>>4307820
what u guys know about retro projectors
>>
anyone know those video cameras that have the body of a DSLR but its a video first & foremost i thought it was called red or something like that
>>
>>4318316
Nta, try again
>>
File: hqdefault.jpg (11 KB, 480x360)
11 KB
11 KB JPG
>>4318417
probably nothing
>>
>>4318417
I spent 15 minutes trying to turn this into a 'ligma balls' joke and I just couldn't figure it out. I'm sure there is one in there though.
>>
>>4318698
The blackmagic pocket cinema cameras are DSLR shaped cameras.
>>
>>4318771
yeah those ones
>>
>>4318789
Are you trying to sneak a cinema camera into a place that doens’t allow pro-level gear by pretending that the bmpcc is a DSLR and you are a tourist or something like that. Or are you filming gorilla style and want to avoid paying fees. Or is their some other reason why you want a cinema camera that looks like a DSLR,
>>
File: CX1qI18U0AA6rND.jpg (40 KB, 718x414)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>>4307872
Their 17k camera should embarrass the shit out of arri
>>
>>4307820
Is there a /vid/ discord?
>>
Should I buy a DSR-PD175P for 150 EUR?
>>
>>4318417
>>4318698
>Ligma projectors are cheap on ebay
>make sure to get one with an modern hdmi ligma out
>/vid/ knows as much about projectors as ligma
>hopefully avatar fag ligma (aka zach) can give you a balls deep rundown
>>
>>4319428
Are you a transexual or some other kind of sexual deviant? Because I can’t think of any other reason why you’d willingly use that website other than wanting to engage in degeneracy.
>>
>>4319900
there is nothing inherently wrong with the website
>>
>>4319429
nah, if you're going to buy miniDV, at least get a CCD one
>>
>>4318051
>>4318064
>>4318049
>>4318046

Okay, it took a very long time to sort through the ton of footage I had. I tried to make a shorter more action packed video, I still have quite a few clips I want to make into some other videos but tried making something half decent tell me what you guys think of this one. I tried looking into how to do the speed ramping and other techniques but I couldn't really get a hang of it so the video is pretty basic.

https://youtu.be/yYPTTsD-XPs?si=LAcJPmMvx_9k3cF1
>>
>>4320150
This. Celebrate Pride!
>>
>>4320485
It is sometimes easier to edit footage if you have less footage. If you have too much coverage you can get lost in sorting through all of the footage to find something good. If you have less footage it can be easier to get a good edit from the footage assuming, of course, the footage was properly shot—exposed correctly and in focus. If you have bad footage and you want to fix it in post it will never look as good as it would if you got in right in camera and if you are a noob to video you promise to wouldn’t have the vfx skills needed to fix badly shot footage. In video editing, as in poetry, less is more!
>>
File: main_main.png (2.02 MB, 946x832)
2.02 MB
2.02 MB PNG
Which action camera could this guy use?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C7UMP8zMSOv/
>>
I slurped a gh5, the prices are plummeting. It's very nice, better than I thought
>>
>>4320733
>the prices are plummeting
That's because everyone's expecting the gh7 to be announced in 2 days.
>>
DJI RS3 Mini is on sale for 25% off on Amazon Canada right now, 325 CAD seems like a pretty sweet deal. Is this thing worth it? I want to get into gimbal shots for cars but I also have a few manual lenses and don't know how those will fare with a gimbal.
>>
File: file.png (184 KB, 440x433)
184 KB
184 KB PNG
I ordered a zenit TTL with the helios 44-m on it.
This is the variant with the M/S switch on the bottom.
I plan on housing it with a 3d print for cine controls. Anyone have any experience with this lens? Will I have to remove the m/s switch to get it properly housed?
>>
File: canon c400.jpg (72 KB, 465x822)
72 KB
72 KB JPG
>canon c400
Anyone else... surprised?
Like I'm sure it will be a great camera but it seems a bit small and boxy. For a camera positioned between the c300 and c500 (and that will apparently not be cheap) I expected a bulkier camera. This barely looks bigger than a c70
>>
imagine not already owning a camera
>>
>>4321348
>For a camera positioned between the c300 and c500
Feels like it's replacing the c300 with that price point. Feels a little underwhelming desu.
>>
>>4321348
>I expected a bulkier camera
Nope, the real market is in social media promo videos. These camera manufacturers need to come up with designs that are lightweight and can go vertical with the cages. Yeah, I know a lot guys on here will hate on that, but that's where the money is going.
>>
File: gh7.png (106 KB, 543x1441)
106 KB
106 KB PNG
we are so fucking back, m4/3 bros
>>
Opinions on the Canon EF 24-105mm F4 L lens, I know it's old but is it a good lens to be my first real lens? I have the Canon EF-S 18-135mm and 55-250mm, will I see a marked improvement in sharpness etc? I have a Canon R10 with an EF adapter.
>>
am I stupid for thinking the a7 IV makes nicer video than something like an FX6?
ZV-E1, a7S III, FX3, FX6 are all just not high resolution enough and a7 IV wins in every scene
see CVP review (timestamped), isn't the a7 IV obviously much better looking? the reviewer doesn't even seem honest
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ORIdHKWzG0s&t=271
>>
File: picrel.png (232 KB, 1190x935)
232 KB
232 KB PNG
>>4321875
a7 IV shares dual native ISO with BURANO and VENICE 8K, 800/3200
the aforementioned mid range models have dual native sensitivity, which would be placed below dual native ISO
good: a7 IV ($1500), BURANO ($30k), VENICE 2 8K ($60k)
bad: ZV-E1 ($1900), a7S III ($3000), FX3 ($4000), FX6 ($6000)
considering the price and tiering... picrel?
continued...
good: FX30 ($1600), a1 ($6500), VENICE ($15000), VENICE 2 6K ($60k)
ok: FX9 ($12000)
don't fall into the 12MP sensor trap, it's only good for 1080p
but... I can shoot 4k120p!!! ...which looks like absolute shit
at least 2k120p would work, right? sure, if you're ok with 100M 4:2:0 8bit GOP compression... and a7 IV does the exact same thing
but... quad bayer sensor... which gets you nothing
I seriously don't get the a7S III type cameras, someone please advise
>>
>>4321883
>I seriously don't get the a7S III type cameras, someone please advise
Less pixels to process results in:
• less rolling shutter, as there are less pixels to be processed, the readout can be done faster
• less heat generated, as there's less operations to do, the imager can be read without having to downsample from a higher resolution
• longer or unlimited shooting times, because they are less prone to overheating
• better battery life
• camera not having to take shortcuts like lineskipping or crop into the image when shooting at high framerates
>>
I need a good lens for recording music performance videos, mainly drum videos. The one I have right now is garbage. https://a.co/d/903KK4v
I can't get far enough in pretty much any room for a good stationary shot. I think it has to do with being 12mm. Can anyone recommend something more useful around the same price? I use the Bmpcc 4k.
>>
>>4321949
that's good but it doesn't matter when image quality is similar to what you'd get out of an iphone (and those have global shutter)
>>
i thought i was missing the answers which is why i asked. but it's pretty clear. go on youtube and look for a7S III vs iPhone, you'll find lots of people in comments coping about the fact their a7S III resolves lower than iPhone 15 Pro and go like "the reason to buy a professional camera isn't for picture quality it's to look professional in front of clients" cope Indian if anyone should know better it should be you
>>
don't listen to YouTubers, trust your EYES and YOUR OWN INTUITION, you can't go wrong that way
>>
everyone on the internet is a YouTuber: YouTube, Reddit, Discord, Forums in particular, the deeper you go the worse the advice gets
>>
I spent $1600 on my FX6 and I still feel ripped off
Canon EOS C400 chads win however
Sony upgrade program when
never
no refunds
FX6 will fade into oblivion and 20 years from now a YouTuber will cover how Sony managed to trick all the YouTubers in the 2020s and helped cinematography stay a thing for a little bit longer that way
>>
you're circumcised, you're vaxxed, you bought a Sony mid range camera
no REFUNDS
>>
>>4322340
YouTube compresses the shit out of the images so you can’t even trust what you see on a YouTube video. The best thing to do is to go to a camera store and test the cameras yourself.
>>
>>4322344
1600 is great for that camera.
It's not a bad camera for lower budget short films / music videos / run and gun, and even with a team you can still plug it up to external monitors etc etc

What I dont like about sony is that you pay extra for IBIS in the lower range cameras, and then they remove IBIS in the fx6 in favor of ND filters, which you pay even more for.
>>
>>4322404
Adding to this - I've seen people run fx6 A cam and fx3/30 B cam, so you have a light IBIS camera and a box cam with ND filters at your disposal. Great setup even if more expensive than a RED and a gimbal.
>>
>>4322404
why buy NDs when you can pay for them over and over again on each camera body?
>>
>>4322453
I’m waiting for the eND filter for matte boxes that’s coming out later this year. That + a good ir cut filter for a matte box is all I need.

The nd filters that come built in cameras are probably not the best quality nds out there.
>>
>>4322507
is there a color cast wwith these eNDs
>>
>>4322517
I don’t know. They didn’t get made yet. I use a good ir cut filter to get rid of ir pollution and color shifts.

https://www.cined.com/lc-tec-explains-concept-for-4x5-65-electronic-variable-nd-filter-first-look/

And:

https://www.lc-tec.se/electronic-nd-filters/

They are still waiting for a manufacture to turn them into filters that work with matte boxes but they look super cool.

I would need to wait until they get made to know if they have any issues.
>>
I'm spending all this money on little accessories, camera bags, straps, rigs, stuff to mount on the rigs etc but refuse to pay up for a good lens. How to stop coping and buy a good lens? I just can't seem to wrap my head around spending a ton on a lens, I have three basic lenses a Canon 18-135mm STM, Canon 55-250mm and a Canon 50mm 1.8, I want to buy a old 24-105mm canon L lens but from videos I have seen it has really noisy stabilization, I do plan to shoot quite a bit of video but I don't know how much that will get picked up by a shotgun mic or how bad it really is when your not in a really quiet scene. I can get one for like 500 Canadian Dollars something like 380 US ish.
>>
>>4322816
Why not rent and see?
>>
>>4322820

I guess I could try that, I have never rented anything before. I don't know where, I guess one of the big camera stores the only one I know of here is called Henry's. I will look into it thank you.
>>
FX6 will age worse like no other camera
it's an absurdy overpriced 1080p camera full stop
you can spend 1/3 of the cost and get a better camera
with FX6 you are paying for
1. more imposant body (still doesn't come close to actual cameras)
2. internal ND (Sony taking the piss, FX6 you pick for dark scenes if anything)
3. illusion of freedom (cheap BP-U batteries, cheap SD media, wowzies no restriction on media wowzies can disable noise reduction) where's your genlock where's your 4-pin XLR where's your audio on body
the people who think they want an FX6 are too misinformed to realize what they actually want is an FX9
if you want that sensor, ZV-E1 exists, you know
same everything, your codec is more compressed, what detail do you expect to miss out on in nighttime shooting
FOOL
>>
>>4322847
love my Canon C300 still beats FX6
>>
>>4322847
Isn't the 4k out of the camera pretty decent?
I mean don't get me wrong, it feels like the fx3 is a much better pick for like half the price. But if you're a run and gun shooter and you want a "proper" camera, I figured the fx6 is probably a fairly decent option?
(The canon c400 basically shits all over it as far as I can tell, but it is lacking ibis as a trade off)
>>
bump limit reached, new thread
>>4322870
>>4322870



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.