>blackmagic finally releases first video from pyxis months after the intended release date for the camera
Am I missing something or isn't the image from the pyxis literally identical to the full-frame 6k?

>>4353973
Is it the same camera rehoused?

>>4353975
Yeah. Same sensor. Unless they've overhauled braw then the image quality won't be affected by any additional codecs either.
As far as I understood it, they literally just took the internals from a cine6k and shoved them into a more traditional box camera with more ports and controls for pro cine work (which is also why I don't understand why it's been delayed for so long)

>>4353976
My guess is they're looking to off load stock of the older model or a faulty part that needed to be replaced.

File: mike3620__catzilla._Catzi(...).png (1.96 MB, 1024x1024)

1.96 MB PNG

>>4353857

If somebody who makes news videos decides to use tools like the Tektronix wfm8300 or the leader lv-5600 to manipulate the skin tone lines of politicians who support the 2nd amendment toward red to make them appear heathy and trustworthy and the skin tone lines of politicians who want to pass gun control laws towards green to make them appear untrustworthy and unhealthy and alien by exploiting the uncanny valley effect to shape public opinion for the lulz could they get into any legal trouble for doing this. Or is doing this a normal part of color grading.

>>4353976
They probably did it because people are selling mod kits to do it to older bmpcc pocket cameras and they wanted a piece of the pie. Getting more money from people who’d mod the older pockets to make them work in a more pro environment. Since people pay for mod kits to do it, blackmagic finally realized their is a demand for it, so they decided to do it.

File: IMG_9688.gif (338 KB, 538x572)

338 KB GIF

>Fujifilm’s LOG is called FLOG
just another reminder of how it’s like to be a fujifag

Anybody know where I can get or has some Panasonic G9 II RAW video samples that I could download? Contemplating getting a recorder but I want to see how the video looks like first and if my PC can handle it

>>4354207
Isn't it just normal prores raw? Won't it be the same as any other prores raw (coorecting for resolution)?

>>4354083
What was the reason to use a DSLR type of body format? Were they just trying to get the attention of those users or was it so they could fit a giant monitor in the back?

>>4354081
you wrote that you got those for pennies, but the ones I can find on ebay are at least upwards of $200 used with many costing more. Do they sell cheaper on facebook?

File: mike3620__a_cute_white_ki(...).png (1.57 MB, 1024x1024)

1.57 MB PNG

>>4354493
If you want one that handles HD you’d pay between $200 to $1000
If you settle for SD you can get one for under $100
If you want one that handles 4k signals expect to pay $2k or more.

If you are just playing around with it for YouTube videos or news videos streamed online, a SD unit will work fine. Nobody is watching streaming news videos in 4k anyways. The agency I work for only wants HD or SD videos to save on bandwidth.

If you get work as a pro colorist pay some serious coin for an HD or 4k model but if you just want to play around with one (because you are an autist that loves playing around with tech) get an SD model or get one that only handles composite video (the type of video connectors cameras in the late 80s early 90s used to use) and not SDI (the connector cinema cameras use which is why those units are so expensive used) video because you can get those units for under $50

File: mike3620__a_cute_white_ki(...).png (1.78 MB, 1024x1024)

1.78 MB PNG

>>4354645

Do they make an OFX plugin for Resolve that would let you do “digital blackface” or an effect that would make rally footage look like a minstral show? That plugin would generate so many lulz!

>>4353975
Pretty much. What remains to be seen is if they've managed to include the BRAW downsample ability from the 12K Cine. Because that would be pretty sweet. But assuming they didn't, it really is just a rehousing.

>>4354083
Nah, they did it because people asked for a box camera. Contrary to popular belief, every Pocket iteration (including the BMCC6K) is the direct result of user feedback. They're just really bad at figuring out the big picture. Which is difficult, considering the huge variety of Pocket users. But from the start, they should have realized that the form factor was the real limiting factor. The Pyxis should solve all of those problems, even though it's not a Pocket replacement.

>>4354682
Yeah man, it's called the "Color page". Digital blackface is pretty easy to accomplish.

>>4354695
I just can’t find any blackface tutorials on YouTube. It would be so epic if somebody made one.

File: mike3620__A_scene_from_a_(...).png (1.27 MB, 1024x1024)

1.27 MB PNG

>>4354691
> BRAW downsample ability from the 12k Cine

If they didn’t add it, and it is possible to do, they’ll probably add it in a firmware update.

That’s what they did with the OG pocket. They released cdng raw to that camera as a firmware update after the camera got released. :-) And then they removed it from the later pockets thanks to RED via another firmware update. :-(

Thoughts on resolve 19 after a few days of playing with it:
>fusion is a bit slower but still works
>magic mask is completely broken now and causes the program to crash (forcing me to close it through task manager)
>exporting in 10-bit h265 fails to render now, normal h265 and 444 h265 still work okay, I haven't tried 12-bit 444 yet
>h265 footage all loads so much faster than before including 6k which previously sometimes resulted in my gpu becoming overloaded and the program soft-crashing (I haven't tested extensively with 6k though)
>tracking still works fine but I haven't tested whether or not it's significantly better at tracking "difficult" motions
I haven't tested a few features like relight or background blur. Relight previously almost caused the entire program to shit itself when I accidentally applied it very badly so I generally don't have much interest in playing with it.
All in all, it's worth it for the better h265 decoding imo but the rest of the new features feel like meme features at the cost of instability

>>4355244
>better h265 decoding
Why would you work with h265 files directly instead of using proxies, especially if you're concerned with decoding performance?

>>4355281
Because storage space.
2 options:
>make 1080/720 proxies to edit instead, waste about 400+ gigs transcoding all the files into prores lq and then faff about replacing the proxies whenever I need to render anything
>transcode into somewhat decent 4k prores that edits well and wastes about 4tb of space (or more)
I haven't done the exact calculations but I have roughly 1.5 tb of h265 10 bit 4k files (some of them are 6k). I was tempted to transcode them as the performance got a bit worse the more I imported into the project and the more editing I did on the files. But it was too much faff to be worth it imo and the new update solves the issue fully

>>4355285
Buying (fast) storage space is what will give you the highest performance improvement per dollar in your situation.
>faff about replacing the proxies
I assume you're not paying for your copy of Resolve, so you're not feeling very motivated to learn to use all of its features, but there's an option to automatically render proxies of your media, and then the option to either use them or the original files when rendering anything.

>>4355303
>I assume you're not paying for your copy of Resolve
I actually am... (I just never bothered to look too deeply into proxy shit because of storage reasons)
>Buying (fast) storage space is what will give you the highest performance improvement per dollar in your situation.
Using proxies won't solve any of the other issues I've encountered, mainly the 10bt h265 rendering and magic mask no longer working without the program crashing entirely.

>>4355312
If the only improvement you see in version 19 is the fastest h265 decoding you could solve all of your problems by buying some storage space for the proxies and rolling back to version 18 where the rest worked fine.

>>4355321
>pay a couple of hundred bucks in storage space every time I do a large project and roll back to 18
I'm sure to you this makes sense. Also, I haven't played with it much but the new colour slice tab looks very cool. Defocus background is something that I will be checking out in greater detail. I think the film grain is improved, denoise is definitely improved/simplified (but again I haven't played with it much yet). And the music isolation tools are pretty incredible. So no, I won't be rolling back to the previous version unless I come across something that prevents me from working

>>4355338
You don't need to buy storage space every time you start a new project, you can re-use the storage you bought the first time.
>the new color slice tab looks cool
It's you who wrote the only improvement in version 19 was the h265 decoding time and every new feature looks like a gimmick, while everything has gotten less stable, so rolling back to the version that's more stable and already does everything you need to does make sense to me.
Also I'm not saying you HAVE TO do anything, rather that buying storage space would give you the biggest bang for your buck.

>>4355361
>you can re-use the storage you bought the first time.
That would mean that I would be unable to go back and reedit old projects.
>It's you who wrote the only improvement in version 19 was the h265 decoding time and every new feature looks like a gimmick,
That's not what I wrote. I said that it's worth it, for me, for the h265 decoding but that other new features feel like meme features that decreased its stability. I implied, though I guess I should have explicitly stated to avoid your autism, that that's based on the stuff I've found myself needing to use over the last few days.
Again, you're suggesting that I should spend a few hundred bucks to solve an issue that's already solved so that I have less features available (meme features or not, I still want to play with them) and more clutter - so that I can improve stability.
Honestly, I'm hoping the next update improves stability as it has done in the past when they've released new versions.

File: mike3620__an_oscilloscope(...).png (1.48 MB, 1024x1024)

1.48 MB PNG

>>4355375
I buy shit off of YouTube old waveform monitors and vectorscopes so I can play around with meme hardware scopes rather then using the scopes built-in to resolve. It feeds my autism having extra gear that makes my grading computer look like it’s something used to control a rocket ship. I just need to buy wood panels for the scopes to get that steampunk vibe going with my grading computer.

>>4355019
True. Then again, we don't actually know what has kept Blackmagic from implementing it sooner. It could be a processor limitation, but it could just as well be that it wasn't possible with BRAW until now. And if it's not a processor limitation, it wouldn't surprise me if they added it to the Pyxis and Pocket cameras.

>>4355409
Since Nikon brought Red so the risks of a lawsuit over cdng is no longer a thing, I am surprised that Blackmagic is not bringing cdng back to their cameras or a lossless version of braw. Is that because cdng or a lossless version of braw won’t work with the 6k or 12k. Or is it for some other reason. Having a lossless version of braw or cdng added back to Blackmagic cameras would be so cool?

File: 43prjwhhcf151.jpg (807 KB, 4032x3024)

807 KB JPG

How strong is the lens mount on a GH5, still waiting on the adapter but I'm trying out the cheap broadcast lens meme.

Should I get some sort of rail support system? Not really sure what I'm going to use it for, but it might be a good idea to support it?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4032
Image Height	3024
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Damn the Pyxis is sexy...

Is there a /vid/ discord?

>>4355620
>How strong is the lens mount on a GH5

Don't know but you probably don't want to find out.

>>4355536
It's still early days. Putting prores raw in the gh7 isn't particularly complicated because the codec already exists and the camera system has stress tested it numerous times.
Blackmagic hasn't released a camera recently. The pyxis is just a rehoused ff6k. They've also spent a lot of money developing braw.
In the future I'm sure they'll improve it to make it "real" raw. I doubt they'll reintroduce cdng though just because it doesn't make sense from a business perspective.

My understanding is that most people prefer braw to prores raw. One of the big advantages (for blackmagic) of braw is that it forces people to use resolve to edit it - and people in turn love resolve. And that's the disadvantage of prores raw. I've seen a fair number of complaints that the gh7 can only do prores raw internally because people want to use resolve.

>>4355650
Besides forcing people to use Resolve does BRAW have any benefits over ProRes RAW. And, how can ProRes RAW be real RAW since it can work on most any camera. Wouldn’t real RAW need to be tailor made for each camera sensor it runs on?

>>4355655
>tailor made for each camera sensor it runs on?
sony make them all anyway

>>4355655
>does BRAW have any benefits over ProRes RAW
Well it's kind of as you said, braw is specifically tailored towards the camera sensor. I've seen at least one example showcasing the difference between recording braw externally on an s5ii versus internally on a bmc6k. The image is different. It's hard to say what's the compression versus what's the sensor, but imo it provides a nicer picture.
The obvious difference is compression though. Braw has several different compression options which can create files that are considerably smaller for basically no noticeable loss in quality. Prores raw only has normal and hq as far as I'm aware. And while they're smaller than dng, they're very large files.
>how can ProRes RAW be real RAW since it can work on most any camera
That's a good question and hard to answer. My understanding is that it isn't "really" raw. However, it is raw enough that red sued dji when they initially put prores raw internally in their ronin. So I can't really answer that.
My guess is that it's a file wrapper for a shit load of parameters that it's up to the camera manufacturer to make work

>>4355671
ProRes RAW is actual RAW with the common definition, there's no debayering.
The cuntstains at red (now niggon) sued DJI just for that fact. Yes, US gubmint gave Red a blanket patent for "non-debayered video bitstream saved to media inside camera".
Think of it like Apple's attempt at making the camera makers have a common, standard-ish photosite-bitstream format. Because no one gives a fuck about ITU/T anymore, and no one else picked up the slack.

>the canon r5ii has 13.6 stops of dr (with snr=2, acording to Gerald Undone's tests) if you shoot in clog2
Jesus... I feel like this should be garnering a lot more attention. Yes, dr is a meme. And yes, cameras can get much better results by applying half decent noise reduction internally. But even still. That literally puts it above every camera except the Alexa 35 and the Alexa classic (this is compared to cined's tests on the other cameras). This puts it above the alexa lf, the Red Raptor, the Sony Venice...
This puts it above canon's own c500ii

File: 1714286653064013.jpg (65 KB, 655x382)

65 KB JPG

>>4354081

>>4355814
dr numbers mean nothing they are 100% noise reduction

unless its a g9ii tier trick all they did was crank the NR. because…
>more DR stops than bits
this means NR. the lower stops are mush and cant take any editing.

the g9ii’s DR boost works because its splitting the readout through two ADCs and even with 16 bit raw comes to maybe 13 stops on a good day (14 bit raw is fine)
canon’s DR boost is NR boost

>>4355835
It doesn't mean nothing. It's overstated in what it measures, but if you properly evaluate the numbers it still means something
In this case, the tests Gerald did showed 14.9 stops total visible. So what you get is a camera that gives you 13.6 stops straight out of the camera, with the latitude to push further. I'd want to see a proper exposure latitude test, but this basically means it has exceptionally good noise reduction to be able to get like 90% of the entire sensor's dr at such a threshhold.
>more DR stops than bits
>this means NR
That's... not a thing. This is due to noise reduction of course but considering how sharp the image is, it doesn't appear to be overly aggressive and isn't ruining the image.
And if the only takeaway is that canon's nr has become class-leading, that's pretty newsworthy in my opinion

>Canoise reduction on the cannot POS R reveals the lie of common gearfag metrics - it was all manufacturer processing, not hardware performance, merely shoot raw and you can do anything with any camera!
>instead of turning their backs on the camera shill cabal that was telling them "RAW is RAW, this camera OUTPERFORMS!" for the past 20 years, they eat it up
Sad.

>>4355677
Why did red sue atomos? Isn’t atomos an external recorder, not inside the camera.

4K60 8BIT or 4K30 10BIT?

>>4355926
dunno, I'd need to read up more on that.

Do any other festivals do something like Berlinale Talents?

File: mike3620__A_statue_of_mol(...).png (1.44 MB, 1024x1024)

1.44 MB PNG

>>4355677
I am hoping that of the reasons why Nikon bought Red was to stop all of the lolsuits about lossless internal raw video recording!

File: Zack_Snyder_by_Gage_Skidmore_2.jpg (16 KB, 220x320)

16 KB JPG

>>4355958
all slo-mo, all the time

>>4356056
They bought them because nikon video is absolute joke and has been an embarrassment for the past 15 years even when they get youtubers to try and convince you that their video specs are "so good" and that they're a "real force to contend with now!"
It's funny because on paper, nikon cameras do have half decent video specs and have done for a few years. But it's clear that no one at the company actually shoots video and they don't understand why only being able to record in nraw, prores hq or super compressed 8bit h.264 is shit.

>>4356132
Their lenses are great for video. I don’t understand why they can’t make decent cameras for video when they make such amazing lenses.

>>4356119
based and mogs all your favourites like James gunn

>>4356155
all nikon questions have the same answer:
standard incompetence

there's no way they actually use their own products outside of a test lab

File: 1669756746277957.png (31 KB, 785x757)

31 KB PNG

>>4356181
>favourites

File: mike3620__a_hyperrealisti(...).png (1.54 MB, 1024x1024)

1.54 MB PNG

>>4356190
Then how come they make or made such God lenses. Or was that done in the past and they just use the God lenses the made in the past as a way of saying we are cinema gods!

Okay I don't where this meme started or who the autist is who keeps pushing it everywhere, but nikon does not make some legendary god-tier lenses.
Saying it repeatedly doesn't make it so. They, like so many others including canon and leica, make decent lenses because they've been in the lens-production business for several decades.

Anyone able to advice on converting/compressing LOG/RAW footage? At something like 5gb or 6gb per minute at 4K, it's eating my storage pretty badly and I'd like to compress it down to more like 1 or 2gb per minute. I'm fine with losing some finer detail by reducing bitrate but really just want to keep the ability to color grade, though I can't seem to find info on converters that will retain the ability and metadata needed.

File: mike3620__a_hyperrealisti(...).png (1.28 MB, 1024x1024)

1.28 MB PNG

>>4356225
I just heard that Nikon AI and Nikon AI/S lenses were great lenses. Zero Optik sells them rehoused for cinema use. So I just assumed that Nikon made great glass. I don’t know if they still make great glass.

>>4356316
The whole reason people bought Nikons was because they were a lens company that later also made camera bodies. And they weren't a lens company, they were several cities formed by the Japanese government to create the most precise optics possible for Japans war effort in WWII, since they were an island completely exposed to foreign Navies, they thought being able to see incoming ships and planes before they were seen by them was key to their survival. After the war they were privatized and produced lenses for everyone. Canon's first camera was built around Nikons lens. They then created a rangefinder to rival the Leica, which they turned into the F Mount SLR, compatible with a far greater range of lens possibilities they then produced, creating a greater range of high performance lenses than anyone else produced on earth. The entire reason Nikon became one of the most popular cameras in the world for the next most of a century was because of the enormous selection of quality lenses copied by everyone. Here on this sub where a few aspie nerds are still excited to find they can formulate an alternative explanation for everything on earth, Nikon sucks, their lenses are shit, digital cameras are all blurry and unusable, 35mm film only contains 2mp of resolution, and all manner of other stupidity and dipshittery for the sake of being an argumentative cunt. These people are compensating for having no friends by being obtuse fucktards. For all their gearfaggotry, they're shit photographers.

>>4356356
>tldr something about factories and planes. nikon???
The best photographers on earth all shot leicas

File: IMG_0335.jpg (113 KB, 1899x1059)

113 KB JPG

>>4356357
Bow to the king baby

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1899
Image Height	1059
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4356357
Oh yeah, that's why all those war reporters, astronauts were shooting wiiiiiiith

oh fuck, Nikons and Blads. Leica has been street snapshittery nonsense ever since.

>>4356358
>HvH
I have to bow, desu

>>4356358
>70mm hires miracle fim
>ooh i know, lemme shakycam this shit
>i got her clothes off, why not tongue up her ass
Just bc you can doesnt mean you should

>>4356356
>nikon's lenses are godtier because ww2 or something and NO I WILL NOT BACK THAT UP WITH ANY ACTUAL DATA if you don't love nikon it's because you're a contrarian and probably think digital cameras are unusable
Genuine nikon shill? Or just a retard?

>>4356360
>nikon used to be good at being disposable war cameras that lasted 2 days so nikon is the best now
Hasselblads went to the moon to show off and take the best pictures possible.

When the space program all but died they went to nikons because lowest bidder.

>>4356360
>nikon: for throwing your camera in the mud as you run away from gunfire, saving only the film - just buy another one
>leica: for a 50 year career as a juggernaut of modern art

>>4356594
Now-a-days reporters just use their iPhone to take news photos.

Nikon lens was good enough for Kubrick

>>4356808
Because it was the brightest camera lens in the world (and moon).

File: mike3620__a_hyperrealisti(...).png (1.66 MB, 1024x1024)

1.66 MB PNG

>>4356907
Did you know that NASA gave that lens to Kubrick as a payment for him filming the moon landing for them in one of his studios.

>>4356957
>nikon fag is a moon landing denier
what a surprise

File: P7090174.jpg (1.94 MB, 1944x2592)

1.94 MB JPG

>>4356962
if NASA landed 70 years ago on the moon why can't they go back? better: why can't they just keep a bunch of astronauts in orbit and bring them back?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OM Digital Solutions
Camera Model	OM-5
Camera Software	Capture One 23 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/200 sec
F-Number	f/1.8
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	6400
Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	0.28 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	17.00 mm
Image Width	1944
Image Height	2592
Rendering	Custom
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	High Gain Up
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>4356996
>if Romans invented concrete in 600bc, why couldn't Britain build anything with concrete until over 2000 years later?

My 12TB Seagate G Drive seems to be failing
Can view and copy data off but can't write onto it anymore
Am sweating bullets

>>4357018
>Today's lesson in data protection
Time to resilver and pray to whatever god you believe in. Might be time to consider redundant backups like a mirrored NAS or at least backup important things to another location.

>>4357018
3-2-1 nigga

Welp I did it- got the BMCC 6k with Nisi Athena lenses. How badly did I fuck up?

>>4356996
What's there to go back for? The point of the landing was more about showing that it could be done, not that there was a reason to. Getting into space is extremely expensive and people lost interest in it a long time ago.

File: mike3620__an_atompunk_roc(...).png (1.21 MB, 1024x1024)

1.21 MB PNG

>>4356957
With generative AI technology I am surprised NASA didn’t use it to fake a Mars landing for the lulz?

File: mike3620__a_specialized_o(...).png (1.53 MB, 1024x1024)

1.53 MB PNG

Why does a fully loaded Leader LV-5600 waveform monitor cost north of $20,000
USD? What does it do to make it worth that much money. How much better is it to the scopes that are built into DaVinci Resolve?

File: mike3620__a_specialized_o(...).png (1.27 MB, 1024x1024)

1.27 MB PNG

>>4357257
Would a Tektronix WFM 8300 be a better choice? How about those software scopes sold by Time in Pixels?

>>4357197
>Nisi Athena lenses
Only bad if you didn't buy them aliexpress.

>>4357257
>>4357258

These seem like a waste of your social security

File: P9070168.jpg (1.34 MB, 2592x1944)

1.34 MB JPG

>>4356999
>>4357227
wow we got real midwits here

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OM Digital Solutions
Camera Model	OM-5
Camera Software	Capture One 23 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Subject Distance	12.70 m
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	17.00 mm
Image Width	2592
Image Height	1944
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Gain Control	None
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	High
Sharpness	Hard

any good book or site for coloring? I wanna get into it

>>4357101
>>4357110
nah I have two more copies of everything but it's fucking annoying

File: IMG_6257.jpg (2.82 MB, 3024x4032)

2.82 MB JPG

Anybody know where i can get a battery grip for cheap for my Canon 5D Mk2? I shot a show on thursday and i naively brought only one battery along and it died right at the final act which forced me to use my phone but i think maybe just buying a second battery to swap will be just as good for my use.

pic related is my rig that i dressed out to 16mm spec cameras from the 70s, my shoulders and back were killing me, i think the weight of the vintage Tamron 38-100 f3.5 lens is too high and id benefit from not having so much forward weight, any cheap equivalent lenses with plastic bodies? its a good lens and the weight provides some stability for my non stabilised rig, but fuck me does it kill my upper back after that four hours. I dont mind manual lenses at all but the lens weight needs to drop if i were to do that again

>>4357654
Use a fucking monopod you toolbag

>>4357654
It takes the standard canon batteries I'm pretty sure. Go on any online retailer (like amazon) and you can get 2 3rd party ones for like 40 bucks. Not as good as the official ones but decent enough to finish out your shoot as backups.
>pic related is my rig that i dressed out to 16mm spec cameras from the 70s,
Why are you using a full frame camera to imitate 16mm film?

>>4357654
>Canon 5D Mk2
You are shooting video on a 5Dii?
I love my 5Dii but thats pretty brave in 2024, especially if its a indoor show.
Not sure if magic lantern can get past the 30min limit, but just get another battery and swap it out when you hit the limit. If you want't to keep going get a dummy battery / NPF / USB / V mount setup. It will last all night on a single charge.

>>4357725
A monopod would kill the shooting on an old 16mm film camera vibe the poster was going for,

File: mike3620__Covid_T._Covidc(...).png (1.57 MB, 1024x1024)

1.57 MB PNG

>>4357312
>sites
https://mixinglight.com/
https://lowepost.com/

>books
Color Correction Handbook: Professional Techniques for Video and Cinema by Alexis Van Hurkman

> YouTube channels
If you want to be a pro and do gud og werk:
Darren Mostyn or Cullen Kelly

If you want to be a hack or autist that just copies
others but want everybody to think you are a color god:
Waqas Qazi

Since you are posting here Waqas Qazi will probably be your speed but if you are a smartie try the other resources I gave you and you’ll learn much more but if you just want to copy the look of Joker other popular films Waqas Qazi is your man.

File: 5d show.png (1.04 MB, 1248x693)

1.04 MB PNG

>>4357725
thats actually a good idea, why didnt i think of that
>>4357779
i figured that because i like the way handheld 16mm camera looks i should more or less try to copy the ergonomics and handling of one

>>4357755
each performance only went for 20 minutes a piece, it was an open mic night lmfao. It did pretty well, i just cranked it down to 50 iso and focused on the spotlighted performance, the edits just going to be a very light focused looking thing, pic related is how it looks

>canon c80
>a c400 in a c70 body
Fuck. This isn't the canon I'm used to. It's actually a competitive cinema camera in a small body for relatively not that much.
>I still can't afford it
Sadness

>>4358154
There line-up is messy. c80 or c400 or a c300 iii all within the same price range.

>>4358172
c300iii is a relic of former pricing. Its price shouldn't be taken seriously and canon aren't actively advertising it (as far I know). The c400 completely replaces it unless you want a s35 sensor.
The c80 is very clearly a "baby" c400. For around 2k less, you lose 6k60p raw, some higher quality codecs, a few ports, and ergonomics issues. Basically the difference between a one-man band and a studio set up.
The pricing makes sense to me at least but I did watch a couple of youtubers break down the difference

Another way to look at it is
>c80 = c70 with full frame sensor
>c400 = c300iii with full frame sensor (and far cheaper)

>>4357781
Thank you!

File: C70-vs-R5C.001.jpg (562 KB, 2100x2100)

562 KB JPG

Should I go for the r5c, or c70?
The c70 has better dynamic range and built in ND filters, but it's $4,500 (pic is old. Prices dropped after the c80 was announced).

But the r5c has better low light performance, and it's lighter. I'll be using an external "big battery" with it (v mount?) it's $3,500

Or should I go for the full frame c80 at $5,500?

Being light enough for gimbal work is an absolute must.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	2100
Image Height	2100

>>4358774
Depending on the frame rate and environment you plan to shoot on, the nd filters are a massive help.
I never liked the tiffen variable nds because they start to show vignette at around the 2nd highest marker.

>>4357654
Can you post more pics of your camera?

I've been wanting to make a short film with 16mm for so long and couldn't quite shake off the desire of it until recently I realised that only reason I want to is because I like the idea of using a camera with a pistol grip haha I've been thinking about doing the exact same thing that you have done and its making me realise just how retarded it is and I only want to do it more.

What is it like to use?

>>4358774
c70 has way more QoL

Are there any cameras which allow me to shoot 24fps, 4:3, black and white straight through the camera?

I have a canon XL2 which does all those things but it's old as shit and the sensor size is ass but I hate how modern cameras force you to shoot in colour at 16:9 and fix it in post.

>>4358898
You used to be able to buy cinema cameras with monochrome (black & white) sensors in them but they cost the same as a cinema camera with a color sensor so I don’t know why somebody would want to buy one of them.

>>4358898
Any camera that can shoot open gate can do this. You just have to choose a black&white colour profile before shooting (instead of shooting log or one of the preset styles).

>>4358898
I would shoot through a color filter and covert in post. Some cameras allow an output lut and you could do that

>>4358901
Why would someone even want a monochrome sensor? Why not just turn it black & white in post?

>>4359047
lol didn’t Fincher get a b&w RED made specifically for him?

need an external monitor for my Z6III for both photography and videography, amateur questions on the Atomos Shinobi II:

>it says input signal up to 4k30, if I shoot 4k60 will it not accept the signal altogether or just cap at 30fps?
>CC doesn't support Nikon yet, but I'm not sure I need it in the first place. can I still use it as just a monitor? can i also use it as a raw monitor, meaning it displays exactly what would be on the LCD of the camera without Atomos's UI/overlays?
>is there another cheaper comparable monitor i should be considering from brands like Viltrox?

tia

>>4359084
I used the original shinobi today, recording 4k120 but set my hdmi out to 1080p60.
You don't have to output 4k60 in your situation.

>>4359047
some ppl believe BW sensor has better DR. Theoretically it should also have more detail resolution, like Foveon, idk.

>panasonic announces 2 new box cameras
What?
As far as I can tell, they've just taken the s5ii sensor and the gh5 sensor and shoved them in boxes that don't seem to have internal nds.
Also, it looks like the cameras won't have internal raw recording and no information about the framerates available. Unless these cameras are phenomenally cheap, I can't see who this will appeal to

Any fellow Ninja V users here care to help me troubleshoot a very strange bug(?) I came across?

>>4359260
Gimbal or drone users might want one and the people who buy a GoPro might want one too. Unless they add ND filters to them I don’t see too many other people wanting one.

I need three cameras for a podcast, I need them to be fairly small and easy to use. Budget would be around $1k for each with lens, and I'm wondering if it's possible to stream all three of them to something like OBS to easily synchronize with my audio interface, is there such a thing?

>>4360775
>I'm wondering if it's possible to stream all three of them to something like OBS
You can use HDMI to USB capture devices like these
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/ultrastudio/techspecs/W-DLUS-13
But it will be cheaper and safer to just get a cheap portable switcher like this
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/atemmini/techspecs/W-APS-14
Hook up the USB output to your PC and select the appropriate capture device in OBS.

File: fstoppers-shitty-rigs4.jpg (190 KB, 710x533)

190 KB JPG

>>4360775
get a few webcams or gopros that support hdmi, you can even use some old phones over iptv
no point dropping $3k on a podcast no one is gonna watch
spend a little more on lighting to get the best out of a cheap camera,
don't forget the video can still be shitty, but the audio has to be kino for people to enjoy it

if you really want to drop some cash, get a GH4/5 or some cheap last gen canon's, just make sure they have a clean hdmi out, you are gonna need some capture cards if you want them in obs

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	500
Image Height	375
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2013:11:30 15:04:15
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	710
Image Height	533

>>4360883
>>4361260
Thanks, we already have good quality audio and a small audience is forming, maybe dropping that much on video is pointless but we're richfags and gear fetichists.

>>4361350
> richfags and gear fetishists

In that case just get an Alexa 35 Live and some Master Primes or Master Anamorphics or Cooke Speed Panchros or Super Baltars and call it a day.

>>4361350
>we're richfags and gear fetichists
>Budget would be around $1k for each with lens
…ok…

Im doing my short movie in two week, any advice ? We are going to film in day light, i have a circular polarized filter, should it be enough or a ND filter is the best choice ? I will work in 4k 24fps my shutter speed will be 50 i think so maybe ND is a good idea ?

There is only one actress and my script is made to make a film shorter than 5 minutes.

Give me your advice guys, i really want to become a good director, i started to think about doing a story board to help my actress and me so we do not waste time figuring out what plan to do.

>>4361770
youre gonna need a nd if you want to open up past f16 in the sun, before you go out shooting take your camera outside and do some test shots to see for yourself how much you need to stop down

>>4361777
vast majority of posters here will learn better the hard way

File: mike3620__a_hyperrealisti(...).png (1.38 MB, 1024x1024)

1.38 MB PNG

>>4361869
The best way to learn how to make a film. Is to make 100s of short films that suck and work on making them a little better. Eventually you’ll learn everything you need to know to make a good film. If you don’t want to make films that suck and you never made a film before, you’d need to hire a pro to help you get the film made and teach you the stuff you’d learn by making many short films that suck and figuring out how to make them better the next time around.

The pic is of the dybbuk that climbs into the window of college students that support Hamas and tortures those students in cruel and sexual ways.

>>4361871
I would like to have a pro helping me, but pro are working on their own project, i guess i should try to find a pro who will be ok to have me as an assitant on his own set

File: RealityIsDisappointing.jpg (1.78 MB, 1452x1825)

1.78 MB JPG

>>4355620
>>4356358
Why is life like this bros? What's wrong with normies?

>>4358154
They're forcing sony's hand, A7sIV or FX-3 II soon brothas.

>>4362051
haha, i posted that gh5 pic,
i got my cheap lens, works well, but the aperture ring is stuck wide open so not ideal hey

File: foolingaroundw.jpg (118 KB, 1007x618)

118 KB JPG

Hello, newfag here. Looking to buy a small portable camera for video recording forlong sessions. My budget is $150-250. my first thought was buying the latest goPro but after some research i found out that there are good alternatives to small box cameras and that goPros have been going to shit as of lately.

i keep in mind that this is probably going to be the only video camera i´ll ever buy so i´ll probably use it for the rest of my life. So TLDR;

>Looking for good goPro or alternative in the $150-$250 price range
>something that has lost of storage or at least can record long sessions without stopping
>can withstand harsh environments (waterproof is a must)
>nice quality when there is lots of movement
>does not overheat too much, so that the camera is not as easily visible on thermal cameras

pic related, will be used as bodycam too

File: index.jpg (7 KB, 242x208)

7 KB JPG

>>4362051
>that setup
...dios mio

>>4361998

Becoming a PA on a set is a great way to learn. Just want what the pros do and eventually you’ll pick stuff up. Probably more practical stuff that you’d get by just binge watching YouTube tutorial videos.

Any thoughts/feelings on the way to "fix" the indie film industry? As we all know, it's massively oversaturated to the point that good films aren't even watched unless someone "connected" is involved and 99% of indie distributors are just scam artists trying to exploit naive filmmakers.

From /tv/, a suggestion of creating an indie vimeo-like online platform to directly link filmmakers and audiences
>videos less than 10minutes for hd, or 5 minutes for 4k, can be uploaded for free
>longer videos cost like 2 dollars/pounds per 10 minutes (up to 4k resolution)
>can charge audiences up to 10 dollars/pounds max for a single watch pass, or 30 bucks max for a week/month pass for everything you've uploaded (that's longer than 20 minutes - can't monetise shortform content in that way)
>able to have 2 types of ads - a sidebar ad and a banner ad that pops up at the bottom of the video (can potentially pop up multiple times) - both silent and relatively unintrusive
>creators can earn ad revenue based on number of times ads are viewed
>platform takes something like 40% of all revenue generated, but you can pay like 100 bucks a year for a better deal and only pay them like 10%
>platform accepts payment through paypal, applepay, googlepay and all the rest
>ability to link longer content with shorter content (ie the audience sees "Neon Autist 3: Revenge", clicks on it, and is given the choice of watching the trailer or paying 5 bucks to watch the full film)
>ability to group your films together (so you can make a Neon Autist playlist with all 5 films for example)

>>4362749
It’s needs to be like Bandcamp for movies, DVD/Bluray/4K duplication needs to be as cheap as cassette/CD/vinyl is for music.

File: 24-04-20231682339910attached.jpg (39 KB, 1000x1000)

39 KB JPG

I did a short film recently as director and camera operator; it was my first time ever making a film and my first time using a tripod.

I used the tripod quite rigourously and it fucking failed me so many times. It's a "SmallRig FreeBlazer Heavy-Duty Tripod Kit" and for the price I expected it to be reliable but it even when tightening all the parts it would still creep one way or another and the panning was either really fucking loose or really stiff which made it difficult to pan smoothly in windy conditions which it often was.

What I would like to know is as this is my only experience using the tripod, is the tripod faulty or just cheap/poor quality or is it a matter of lack of experience on my part not knowing how to use a tripod properly?
I have another project coming up and I need to decide whether i'm going to sell it or get a new one or try to make it work.

>>4362749
The internet is pretty much the reason indie film has taken a nose dive by creating so many platforms which seek to exploit the attention spans of people for the sake of ad revenue. A indie film website would just simply not work because 1. they are too long 2. they are usally not that good. Nobody is going to browse through a catalog of 2 hour long slow low budget films about whatever random crap when within two clicks they can be on tiktok looking at food or boobs or racebait.

In my opinion as somebody starting out making indie films my plan is when I have made my first feature to basically just book music venues and promote my film as a band might promote a gig and advertise it to dedicated film enthusiasts. Film in the home can not compete with social media and TV for peoples attention but as form of social entertainment and an experience TV and tiktok can not compete with film. Film is made for cinemas and social gatherings so we simply need more indie cinemas with an emphasis on the social element of it. i.e serving drinks after the film to encourage discussion of the film/offering a place where people who like film can meet other people and discuss.

>>4362990
With that kind of tripod you don't want the handle itself to be too stiff, loosening it a little bit can help so you don't make the camera shake when applying force to it. Not saying it was necessarily your problem but it could well be aggravating it.

>>4362829
Expand?
I haven't used bandcamp in years. Are you suggesting that watching films on the platform should be free, but that the platform prints and sells dvd/blurays of the films as well?
I don't think that would generate enough income to keep the platform sustainable. Using h265 encoding, a 4k feature is still like ~20gb. Using h264, it's closer to 60gb+. And then you have to have 1080, 720 and 480 versions as well for people with slower speeds/worse hardware
>>4362992
Interesting. So you think it's fundamentally impossible for (true) indie filmmakers to link with audiences through the internet because of attention spans and too many competing platforms?
How do you plan on finding live audiences for music venues? While not completely dead, the live music scene is a shadow of what it was even 10 years ago. I can't see a lot of music fans turning up to sit in silence for an indie cinema screening. And a lot of so-called "cinephiles" are almost inherently anti-social, preferring to watch films online so as to avoid other people, the hassle, the cost and have the ability to pause and use the bathroom mid-way through.
How do you plan on marketing it to them?

>>4358185
Full frame sensor isn't always desirable, especially in cinema where many lenses are designed for super 35 and under.

>>4363001
No camera is "always" desireable. Full frame generally has better image quality though. It's also the current trend.

File: mike3620__a_logo_for_a_pi(...).png (633 KB, 1024x1024)

633 KB PNG

>>4363015
If you already own a lot of super 35 lenses, you don’t need full frame. If you don’t own any lenses, get the best camera you can get but remember that if you shoot full frame or large format you’ll pay a hell of a lot more for quality lenses. The best bet for people is to buy a set great lenses and rent the camera you need for the job. This is more for news or event people who need spherical lenses; if you are a narrative film makers probably rent everything and just own a few lenses and maybe a camera for your passion projects.

>>4363026
Most s35 cameras have used full frame lenses traditionally because a lot of DPs used photography lenses.
Additionally, big productions don't own lenses, they rent them. Further, there isn't a huge price difference (that I've seen) in ff lenses vs s35 lenses.
Anyone who chooses to invest in lenses would be smarter to invest in ff lenses imo, and that was the case before the boom in ff video cameras. At worst, they still work fine adapted to an apsc mount. At best, you can use a speedbooster and get more light/dof.

>>4363015
That's a negligible advantage, especially for video. Mostly marketing hype.
But hey, if you want the 2009 indie mumblecore look, go for it by all means.
If you don't. get good lighting instead so that you don't have to shoot at toneh-saturated stupidly open apertures.

>>4363091
>That's a negligible advantage, especially for video
Here's a video of Roger Deakins talking about how much better the arri lf is over the regular arri.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lC4eGpfhpm8
You're not more informed than Deakins. You're talking out your ass.
>But hey, if you want the 2009 indie mumblecore look, go for it by all means.
You literally have zero idea what you're talking about. 2009 mumblecore films were, by and large, not shot on full frame cameras. I don't know what makes you think that. I assume you found a single one that was shot on a canon 5dii and assumed that every mumblecore film was the same without doing literally any research?

>>4363110
Mumblecore is notorious for its amateurly lit, toneh filled scenes.
>you're not more informed than Roger Deakins
I'm also not financially incentived by Arri to sing the praises of any of their products. He peaked with Rango by the way, I guess he's best suited to virtual cameras.

>>4363138
>toneh
?

>>4363151
Named after Tony Northrup due to his abuse of bokeh where backgrounds just disappear into nothingness.

>>4363000
>So you think it's fundamentally impossible for (true) indie filmmakers to link with audiences through the internet because of attention spans and too many competing platforms?
Yes. I myself despite watching lots of films and being very dedicated to watching them with full focus still find that the moment I go on my phone or the internet my mind races from one thing to the other. If my computer is too slow then I go on my phone, if an app takes long to load I find something else. The limitless opportunities of the internet means we are always one click away from something new and exciting and the moment that thing becomes stale, which may only take 10 seconds, we can instantly find something more exciting. We are simply fish in a big pond surrounded by bait and websites compete to grab our attention with better bait in order to fish us out.


>How do you plan on marketing it to them?
This a good question and ultimately I'm sure there are plenty of independent cinema owners and music venue owners who would also like the magic answer. I think at some point there will have to be some sort of social awakening where people realise how much of their life is wasted away isolated online and will seek social expierences and think films are an obvious answer because autists can just go and sit there in silence and leave and more social butterflies and film enthusiasts have a place to hang out or network. Also the fact that mainstream film is so obviously of poor quality that even many normies realise it means indie films has a chance to reach people who just want to see unique films and since they can't be found on streaming websites or torrents then they can only be seen in venues.

>>4363000
720p streams would be free, everything else you pay for.
Platform wouldn’t pay for physical, artist would. But costs associated with physical (master disc replication, minimum order numbers, etc) still keep it firmly outside the realm of indie filmmakers. Nothing close compared to what indie musicians can easily do with selling professional physial releases out of their bedrooms if they wanted

>>4363177
Good post. Given me a lot to think about.
>>4363200
>720p streams would be free, everything else you pay for.
You see, I hate this despite knowing it's probably the best idea. If 720p streams are free, almost no films (if any) will make back their budget (and thus the platform would have a minimal income). You'd be relying a lot more on ad revenue and then you'd just be creating youtube 2.0.
The problem is that music is fundamentally a different medium. Listening to an artist in your bedroom to chill out is one thing. Then, if you like them, you want to listen to them on the train and when running errands or whatever. So you're motivated to support them and spend money maybe.
Films aren't the same. If you like a film, you might rewatch it a few months later. But it will still be in your home that you watch. For 99% of people, 720p will be adequate.

>>4363225
>The problem is that music is fundamentally a different medium
Sadly, you’re right. I keep making comparisons to music because that’s the background I had before falling in love with filmmaking. I am extremely jealous of the musician who can sit on their bed, make a recording on their phone or laptop, upload it to Bandcamp, and either charge for digital (set at any price, even free or name your own price) or easily put together a CD/physical package to sell. Even no name artists can make decent money (or atleast recoup any production costs) doing this. All of this is fast, easy, and cheap.
This does not exist for the indie filmmaker. I know many would suggest YouTube or Vimeo as a similar avenue, but they’re not in the same atmosphere.

>>4363225
>If 720p streams are free, almost no films (if any) will make back their budget (and thus the platform would have a minimal income). You'd be relying a lot more on ad revenue and then you'd just be creating youtube 2.0.
The filmmakers using this platform should be low budget/microbudget/no budget, big time filmmakers should go elsewhere. That would allow lower budget films a much easier time recouping a smaller budget (if you care about that, many indie artists don’t care about recouping costs and simply want the film to be seen)
YouTube 2.0 is fine, if it’s solely focused around indie filmmaking- none of the other bullshit pollution normally found on YouTube is allowed. Starts to sound like Vimeo.

>>4357308
>thinks the moon landing was fake, has such hits as "why can't we go back it was 70 years ago!!"
>calls others midwits
it didn't get easier to go to the moon, the technology we use now to go to space is still largely the same: giant tanks of kerosene and liquid oxygen on top of a nozzle. the ISS (where "a bunch of astronauts" have, in fact, lived continuously in orbit since before your zoom zoom ass was born) is a few hundred miles from earth's surface at its apogee, while the moon is 1.5 light seconds from earth; it takes about 6 hours from launch to docking if they're quick with the ISS, it took the apollo astronauts three days just to reach lunar orbit.

Cam anyone enlighten me on when to use those flat light panels like the arri skypanel vs the more common moon light designs?

>>4363448
If they're made by Arri, then it might be contractual.

I am looking for table tripod for documenting people working with their hands on a table (mostly video)
>should be able to be raised to 50cm
>can carry a 1.5kg camera without the head tilting on its own accord (the camera is kinda light compared to some of the lenses)
>take ARCA SWISS plates
>stable stand
>bonus points if it can do that thing where the central pillar can go horizontal
>bonus points for foldable to be light and small
>more bonus points for using tilt rather than ballhead

Should I be using grey cards to white balance?

how's hookup culture in film industry?

>>4363586
Depends what position you hold on the set.
I knew this ugly as fuck Producer named Harvey who got with the hottest chicks in the game, but that dude screwed up and caught a penis eating bacteria or something.

>>4363637
oh not that type of slimy shit. but hookup shit in general

>>4363637
If a good looking bass is easy to catch that watering hole is probably filled with crabs.

>>4363653
Now that's sage advice.

>>4363249
That's because they are different mediums. Short audio can deliver a lot of emotion, whereas film needs more time. If you try to compress time expect costs to go up considerably. You also don't need eyes to listen to stuff, so you can go do other stuff while bandcamp music plays, making it possible to go through a lot of albums way quicker than watching films.
If you want a business idea, then I suggest making a bandcamp of stock videos. Indie stock videos for hillbilly videographers.

>>4363585
You can, provided it's not too dark. Most white cards are too white for white balancing, you have to stop down so it appears light gray anyways.

>>4363774
Aren’t there already a shitload of sites for stock footage?

>>4363774
> stock footage for hillbillies
They don’t let you sell incest porn there.

>>4363803
Yes. He's being an idiot, trying to sound smart.
It's probably just fundamentally impossible to create a platform for indie filmmakers. It kind of makes sense since the film industry is on its last legs as is - so there's obviously not enough money to support all the low budget fringe creators if the mainstream big budget stuff is on its way out. Tiktok and youtube have made films irrelevant to the younger generations.
The older generations don't like new films because they're new. The people left are, by and large, too lazy to go looking for kino. So it's an unbelievably small audience that every low budget creator is marketing towards.

>>4363841
>there's obviously not enough money to support all the low budget fringe creators if the mainstream big budget stuff is on its way out
But the reason it’s on its way out is because there’s no way to continue supporting $200-300mil productions. The solution is actually going back to low budget productions, it’s why horror continues to be successful.
Instead of one $200mil film, produce two hundred $1mil films.

>>4363862
>Instead of one $200mil film, produce two hundred $1mil films.
But this is the problem.
200 films is a massive amount of oversaturation in a market that's already dangerously oversaturated. The big reason why films don't have staying power in popular culture anymore is because there are too many of them.

In the 80s, only like 5 or 6 films would release each year that were worth watching. And they'd cover the major genres. So if you were an action fan, Rambo comes out and everyone who likes action films watches it and obsesses over it for at least the next year. Additionally, you can only really watch films in the cinema since your television is blurry and shit and laserdiscs are stupidly expensive and the tv broadcast of films always cuts the best parts due to controversy or whatever.
So there are less films people have seen, but everyone has seen the same films.
Compare that to now.
Action fans have like 10 films released so far this year alone. And they're almost all identical and generic. You don't need to watch any of them in the cinema since they'll all release on streaming within like 2months. So you speak to a random action movie fan and have they seen Extraction 2? "Nah man, I'm not into netflix shit. I liked the new Road House film though"

You add the amount more that you're talking about and the whole industry just becomes cheaper and you accelerate the decline. The big tentpole blockbusters are the only things keeping the theatres in business at the moment.

>>4363888
>, only like 5 or 6 films would release each year that were worth watching
That's way more than what we're averaging now.

>>4363448
>more common
bro those skypanels are fucking everywhere

>>4364045
> they were 5 or 6 good films in the 80s

Now we just remake the 5 or 6 good movies from the 80s add woke shit to them and make them worse than the original.

>>4363888

>In the 80s, only like 5 or 6 films would release each year that were worth watching.

I bet you're the same person who complains that movies now are bad because you are just aware of Disney films and Netflix's biggest releases

>>4364220
Disney added trannies to Star Wars. We don’t need any fucking trannies in Star Wars. We just want the space lasers MTG loves.

>>4364220
No, I'm the opposite. I think there are several films worth watching released each year. Moreso now than in the 80s. But oversaturation and advertising means that the majority of decent releases are massively overshadowed by mediocre shit.

File: sigma_fp_l_01[1].jpg (23 KB, 550x413)

23 KB JPG

what's the appeal of the sigma fp? it's not much smaller than the 1st gen a7s which has an evf, better dynamic range, better ergonomics, more common mount, better AF, etc

i want to like this thing but i just dont see a reason to get one over my a7s mk1

>>4364234
claimings its the smallest camera while having to pay $300-$500 for mutually exclusive hotshoe and evf attachments that rob it of its smallest camera status

not having a shutter so you're limited to video, rocks, and leaves

>>4364236
and it has no dials to quickly change settings, so has no redeemable run and gun features, so you gotta kit this thing out in any situation. but why get this vs something from blackmagic, the sigma fp fanboys definitely seem like theyre coping since they sunk 1.5k into this thing and all they can say is that its the WORLDS SMALLEST FULL FRAME camera

it almost seems like a waste of resources, labor, sensors, and time

>>4364244
The fun is buying all the shit to kit it out and looking like a ~cinema videographer~

Any suggestion for a relatively cheap high quality lightbulb? Something like https://nanliteus.com/nanlite-pavobulb-10c-rgbww-led-bulb/ but available in Europe and maybe cheaper?

>>4364247
If you the matte box to you cheap China-special DSLR most morons will think you’re a pro cinematographer

>>4364234
When it first released, it was basically the only way to get full frame 4k raw video on a budget. It also doubled as a very small ff stills camera.

>>4364163
Yes but why choose them over the mono lights?

>>4364234
trap for the poor

Any advice on buying a monitor for the first time?

Whats the difference between say a Feelworld FW759 and some expensive Atomos gear? I'll be using it for filmmaking.

>>4364896
The atomos gear and record video in prores raw. At least some models can. I don’t think the feelworld Montior can do that.

>>4364908
Does that mean if I used it on an older camera like a miniDV it could record better quality than the camera itself?

File: GTwHIVkXgAA46gp.jpg (60 KB, 1078x573)

60 KB JPG

>>4364234
>>4364236
>>4364303
How does the Fp produce video anyway?
Does it use oversampling or pixel binning?

>>4364959
I'm pretty confident it uses line-skipping since the raw is 8bit (didn't even know that was a thing until I looked up the camera's specs). That's probably why it never really took off as an invaluable cheap video camera in the same way the blackmagics have.
(Also, the complete lack of compression on cinema dng raw means you get 10mins total footage on a 128gb card according to the site I looked at. Dreadful)

File: 5233topViol.jpg (153 KB, 729x317)

153 KB JPG

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVDIC44DfEk

Any idea what focal lenght this might be? Also I really enjoy the camera work overall in Kitano movies. That scene especially with Erik Satie music. Sad Japanese stoped being god tier film producer

>>4365156
Long, 200mm+. My guess is 300.

What do you mean they stopped being god tier? Ryusuke Hamaguchi exists.

>>4356132
I’ve been having a great time using 4K h.265 10bit nlog with the Z9, image quality is pretty similar to NRAW and the file size is absolutely tiny. Just shot a 4 day 2 camera interview docu piece and the whole thing weighs in under a terabyte.

>>4356296
Buy more storage. Or use ProRes LT. but the answer is always just buy more storage.

>>4365156
it's a long boy shot, solo walks + long length + background contrast = instant drama

>>4360215
Would help to know what the fuck the bug is. I have a V+ but I’m not very versed in it.

>>4362990
Tripods are a case where you get what you pay for. Smallrig is cheap shit. You need to move up to at least Sirui or Leofoto if you can’t afford Sachtler or Vinten Flowtech.

>>4363568
Why not just rig a couple of C-stands with a crossbar held in two knuckles, and a clamp for the camera? Overhead you need to use a bit of safety cable as well in case the clamp fails.

>>4364959
>oversampling
lmao. the thing would burn to a crisp. the only reason the thing is usable as-is without a fan is due to the minimal processing+compression which results in crazy bloated filesizes.

>>4365155
>>4365168
Fuck.
What's my best (affordable) option for a 1080p60 not line-skipped 4:2:2 10bit (or better) camera that's compatible with EF lenses?
The 5D Mark IV?

>>4365218
The 5div only does 4:2:2 (or 4:4:4) 1080 when using an external recorder. Internally, you only get 422 if shooting in 4k (and it's 8 bit).
You can get the og BMP an a speedbooster. That will get you what you want.

If you want a canon, your best bet is to get like an r8 or r10 camera used (but then you need to buy an ef to r mount adapter).

>>4365251
Wait, it can do 4:4:4 externally?
I'll have it fixed so it doesn't matter how much crap is hanging off of it, although internal is always preferred.

I'd prefer not to have to use a telecompressor.

>your best bet is to get like an r8 or r10 camera used
Aren't those still kind of pricey, even used?
I don't mind adapters.

>>4365265
>Wait, it can do 4:4:4 externally?
It can't do 4k externally at all.
I've just it looked up though. I thought it could in 1080 but everything I'm reading says it's limited to 422 so I dunno. I thought the 5diii could as well but I have no idea anymore.
Google the manual and it should tell you.
>Aren't those still kind of pricey, even used?
I don't know, depends on your budget. Should cost a similar amount to a 5div. An r50 is cheaper and I think also does 10 bit 422 so it's worth looking into.
With an adapter you've also got sony and panasonic cameras open to you as well.

>>4365287
>It can't do 4k externally at all
I don't care about 4k.
The files are too big.

>everything I'm reading says it's limited to 422 so I dunno
I believe that's what I read too.

>I thought the 5diii could as well but I have no idea anymore
It can only do 30fps though.

>An r50 is cheaper and I think also does 10 bit 422 so it's worth looking into
Last I checked it wasn't much cheaper and I'd rather have the better camera.
Can the R50 do it internally?

>With an adapter you've also got sony and panasonic cameras open to you as well
I'm not big on Sony.
I'll have to think about Lumix.
What's the model to look at?
The original S5?

>>4364638
Sorry to gearfag outside of the gearfagging containment but figured I'd ask here as well and hopefully get some insight for my specific use case. If I can't be swayed one way or another I might literally just flip a coin.
Also it might be helpful to note that as far as the Sony and Minolta lenses I already have, I have:
>Sony 16-55mm 2.8 and 70-350mm
>Sigma prime trio (16, 30, 56)
>Minolta 50mm 1.7, 28mm 2.8 and 135mm 3.5
So basically everything I could possibly want as far as modern and vintage lenses goes. I really like the sound of the small file sizes on the Canon and I find simply putting my Sony on a gimbal to be kind of a pain in the ass so I worry I'll hate putting together a rig every time I want to shoot. I feel like the Sony might be better for low light situations though (especially since I already have a whole set of 1.4 primes) and great autofocus when needed. What would you guys go with?

What settings should I use for some out-of-camera video that I won't be color grading later? Essentially b-roll settings I guess. I currently use a Sony A7SIII for video and S-Log3 for stuff I'll grade, so would S-Cinetone be good for just general video I won't touch later?

>>4364916
Actually yes, check out this thread
>>4314064
Only issue is you'll need some sort of aliexpress analog to HDMI adapter

>>4365218
The 5D4 is 10 year old tech that's canon crippled and still costs a fortune due to photographers, do NOT buy it for video

>>4365427
>do NOT buy it for video
What do I buy then?

>>4365429
I dunno, with an adapter you could stick an ef lens on almost anything, and these days almost anything can shoot 10 bit 422, an iPhone can shoot 10 bit 422.

I upgraded from the 5D4 to an R5C but that's overkill for what you want and it has issues (no fullsize HDMI, no IBIS, chews through a standard LPE6 battery in 10 minutes)

>>4365431
uhh, to be more helpful, if you don't need autofocus look at a BMPCC

>>4365431
>an R5C
I'd love to have one, but it's out of my budget even though it's a great deal for what it is.
Does the 5D Mark IV record 8 or 10 bit externally?
I think I remember reading that it required a certain version of firmware.

>>4365432
>if you don't need autofocus look at a BMPCC
I'll consider it.
What's your opinion on the EOS R?

>>4365166
I spent £400 on the tripod. I would have thought that would be enough to just be basically adequate.

>>4365427
The 5div's video is actually severely underrated. It has 2 flaws:
-the crop factor (x1.66, often incorrectly reported as 1.7)
-the file sizes that come from using mjpg
But in return you get clean 422 dci 4k internally with fantastic autofocus, a decent sensor and great ergonomics. I wouldn't buy one now just because it feels like it'd be better to save up and buy something more modern. But it can absolutely be used to shoot brilliant video.

>>4365517
£400 on the tripod
A good tripod costs £4000 or maybe £8000 assuming you want to hold a camera with some weight to it. If you are just holding up your phone or a cheap point and shoot or a light mirrorless crash cam or a GoPro then a cheap tripod might work but if you want to hold up a rigged cinema camera that you need to plan to spend over £1000 on your tripod.

>>4365517
Manfrotto make decent tripods. I got myself a base and fluid head for around £150-200 each and that was almost 10 years ago. Given me near perfect performance (only issue is that panning the wrong direction loosens the head from the base - not noticeable in filming but annoying to deal with)
>>4365590
Unless you're using a large cinema camera on a sizeable set, this is terrible advice. The average indie creator should not be spending over a grand on a tripod. Cut that shit out.

>all of this gearfagging
>no talk about editing, pacing, script, camera position, composition, camera movement etc.
lol, lmao even i thought /vid/ was based

File: vid lion cave script revised.jpg (138 KB, 943x691)

138 KB JPG

>>4365602
/vid/ has always been more gearfaggotry than anything else. Talking about gear is straightforward and unifying.
Spend a little time here and you'll realise that most people in this thread don't make narrative content or even have designs on doing this professionally. A filmmaking general would be great but there legit just isn't enough interest.
/vid/ has output some bangers over the years though

>>4365603
there were few anons who were working in real production crews. what happened to them?

>>4365611
a. They advanced in their career and are busy in the professional grind of 18 hour days for minimal pay on multi million dollar productions. So they no longer have time to shitpost on /vid/
b. They kept failing and became discouraged and quit the hobby/industry altogether
c. They're still here but there's only so many times you can talk about something without it sounding stale and they have nothing new to add

>>4365602
i love lighting but no one gives a fuck about that

>>4365625
I do. Actually trying to improve the small amount of video I do. I have a couple of fill lights and some tripods to mount them on, but I'm honestly not a big video guy. Just trying to learn the most effective way to light video and stills both in a controlled environment and a "studio" setup. Honestly though I think most my issues are too basic to warrant a conversation on so far.

Go for gold anon, tell us your lighting setup and what you /vid/eo, or maybe an example of what you wanna discuss.

>>4365596
The average indy shooter should be using a camera and lens combo that weighs under 5 pounds — the light mirrorless camera I talked about

>>4365602
Isn't that what /film/ on /tv/ is for? Come to /vid/ for technical questions, go to /film/ for artistic discussion. Not that you are going to get much.

>>4365602
>no talk about editing, pacing, script, camera position, composition, camera movement etc.
Then let’s start talking about it. Anything on those subjects you’d like to discuss?
I bought a bunch of gear recently (heh) and lately I’ve just been setting up basic shot compositions to have footage to mess with, will be writing a very basic short script to film this weekend for more testing (pan, tilts, zooms, low light, handheld, closeups, wides, etc). Want to then take all of that into Davinci to see what’s up with the newest updates and trying editing/coloring out there. A “legit” short script will hopefully follow after that, once I feel a lot more comfortable with the new gear and software. Have a couple of ideas so far, we’ll see what develops and is easiest/cheapest to actually film.

>Honestly though I think most my issues are too basic to warrant a conversation on so far.
Might be, but you could still offer up for discussion on how you’ve overcome any issues or general/common advice on them

>>4365723
Second half was meant for >>4365629

>>4365717
/film/ is meant for discussion of arthouse and classic cinema from an audience/“academic” viewpoint. There have been a few indie filmmakers who try to post there but they’re always either ridiculed or run out very quickly.

These threads could contain discussion on “techniques, gear and anything else related to capturing video footage” so we could actually discuss the elements of filmmaking from a filmmakers perspective, get into the fine details and what all goes into it.
Unless there’s another general I’m unaware of?

>>4365717
>/film/
>anything other than discord hipsters salivating over "approved" old films and complaining about how much digital sucks
Eww. Gross

>>4365629
i'm not posting work here, i'm only really interested in the technical aspects of g&e

>>4365596
>Manfrotto make decent tripods.
I can't stand their heads sometimes. There's this slight grip that makes it hard to make a small, light adjustment in framing. The Sachtler that I own doesn't do this.

>>4365745
>Sachtler

I bet your Sachtler costs much more then your Manfrotto.

does anyone still master dvds?
i just want a video to play as soon as it goes in, no menus
what program should i use? mac or pc

File: Donkey-Sanctuary.jpg (366 KB, 2000x1289)

366 KB JPG

>>4365625
>>4365629
Are there any continuous ring lights for macro video?

>>4365589
Yeah but it's 8 bit, and can only output at 8 bit

Frankly it's a dealbreaker if you want to do any sort of grading

>>4365717
/film/ is about literal film photography

it's just gearfagging about tech that's 20 years out of date

>>4365896
There are fill lights that fit onto the end of your lens like a ring flash. They're dirt cheap but only because the ones I found were chinkshit. They worked, but I ended up opting for a classic speedlite. There are also these, which are interesting since you can manipulate the light more effectively but I have not bought them:

https://www.amazon.com.au/JJC-Rechargeable-Adjustable-Photography-Accessories/dp/B0BQJ81P1S/ref=sr_1_5

>>4365723
My biggest issue right now is actually the post portion of the whole ordeal. I know fuck all about colour grading and only somewhat understand the impact of chroma subsampling, bitrate, and compression has on the quality of a video. Most videos I take end up having sections that looks like mush which I can only assume is the bitrate taking a nosedive. OOC stuff looks... passable. I just feel like I'm leaving a lot of quality on the table but I'm unsure as to where. Perhaps that's the cost of shooting outdoors in lighting you can scarcely control, or maybe using a mirrorless camera for good video was a meme. Not sure.

>>4365903
>and can only output at 8 bit
Even externally?

>>4365921
>I know fuck all about colour grading
Thankfully there are tons of resources for that. YouTube gets shit on here but there’s still legit knowledge to be found plus lots of books you can get, even Blackmagic has free courses you can take

>>4365921
>There are fill lights that fit onto the end of your lens like a ring flash. They're dirt cheap but only because the ones I found were chinkshit
Have a link?
Did you find any that weren't Chinky?

That flex head model looks interesting; I might try it.

>>4365904
You are thinking of /fgt/

>>4365903
I've done extensive grading and been fine on it. 10 bit is great but it's become a crutch for new kids. Back wehn clog was first developed on the canon c100 they only had 8 bit codecs in 1080, filmmakers still loved that camera and clog for a reason.

>>4365939
Any book recs? I prefer to read and not be bombared with cringe youtuber schtick just to understand the basics of something

>>4365861
Try out DVDStyler, it's freedom software. You can set up menus, but it should be possible to skip all that and get the movie playing. It's using dvdauthor under the hood.

>>4365940
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/224547625234
This is literally the cheapest shit you could buy and is similar to the one I tried. The adapter ring clacked around and did not sit firm, and the light was helpful but not enough for macro stills which is my focus. For general lighting of a video it might be sufficient but the build quality is ass. I never found one worth more than $100; everything after that was just a macro speedlite.

The one I linked before, the dual armed one, looked more interesting and seemed less of a fuckaround. More control over lighting directions and no need for a fucky adapter ring on your lens. JJC is also a passable brand that makes alright products especially considering the price point, whereas every ring fill light I saw was just generic fodder brands. If you get it lmk how it goes.

>>4366071
>dvdauthor under the hood
Fuck, I remember that shit

As an aside, dvds were fucking awesome.
Blurays are less awesome from what I've seen. No cool interactive menus with extras like deleted scenes or bloopers. And streaming obviously is basically nothing.
And dvds were great because they were cheap and anyway could make one. Blurays require special software and you're not just dumping an hd video file onto the disk. It's fucked.
If they bring back a medium as great as dvds but for hd (or even 4k) video, it'd genuinely help curb piracy as people would have a physical token of the films they like that had goodies included like director's commentaries

>>4366102
There will never be a return to physical media. It is simply too profitable to deliver everything digitally saving both on the manufacturing costs but more importantly giving you the ability to gate your content behind a subscription. Also people are largely apathetic to physical media and even if they did care if companies gave them no choice, they would settle for streaming it.

What is the best native 1080p camera for under $1000?

>>4366102
>Blurays require special software and you're not just dumping an hd video file onto the disk. It's fucked.
This. I made a BD-R and it literally won’t play on any player I’ve come across aside from PlayStations and PC drives. Yet any fucking DVD-R or DVD-RW I used to shit out played flawlessly on every shitty DVD player out there.
To get a legit Blu-ray pressed is expensive. Fucking sucks.

>>4366106
What’s a shame is that with 4K, higher bitrate, and larger files, a physical disc in my opinion is actually more convenient and accessible to people. We should be moving even more towards physical, not away from it.
Instead you’ll get gimped, small files with garbage bitrate. Fucking infuriating.

>>4366123
If the industry cared, usb thumbdrives would be the perfect medium for films
>relatively cheap
>can comfortably fit a 4k film on a 64gb drive (most of the time a 32gb drive) if encoded in h265
>small
>already work with most bluray players and tvs
But the fucks at the top are too paranoid that it'd make it too easy to rip films off the drives and pirate them (as if every film isn't pirated months before its physical release). Plus, there's no new equipment to sell with it so it'd only benefit consumers

File: mike3620__a_photo_of_the_(...).png (2.14 MB, 1024x1024)

2.14 MB PNG

>>4366018
The one book you should get would be the
Color Correction Handbook: Professional Techniques for Video and Cinema by Alexis Van Hurkman because that book will teach you everything you need to know about color grading.

File: mike3620__a_photo_of_DJT_(...).png (1.81 MB, 1024x1024)

1.81 MB PNG

>>4366106
If companies give them no choice but streaming and they want it on physical media, they’ll just capture the footage on their computer. If companies want customers for life they better give the customers what the customers want or customers will use hacking tools to get what they want.

>>4366101
I made a number of dvds using it, composing and programming menus was always a bitch but it was interesting to get into that low level stuff.

File: IMG_4483.jpg (141 KB, 1024x768)

141 KB JPG

Because it’s election season, Trump’s Special Child makes another appearance on /vid/ and now her handler got a Leader LV-5600 scope with focus assist in his kit so he can shoot wide open with crazy-fast lenses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq4xbdna53w


——————————————————————

Trump’s Special Child’s Handler got his hands of a Leader LV-5600 so he could use his Voigtlander Super Nokton 29mm f/0.8 Aspherical Lens for Micro Four Thirds wide open at f/0.8 and still get Trump’s Special Child in perfect focus. Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/nq4xbdna53w?si=3aG-QEQ7tdiQvNWp

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1024
Image Height	768
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>4365861
I am surprised that Resolve didn’t add DVD or BluRay authoring yet; they seemed to add everything else video related to that program.

>>4367192
>yet
Why would they ever do that in future installments?

>>4367192
>try to import .vob file from a dvd
>davinci: durrr whut is???
>ok how about some avi’s from…
>davinci: i have no idea what any of that means

No better than final cunt pro

>>4367192
I agree, wish they would add this.
As well as MIDI tracks in Fairlight, but I doubt that will ever fucking happen.

Reccomend me a tripod

>>4367243
bro you don't want fairlight controlling midi clock, that sounds like a disaster

>>4367435
:(

>>4367816
This is still somehow less cringe than Trump's Special Child.

File: 1708368860023961.jpg (1.4 MB, 1600x900)

1.4 MB JPG

how much image stabilization is provided by a decent gimbal like the dji rsc 2?

i have a camera and lens collection with no ibis or ois at all, and i want to get a bunch of static hand held shots. how bad would the shake be with a gimbal?

eos r5 any good?
one going for $2200 aud, should i bros?

>>4367939
I hope someone will phitjjdjotoghraph your bs

>>4367939
That's way cheaper than any I've seen in Aus. Might be worth it if the shutter count isnt 150k. Basically new R8 money on an R5 hmmm.

>>4367214
They seem to add everything else video related to that program. So why not an option to master physical media too.

>>4367939
I'd kill for an r5.
The only thing that stops me buying one is that the r5ii exists, and that I can't reasonably edit (or store) 8k footage.

>>4367981
Why edit 8k footage anyways. It’s good for reframing shots but aren’t most videos released in 4k or 1080p anyways.

>>4367980
Not that anon, but dvd mastering is different to just outputting a file type. A program like dvd styler is free and handles this perfectly.
Resolve would need an entire separate tab for this and it's basically a pointless feature since dvds are limited to such a low resolution and basically outdated now.

(As an aside, I think everyone who cares about physical media would love to see a proper successor to dvds - essentially dvds that can handle hd or 4k media. Blurays are fucked because of expensive licensing and complicated programming. From what I understand, hd dvds are similarly retarded. It'd be nice to see resolve, or anyone, start work on an open-source solution to this where you output a file that can be played by a free (open-source) program that worked similar to dvds with menus etc.)

>>4367982
If you're reframing shots, you have to shoot in 8k in the first place (storage issues). Then you can use proxies sure, but you have to edit that footage. If you're using a 4k (or 1080) proxy of 8k footage, you won't be able to properly judge the clarity of that image until you render it.
For me, the ideal resolution is 6k. Just high enough that you can fuck around with a 4k output. But low enough that I can actually edit and store the footage without faffing about.
As technology improves, I'd raise that to 7k in the near future.
(And one of my problems with the r5 is that you can't shoot anything inbetween 4k and 8k)

File: ackchyually.gif (117 KB, 480x480)

117 KB GIF

>>4353857
how do you define flat lighting?
asking for extremely autistic opinions here

>>4368211
lack of contrast with everything toward middle grey in exposure

>>4367926
From my limited experience, as long as your lens is wide enough and you keep some distance from the subject the results are pretty good. It helps if either you or the subject moves across the scene. The only real issue I found is if you get too close to a subject and they don't move/play dead, then the slight wobble seems to be more apparent, easier to notice, making the shot look cheap.

>>4368211
when the lighting is uniform across the frame.

I think this is the technical definition >>4368278, but I would even say that shooting at midday, despite it producing high contrast in the image, is still flat because of it's uniformity

>>4365167
I wish I would have checked back earlier so I could have told you how retarded that is.
That is in no way suitable for my conditions, but i already ordered a combo fro. Sirui

>>4365603
People don’t post screen plays here because they gave me a few days ban for posting one. It is political trash not an award winning screen play. I know it probably wasn’t formatted correctly because I don’t know how to post properly formatting screen plays but it began “Int. Barn. Night” which is how I think screen plays are supposed to start to let you know that the action is taking place in a barn at night. Unless, of course, mods here don’t like it when racist things take place in barns in the screenplay for the lulz.

File: Screenshot_20241006_15530(...).jpg (856 KB, 1439x1073)

856 KB JPG

Should I get this , counteroffer on eBay $2500aud
9372 hours


Working great
16×9 Alexa Classic plus
High Speed license
Anton bauer gold mount battery plate.
No monitor evf / batteries, top handle or lens included.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Android TP1A.220624.014.N986BXXSDHXH1
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	1439
Image Height	1073

>>4369644
what chonky looking piece of a camera that is

>>4369644
Unless it comes with an EF mount or you have some PL mount lenses. It will get costly to use unless you are able to put a new mount on it. The image looks very nice but batteries and stuff for it can get very expensive. It’s better to find a package with everything you need or want included.

>>4369644
That $2500 is like 1/5th what you'll end up spending to get that in working order with all its bells and whistles, AND supply it with lenses. Now, hiring one of those fully rigged out seems to cost about $3,000/wk AUD, so if you've got spare cash it wouldn't be a terrible project you could either a) eventually make money on, or b) have a professional rig for pennies on the dollar after some time and fitting it out.

It's also like, the first model of their digital lineup. Without much knowledge about this specifically, I would go in wary and expect it to be a bit of a bitch to use and maintain, then be plesantly surprised if it isnt.

>>4369712
The lenses he needs for that camera can cost $10,000 per lens used or more. PL lenses are as expensive as hell.

File: Screenshot 2024-10-07 at (...).png (463 KB, 2124x546)

463 KB PNG

>>4369692
>>4369712
>>4369730

Yeah, I don't really need it but I like to fuck around with gear, I guess I could rent it out to some poor uni students for cheap, I have some arri lights too, might be a bit of fun.

$10K a lens is only if you go top tier, pic related is what I found on a quick search, I can always do the dune route and get a pl helios for relatively noting

>>4369730
Fuuuuck I knew they were a lot but that's insane. Yeah fuck that idea right off, go buy a skyline

>>4369741
>>4369740

If you don’t mind using a china special or Russian knock off you might be able to pick some up for under $300 but if you want Cooke or Arri lenses get ready to empty your bank account.

So panasonic is announcing something on the 8th.
Everyone was pretty certain (and hyped) that we'd finally get an s1hii or s1rii since both cameras are fucking old.
We've basically got a confirmation that neither camera will be announced. Instead, it will be the s5d. "What's the s5d?" I hear you ask. Well remember the s5? No, not the s5ii that was released 2 years ago; we're talking the camera before that. Well they're taking that and... rereleasing it.
That's it.
Enjoy!

I've been using action cameras for recording night driving footage with various light sources. (Headlight/streetlights/store fronts etc)
I feel like the dynamic range is just not acceptable for the environment. Everything is way too grainy if the ISO is above even 800, and below that it can't seem to see anything if the shutter is faster than 1/50.
I can find a local GH5 for about 450 USD, or a BMP4K for about 600 USD. I'm leaning towards the GH5 just because of image stabilization and I don't own a gimbal.
Am I wrong in thinking the GH5 will be a better option that just waiting on a the next newest action camera? (From 360 or DJI likely)
I don't currently own any cameras at all or lenses, so I am starting from nothing.

>>4369766
Can you keep this pedo AI shit off the board, you degenerate?

File: mike3620__a_large_format_(...).png (1.59 MB, 1024x1024)

1.59 MB PNG

>>4369964
If you want to do action shots using a mirrorless camera invest in lenses that are fast. f/2.8 or wider with micro four thirds you can get f/0.95 or faster primes those lenses would be awesome for getting a night shot with a low iso.

>>4370079
Makes sense, the price for lenses that fast doesn't seem too insane, but even if I'm in it 450+300 for the body and a single lens, is that going to be noticeably better than a newer action camera for night time video?
I'm really not leaning either way, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the technical benefit of buying a mirrorless system for my application of night time motion in a town or countryside.
Appreciate the info as well.

>>4370325
I'm guessing you meant to say it will be much much better *with* a mirrorless right?
Cool, that sounds like a decent option then. I'm not trying to be a big youtube fag or anything like that, mostly just recording my drives around small towns and cities for my own enjoyment. Hobby videos I suppose to show family.
With such a fast lens will the focal plane not be incredibly shallow? i.e. the road and trees won't be in focus at the same time? I'm still fairly new to anything outside my point and shoot. Thanks again.

File: IMG_3601.png (1.35 MB, 1024x1024)

1.35 MB PNG

>>4370329
It depends. Stuff in the far background should be in perfect focus. But if you focus on something close to the lens such as a fence everything else will be blurry. If you want everything to be in focus and not burry. You need lighting not a very fast lens. Very fast lenses are great for bokeh and neon-noir photos. You might want to see if you can add a powerful light to your car if you want everything in focus and not blurry. Test the lenses and cameras out first and see what works for you if you can do that.

>>4370333
I'll have to think about it some more then.
I don't have a local spot to try a used camera in my car, and no one I know is big into photography. I'll try to make do with the P&S I have for now and if it seems worth while to drop almost a grand for it I'll keep in mind your recommendations. Appreciate it.

Hello sir I want to learn how to make a movies. Is it too late for me? I'm 34 from america. I've never done anything creative my entire life. I have no money. I want to become a big director

File: 1727484289667718.png (36 KB, 680x646)

36 KB PNG

>>4371001

>>4371001
Hang in there!

>>4371001
Just get some money and you can do whatever you want.

Fresnel tungsten lamp lights, are they in or out?

>>4371628
Thanks for the insight.

File: alexa.jpg (142 KB, 1280x960)

142 KB JPG

>>4369644
>>4369692
>>4369712

Alright bois, I bought the Alexa Plus for $2900 AUD with a lens, he showed me it worked so everything is gucci.
The lens is a mk1 sony cine alta 35mm, its got a loose screw in the mount so it rattles a bit but it works fine. ($400 is pretty cheap)
Got a Ninja 5+ sdi coming my way so I can see what's going on, battery solution is also coming next week.
Ill need to work out some sort of handle/tripod system so I don't just have to keep it on something flat.

Got a question if anyone knows about these;
Can I record via SDI and get decent quality vs the SxS cards? They seem a bit hard to find and expensive. The ninja records anyway so it can make do for now.
Any other tips would be great.

Anyway lads, might be a bit of fun, we will see what happens, probably a bad idea and a financial mistake, but hey, all for the tonez

>>4371585
they get hot, they are heavy and drink the power, you also need to keep spare bulbs
when you turn them off they tick, so don't record while they cool down
are they fun, yeah
cri is better than anything else led in the same price range, just don't forget to white balance
i have a few arri 1k's, you can spotlight them out a window onto the house across the road and light it up like daylight

>>4371750
Fwaaaaarrrrr sick. That's a dope kit for that money. The batteries are expensive iirc and you'll want some kind of rigging but legit, what a steal. Can always sell it on if you don't mind sitting on it for a while

>>4371759
she's got a gold mount, but the guy had a gold to v adapter so im gonna try and do the same,
100wh v mount is about $150-200, not quite sure how long its gonna last but id say id be lucky to get 45-60min out of it, we will see sometime next week

>>4371750
So you spent almost 3 grand on a camera that can't shoot 4k and needs an external monitor to work properly?

>>4371803
But the image quality of that camera and the dynamic range of that camera blows all other prosumer and consumer cameras that are sold right now out of the water.

File: mike3620__what_the_boy_se(...).png (2.08 MB, 1024x1024)

2.08 MB PNG

Anons, I made a fake person to ask trump's special child to make trump videos so if trump losers the election she won’t get mad at me because she likes to shoot the messenger. How illegal is it to do this? Or is it normal to use ai to generate requests for videos from people who don’t really exist people like Holden Caulfield or Tom Sawyer or Jay Gatsby.