/vid/ - Video General

File: tumblr_mhow82ok5K1s3q4m3o3_500.gif (1016KB, 500x340px) Image search: [Google]

1016KB, 500x340px

DICKS OUT FOR MEMOVSKY

And pertinent from the last thread, how do I into an arthouse-ish surrealist sequence, like in Zerkalo?

>>2967763
It would involve creativity.

File: IMG_20160915_161207.jpg (4MB, 4160x3088px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4160x3088px

newfag here. pic unrelated

did I really just read someone recommended an Ursa mini over an FS5 like it was an easy choice?

BMD is the harbor freight of the camera world. If you don't get that reference go ask your dad.

I've seen the magenta issues and DOA units myself. It's the Fisher Price "my first camera" of the video world. The best thing about the camera is the sensor, which I'll admit is tasty. But past that you get what you pay for.

Hell I work at a dealer and have seen so many of these guys come back my head spins.

If you're in the market just save up a little extra and wait for the flood of lightly used FS7s to go on clearance when the m2 releases in Jan. They may even drop the price increase when the m2 drops.

File: 1479494864110.png (77KB, 372x300px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 372x300px

>>2967795

>tfw too intelligent for Sony cameras

Recently got my Panasonic 12-35mm 2.8 which I want to use for my Run&gun, documentary Style Shooting. Basically, I want to have it on 95% of the time.
While 2.8 is good, I am getting problems with light sometimes, especially when Shooting 50fps.
What's a good lighting Solution that isn't as heavy as the Neweer 160? I like what the lumecube does but it's stupid gimmicky Bluetooth shit doesn't fit. Any other sources of portable String light to mount on my camera that you guys would recommend?

File: AndroidPIT-lg-g5-friends-0428-w782.jpg (43KB, 782x440px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 782x440px

Does anybody know if FiLMiC Pro works with the LG G5?

It's my understanding that the default camera app does not have manual control for video (unlike the LG V20), but can I force manual control in another app?

Will a capture card like link related work for capturing better video from a camera?
(sorry if this is a newb question, i literally have no idea)
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Elgato-Capture-PlayStation-Definition-Recorder/dp/B0082J1YCE

I will be receiving a digitalized version of a test spool from the ol' K-3 sometime next week. For the next shoot are there any rare/odd stocks I should keep an eye out for? Vision3 is a future contender but for now any low contrast shitty color crap poop would be great.

File: Canon_EOS-5D.jpg (4MB, 3977x2652px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 3977x2652px

how is >pic related for filming?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 600D
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Uwe Aranas
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:09:08 21:14:45
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/11.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/11.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	100.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>2968185
waste of money considering what else is on the market right now.

Want Canon? Get the Mark III
Want 4K? Get A7sII or GH4/5 when it comes out
Want good codecs? Same as above and/or external recorder

Mark IV has nothing to offer in today's market for video and the video codec they put in it is just stupid.

>>2968256
>Mark IV has nothing to offer in today's market for video and the video codec they put in it is just stupid.

This. Very Nikonish move of them.

>>2967795
Wtf is going on in that pic, why not just buy a DSLR ?
Poeple can get memes so easily these days

>>2968325
They Just buy the Sensor.
Considering it's a FF 20MP it's understandable

>>2967798
it's to, you dolt

>>2968256
While the mkiv certainly isn't revolutionary or video-orientated, having 4k and 1080p/60fps is still useful as fuck
the 4k codec might be shit, but if you're outputting in 1080 then you have a huge amount of space to crop and it will be sharper if you simply down-sample it

Plus it offers uncompressed 1080p if used with an external recorder which should provide fucking amazing quality without having to magic lantern it

>>2968360
JFC Just get an a6300/6500 or a G85 if the 4K is so damn important.
Codec Beats Resolution, Even with space to spare.

>>2968360
what is the point of 4k? isn't it a minority that have 4k monitors? i've read that scaling an image down can make it better, but i don't see why that would be the case.

>>2968368
It created a asharper 1080p Image. Really worth it.
Also allows zooming in or stabilizing without loss of quality.

>>2968371
I'm trying to imagine how 'sharpening' an image works.

I read some hollywood filmmaker saying he wanted 6k cameras so he could make better 4k images, but I don't really get it.

Maybe there are digital imperfections of the cmos sensor so this is neccesary.

>>2968374

>I'm trying to imagine how 'sharpening' an image works.

sometimes good, sometimes not depending on the downscaling and post

>I read some hollywood filmmaker saying he wanted 6k cameras so he could make better 4k images, but I don't really get it.

it gives you the freedom to recompose after the fact. Imagine you shot and then later realized the horizon wasn't level.

>>2968378
>Imagine you shot and then later realized the horizon wasn't level.

That is a great point. I was thinking about eliminating the bumps of walking in a run-and-gun style documentary, but i had not even considered something like that.

>>2968374
>>2968374
>I'm trying to imagine how 'sharpening' an image works.

Imagine the reality protected onto the sensor as a 2D Image with infinite resolution. The moment that image hits the sensor, it has a set ammount of pixels. When talking about B&W Images, each pixel has the possibility of being one of 256 shades of gray (or more when using another Codec but let's stick with 256). Sometimes, this one pixel isnt accurate enough to representatives reality, since the resolution is only averaging reality. So maybe the blackness or thickness of a black line gets averaged the wrong way and you end up with a gap in a line.
So if you instead of one pixel had four, then that line had less of a chance of being averaged the wrong way on all four pixels. sampling down from those four pixels to one (from UHD to FHD) gives you more information to work with, so a "wrong" information has less of a chance to overwrite a "right" one. Therefore, lines are less likely to blur and remain more sharp
In the end it's about preservation and destruction of information. Just like with 10bit vs. 8bit and 4:2:2 vs 4:2:0
More information means more accurate representation and more information to work with.

>>2968374
It's not 'sharpening' as we usually think of it, it's more like level of detail captured in high quality. If you compare it to analogue film, it's in a way like the difference between shooting 35mm negative vs. 70mm. It's not sharper per se, but small details (leave in trees, background elements) are more fully detailed and thus make for an apparently sharper image without the need for digital sharpening.

As for why people want to shoot 6-8K, a good example is David Fincher. What he does is he will shoot 6K on a RED a bit wider than needed, reframe and stabilize any movements in post and deliver House of Cards to Netflix in 4K (they force everyone to shoot 4K btw). So all the movements will feel very smooth and clean with no imperfections without losing any detail if there's a need to crop in a bit.

From my own experience on smaller sets and smaller productions, I can say 4K helps you move faster in most situations. In an interview you can effectively get a medium shot and a closeup at the same time, in a short film you'll be able to crop in 4-5% because the boom guy is inexperienced and almost ruined the best take.

Some people are purists and say you should never reframe in post etc etc, but a good DP should use the technology to their advantage rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Higher resolution can save your ass if you're not working with top-of-the-line people.

Lastly, I find it quite useful for placating conflicts on set. If I'm DP-ing and have one opinion in regards to frame size and the director has another, I can just say we can reframe in post and we both learn something rather than arguing and wasting precious time on set.

>>2968388
>Sometimes, this one pixel isnt accurate enough to representatives reality

Couldn't you just have better pixels in the sensor rather than more?

>>2968397
Sure if you can find a way to Make "better pixels", Go ahead.

>>2968397
This is actually the reason why bigger pixels on the sensor are better and why the A7S is better for Video than the A7. It has 20MP on the same sensor area while the A7 has 42MP. Bigger pixels=>sharper Image, better low-light perfomance

>>2968392
High quality post. Thank you.

David Fincher (cradle of love video is great).
>a bit wider than needed
Do you mean wider aspect ratio or just generally larger?
>reframe and stabilize any movements in post
Is this so he doesn't need a dolly?

(they force everyone to shoot 4K btw) Thanks for this, I had no idea. I read that Mad Max Fury road was screened at 2k resolution (as well as Star Wars The Phantom Menace) so I don't really get the hollabaloo.

>In an interview you can effectively get a medium shot and a closeup at the same time
This is great, but I feel like you could do the same thing by mixing crop sensor video with line skipping (so you could get a full sensor image, but wouldn't look as good as 4k, but would use less memory). I can't tell what is more important, a fullframe sensor or a smaller sensor with more pixels?

>>2968404
How about a ccd video camera?

>>2968407
I assumed this was the reason people like full-frame sensors, rather than it being about being able to get closer.

>>2968416
Replying to my own post,

Mad Max Fury road was filmed at 2.8k, then played in theatres at 2k, and now an upscaled 4k bluray is being released that has been color corrected.

This seems retarded to me. It is almost like 4k is a meme.

Roger Ebert said that techniscope looked like shit (half the height of super35mm to make it widescreen for anyone unfamiliar) because the colors ran, but that could be because of film grain. It doesn't seem to mateer when you have digital color correction.

>>2968416
>>2968431

>a bit wider
I don't mean wider aspect ratio, I mean you'd take the shot you want, on the lens you want, frame it, then pull the camera back 2 feet or whatever. Like a looser shot than intended so that when you crop in you get exactly what you wanted (rather than cropping in from a frame you already liked).

>Is this so he doesn't need a dolly?
Of course not. You would do the tracking shot on the dolly still, but the dolly at the end of the day is a mechanical thing, there might be a little bump, or a movement might not be perfect. You would just take that dolly movement and add further stabilization in post to make it perfectly smooth, unnaturally smooth I would say.

About forcing 4k, only Netflix does that right now, and I think stuff on Amazon Prime will as well but not sure about that yet.

With the line skipping thing, I feel like these days memory is less of an issue than resolution, especially in a corporate/interview type situation. It depends obviously but I for one would take quality over memory cards.

The Mad Max thing, upscaling is not the best idea yeah, I'm not sure why they're doing it beyond meme status. Don't know about techniscope but digital upscaling works the same way as any other kind of upscaling, you're trying to pull something out of nothing, so you'll get a poorer quality product if you start pixel peeping. Should you? Probably not, but from a cinematography standpoint you want the best quality image possible to ideally shoot 4K if you want 4K (this was a big argument with the Alexa for a while as it was upscaling UHD instead of shooting 4K natively. They had to accept defeat now and add for-real 4K in the Alexa Mini).

>>2968465
Thanks, man. You've been so helpful.

Is there anyone who can explain 'color science' to me, as in when they refer to the differences between the sensors of cameras.

In color correction, does it really matter? (Say that you are taking 10-bit video.)

Also, can you get technicolor like looks with digital? If you had Marilyn Monroe in front of you, could you take pictures as stylish as her nudes without photoshop-like manipulation (I have no idea if there was airbrushing in the 50's)

>>2968416
> I can't tell what is more important, a fullframe sensor or a smaller sensor with more pixels?

That's an interesting question. I'd say you want a good mix really. Fullframe is bad for video anyway in my opinion and is more of a meme than 4K will ever be because it fucks with focus.

Super35 is really the ideal sensor size right now, but smaller sensors can be good too, you just have to shoot wider open to lower DoF, so faster lenses might be needed.

>>2968487
DoF itself is Kind of a meme.
It's Just one way to achieve Separation. It's more important to be able to shoot around it. You shouldnt really shoot it everytime because the background is also the environment and for cinetamic Story telling the environment can be very important.
Of course, you can always Close the aperture, but the super16 Look isn't Bad either. It has a better feel of 'presence' in the Scene, whereas blurry background is more a 'detached' Feeling.

>>2968482
The whole color science thing is difficult...in a sense with 'enough' color correction you can make any camera look like any other camera past a certain point, but some people like the look they get out directly from a camera before color correcting, hence the popularity of the Alexa.

The thing is getting a camera whose colors you like out of the box will save you time in post because you won't be fighting against the sensor. For many DP's the biggest issue is skin tones for example, and I've heard many people talk shit about Sony cameras because of the way they pick up skin. I for one really like it and on the other hand really dislike Canon and Blackmagic color science.

so, TLDR: Yes you can fix it in post, but use the camera you like the look of to start with and you won't have to deal with that.

>>2968491
DoF is and isn't a meme. I agree with you that blurry as fuck backgrounds, which are more or less the norm these days, are very distracting and I hate them, but having a camera that can achieve that effect when you need it is very useful.

The other issue, realistically, is that for many small projects lighting is the reeeal real problem. If you look at movies from the 40s-50s, that shit is all in focus and it looks great, because if you have all the money you need you can create excellent separation with lighting and contrast levels. But with a small budget you can't, so shallow DoF is basically a way to cut corners when you can't light properly and/or you don't have a production designer and location manager to make use of those backgrounds and make them look excellent.

>>2968494
What I wanna know if the rise of 10bit and 4:2:2 could actually mean better, cheaper greenscreens, because with more accurate colour could come less distracting artifacts in Hair and around corners.

>>2968494
Yeah, I read that German Expressionism in film was a result of the limited power allocations (post-war times) so they couldn't use the fuck-ton of lights necessary for a film.

>>2968492
About Marilyn, though. Do you have the chops?

>>2968499
10-bit 422 isn't enough for greenscreen anyway on a big scale. you want 4444 or RAW ideally for greenscreen work, and as high res as you possibly can.


>>2968508
About Marilyn, you can replicate anything nowadays with enough color correction and talent, but I for one couldn't do it myself.

>>2968537
Can you make color corrected pictures that look like the Anna Karina colored photos?

>>2968368
Memery is part of it. "4k is the next big thing!!!!" doesn't just apply to creatives--clients want the newest hottest thing, and they want it to cost the same as the old thing.

"more is better". Many photographers don't need 20+ MP bodies for wedding photos and print ads, but once in a while it's worth it.

Downscaling to 1080p is nice.

As for hollywood stuff, well if you have a few million bucks to throw around, why not have the best? You have a guy sitting on the camera truck doing nothing but managing data.

Most of the cost of an Alexa or Red Epic is in R&D and the limited economy of scale in small quantity manufacturing--it wouldn't be much cheaper or better if it shot 1080p.

Personally I'm hoping we level off with 4k for a while, and manufacturers focus on picture quality (this is more or less Arri's strategy, and they've done marvelous things with it).

>>2968465
The mad max upscaling is just a goof so that they can put 4k on the package. No doubt about that. There is a very lucrative segment of the market that buys whatever media and electronics companies tell them is THE BEST.

Even in a nice movie theater that's committed to top notch projection, most people won't be able to tell the difference between 2k and 4k on screen without sitting in the front row and squinting. The difference between 4k and 6k is even more slight.

While the higher res does make compositing easier, it doesn't really matter when most of the SFX on screen are ugly boring trash. Oooh! More flying robots! Nobody notices or cares.

Color rendition, dynamic range, and things like that are way more attractive ATM.

>>2968574
I imagine that the 2k vs 4k vs 6k matters much more when there are alot of stills, like in a romance where you look closely at a small section of the screen (eyes). Most romance movies are still done on film.

Do any of you guys know if there is a digital filter that makes things look technicolor (like Robin Hood) if it was just saturation you think it would be easy, but I don't think I've ever seen a digital image that didn't look digital.

There are some pretty crazy filters out there.

>>2967925
Hardly. The device captures HDMI video and converts and saves it in an mp4 format. This compressed format will hardly be any better than the camera's internal recording. The bitrate could even be lower.
In case your camera can output an umcompressed stream via HDMI you can capture it with an external recorder which converts and stores uncompressed data or which uses a more professional format like DNxHD or something like that.

>>2968648
>Most romance movies are still done on film.
Not in my experience, but I'm more commercials and TV. If they do, it isn't for the raw resolution. AFAIK nobody bothers with anything more than a 4k digital intermediate, and nobody but a handful of art house theaters projects 35.

I did once work with a DP who insisted on shooting some sun set material on 35mm. I assumed it was for buttery highlights and nice warm tones on dark skin, but he was sort of a cypher. It was intercut with Alexa stuff, and looked very nice.

>>2968649
Thank you!
That actually makes a lot of sense too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhJf6Rqffok

any other neat making-ofs like this?

>>2967810
Noone? Anyone?
Really looking through a lot of stuff, including cmping gear , for lighting solutions.
/diy/ isnt very helpful, one the one hand because it's super slow, on the other hand because I'd need a degree in electrical engineering to understand anything they say

>>2967810
Aputure amaran m9

>>2968660

Sunsets are one of the most difficult things you can shoot and one of the best things to test cameras and sensors. You have to deal with:
- high natural contrast
- extreme highlights
- really deep and detailed gradient

Film is naturally better suited to capturing highlights anyway, and captures gradients more organically than digital cameras (again, if you're obsessive about quality).

The other thing I've seen done on film for VFX is fire and any kind of fire effects for the same reason. Fire has so many different hues and little differences in colors that only 4444 or RAW can really capture it, and even then film will probably render it more fully and beautifully. So for comp shots some DP's will shoot fire 'plates' as it were and mix with digital shooting.

>>2968814
Awesome, thanks.
DUnno how many lumens it has, it says 900lux. I'm no phycisist so I don't know what Lumen, Lux and Candela actually are.

>>2968841
thanks, man.

>>2968772
that was really thrifty, i don't understand why he needs to pay to get his own raw files, though? it must be some kind of hollywood bullshit.

Does anyone know of any artists that do like visual art / art films ? i really have no idea what the proper term for it is but an example of what i'm thinking about would be SUSBOY

https://vimeo.com/103196144

I guess like a painting or other art work but in video form? if someone knows what i'm talking about and can give me the proper term for it that would also be great

>>2969253
There's a huge genealogy of works in the intersection between cinema/video art/installation/new media/whatever basically all the way back to the european avant garde in the 20s but especially from the 60s onwards. I recommend reading Expanded Cinema by Gene Youngblood if you're interested.

Some big names:
June Paik
Peter Campus
Bruce Nauman
Dan Graham
Bill Viola
Marina Abramovich (ulay too i guess)
Marcel Odenbach
Takahiko Iimura
Martha Rosler
Michael Snow
Brakhage

>>2969166
He's editing proxies. The raws are held and managed by the post house (so the studio is basically paying someone to pull the files for him, and eventually ingest them back into the final picture master). It's not that complicated, but when millions of dollars are invested in the process, you can imagine why the studio would not trust the whole IT process to the director alone.

Studios today are basically banks. Everything from editorial, special effects, lighting equipment, casting, camera gear, etc is farmed out to third party specialty companies, rentals, etc).

>>2969789
I always thought it was the studios control of the theaters, but I don't know if the production companies are owned by the distributors.

It is even possible to get celebrities in indie films if you can prove your artistic value. So if you are cool with limited distribution and no special effects then all you need is some cash (Refn only had a million on his first film, I think.)

>>2969902
Theaters are not owned by movie studios (it's actually not allowed because of an old anti trust suit). But big studios hold a lot of sway with exhibitors, and few exhibitors will sign a contract with a small art house distributor when it means losing out on the money from screening the latest big blockbuster.

Getting your indie film into a big chain cineplex is difficult, but with an independent movie house, you can rent the whole theater, like any other venue.

>It is even possible to get celebrities in indie films
In the 20's-50's big stars would often be on exclusive contracts with one studio. No longer the case. I've worked on a couple small films where the big name stars were working for a cut of the profits (no pay up front) because they believed in the project.

The "production company" is often just a shell corp owned by the studio, or perhaps a company owned by the producer (which gets most of it's money for making the film from Warner Brothers or whatever). One film may have many "distributors" with rights to exhibit in different markets. Warner Brothers or Sony is just the biggest name on the list because they distribute to North American theaters and home video.

>>2970441
>I've worked on a couple small films where the big name stars were working for a cut of the profits (no pay up front) because they believed in the project.

Do you understand how Hollywood accounting works?
The way i understand it is if you go into debt to make a movie, then your profit is less, so you pay less taxes.
I have no idea if an indie filmmaker needs to pay corporate taxes on profit before doling out the money or what. (Corporate taxes are retarded.)

>>2970547
I don't know if anyone understands. There's lots of different models to finance a film, and lots of ways to dodge taxes and obfuscate profits (particularly when it comes to screwing over artists and independent producers in profit sharing arrangements).

Then you throw in state tax incentives and rebates, and it's just a clusterfuck. As a below the line mug, I don't interact with that part of the business much.

File: GradingForGrey0333.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

Currently trying different grading styles and arrived at "grey autumn" and I'm trying to figure out whether I should increase highlights for some actual contrast in the image or lower them to achieve complete dullness.
Can a shot be dull on purpose?
Pic related is with raised highlights

>>2971409
I really like the colors and the saturation of the image

I just wish the picture itself was more interesting. It has no story. It's just documenting a quaint corner of the world.

>>2971451
i'm literally just taking stock footage and grade it in blender.
i dont have access to fancy prebaked grades and found no guide on how to achieve certain looks so I just started doing my own thing.

>>2971473
Don't have the original so I can't say how much better you did but like I said, I like the paint job.

>>2971535
I|ll look if I can upload a split comparison later
Generalz prefer using curves over colourwheels because it gives more control.

>>2971409
Careful with those whites, the lamp posts and the cars on the right look almost if not completely blown. No clue how blender works but in Resolve you could go to the Log Wheels and lower just the pure whites to maintain information.

About dullness what I'd say is make sure the blacks are black and then leave the highlights middle-to-high rather than all the way up if you want it to look sad and overcast. That look can work, just look at The Conversation. Oh and don't take so much saturation out of the reds, it looks fake.

>>2971648
>>2971648
Thanks, sounds like solid advice
>make sure the blacks are black
I did the opposite, raising the starting level and making the black stay leven for a tiny bit so blacks seem brighter but also larger and flatter. I thought it would create a sort of dull, uncontrasty feeling.
I can do the same with whites, making the maximum white lvl around 95% but also make the curve reach that level earlier.
When using curves I try to use as little points as possible to create few "cliffs" or "flats"

File: 16-reception.png (794KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

794KB, 1024x576px

>>2971655
I guess I'm biased, in a sense, since I hate it when black isn't black in films. Contrast is a relative game anyway, so you can have a dull image even with true black on there by putting the whites at like 75-80% instead of 95.

If you crunch things down towards the middle it won't look uncontrasty, it will just look like Log footage which is never good. Here's a still from The Conversation so you can see what i mean. It looks dull and depressing because the lights are dim, but the black level is realistic, not lifted.

More examples and a very good site in general for inspiration here: https://film-grab.com/2010/08/26/the-conversation/

File: GradingForGrey0333.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>2971656
Ok, i did it.
The colour-curves are just lowered midtones, so a node in the middle pulled to the bottom right
Screenshot of the curve to follow

File: Screenshot from 2016-11-25 15-17-50.png (616KB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

616KB, 1680x1050px

>>2971724

>>2971724
Actually, I just compared to my previous and I liked my previous better, it just looked bleaker. made some other adjustements. I kept the curve of brightness roughly, but lowered contrast further, keeping the shape of the saturation curve.
The first pic I posted had a certain "piercing" feel to it, as if the bright areas where the only real points to hold on to, quickly tarnished by grime and shadows. Like a few bright spots. It made the scene look darker, more like a scene in the evening rather than overcast noon.
I also noticed that using vector-handle rather than autohandle makes the scene look weird and unnatural. Does anyone have any similar experiences?

File: GradingForGrey0333.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>2971747
comparison
the colour is still too much on the second iteration. they draw attention from the white-black contrast.
highlights still at 80% Y and evening out at 93% X, saturation still lowest for blue
I think the biggest example is the no-parking sign. the colours are so desaturated that the bright white border is popping more despite being relatively dim. The windows also have more of a pop from the brick wall.
I'm going camping over the weekend, otherwise I'd tinker all the way to monday, maybe I'lll try some different shots with this profile.

>>2971747
>>2971774
Perhaps it's just because I'm biased for shadows, but I do prefer the second one. There's obviously significantly more color, but it still retains a decent worn-out look. IMHO, I'd go for that one.

>>2971782
Actually, I think >>2971774 might be the best formulation, desu.

Why is the Red's sensor aps-c and not full frame? Why does it use cmos instead of ccd? Is it equal to a dslr sensor, but with a much bigger processor and faster memory?

I was just thinking that if you could turn a dslr into a webcam, it would be the equivalent of an overpriced Red camera (barring proprietary software).

>>2971987
>Why is the Red's sensor aps-c and not full frame?
Red models have slightly different sensor size. But they are Super35 sized for the same reason full frame cameras are 36 × 24, conventions derived from film and lens/mount compatibility.

> Why does it use cmos instead of ccd?
A mixture of technological benefits, image quality, manufacturing complexity and cost.

> Is it equal to a dslr sensor, but with a much bigger processor and faster memory?
It's largely the same sensor technology. But RED's have a fixed ISO-rating where the signal is not amplified before recording and a global shutter.

>if you could turn a dslr into a webcam, it would be the equivalent of an overpriced Red camera
What

>>2972049
I think it is possible to take a sensor out of a dslr and get the data from the sensor onto a laptop. How difficult could circuitry be. I'm going to buy a broken dslr and try it out. I was just curious as to whether there would be a limitation on the sensor itself. Magic Lantern has shown that the sensor isn't the bottleneck.

>>2971987
>>2972049
About the full frame thing, the other reason for not having full frame is because full frame makes focusing harder at lower f stops, so it'll be more difficult to focus at f2 on a full frame sensor than on super35. Super35 gives you the best balance of capturing light, the ability to have shallow focus when you need it, and the ability to focus when you need it.

File: tmp_1878-IMG_20161126_141718-147874864.jpg (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

Did you get yours yet?

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	OnePlus
Camera Model	ONE E1005
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Exposure Time	1/20 sec
F-Number	f/2.2
ISO Speed Rating	904
Lens Aperture	f/2.1
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	3.79 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3840
Image Height	2160
Exposure Index	339
White Balance	Auto
Gain Control	Unknown

File: A_tarkovsky_sculpting_in_time.jpg (13KB, 232x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 232x300px

>>2972470
Have never read that, but it's pertinent to the question I was about to ask. What are some proper books on film theory?

>>2972489
What kind of film theory are you interested in

can anyone recommend me a nice camera for ~$800, main purpose is short films

>>2972820

If you can get a second hand GH4 off ebay you're set

>>2972489
If you're looking for an introduction/secondary literature to the topic, there's tons of stuff. 101s I'v read: film art by thompson/boardwell which is basic but boring, film theory by robert stam which is handy as a reference but useless if you want to actually learn the theories, and major film theories by dudley andrew which is old but great.

If you want more stuff, here's some classics that are fun.

Jean Epstein - just get an essay collection
Eisenstein - film form/same as above
Vertov - kino eye: writings of dziga vertov
cahiers du cinema - godard/truffaut stuff
Bazin - what is cinema
Kracauer - redemption of physical reality, mass ornament
Cavell - the world viewed
Brecht
Balazs - theory of film
Deleuze - movement image/time image
Mulvey - visual pleasure
Sobchack - phenomenology of film experience

How far has Magic Lantern come?

Can I record 10-bit videos on my 70D at 1080p without this "crop mode" I have heard of?

hey all, finally gave up on my NX1, for now at least. Sold it and snapped up a GH4 and panny 12-35 for dirt cheap ($800).

Finding im hating the skin tones im getting in cinelike D, but i know there's good results to be found there. Any recommednations for tweaks to cinelike d? I dont need it flatter, i just feel like the tint is off.


Also, does the Metabones XL make this thing alright in ambient street lights at night? Because if so, I might get a shogun and do V-log with this, but if not i wanna pick up the c100 or JVC-LS300 while theyre still on sale at Adorama for the weekend

>>2973348
(obligatory "or get an a7sII")

>>2973348
Panasonic skintones are a bit weird. If you find them too orange, you have the same problem I had but I found a quick way to avoid them:
>no automatic whitebalance
>lower saturation to -2 or -3 in your preferred style
>if neccessary, adjust Whitebalance color-bias manually
>consider polarizers

Also, if you don''t grade your shots, ditch Cinelike D and instead go for cinelike V

File: Rollei_Lesertest_Mini_Wild_Cat_pmo.jpg (55KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1280x720px

The Rollei Wildcat Mini stabilizer is like 30 bucks instead of 100 on amazon right now.
Anyone know about it? is it worth it?

>>2972061
You can already purchase external recorders that can pull higher quality images out of the camera. I'm guessing for much less money and wasted effort than trying to roll your own electronics.

High end cinema cameras are no more overpriced than any other piece of industrial equipment. They don't make millions of them the way Canon or Panasonic does, so they have to spread the overhead costs over fewer units while delivering a more robust, reliable machine.

>>2973737
What do you want it for?

At that price, it's hardly a big risk, but I'm not fond of those little glidecams. I'd rather just stick a handle to the bottom of the camera, stick an eyepiece on the back, and shoot with it like it's a little super 8 camera. Good handheld can be aesthetically pleasing, but glidecam footage usually just looks like an inexperienced steadycam operator.

>>2973348
Nice bargain dude, I'm jelly af

>>2973733
I would suggest to anyone shooting video that you not use auto whitebalance, ever. No bigger headache in editing or color grading than dealing with a constantly shifting white balance. Use the Kelvin dial and keep it locked on one setting for each scene.

When I can't do anything about mixed daylight and incandescent sources, I set it somewhere in the middle (ie start at 4100 and dial it around from there, depending on which source is dominant).

The only exception I can think of is if you are shooting in a walmart or a factory floor illuminated entirely by flourescents or high bay fixtures--and if you are, grab your whitebalance off a white card or sheet of fomecore.

>>2973965
>anyone shooting video
>The only exception I can think of
>lluminated entirely by flourescents

yeah those settings must be super rare

>>2973954
>You can already purchase external recorders that can pull higher quality images out of the camera. I'm guessing for much less money and wasted effort than trying to roll your own electronics.
Not that guy, but I use a canon 70d
Could I get 4:2:2 colour with an external recorder?
And what's the cheapest, best recorder to go for?

>>2974019
The problem that you have to keep in mind with external recorders is not just if the sensor can process 422 or 10bit or whatever, but more importantly if you have a setting in the camera to choose what to send over. the nice thing about the GH4 for example is that you can tell the camera to send 10bit 422 through the hdmi and also tell it what framerate to send over. I've got mine hooked up to a Blackmagic 5' monitor/recorder and you can get excellent ProRes422HQ in V-Log out of it.

So even with a recorder make sure you can tell the recorder what you want it to record (i know you can't do it with an A7SII for example)

>>2973954
Technically I am using my Monopod+Standfoot 90% of the time, sometimes handheld.
I do mosty documentary stuff but being able to add smooth motion into the mix would be really appreciated.
Still don't know if I should go for it.

>>2974534
In my experience, the little glidecam thing only looks smooth with a fairly wide lens (which is also true of handheld/shoulder mount).

They're also a little fussy to balance, and overall seems like too much bulk and hassle for documentary work. Because you have to hold it out in front of you (rather than resting the weight on your shoulder) you'll tend to fatigue more quickly than you would with a much heavier camera on your shoulder.

Pulling focus mid shot is also just about impossible without a wireless follow focus system.

If it's only thirty bucks, try it out--but being able to shoot handheld that doesn't feel like blair witch shaky cam is a lifelong skill.

>>2974019
New ones come out faster than cameras. I see the Odyssey 7Q quite often.

>>2974574
Using the 12-35mm Panasonic Pro Lens, which is A: very wide and B: internally stabilized.
I often film at 18mm or slightly above, since it's the standard length for an MFT sensor at 4k Video-Crop

a friend of mine wants me to record his going away house party. they are gonna have a couple of bands playing that night.

ive never done any sort of videography before and im gonna be using a t5i, which i know isnt the best for video in the first place.
if anything though, im more worried about the sound because of the bands im gonna be recording.

I have access to a zoom h1 at the moment as well as a cheap condenser mic a takstar sgc-598 to be exact, which i heard is almost as good as a rode pro. should i just record everything through the Zoom h1? or should I use the mic hooked up into the zoom h1?

>>2974672
I assume you meant "should i just record everything through the t5i? or should I use the mic hooked up into the zoom h1?"

In which case:
Use the Zoom, use headphones, monitor your fucking levels (can't stress this enough, bad sound ruins everything) constantly, dont use autolevel, don't use lo-cut (okay maybe lo-cut).
Consider getting or making a monopod. they are cheak and do so much for video stability.
A stick with a 1/4" screw sticking out and a rounded bottom will do for simple stationary pans.

Any good cheap editing softwares for importing/exporting videos to/from DiVinci Resolve?

>>2974693
>I assume you meant "should i just record everything through the t5i? or should I use the mic hooked up into the zoom h1?"

well i mean if i should just record everything using the zoom h1 as is with its own built in mic or use a different mic that is then plugged into the zoom h1 to record everything.

in other words, i guess what im really asking is if the zoom h1 mic is good enough?

sorry, i know these are dumb questions.

>>2974778
Depends on the situation.
For indoors, talking level volume the built in Zoom mic would be great, but anything outdoors or loud you would probably want something more robust.
Before you put down any cash though, obviously try out what you have access to first.
Put the Zoom in a room and blast music out of speakers and yell, and see how it handles it.

I have a film contest coming up in a few weeks, what are some of the best settings for video on Panasonic G7?

>>2974785
literally a dozen videos on Youtube.
Short answer: if you wanna edit, Cinelike D, -2 -3 -3 -2

>>2974769
Anything that can export an XML, EDL or AAF. I use Premiere, haven't tried anything else but I know FCP and Avid can

File: lettermangoat.png (183KB, 468x350px) Image search: [Google]

183KB, 468x350px

I had an idea for an online video series to help promote my local zoo. The basic idea is to interview a zookeeper with some of the zoo's educational animals, like Jack Hanna's appearances on Letterman and Johnny Carson. The zoo people I talked with liked the idea, now it's just a matter of planning and properly equipping myself.

What would be the essential gear to achieve decent production values? I'm thinking a daytime shoot (and probably do a bunch of short videos in one afternoon/evening) with a two-DSLR setup, one for wider shots and one for close-ups on the animals.

I know I'm not nearly prepared, with just a Nikon D3100 (doesn't even have an external microphone jack) and a couple of standard primes. I probably won't be the one to actually shoot it -- I have next to no video experience -- but I'd like to if I can.

>>2968374
Downscaling is really really good, especially in video use cases. A 0.5x0.5 downscale is also easy to do.

There's a whole bunch of reasons why the regular old input of 95% of video cameras looks crap on a pixel level. Inbetween demosaicing, lineskipping/pixel binning and codec softening you're loosing a whole lot of resolution captured by the sensor itself.

By sampling at 4k you more or less the same softness at the pixel level as you'd have at 1080p, depending on your camera's implementation. But when you downscale this you're squeezing in the high frequency information that was unsamplable by a 1x1 pixel from a 2x2 pixel area which was capable of sampling it back into a 1x1 pixel which can display it.

Tl;dr - Massively cuts down on artefacts, raises per pixel sharpness significantly beyond what a 1080p sensor readout can do alone.

>>2975347
External Sound.
Sound is really a massive Faktor in Video.
Get a Zoom or Tascam recorder

Hey guys, remember me, they grading Guy?
I turned my Experiment into a Video.
https://youtu.be/nCg4DwV2uN0
I am thinking about turning this into a regular series, since I can't find a lot of stuff to publish but I want a regular Content Output to keep my Profile up.
Any hints? (I know Most Software allows standardized presets, I don't Care, I use Blender and like playing with Curves)

File: 81HturKHOIL._SL1500_.jpg (253KB, 1214x1500px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 1214x1500px

Does anyone know about SDcards?
I want to get a couple for 4K video (GH4) and I am torn between the SanDisk Extreme (90Mbps) vs the SanDisk Extreme Pro (95Mbps).

I don't think that the £10 difference is worth it for the Pro ones but I want to know if 90Mbps is enough for 4K recording.

>>2975347
I would recommend going with 1 camera. 2 cameras requires more work, planning, cost and people. But it depends on how much of want to invest in the project.

2 cameras
Storage/power

17-55/24-70/24-105 + 70-200
or 24, 50, 100, 200 vintage nikkor primes (w adapter if needed). Benefits are longer focus throw and aperture ring, drawbacks are no electronic coupling
ND's
Polariser

Tripod
follow focus
If you want to move the camera:
Monitor
Stabilizer/gimbal/shoulder rig/glider

Reflectors/polyboards/bounce boards for daytime ext


Portable recorder
Shotgun w boom,zeppelin,deadcat
or lavaliers but you should be fine with just the shotgun

who are some good directors/cinematographers? Keeping FilmStruck for a month, pretty nice list. Hey are most color films shot on Kodak? And what's the color correction process like back then? Anyone know of a YouTube video that goes over it. Any wide angle (about 28mm) movie gems out there?

>>2975640
Yeah, I know sound will be a big deal, especially since the point of this will be talking about the animals.

>>2975728
The saving grace of this is that this wouldn't just be me doing it. This project would be for the newspaper I work at, working with our photo department. But I do want to be as involved in it as possible.

File: feeling.jpg (15KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 480x360px

I'm buying a new body for a video rig, but man I cant decide. I could get a pretty good deal of the BMPCC, 650€ (Lumix 6 14mm f/2.5 lens and 3 batteries included), used, but is it even worth considering anjavascript:;ymore? Sony A6300 is also tempting with it's small size and resolution possibilities. And Lumix GH4. And A7s.
Fuq, so many cameras.

>>2975920
If you're a filmmaker who genuinely cares about muh kinography then the BMPCC is by far the best choice. Otherwise, if you just want to use your camera for vlogs or marketing projects or such, the GH4 will do.

I have around 200€ to spend. What buy

So far I already own a pentax k-50 with 50mm 1.4f, kit lens, tamron 70-300mm, tripod, 2 lights, one headlight

>>2975701
For the codec in the GH4, yes either is enough. Hell even 60MB/s write speed is enough. The problem with 4k in DSLR's is that it takes a huge image and compresses it massively which soon enough you'll see if you do any gradient tests with the GH4.

Source: I have a GH4, but record into a Blackmagic monitor to get dat sweet ProRes422HQ that records 1080p at 3 times the speed the GH4 records 4K in camera. Think about that.

>>2976407
You already have a pretty decent set-up, not sure about what else you can buy for only 200.

>>2975920
Those all have distinct features. Do you even know what you need?

>>2976407
how are you liking the k-50?

File: 14324351_967602490017085_7949225479776528438_o.jpg (100KB, 1232x816px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 1232x816px

>>2976454
Videos shot with it are decent at best but photos are good.
In camera editing is solid.

It has sustained quite the abuse (f.e. a spear thrown right at it) with only very superficial damage, I used it in rain and in water fights. Other cameras would long be dead in my hands

>>2975643
noone so far?

>>2975735
>who are some good directors/cinematographers?
Start reading about Roger Deakins like a basic bitch

>Hey are most color films shot on Kodak? And what's the color correction process like back then?
Yes, Kodak was (and FWIW remains) the king of motion picture film. We used to be able to get a discount by hinting to the Kodak sales rep that we might shoot Fuji instead.

Color correction was weird. Google "printer lights". I never actually did an all film post production, but read alot about it. Today, movies shot on film are scanned digitally for editing and exhibition.

>Any wide angle (about 28mm) movie gems out there?
Few movies shoot strictly on one focal length. We use different lenses for different shots and effects. Terry Gilliam loves wide lenses (more like 12mm!) and has some very enjoyable films in his catalogue.

File: LUMIX-Digital-Camera-DMC-FZ300.jpg (38KB, 605x403px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 605x403px

Poorfag here who wants his first proper dslr/mirrorless camera for video.

Both the g7 and FZ300 are now 500 bucks...at that price range, is there anything better than these 2 options? what are your thoughts?

pic related, the FZ300

>>2976609
I'd get the g7 based only on the fact that you can change the lens, I was on the same dilemma some weeks ago but convinced my boss to give more money for the g85

>>2976618
>convinced my boss
just call her mom, bud

>>2976609
For Just 200-300 more you can get a G85 which has IBIS and weather sealing.
Get a cheack Vintage lens or the Pana 25mm 1.7 as a cheap Starter lens

>>2975959
Where does the a7s/ii fit into this scheme?

>>2976609
>actually indecisive between a G7 and a p.o.s. fixed lens point and shoot
Anon, unless if you stumble upon a really cheap BMPCC being sold on Ebay, the G7 is by far the best option in that price range.

doing color correction across different scenes with different light? what is high budget production doing differently than a small budget independent film prod

>>2975920
>>2975959
>>2976609
>>2976817

Remember, the BMPCC is a huge pain in the ass unless you have a full rig with eyepiece and wide ass lenses/speedbooster. And don't mind a ton of color grading (I personally don't but a lot of indie directors don't have time for that/don't know enough to not fuck it up).

So I'm looking to create an audio series (I know this is video general, but my question pertains to both) and I need some help finding a particular sound up.

You see this all the time in war movies or scenes that show a lot of distraction:

>Tons of background noise
>Focus in on main character, maybe even zooming in on face
>Background noise slowly crescendo
>Eventually reaching a ringing noise
>Quick cut where music goes back to normal, signifying the main character regaining focus in the difficult situation

I need examples of this. Anyone know specific clips?

Thaaaaaaaaanks.

File: 1459469249242.png (219KB, 540x600px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 540x600px

>>2976857
>Eventually reaching a ringing noise

>>2976781
Wherever you want it to. Anon is full of shit.

>>2976828
>high budget production
RAW workflow. The director and possibly the cinematographer sit in a dedicated color suite with top of the line calibrated displays, supervising an experienced colorist. The cinematographer often shoots test charts on set to provide a reference for creative decisions. The budget and schedule may allow time for things like changing the color of a prop or making broad creative decisions (such as making all the greens feel like Velvia film stock from the 90's, or making a flashback sequence look like 1950's technicolor). Because they had a lighting crew and solid technicians, less work is needed to make lighting look consistent (though even big budget shows occasionally have to make a shot taken at dusk match with earlier footage).

>indie film
Could be as modest as the director/editor trying to make dark shots useable while hunched over his macbook, using the shitty sliders in his free editing software.

>>2976781
I worked in television production this summer, studios are slowly switching to using the a7sii.

The camera workers all agree that it's where companies are headed. You get great video quality at a fraction of the cost of the huge cameras. The only downside is the battery life, but that can be mitigated easily.

For low light shoots, they only bring the a7sii, and eventually all cameras will be swapped for them.

>>2976889
I work in film and television full time and you're full of shit.

I mean you're correct that there'll be a trend towards smaller, cheaper camera bodies on more shows (and hopefully professional ergonomics will likewise become cheaper). But that's been happening since the 5Dmk2 came out.

>>2976781
>but what about my personal favourite brand, why aren't you talking about it?
>>2976889
>don't worry young sir, I can quite assure you that your favourite brand is the best that ever was and ever will be

And this is why people hate Sonygger Shills and expect them behind every post.

>>2976929
Bruh, say what you want, but I've actually had first hand experience with this. This scenario isn't a hypothetical "totally bro these will revolutionize the game" statement. I have witnessed the change to smaller cameras to work in tight quarters for low light shoots.

The a7sii is what is being used for that job, and their cheaper price (compared to cinema cameras) is extremely attractive to media companies.

I heard that for filmmaking, you usually don't want a lens with an f-number above 4.0. Can someone explain why that is? I know what the f-number is, but I don't really understand how it relates to things like picture quality.

>>2977130
Because lenses that can be Sharp wide Open have become cheaper these Days, people have started to believe that The only way to get background Separation is through bokeh/shallow depth of field. And since to achieve that can be expensive, people have come to associate shallow DoF with "professional"
It's an easy way if you got the gear, but you can Just as Well shoot Films on 16mm-like formats. But People like Quentin Tarantino have created a cult out of 70mm so now every filmschool Student sucks bokeh dick.

>>2976857
last series of GoT had this in the battle scene in battle of the bastards
pretty sure saving private ryan has a couple of moments like this

CoD4 also has this if videogames work for you

>>2976889
Bullshit
Overheating issues stop the camera from being used for a prolonged period of time
Unless you only work on shows that are basically nighttime wildlife documentaries, it's more common to just properly light the set rather than use a small camera with a high ISO

>>2977200
>But People like Quentin Tarantino have created a cult out of 70mm so now every filmschool Student sucks bokeh dick.
>implying filmschool students haven't been sucking bokeh dick since the start of the DSLR revolution

Unnecessary over-the-top bokeh has been the calling card of amateurish productions for at least the last 5 years and H8ful only came out last year

File: likecrazy-image.jpg (153KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1920x1080px

>>2977200
>>2977283

It used to be worse.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	QuickTime 7.6.6
Image-Specific Properties:
Pixel Composition	RGB
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2010:12:06 15:47:29
Image Width	1920
Image Height	1080

File: IMGP5623.jpg (363KB, 2464x1632px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 2464x1632px

>>2977283
>>2977200
Sometimes bokeh is nessecary though..
I do plenty of low light shots and I dont have a Sony a7s or something of that caliber

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	PENTAX
Camera Model	PENTAX K-50
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.7 (Windows)
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	75 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016:12:04 22:58:10
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Exposure Bias	1 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	50.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Low
Sharpness	Soft
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

What's the best camera for shooting dark skin? Preferably something 100 dollars or less.

>>2977538
>>2977538
Nigga what?
I have to sort just how many different "nigga what?"s this Post is giving me!
First: why the flying fuck Dark Skin?
Second: what Kind of camera do you THINK goes for under $100?
Third: what Kind of answer were you hoping to get here with that question? Where do you think We are?

>>2977547
>why the flying fuck Dark Skin?
Cause white people are ugly and I don't want to make movies with them.
>what Kind of answer were you hoping to get here with that question? Where do you think We are?
Didn't think about it, I need a good video camera.

>>2977553
Then Go steal some japanese tourist's camera on the street.
Better and cheaper than anything you could afford on welfare!

>>2977554
(you)

>>2977130
Low f-stop is an easy way to achieve background separation, and prosumerfags are constantly trying to make their wedding videos and corporate training videos look like a mass market film.

Does anyone else have trouble either finding people or working with people. Related story.
>"Hey son wanna make some money"
>ohgod.jpeg
>go shoot orchestra performance
>tell him I need at least two pair of hands but no one will do it from school
>"Yeah don't worry I'll be by the camera the whole time"
>"I took a class on this so I'm pretty good at zooms"
>"What's focus"
>This continues for hours
>tell him just not to touch it unless something goes wrong
>leave to go shoot on stage
>something does go wrong
>camera turns off
>dad not there
>whatdo
>freak out
>tell him about it
>"That's just the way the world works kiddo"
>This project is due in a week

So I'm taking a road trip with a group of friends sometime soon and I want to record all jokes and fun we'll be having during the car ride. I was wondering what kind of setup should I be looking at to record eveyone and still have decent audio. I was thinking maybe getting a gopro and setting up a rig with maybe a rode minimicro, I was wondering if anyone else had any suggestions.

>>2978300
The gopro quality actually isn't that good. If you can help it get something more dedicated like a DSLR or mirrorless with a very wide lens. The Rode video mics are actually pretty good for their price so you could do that and it's got some reusability for other projects later down the line. If you can't afford it then I wouldn't try to rent considering this is an experimental vlog sort of thing and not an actual production where you'll get money back. My recommendations.
Cannon EOS T series (T3i or T5i is good)
Cannon F/4.5 10-18mm
Rode Videomic Shotgun

I assume this is just going to be a "dumb buddies do dumb things" kind of video, but I wish you the best in how it works out. Make sure to post it in a thread later so we can see how well the advice works for you.

>>2978300
Geht something with a an articulateable screen and mic Jack.

>>2978424
>>2978300
Probably gonna end in a G7 or G6, depending on whether you want 4K.
Dunno what Canon Models have articulating screens.

Okay, I just got a steadicam for my blackmagic, managed to balance it roughly in about 20 minutes. Any tips for using this thing in the field? How do you minimize horizontal drifting? Also is there any way I can alleviate the strain on my wrists apart from buying a arm/body brace?

>>2978533
Answer to the first question is basically 'git gud', that is, practise around your house until you feel comfortable.
Answer to the second question is no, you won't be able to run it for too long without an articulated arm. Unless you go to the gym.

>>2977282
I'm with this guy. I don't know any decent place making fiction on any kind of budget that would shoot on an A7S2 when it's so incredibly cheap to rent proper cameras (relative to film budgets in general, including shorts). Why would you want a bad codec, gimped, low-mbps 4k and crummy 8-bit compression on a picture that you HAVE to grade over spending a minimal amount of money to get a decent piece of kit.

>>2978568
Thanks m8. Any idea about the horizontal drifting?

>>2978573
As I said, practice makes perfect. You need to learn how much pressure to apply with your off-hand to balance out any drifting that might be going on without fucking the balance. There's no magical solution to it sadly. Well, also making sure you've got it very well balanced, especially weight-distribution-wise

I'm looking for a pair of inexpensive LED panels, mostly for shooting tabletop review videos. (Mostly pocketknives, which have a lot of shiny bits and therefore need a decently large and soft light source.) I'm looking to spend under $200, but could probably stretch to $300-ish if they're more versatile, ie large and powerful enough for talking head segments or maybe even still portraiture.

I've been doing still flash work for a long time, so I have plenty of stands, modifiers, a light tent, etc, and don't need a full kit with all of those things. If it matters, the main camera I'll be using is a Canon XA20.

Are there any particularly good panels in this range or is it all identical chinkshit?

>>2979402
I recently used the Camtree 600 Studio LED's on a short film and was quite happy with them. Very strong, they take direct power or v-lock batteries. But you need to put some diffusion on them, as with all LED's. They're listed at £500 on Amazon UK, so they're just a little more expensive than what you're asking. If i had money to spend right now i'd get those.

>>2979600
Forgot to say, this is 500 for 2 of them, with stands and accessories.

>>2979402
If you're mainly shooting static objects, you should consider a couple cheap paper lanterns and sockets from Ikea.

>>2979600
Those look nice but they seem to sell for about $850 a pair in the US, and that's almost 3x my budget.

>>2979845
I've been down that road before and it's not one I'd like to repeat.

Aside from the hassle and lack of portability of a jury-rigged setup like that, I also don't trust that they'll be even enough for what I need or that I can get proper color out of them. They're also quite obstructive, and I need to be able to pick stuff up and manipulate it in my working area.

>>2979402
>>2980026
What' the reason you want LEDs? In that price range you'd get more light w better color quality with fluorescent or tungsten light. Since it sounds like you'll be shooting indoors in a controlled light environment, and already have modifiers and diffusion, I'd rather go that route.

>>2980083
They're compact and run cool, and for the scale I'm working at an LED panel is soft enough to use without a modifier. I live in a studio apartment and space is pretty limited, and with small LED panels I can put them just out of the frame and have good light for the kinds of videos I'm doing. With tungsten or flouro I absolutely have to use softboxes or umbrellas, which means more space, bigger stands, and having to work uncomfortably close to hot lights.

LEDs also give me power control, which is important when working with small shiny objects where I have to keep the light source close to minimize unwanted reflections, and the ability to adjust color temperature on some could be quite helpful as well.

Another big thing is that LEDs are much more practical for battery use. Reviews are my main priority right now, but I occasionally get asked to do an interview or talking head video (for example I've done some BTS stuff for independent film production), and other times I want to appear on camera myself, and it'd be very useful to be able to bring along a couple of wireless LED panels instead of having to set up a whole hot light rig that needs wall power.

>>2980094
Makes sense.

If you're trying to spend only 200 dollars, you can't expect top quality. But there's a brand called Neewer that seems to have decent reviews, and they're closer to your price point.

If they're a bit green or magenta, get some 1/8 +/- color correction gel. But I bet they'll be fine for your purposes.

>>2980129
Yeah, the Neewers were what I've been seeing. I kinda figured that at the $200-300 range it'd all be pretty much the same, but it doesn't hurt to ask.

Gels and stuff are easy, at least, because I live like 10 minutes from a major studio supplier (FilmTools). I just can't come anywhere close to affording most of the actual lights they sell, since they mostly sell professional gear that costs thousands for a basic setup.

>>2967761
Where is a good website to get free stock sound effects? I'm creating a podcast series and would love to have some sounds to increase my listener's immersion.

File: tv_error.png (38KB, 367x358px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 367x358px

Really at a shitty internship atm.Doing a diploma in broadcasting and have done all of my theory so I'm out there getting work experience and have been thru 2 internship were I got real work in the skill/role I applied for,but this is my final intern and its quite frustrating without sounding entitled.

>Arrived there with a contract signed at an agreed amount for stipend-turns out I'm not receiving even half of that,and that's after 2 months of fighting them.Can barely cover commuting expenses

>No defined role as expected but 90% duties/tasks are not related to film/TV

>Erratic and temperate bosses who dont offer clear information for whichever task they task you to

>don't call me by name and once when a client arrived when I told them my name get pissy as to why I act as if they don't know it (?)

>Some days have nothing to do and when request to learn certain software get sent on errands

>Some days I'm a construction worker some other days I'm dropping off the bosses kid at her boyfriend and picking her up afterwards or doing house groceries

.>Production days, shuffle and help every department which is getting paid handsomely end up getting blamed after freelancers leave for any mistakes

>Boss lost a set of equipment in another city on the week I arrived and asks me why its lost

>when I get chance to shoot with them heir literally faulty camcorder has focus/lens issues which I've informed them of multiple times and has been to repairs those times got blamed again for soft footage which an external freelancer also made them aware of

This local industry is small and these guys are known players,i realised the long hrs and industry shit that goes on but its honestly been soul sucking being here and being too broke to be held by a big surety makes shit even more miserable.Sorry for making this my blog but here's an account from someone who's not entirely useless to work processionally.make headway the right people kids

>>2980174
I personally like commons.wikimedia.org

mainly because no worries about licensing.

>>2980203
Well, you think you would behave differently when you would be in the situation of running a company. You think you would respect people more and listen and stuff. But you won't. In the process of establishing you learn quickly to not care about people, otherwise you run out of business. That is how it works. When you'll see it from the other side, you'll understand.
This is mainly because people are incompetent. The most of them. But you don't have the time to assemble the rare optimal team of real high professionals. Things must be done. So you take the work force you get and then you have to develop an attitude to get them to work. .. Dude, most of your company's intras aren't even able to properly make coffee.

This is what differs high-tier companies from the middle-class. The middle-class is the worst. But to be fair they have to deal with constant resource issues, while the big players can afford to for example acquire the perfect team.

Try to get out of the middle-class as soon as possible. Good work and high innivation is only found in either the very large players or the very unknown small ones. (Fun fact: it's evident that cooperations are hardly made among big players and the middle-class, but mostly among big players and very small ones. Imho because also the big players know about the shit attitude of the middles and try to avoid them where possible.)

>>2980343
Sorry to be blunt but youre full oft shit.

>>2980203
Communications is key. Put Costa in relation and usw big words. Make your goals your Bosse goals. Make sure he understands why this simple matter is oft immediate need.
Built trust

>>2980356
middle-class pleb. q.e.d..

File: 0f6.jpg (372KB, 1803x1351px) Image search: [Google]

372KB, 1803x1351px

Where to download motion graphics / flat design animation sound effects?

Tried everywhere but cannot find any downloads or torrents of such sound effects.

Looking for something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vaGG_aYMQ0

Could anyone help a poorfag student out
I can give health & fitness advice in return if you want

Are there any budget recorders that don't have a built in mic? It seems like the Tascam DR-05 or Zoom H1 are the recommended ones but other people recommended getting the DR-40 cause of XLR. Is it really worth it? I'm kinda on a budget of $50 or less.

>>2980683
XLR will have a lot of advantages down the line.
But for XLR to pay off you should also have XLR-microphones.
Some Recorders have XLR-inputs that can also take standard 5,6mm plugs, like the H4n.
The budget options are fine for the beginning.

Generally, what many people forget is that "budgeting" means not just buying the cheapest single gear NOW, but what will save you most down the line.
So make a roadmap where you want to be in 1 year in terms of gear and plan accordingly.

>>2980356
Thanks lad gonna take it on the chin and use this as bootcamp
>>2980343
I understand that too,I don't even make the coffee and the office is 10-15people.A big part of me is really unhappy with the culture and atmosphere there desu and I get your other points too.as I'd said im taking this exp as a grinding bootcamp

>>2980793
>>2980683
The 1/4" plug on the h4n is unbalanced line level, won't work properly with microphones.

>>2967909
>can I force manual control in another app
yeah, every android phone should be able to do this.

Which camera under $2000 has the most soulful video look

>>2975920
>Rollei Wildcat Mini stabilizer
bmpcc is great for 30 minutes

>>2981984
>the most soulful video look
i-is this a troll?

>>2982038
yes. digital has no soul in contrast to film.

>>2982045
Does digital not also steal the souls of those whose image it captures?
Wow, technology sure has come far

>>2980793
>>2981504
Probably won't need XLR for a few years so I think 3.5mm should be fine enough. Just curious, how bad are cheap audio recorders like a Sony PX333 when paired with a nice mic? Is it a "bottleneck"?

>>2981984
Get at GH4 + blackmagic video assist, about 2k altogether and you get great video out of it.

File: tv1308296083_616x350.jpg (26KB, 616x350px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 616x350px

>be in basement
>want to try some horror-type camera moves
>up the shutter speed for the jittery feel
>playback video on PC
>the exposure does some 'wavy' bottom-to-top motion to the beige walls

What went wrong?

>>2983143
rolling shutter?

>>2983143
what lighting in the basement?

>>2983149
>>2983156
>less or 50 shutter speed all is good
>60, 80 waves
>100 good again
>over 100 unusable footage, waves get more noticeable the more you up the speed

Must be rolling shutter. It has those energy saving house light bulbs. White light.

>>2983149
>>2983160
No, it's not rolling shutter. I am talking about waves of exposure difference.

Why do you buy so expensive cameras when you have no fucking talent?

File: 2.jpg (60KB, 800x501px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 800x501px

>>2983143
143 here.
THIS is what I see. lines like those (with very soft edges though , multiple ones and they move from bottom to top! But on shutter speed 100 they go away.

File: focal-plane-shutter-definition-photography-i1.jpg (82KB, 500x262px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x262px

>>2983168

>>2983143
>>2983168
you need flicker free ballasts for the fluorescent lights or that shit will happen

>>2983170
This is true. Didn't think about that.

>>2983171
There it is. It's florescent light banding. Not the camera. Feels relieving.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3920475

>>2983143
>>2983160
Some lights aren't constant, they pulse around 50 times a second (give or take) to save energy
It's useful cause it lets you know if your shutter speed is off

You can either buy new bulbs, or just change it to 1/100 of a sec
Considering the difference between 1/50th and 1/60th isn't noticeable at all (assuming 24fps), I'd recommend just going with 1/100 for that effect
Though really I'd recommend not going for the effect since 24fps already creates jittery movement but that's a different argument

File: nat1480680090723m.jpg (98KB, 1024x514px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 1024x514px

Another thing that I can't find a def answer is
Mp4 (lcrm) or mov? I don't have other recording options.

>>2983252
1/100 seems enough for my needs. So I ll be alright.

>>2983268
Whichever gives higher bitrate. Copy and check with Mediainfo lite

http://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/mediainfo_lite.html

>>2983252
>to save energy
No, because theyre AC driven. AC has some Basic advantages besides a slightly lower energy consumption.

I'm on the look for a stereo mic.
Nothing fancy, just something good enough for the casual shooter.

Already have a sennheiser me66.

Premiere Pro question here. Is there a shortcut option for "Sync Lock" in any more recent versions? Can't find it in CS6. Also any way to toggle sync lock for all tracks at once?

>>2983598
Zoom H1. you can either record directly with the device or plug a 3,5mm cable from the headphone jack into the microphone jack of your camera. the latter option will have a bit less dynamic but it'll be alright.
Alternatively, look into Rode's line

>>2983693
Oh, this is real nice!

Just what I need and more, thanks anon!

>>2968185
For low light get a sony mirrorless
if low light is not a priority get a g85 or gx8

File: Blackmagic-Pocket-Cinema-Camera.jpg (149KB, 1500x854px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1500x854px

newfag here.
how is pic related?
I want to use it with old vintage C Mount lenses.
good or not?

>>2983723
kill yourself

>>2983731
I'm already working on it

>>2983723
It has like a 30 minute battery life and you need a ton of equipment to make it work even barely. so unless you are planning on sinking three times the price of the camera into gear, stay away. Get a used GH4 instead or a G85 if you need the IBIS.

>>2983738
thanks

>>2967763
>Zerkalo
Good taste my man

Well, one of the aspects of Tarkovsky's style that I've noticed lends so well to, as you put it, "arthouse-ish surrealism" is the contrast of movement. In speed, in direction, in pan/zoom vs. scene focus. The scene you just posted is textbook for all of these aspects. Even in just that second-long .gif, you've got crazy levels of foreground vs. background:
>a man sprinting with the pan vs. a motionless figure
>slow rhythm of the rope+bucket vs. the raging fire
>side-to-side pendulum of rope+bucket (once again, with the pan) vs. the FIRE RISING

What the .gif doesn't show is the start of the shot (great oner btw) of the camera panning painfully slowly left as everybody's freaking the fuck out. You've got no idea why, but you're just stuck there, unable to do anything about it, completely helpless. For the start (if I remember correctly), the camera is even panning out, showing the empty inside of the main house when everybody is shouting and running outside, completely away from where the camera is focused. Really memorable scene, for good reason.

I plan on building my own shoulder rig for my GH3. What are the diameter and spacing of the two rods I see commonly built into these rigs sold online?

>>2984049
They're called 15mm rails and you can buy stuff for them everywhere, no need to know technicals. But if you really need to know, I guess you're fucked because I can't find a standard or norm anywhere.

I also again noticed how fucking expensive they are. a shoulder support for 450$, a mounting base for 550$
What the hell?

>>2984049
the diameter is 15mm (outside). the spacing is 6cm (center to center).

>>2984090

this is why you see so many 0 budget guys using homemade rigs

>>2972998
thank you for this post

>>2984090
>>2984109
Just buy your rigs from Korea for half the cost. Ginirigs was the king of cheap, decent aluminum rigs since 2010 or so.

File: file.png (168KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 512x512px

Avid Media Composer or Premier Pro?

>>2984925
neither

>>2985007
great suggestion

>>2984925
It's personal preference
Avid is the professional standard, but it's on its way out
It's also considerably cheaper than an adobe subscription if that's relevant to you

pp just works very smoothly for the most part though

>>2984744
I just dont see how ginrigs is king of cheap when they charge $300 for an "all-DSLR" cage while smallrigs asks $100-150 for camera-specific cages.
Actually, the cheapest ginrigs have starts at $130 for a bmpcc

File: canondsc04673.jpg (61KB, 620x427px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 620x427px

I'm switching brands to Canon because I'm interested in shooting more (quality) videos. I'm just starting out researching what's what in Canon's gear. Would really appreciate some advice and tips from Canon users. Full-frame is sadly out of the question and I had my eyes on D70 right now.

>>2985320
Get magic lantern
Get the 18-35mm 1.8 or one of the 18-50mm 2.8. They are parfocal, constant aperture and video stabilized

>>2985320
I have a 70D
Autofocus is great

But you're limited to 30fps at 1080
And you can't take timelapses
If you can afford it, the 80d is just enough better that it's probably worth it

Hello,

I have the video tripod MVK500AM compatible for bowls 60mm but is it possible to "cheat" by putting a fluid head with bowl 75mm on it? Like the MVH502A.

Thanks.

File: question.jpg (19KB, 296x320px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 296x320px

Weird question:
I uploaded a video with music from 1886 from a classical composer. The music is just in the background, the video is very short.
I downloaded the file from a public domain website.
Still I got a copyright claim. Where can I find out whether I can use the video for monetization?
The music is "the aquarium" by Camille Saint-Saens

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Photographer	Miyomo
Image-Specific Properties:

>>2985516
Nevermind just figured it out, it was about the recording.
However, now I wanna know where I can get public domain versions of classical pieces.

>>2985522
with difficulty
alternatively, you can record your own

Is the a6300 a bad buy for a semi-pro video rig? Mostly going to shoot commercial videos, interviews and documentary style inserts, which I have previously done with an rented 5D mark III, but 4k is starting to become a must as I'm getting more and more work.

>>2985150
Indeed. You just don't know yet.

>>2985394
no. bowl adapters do exist tho, but I think you only can adapt a smaller ball to a bigger bowl, not the other way round.

>>2985522
there are some projects for fr public domain classical music recirdings. open golberg variations for example.
pro-tipp: search for recordings from military orchestras. in muh usa they have to publish everything they record as public domain.

File: Number one butt.gif (2MB, 383x302px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 383x302px

>>2985984
that's a real nice tip, thanks!

I'm in the search for my first camera for video and i have two options:
>Canon T5i with Magic Lantern
>Panasonic GH3 hacked
What should i go with?

>>2986056
shit i'm doing some research and apparently there's no hacking for the GH3.
I guess the Canon with ML is better then? Zebras and ghost images are really useful.

>>2986066
Panasonic has Zebras and Blinkies by default.
Panasonic is the cheapest way to get 4k and weather sealing though.

>>2986056
My university has 700Ds (the T5i outside of the US) as standard cameras for reporting and student projects.
I used one once and it felt like a cheap box of plastic. The burstrate is horrible, the AF is slow and bad, the ergonomics are horrible.
I know with ML it will prolly be a decent videocamera, but just the possibility to use something with a better built to it is worth it in my opinion. Software cant fix everything, but just working the camera and using the buttons already feels like you're peeling away the finish. Also the button-layout is bad as well.
My suggestions would be to save up more money either way, no matter if you're getting Sony, Canon or Lumix. At least a 70D or a used GH4. The built quality does matter.

>>2986056
Source on the GH3 hack?

>>2986105
>GH3
>4K
nah
But does the GH3 have zebras then? I didn't saw anyone talk about that on reviews.
>>2986160
I live in Brazil, an A6300 costs 2080 US Dollars for the cheapest ones. It's either the T5i or the GH3.

>>2986233
doesn't have zebras.
The T5i is really low build quality. I urge you to try to upgrade to a 60D or 70D.
The GH3 does not have zebras, but Weather sealing.
I use a G7 and know how important zebras/blinkies can be but don't go down the road and buy something that will drop and break the first chance it gets.
Have you tried importing from ireland via ebay?

where can I find some little assignments or even footage to train my editing skillz on Premiere?

>>2986469
>Have you tried importing from ireland via ebay?
taxes and waiting times make it not worth either way
i was checking on used 60D's but ends up i'm getting it as a gift anyways and my father prefers to buy that shit new on store, i did sent him some 60D's on the town he's travelling atm but i don't think it's going to happen.
>tfw my Nikon F2 from the 70's is gonna last more than my dSLR

Ok i managed to scope an used 60D instead of the T5i, and it comes with a 50, a LED, a backpack, battery grip, 2 batteries and shit.
I guess it's better than the T5i given the APS-C canon sensors didn't evolve at all during the timespan.
Gonna use it without Magic Lantern for a while but eventually i'll put it in. Did anyone ever bricked a camera with ML?

>>2987264
for questions such as this best ask the ML forums. This is kind of a small sample size here.
Battery grip is mighty fine, sounds like a decent deal you got there.
If by "50" you mean 50mm lens, good for you, it will last you some time.
Your next step would be setting up a budget.
I'd go down in this order:
>tripod
>on-camera microphone
>external audio recorder
>a lens that you can use for 95% of situations
>a lavalier microphone
>a boompole (look into DIY projects)
The standard "super for video" lens is one of the 2.8 18-50/55mm or the 1.8 18-35mm so that should be on there somewhere.
Stick to that plan and dont get tempted by "oh that looks awesome, let's get that next!" I spend half a year and almost €600 (very much for my tight budget) just buying stuff I never use or dont need.
Also, if you can borrow any of these for a while, that point can go down further the budget list. I borrowed my dad's old tripod for like 3 months, which allowed me to save up more for a better one while already gathering experience.

>>2987309
>tripod
already have
>on-camera microphone
gonna sell my old Sony A-mount 50mm and get a rode videomic
>a lens that you can use for 95% of situations
this will take a while, maybe if i sell my old body or my Nikon F2 but i'm not going to sell the F2
>a lavalier microphone
if i have money left from the rode
>a boompole (look into DIY projects)
yeah maybe
The thing is i usually shoot my stuff with friends and i already have some friends that help me doing off-camera audio recording
I'm gonna make a DIY glidecam first or buy one cheap after getting the boom.

>>2967795
no, never go for the FS7 if you're shooting narrative. skintones are green and it's just very frustrating to grade. If you're willing to spend some serious cash on a camera (10-15k) the only real option is RED.

File: 3f5795ea558cbbc3b49be63bc1c08e1c.png (31KB, 90x122px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 90x122px

Looking for opinions and tips.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jlSKmzVAb8

>>2988058
It's boring, cut faster, cut more, change the music, Pink Floyd isn't fit for it.

So I'm thinking about investing in a high-end camera and I'm not sure what to go with. I was almost 100% on the Scarlet-W but I've just been offered an Alexa classic for $15,000 and I'm having a hard time deciding.

I love Arri's color but the Dragon sensor is great too and the Scarlet is 4K capable. What should I do?

>>2987264
It's pretty hard to brick a camera with ML as long as you can follow instructions.

>>2988121
get a mememagic

>>2985947
nop, it's a very nice camera for interviews only, once you go handheld boom: rolling shitter

Right now I have a 70D and my favorite lens is a 24mm pancake lens (which equates to 39mm rounded up with the crop factor of 1.62)

In the future I might buy a sigma 30mm lens, is that probably the closest I will get to 50mm on this camera?

Even further in the future I might get a new camera, either a 6DmkII (depending on its specs), A7SII, or GH5 (depending on its specs). I understand the 6D line is fullframe, so is the A7SII, but the GH5 is M43. I was reading that M43 has a 2.0 crop factor, so using a 25mm lens gives you 50mm; but in 4K mode on the GH4 it's a 2.3 crop factor. I wonder if the GH5 will have that same crop factor in 4K mode or if it will allow the user to record 10-bit in 1080p.

So how does a speedbooster work? Does it increase the maximum aperture (like 2.8 to 2)? Does it change the focal length? Would my 24mm lens come out to 48mm on a GH2/3/4/5?

What kind of stuff do yall shoot? Anyone actually making short films?

>>2988594
The speedbooster applies a cropfactor below 1 to the lens. It DOESNT increase aperture but it focuses the light in a tighter area (your Sensor).
You get more light so it's brighter and you also get light from a wider Angle so the Background seperation/blur increased as Well.

As of the 4k crop on the GH5. I am pretty sure that they announced internal 6k Recording downsampled to 4k, which the GH4 DIDNT do, so i think it will be cropless since they use the full width of the Sensor.
I own the G7 and it applies the crop only in 4k and Not HD or FHD.

>>2988627
I do field recording/reporting to get resume Material for general journalistic/communication work once I'm out of College.

Anyone get any fun christmas loot?
Got a handle, LED lights and a zoom h1 here

>>2989598
Got a few SD cards and a battery grip for my a6000

>>2989598
I just ruined the thread on the screwhole on my old h1 so be gentle.
I got a JB Hifi gift card i'll probably put towards camera crap.

So not so much about /vid/ itself but does anyone have a collection of stills from movies and the focal length and lighting they're using? Maybe a book or documentary or something.

Especially on 2.39 compositions, I have a hard time figuring out what focal lengths they're using.

>>2989957
Most professional cameras use a super35mm crop sensor. The most common focal lengths are 28mm, 35mm, 50mm and 75/80mm

Use the one that looks right for what you want

>record 20min~ of material during christmas gift opening
>120fps because all the gifts was for the small kids so wanted to catch their movements
>now when I'm back home looking at the material I notice that the indoor lights caused massive flickering

I forgot to test the environment first.. Fuck me.

>>2989957
some storyboards can tell you that

How is the GH7 ? Any users here ? I'm interested in getting one, my 7D is getting old, and the GH7 seems like a good camera.

>>2990329
what brand? because it looks like you mean Lumix
there is no Lumix GH7.
there's a G7, a GX7, a GH4 and a GH5. the first three are obsolete and the last is scheduled for a April-May release

Someone wants me to record some video/interview type stuff next month, I told him I dont have any real video equipment but Im willing to throw stuff together. He said he would buy a microphone for me I just need to pick one.

My camera is a Fujifilm X-T1, not great for video I know but better than a lot of things. The fuji microphone seems to be shit, so Im thinking of getting a Rhod.

Can anyone recc me an onboard shotgun mic around $100 that will work with the X-T1?

>>2990379
>>2990379
Rode's VideoMicGo or Micro.
But are you Sure you can use a shotgun for Interviews? The Zoom H1 is also a decent Mic, more of an environment Mic. It can either Record in its own or you can Plug a 3,5mm directly from the headphones Jack to the microphone Jack of your camera. The quality will be a Bit worse but barely noticeable.

>>2990414
Its going to be outside in the desert outside Las Vegas (possibly with gunfire in background) with some short informal interview type clips and "candid"
footage where I just record conversation/banter.

Rode VideoMic seems to be the best pick so far. Found one on amazon that comes with a french tickler wind-blocker.

At the moment my concern is: does the fuji's built in pre-amp suck dick so much in that audio capture will always be horrible unless I try to get a pre-amp.

>>2990421
Going to SHOT, I take it? I'm kinda jelly.

I like the Zoom H1 for that kind of stuff too. In addition to using it as an on-camera mic, you can also plug a cheap lav mic into it and have a decent solution for interviews.

Personally I'd avoid the VideoMic, I had the first-gen version for a while and it was garbage. Newer models might be better but I don't trust any mic that plugs into a minijack and relies on the camera's preamps.

>>2990450
How do you use the H1 as an oncamera mic? I can only find pics of it being a handheld recorder, which wouldnt be good for what I need :/

>>2990453
get a shoe to 3.5mm adaptor and plonk it on the top
you can either sync the audio with the video in post or listen to
>>2990414
>Plug a 3,5mm directly from the headphones Jack to the microphone Jack of your camera

>>2990625
watch out for lens noise, though
and the build quality on the h1 isn't great
>>2989889
i busted the threading on the screw mount :(

>>2990453
LITERALLY explained it in this Post
>>2990414
Take a 3,5mm Extension cable and Plug it from the headphones out of the Zoom into the microphone in of your camera.
The Quality will be a tiny Bit worse (you'll lose Bass) than if you record directly in the device but it will die just fine if you dont want to fiddle with 2 different files in post.

Get/make a shockmount for it, the Zoom picks up a lot of contact noise, even the rattling of the sliders on the back. Just get a length of PVC pice and some rubber bands and a coldshoe foot or a 3/8" threading and a cheap tilthead from eBay and you got something as good as the $35 things from Amazon.
One DIY Manual online Even Just Cuts a loop out of a Tennis Ball and puts screws in it.

Can indeed confirm that Rode's newer Models are way better.

>>2990453
sync the audio in post, trust

Quick question. How did they get such a good image in low light in this video:
https://vimeo.com/197084032 ?

The opening shot looks like it'd be done with the Olympus 9-18mm f4-5.6

My room with the light on is too dark for my bmpcc when I have a 14-45 3.5-5.6 wide open. So what am I missing /vid/? Why can't I get these beautiful crisp low light images?

Posted in another thread but no replys pls hlp

Only have $425 AUD and am looking into some decent DSLRs for film making. I've done a fair bit of film making in the past with Canon EOS 100Ds.

But in truth, I'm not sure what to look for when it comes to DSLRs for film making.

If there are no suggestions for DSLRs, are there any pointers as to what to look for in a DSLR for footage?

>>2990673
That's not as low-light as you think would be my guess
Create bright ambient light, then make the light fixtures in the shot really over-the-top bright to create those harsh shadows and make it seem like they're lighting the scene

There are probably diffused lights behind the camera and above, I reckon
Pay attention to the shadows and you can see it's not only lit by the lights in the frame

>>2990685
>Only have $425 AUD
I have no idea what that is in real money
But as a starter, I always recommend a canon 600d (also known as a t3i)
>interchangeable lenses
>ef mount
>mic jack
>magic lantern support

Go second-hand on ebay. If you have any money left over, invest in a tripod and a microphone

File: Sony-Vegas-Pro-Logo.png (264KB, 720x720px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 720x720px

I know this isn't related in any way to Photoshop and Graphic Design, but, i still wan't to ask.

I've been trying to do an effect like this in Sony Vegas 13, but i can't and i don't know how to do it, so i'm just gonna' ask for some help.
How do i stretch an image like this? I've been trying to do it in the 'Event Pan/Crop' thing but i can't do it.

How the picture should look: http://imgur.com/a/gtcsw

How i wan't the picture to look: http://imgur.com/a/IIEz6

And yes, i do not wan't to remove the black borders and all that bs, i just wanna' make an image look like that.

I just finished around 14hours(total) editing and stabilizing 120fps material in AE, only to be made aware of that AE can't do more than 99fps..

What video editing software lets me render at any fps I want?

>>2991215
Blender

>>2991222
I'm more familiar with Maya, does it have the features for it as well?

>>2991224
I have no Idea, but I never heard Maya ever being mentioned to have NLVE capabilities.

I want to start filming some stuff, what is the best entry level DSLR for video? I've be told that the T6/1300D is a good place to start, are there any better alternatives for around the same price?

Thanks.

>>2991637
IMO the Sony a6000 would be a better choice. I made the same choice about a month ago, I don't see a reasonable upgrade path for cannon seeing how they have gimped their top level DSLRs and Sony has been picking up the pace from there.

>>2991665
They gimped the video on their DSLRs so their video gear could maintain its high price, right? I'll look in to the a6000, anything I need to know about it? How does it compare to the T6?

>>2991682
A6000 has better overall specs, but Canon has more long lenses (>300mm) but Sony is getting closer. I don't see a reason to go Canon, especially since EVFs are more useful than an OVFs for video.

>>2991689
Sorry, I'm entirely new to this so I don't really understand the acronyms. So each brand produces their own lenses which aren't compatible with other brands, and the only thing Canon has over Sony right now is lens length which they're catching up on anyway?

>>2991215
Why you shooting at 120?
If it's for slow motion, slow it down and export at a lower framerate.
If it's not for slow motion stop being a retard and export at a lower framerate.

So I recently got a production budget for work, but this is the first time I'm doing everything myself

Can I get some recommendations on lights ~$1000 for a small size set/scene? Super cheap I know. Going for an evening talkshow look

>>2990453
The H1 fits in cheapo shock mounts.

Here's one for $12.95. https://www.amazon.com/Movo-SMM2-Shockmount-Microphones-Diameter/dp/B00HX40PPG

>>2991694
There's a variety of lens mounts. Each has advantages and disadvantages. You can buy adapters for Sony cameras so you can use Canon lenses on them. Due to the way the Canon mount is designed you can't do it vice versa.

Many would argue Canon cameras have better color science than the Sonys. I would go for Sony too though (I'm not the guy you were talking to before). I'd also have a look at Panasonic G7, definitely a worthy contender.

I just upgraded to a GH4 and an Olympus 12-40 from a D7000. I'm looking to get into videography but I have a question about shots with a lot of lighting variation. Let's say I'm shooting something that moves from a brightly backlit window with natural light towards my kitchen with normal interior lights. What's the best way to handle the transition both in terms of keeping an even level of light and controlling the white balance of the video?

I want to learn film making. Where do I start? My college has some classes but I wasn't able to get into any of them. What sort of equipment will I need? I still need to buy a tripod.

>>2991714
Oh I see, that makes sense. I'm getting the impression that Canon is quite greedy with their practices, like gimping video on DSLRs and not allowing non-canon lenses, would that be why most people on this board seem to really dislike them?

Thanks for the recommendation, the G7 certainly looks like a contender. I've also found the that the D3300 might be a good contender to the 1300D, it has a better sensor and a mic port for essentially the same price.

File: 1457051555465.gif (206KB, 256x256px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 256x256px

>>2991905
I actually came from the D3200 which is very similar to the D3200. I would not recommend Nikon for video, especially their entry level bodies, while it does have a mic jack, something the a6000 does not have, it lacks a screen that tilts, making it hard to do low and high angle shots without an external monitor. I wouldn't recommend using the mic jack anyway, you could buy something like a zoom h1, which has a better preamp, meaning you will get more out of your microphones. Also, Nikon doesn't have much focus on video anyway, they have only two cameras that can record 4k, and both of those don't have any video focused features like focus peaking and zebras.

>>2991905
You're getting that impression about canon because this thread is very anti-canon and pro-sony
Canon isn't "greedy" any moreso than their competitors. I actually had a huge post typed out defending them a few hours ago but I can't be assed to shout at deaf ears

There's many reasons to go canon, don't be fooled by shills in this thread. Having said that, there's many reasons to go sony, panasonic or even fujifilm

>>not allowing non-canon lenses,
this flat-out isn't the case
just google "best 3rd party canon lenses" to see that

>there will never be a cheap 30mm pancake lens from canon

technically id want it to be 31.25mm, but i think being that precise would make it expensive

>>2991941
Wouldn't a 7mm extension tube be what you need if you are using a 24mm lens? That would probably give you the closest to 50mm as you can get on APS-C.

I know there is a 7mm extension tube but I don't think it's a canon one, so it might not work correctly.

>>2991935
Thanks for the advice, I didn't know about the Zoom H1. Do you think the audio on the a6000 alone is decent, or would some kind of external mic like the Zoom H1 be a necessity?

>>2991936
Oh, fair enough. I didn't know about the 3rd party lenses. I'm not surprised there are shills for brands, it's the same on almost every other board. Do you think you could outline some reasons as to why I should go Canon over some other brands, I don't think I've heard anyone talk about the PROs of Canon yet.

>>2991954
Canon is great for pictures, and their entry level bodies are great for what they are, even in video. If you know you are going to buy a cinema camera somewhere down the line then investing in EF lenses is a great idea. Sony just has a better system if you want to stick with a mirror less type body. I actually wouldn't recommend Sony if you are just using it for video and won't be taking photos. If you want a dedicated body for video and don't care about stills quality I would recommend getting a Panasonic body.

File: Yell spongebob.png (384KB, 473x356px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 473x356px

>browse photography-youtube
>"the Lumix G85: the best Vlogging camera"
How can any one single person be stuck up so far their own ass they refer to an magnesium-body, weather-sealed, double-stabilized, 4k-capable MIL-Camera as a "Vlogging camera"?
I better brace myself for the FS7: the perfect camera for homemade videos!

Some people have way too much disposable income for their own brains and these people seem to congregate on Youtube.

>>2991954
Their 4k is superior quality to all their competitors atm (1dxmkii and 5dmkiv vs a6500, a7sii, gh4, XT1)
-But you can't record their 4k externally (not that it really matters unless you're using it as an a-camera on a professional production)
Their autofocus is on-point and pretty much camcorder-tier
Their colour is superior in general, gets good skintones
Decent build-quality, simple menus, easy to use while still giving full control

It's no secret that canons are better for stills than for video, but this idea that canon can't keep up with video is a meme that spawned because they were so late implementing 1080p/60fps and because they don't put c-log on their non-cinema cameras
They've fixed the former and the latter isn't a huge deal considering the internet (google ways to achieve the same thing)
It's most upsetting because there are several camera-news-outlets who parrot the same talking points about canon not being able to keep up in the video market. /sigh

>>2992020
Upper-middle class kids with trust funds and nothing to spend it on after buying their cars

Plus, there's shit tons of money to made from youtube. The FS7 won't ever appeal to them because it's too big and there's no "auto" mode

>>2992035
>>2991969
I appreciate getting non-bias, in-depth answers. Do you think that the T6 is a bad place to start if I want at least good quality stills AND video? Should I be looking at Mirrorless cameras like the a6000 that most have have been recommending, or is the T6 a good place to start so I can learn fundamentals?

>>2992041
If you're starting out as a beginner and plan to do this seriously, I would recommend a used t3i personally (or maybe a t4i now)
The t6 lacks a mic jac among other features
The t6i probably isn't worth the price but it does have autofocus in video mode

Personally I'd say to grab a t3/4i and use that for a year and then upgrade. This will force you to learn how to use a dslr and they work as great stills cameras. A used t3/4i should cost you around $200, which isn't much relatively. And then you can upgrade to sony or panasonic or whoever (anyone except nikon basically, but their video is shit) and still use any lenses you've bought via an adapter

I've never used an a6000 and I hear it's supposed to be fantastic
It does however lack the ability to change audio levels or a 3.5mm mic jack from what I read. So you'd need to record all sound externally - or just settle for shitty sound.
But with the recent release of the a6500, personally I'd say waiting for a price drop on the a6300 would be more down your alley, and that will shoot 4k.

I dunno, it's up to you man. Panasonic have cameras worth looking at as well. At the moment, I use a canon 70d and it serves me great for photos and video for now

Hell if you're really determined to go the distance and have enough money, you may as well just buy a black magic pocket cinema camera (or even an ursa mini 4k)

>>2992072
Unfortunately my budget doesn't quite meet something like a black magic pocket camera, but something like the t3i with a mic would serve as a good all round DSLR for stills and video?

Assuming any I won't make use of the sound in any video I shoot and just do some AR, how does the T6 stack up then?

>>2992079
I mean it'll work, but I'd never buy one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4iVFMoK41E

>>2992087
To be fair to the T6, the operator in that video is awful, here's a more realistic test:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6id_2iBX9o

>>2992093
Oh yeah I quite like that guy, I would've used that vid if I'd seen it

But I wasn't posting to criticise the camera, just to say that yeah, it's a camera that will shoot 1080p and has interchangeable lenses
There's nothing wrong with it, far as I know, but it doesn't do enough for me and I'd rather get a used canon "i" camera
But to each their own

What are your guys' thoughts on the Canon 100D/SL1? How does it compare to the T6 or Sony A6000 for video and stills?

>>2992116
no idea but im pretty sure it's literally made for girls
i say this because the only person i know who has one is a girl who bought it due to its size and weight

in every other aspect, it's basically just a slightly-worse 700d as far as I can tell
but i haven't checked its specs in a while

Why is the Arri Alexa the only camera that shoots good footage right out of the box, no hassle? Aside from film of course. I've shot on everything, RED, DSLRs, Blackmagic, and Alexa is the only camera I can use without constantly stressing "does this look visually interesting?", "is the background unique enough?", "is the lighting 100% perfect?", etc. Every other digital camera looks like fucking garbage unless you're anal about literally every small detail.

I know it's an expensive camera but what are the technical details as to why it looks so good in every situation? I defy you to find a piece of bad looking Alexa footage online.

>>2992256

To illustrate my point, here's some lazily shot Alexa Mini footage: https://vimeo.com/131013002

on any other camera it'd look plastic-y, orangey, digital as fuck, but this looks like it'd fit in some avant-garde, experimentally shot feature film no question. It just "pops" automatically without any attention to detail, without any hassle lighting, etc. The only other medium that can do this is film which I'd love to shoot on again.