CINEMATOGRAPHY RANT

>>3053125
N00bs gonna n00b

It's what happens when you make your work out of what is now considered a hobby

I'm somehow get the feeling that you aren't Chivo or Deakins, but are instead a sub-par freelance "DP" complaining about other freelance "DP's" who have nicer cameras than you.

That's okay. you do you.

File: 16112702_10154683544496418_1842720065010849183_o.jpg (185KB, 2048x1366px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 2048x1366px

>>3053125
It's kind of an unfortunate situation for a lot of the people in the industry. I'm a videographer (definitely wouldn't call myself a DP) and I was going to shoot a music video for a relatively small band in Texas. Had two a7s for 4k, a few lenses and really basic lights. We were going to shoot two camera men, two days including the editing for like $2,000. The director wanted to go with someone that had a red that would do it for the same price. Clearly the director went with that. But I get it man, I can't compete with those guys, and unfortunately it's just the fucking name. People that are semi-familiar with the industry, know the name "red" and will pick someone only because they have that camera. A lot of the industry is how good the camera looks for the peoples ego. They see the big camera, and they'd rather have that than a small dslr, because it looks good in the pictures. Granted a Red takes a shit on a dslr, but you just can't compete these days with people that have those cameras, because they're the ones getting the jobs. That's why you see everybody and their mom running around with Red cameras

>do project on GH3
>client is happy
>nobody ever comments "wow I bet that would look way better shooting with a Sony A7RII™"
>sony btfo yet again

>>3053140
Come on man. Why turn this into a fucking sony thing? I'm a sony fag, and at least I can admit that the Panasonic's are pretty great cameras, especially the gh5. There are a lot clients out there that simply won't take you seriously if you show up with a dslr, not because the cameras can't do the job, but it's because the clients don't really know that much, and think that you need a huge camera that looks professional to give a good product

>>3053143
I just like shitposting. I don't remember this board being good for anything else. Fruitful discussion certainly doesn't happen here.

That said, I bet there'd be a market for a RED shaped housing for smaller cameras. Leave off the RED logos, buy those separately to avoid copyright, ???

>>3053145
hmm, not a bad idea... Maybe even make it functional for something. If I had the balls, I would completely dismantle my a6300 and put it in a larger case to add more effective heat dispersion. Might even be able to make good money converting peoples overheating sony cameras, while making them look larger and more professional

>>3053148
Well a large part of professional video cameras is having a modular housing so that you can bolt all the tacticool accessories you want onto them. Thus, it's relatively cheap to develop the housing itself, and merely time consuming to figure out how the controls will work. Given that videographers tend to have a decent sized budget, you might be able to make a small business out of doing made-to-order video cam housings for various cameras.

>>3053149
Wouldn't something like that be easily achieved with a simple cage housing though? like pic related.

I could imagine a fully enclosed a6300 with powered display like an atmos display recorder, and battery powered cooling system. And mounting support. Obviously this would be good for any camera system

>>3053125
Just shoot 16mm

File: WHAT.gif (3MB, 355x300px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 355x300px

>>3053153

>>3053134
Such an arrogance

This is pretty accurate. I DP a decent amount of commercial work in NYC, mostly online content. Name brands, lots of the alcohol name brands.

I saved last two years, bought an FS5, and Odyssey 7Q+ and all the RAW licenses. You'd think 4K RAW would be enough for a fucking Instagram story - but you'd be wrong. Most you'll get is a "meh".

It's NYC and it's 2017 so it's 6K RAW or get the fuck out. And make it fucking uncompressed. You say something they'll give the job to someone else who buys into the 6k meme

>>3053159
HAHAH WAIT!!! You have clients that want fucking 6K video for an Instagram story?? What the fuk??

Why not just lie and tell them that your camera does 6k. They're obviously retarded and don't know shit about dick. Did the job pay well?

>>3053162
Hilarious right? But, not that simple. They would know. The whole thing is a sham, a game if you want.

They have ridiculously large budgets, and have to justify them somehow. They are able to sell these packages I guess, then need to back their price point up.

And that's how you end up with a Red Epic 6K, a full kit of Arri Superspeeds and a crew of 15 to film a 30 seconds unboxing for Facebook.

>>3053164
That's incredible, almost hard to believe there's just that much money pouring around all over the place. And what makes it even more insane is that (to use your unboxing example) youtube channels like unbox therapy, in my opinion, look fantastic, are filmed in 4k, and I think with a panasonic gh4 or gh5. It's just crazy that anybody would honestly need anything more than that for social media.

>>3053159
>>3053162
>>3053164
>>3053165
I work commercial gigs on the west coast (not video) and the agencies I'm hired through tag on an extra 20+% onto my price to bill the client. As the DP/photographer, you are (probably) not the highest price listed in the budget so it's expected that the client can handle the extra cost of paying for someone more expensive since the agency can then make more off of it. Everyone wins (except the client but who cares).

>>3053155
Alright then fall for the digital meme.

>>3053175
Can't tell if you're on multiple layers of irony right now.

>>3053172
Yeah, this makes sense. I know that clients have deep pockets. My gf works for a company in San Diego doing interactive training for companies like google, tesla, sony, etc. And they're dropping $400k for essentially, fancy powerpoints.

Just curious, what city do you live in? I want to get into agency work, but just don't really know the routes to get there.

This is literally everything I hate about the industry nowadays. People with years of experience and hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of kit spending their time making vapid, pointless content whose audience will completely forget about within minutes of watching it. Social media is burning away everyone's attention spans and these are the guys fuelling that fire. The worst part is that this is one of the most lucrative professions out there so it's not going to be disappearing any time soon. Nobody gives a shit about making great art or telling real stories, or even playing their part in not reducing the collective IQ of the western world. It's all just money.

File: 1382550846158.jpg (128KB, 500x645px) Image search: [Google]

128KB, 500x645px

>>3053157

sorry my bad i should be humble in front of all these grizzled industry veterans complaining about how it's not fair that other people have nice things

>>3053177
Why would I be ironic?

File: [HorribleSubs] GATE - 10 [720p].mkv_snapshot_09.11_[2016.11.10_19.50.04].jpg (201KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1280x720px

>>3053125
>not getting a gh4 + grip + adapted huge fool frame lens + rails
i thought you creative people are creative?
you're fired.

>>3053125
So, let's get this straight, you're losing multiple 2k+ jobs because you won't fork out 10k for a body?

Lol, great business head you got on ya son.

>>3053233
10k? Lol, try 50k.

>>3053233
haha! 10k barely buys you a fucking canon body! pic related is just the body. You want a display, handle, and battery? Thats another 9 grand

>>3053312
those other guys can buy a RED... why can't you?

I would trust someone who is able to afford such a camera a lot more than someone who shows up with an A7II

File: Screen Shot 2017-04-07 at 7.43.41 AM.png (92KB, 518x696px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 518x696px

>>3053317
I agree with you, but just because someone takes out a $50,000 loan to buy a camera package, doesn't automatically translate to good videographer. I'm just saying that while the red cameras are fucking amazing, it's overkill for an instagram story, and other things.

Sorry, forgot to post pic for this post >>3053312

>>3053159

This is what happens in NYC/LA where money is everywhere. There are weddings where you have 6-8 man videography crews and someone live editing footage from a fucking mobile station.

Half of your problems would be solved moving to a market where college kids don't have their parents buying them red weapons for christmas.

>>3053317
>I would trust someone who is able to afford such a camera a lot more than someone who shows up with an A7II

And you might regret it. The worst fucking "pro" footage i have EVER be given to edit came from a local guy with a RED. He couldn't color-correct for shit. The codec he gave me was fucking jpeg. Tripod, to keep the shot steady? Nah.

But hey, he used a RED.

What was maddening - I'd offered to shoot it on my GH4 - for free - along with doing the edit. It would have looked 1000% better.

But they declined, because #RED.

>>3053317
Those other guys can buy Reds because their daddy still spoils their 26-year-old college dropout loser son

Just to differ the topic a little:

The problem discussed in here in strictly and exclusively related to offering services to end-customers.

For the actual act of producing own content at one's own account, the situation is completely different.
I produced my last cinema movie in 2k scope and made solid returns with it. And I recently sold the first season of my first tv-show, which we're producing right now, to a tv-station and it's in fHD. I work all my stuff with an older cinematic corder in the $4k range (I hacked the firmware tho to give me the raw data). I did not even consider to buy a new cam with the money from the last movie, even though I easily could have afforded a fancy dot. Nobody ever even asked me on what it is shot, because I - caution: ego - know what I'm doing and there is nothing about it where you could even tell a difference to any other high-end product.

So, for all of you being unsatisfied with the consumer market: Why are you even in a market you can't compete? The market functions how it does and complaining will not make any difference. Why you do not complain that the space-traveling market is unfair, because it is all so expensive? Hm? Right, because you wouldn't be retarded enough to even try it. Learn from that and go into a market which makes sense for your situation.

Intelligence is the ability to adjust to new circumstances.

>>3053233
It's bad business to invest in equipment that will not give a return on investment.

Unless an owner/operator can easily pay in full the cost of a high end cinema package (IE RED or ARRI), they usually do financing. The interest on these financed cameras increase the investment and, long term, creates a loss for the individual's business.

>>3053417
If I want to capitalize on the market, then I'll take advantage of the sharegrid rentals. Instead of buying a camera package, I can just up my day rate to offset the cost of the sharegrid rental and walk away with no overhead.
Most importantly, a quality producer will always prefer a rental house over an owner/operator.

Inexperienced or bad producers prefer an owner/operator because the producer doesn't know any better. What else will fall short on the production? Safety? Crafty? Script quality?

The best business strategy for the cinematography market is the low overhead strategy.

>>3053436
>>>3053233 (You)
>It's bad business to invest in equipment that will not give a return on investment.

So are you suggesting I spend money on gear that makes me unhireable? Lol.

If your gear isn't as good as the competition, and you're clients want a good production, not an affordable production, you're fucked.

Buy the gear or market yourself at a third of the cost or die.

>>3053443
The point he's making is that clients don't know the difference between good production and good gear, and would rather pay for the latter than the former.

>>3053323
>WEAPON BRAIN
>HELIUM SENSOR

Why is Red's product naming so bloody fedora lord cringe?

>>3053483
They need to make it sound cool dude! The dragon name was pretty sweet desu senpai

>>3053508
Soon they will bring out the Red Epic Weapon Dragon T-Rex Nuke with Hydrogen Ultra sensor.


Fucking manchildren.

>>3053718
I'm product designer for red. I gonna steal this.

>>3053475
If he had good production, he would already have made sales, which clearly isn't the case.

>>3053443
>If your gear isn't as good as the competition, and you're clients want a good production, not an affordable production, you're fucked.
>Buy the gear or market yourself at a third of the cost or die.

Anon's tone is blunt, but his message rings true.

If 9-of-10 clients want a RED, that's what they want. Doesn't matter if you are 10x a better DP.

Even if Noob McRed shoots crap footage, the client is not going to think "We should have hired the guy with the GH4." No, they're going to find someone else with a RED that they think is better than the last guy.

So sometimes, the sad solution is - if the market is THERE, if the paychecks are THERE, get a RED. Bite the budget bullet. If you're 10x better than Noob, you'll put him out of business and have your gear paid off sooner.

Yeah, it does suck to know that your $5K mirrorless kit can do many shots just as good as the $20K gear. But this isn't always a budget industry to work in. :/

BTW: I could write a check today for a $40K worth of cams and glass. No chance I will, because I'm in a smaller market that will *never* be able to pay enough to justify that sort of investment. So... it's not just about having the gear, of course. You also need the clients. And the talent.

>>3053137
I bought a Scarlet-W for this reason.

>>3053754
And how has it been for you? Have you been able to get more clients? Was it worth it? And how do you like the picture?

>>3053721
What? He clearly has.

what if you show up with a c300ii or black magick?
not pro enough?

>>3053803
Throwing in a view from London.

Depends what kinds of jobs you're going for. If it's proper high budget they won't look twice at your application because enough people are Arri/RED owner-operators willing to do it for cheap.

In fact, it's so bad that there are enough people that will do it for something like £200/day including kit which is bullshit.

Really the best way to work I've found is to either pitch yourself to a lower-range market, so people who don't know much and are willing to use not-a-RED, or have friends/connections who help each other to get jobs. I've been quite lucky to have gone to filmschool and made friends with the people working there as now I can rent out lights from them free of charge, so Incan at least get gaffer jobs if not DP-ing.

Really the best way in an ideal world would be to rent the kit as buying a camera that will be obsolete in 2 years is not a great idea, but you have to find producers willing to understand that and willing to listen to something besides buzzwords.

>>3053125
I agree with you

>checked b+h
>that jvc 4k super35 and shoots 422 is cheaper than a7r2
why is this not hyped?
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1096581-REG/jvc_gy_ls300_4kcam_handheld_s35mm.html

>>3054185
MFT mount not too popular.

Literally doesn't do 422, only does 8-bit

Shit compression considering it's 4K, and it's not even true 4K

>>3053803
BlackMagic products have reeeeaaaly bad reputation in the market. Especially the cams are seen as horribly amateurish and if you show up with BMs, people literally start laughing (I observed such a scene once in fact).

>>3054185
Don't listen to the schmock above. It is a nice cam to a good price. The downsampled HD-SDI feature is great, when you think about it. The scanning sensor too. But ofc you cannot obtain raw data with the cam. So consider for which usecase you want to invest.

>>3053348
the chance that the guy with a hugely expensive RED (or similar camera) sucks is a lot smaller than the chance of finding some college dropout who decided to spend his last bit of savings on a A7II and call himself a cinematographer

I mean I could literally just do that, walk to the store buy some sony camera, launch a 10 dollar a month website and yeehaa I'm a cinematographer.

I would have to sell my car and empty my savings account to buy a RED and associated hardware.


the bottom line is: if you lose so many contracts because your gear is not what the customers are asking for it is not their fault. YOU are the one who doesn't fit in the local market. the customers may be wrong about it but that is not what matters if you have to suck dick in an alley to pay your mortgage.

>>3054185

Every JVC camera I've ever worked with (this includes pro ENG gear) has been just a shitty experience. JVC is the Folgers of coffee.

>>3054243
"the chance that the guy with a hugely expensive RED (or similar camera) sucks is a lot smaller than the chance of finding some college dropout"
I think you should tell LA that, because most RED owner/ops suck.

>>3053483
>>3053508
>>3053718
>>3053720
RED was founded by the same man that founded Oakley. Check out his site and you'll see why RED looks and is named as it is.

http://jannard.com/

>>3053125

This is how life works. It takes money to make money.

OR

You work on a demo reel that showcases your talent with the tools you have available and this will get you jobs (to later buy said equipment).

>>3053183
Lucrative vapid content = Financing for great art and real stories.

>>3055039
You'd be surprised at how many clients don't bother watching showreels.

I'm sitting on a Scarlet and no bookings coming up as a DP. Feel like my marketing/site or pricing is off. I feel like an absolute retard. Can I get some hot tips to pull my head out of my ass?

>>3055045
I'd rather slash my passion project budget than contribute to making the world a worse place.

>>3053143

The problem with the A7S is that the inbuilt encode is a LongGOP4 format, some bullshit alphabetti spaghetti XAVMRXML. If I want to do anything remotely professional with it (say cut in avid) you'll find it isn't supported because it's not even considered a 'professional encoder' I need an exterior capture device like a samurai to be able to record raw 10-bit and work on my post.

>>3055026
>http://jannard.com/

My eyes are bleeding.

>>3055020
which means that the people who cant even afford a red suck even harder

>>3053137
stupid question. You guys can't rent this shit?

File: maxresdefault.jpg (265KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

265KB, 1920x1080px

>>3054193
ursa is not pro enough?

i would laugh if you bring the pocket camera or the first block camera.

>>3055223
this is a circle jerk thread.
OP is probably RED marketing team doing gorilla marketing.

>>3055184
>oh no, I need to spend extra money to turn my $2000 consumer camera into a $50k professional grade videography device.

Lol, if you dare come back with "muh panasonic" I'll slap your stupid cuck sensor right into your cock.

>>3055239
muh panasony

>>3055236
Ursa is rediculous. The main problem with BM is its children's diseases. All products have flaws, mainly related to fast and cheap construction and production. Unreliable toys. If you spit out cams at these prices and simultanously want these features you either need time, which means high costs, or you bring out banana products. You can't change this.

Although, you could go another way to offer high-end products to moderate prices. That would be true minimalism. But no company seems to think this would be a returning way to go. A cam with a short fd mount, a god-tier sensor and an ethernet back-end which merely spits out the bayer data in an open format for $2k retail price would be THE stuff for me. Fuck wlan and auto-focus and all that fancy stuff. Fps and shutter are all settings I need. Even Iso is retarded.
But ofc people want blutooth and a built in voice activated coffee machine.

>>3055184
Yeah, i know it's a shit format, but lets be real here. For doing anything less than a high end TV show or a movie, it's not 100% needed. Yeah, it's better, I know that for sure, but when doing social media for an instagram story, I'm sure xavcs will do most of the time

>>3055223
it's still not that cheap. Especially if you've never used a red camera, you could be in for a steep learning curve and fuck up some shoots because you don't know what you're doing.

>>3055260
>Iso is retarded

...

>>3055600
>you could be in for a steep learning curve

I feel like it's one of the easiest cameras to operate. Especially with Adobe coming pre-loaded with Codec Support. Outside of poor performance in low light (at least on the older models), what did you find difficult to pick up on?

>>3055662
I feel like theres a lot I don't know about the workflow portion of it. There are shitloads of options for compression ratios, file output types, raw vs compressed. Outside of that, it's just a camera. I just feel like for a lot of people, there's room for fucking up with a camera that you don't know.

>>3055666
I think the post aspect is all about how much emotion you put into "correct" or "incorrect" color correction or handling. Of course you'll want to do as little destructive editing as possible, but your end result films will always be compressed to a degree, and ultimately your hosting platform will choose for you what quality you end up with.

I enjoy tinkering in DaVinci Resolve for color, but I'm not fast it, and it's a whole 'nother step to indulge in. I'm much faster at baseline correcting in RedCine (or Source Settings), and using adjustment layers in After Effects to finish my "look". I'm trying to find the balance of the "Cine" look of RedLog and the polish, sharpness, of Gamma. Open to suggestions for correcting if anyone has any.

That being said, outside of locking my Red's touchscreen on my first paid gig with it (live event too) and not knowing what the fuck was happening, Red's been easy to deal with.

>>3053125
>>3053137


Wouldn't your portfolio speak for itself?

I mean, you can even explain resolution to clients. I saw a wedding videographer who explained what 4K "raw footage" meant and why they had to charge extra for releasing the "raw" footage.

I guess what I'm saying is most clients don't know a thing about video. If your portfolio is strong you can market yourself as "Real cinema quality with DSLR prices" or something similar. "We're able to keep costs down, but quality up." Talk about sensor sizes, and resolution.

>>3055699
>wouldn't your portfolio speak for itself

Of course it does, it's just much easier to say 'soz, your gear isn't what I want' instead of 'you're bad, I ain't paying you to do shit'.

>>3055699
But see that blade is double edged. If the client doesn't know a thing about video EXCEPT buzzwords like '4K' and 'Alexa', they'll think 'the only way to get what I want is to use X, nothing else will deliver that quality'. It's black or white with a lot of clients, doesn't matter what you explain to them.

It's the same as with the consumer photo market and megapickles, more means better, fuck other considerations.

>have to market self with other people's product.
why photographers and videographers are losers?

>>3053797
Only had it for about 2 weeks, and I've gotten one gig and one rental out of it. So who knows.

Picture is good - not much better than Blackmagic's, but I think Redcode is the best format out there. Highlight retention is really impressive at 800 ISO. I bought it more for the name than the picture, though, because that's what puts food on the table.

>>3055685
I like divinci, but the camera that I have at home can't be pushed crazy far in davinci, but it's by far the best coloring program out there. I would love to have a red camera at home. I almost won a $50,000 kit from a magazine contest, I was one of 5 finalists, and the winner got a new red dragon kit along with some red lenses and one of their support packages.

>>3055699
Not necessarily. I think with a lot of clients, they'll look to see what camera you're shooting with first, then look at your work, instead of looking at your work first then checking what camera you shoot with. The red camera is a huge magnet for work.

>>3055769
Did you finance it or buy it straight cash? I want one really bad, and I honestly don't mind getting a used one as long as it's not thrashed in any way

>>3055769
>>3055685
Also, where do you guys shoot out of? I'm in San Diego looking to move up to LA. If you guys have a shoot coming up, I'd like to come help for free just to try to meet some contacts in the area. I don't know anybody up there, so it's difficult to get some work without already being up there

>>3053153
>2017
>Not home developing 70mm colour film

>>3053165
Those unboxing videos are the paid articles of the video world. Basically, newspapers all have sponsored articles where it looks like a legit report but it is actually a commercial. Something with unboxing on a high level. That's why the budget is high.

>>3053348
Wait, don't you as the editor have to work with the director to color correct?

>>3055045
>Financing for great art and real stories.

Which is growing thinner and thinner every year.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8esUVOF-G4

technigger uses red.
don't be jelly.

>>3056179
technigger has enough subs and views to finance his own movie.