Archived Threads: https://fgts.jp/p/search/subject/video%20general/
No more sticky, guys. It was shit anyway.
Sony is #1.
>>2687144
>Start Uni
>They have 700Ds for 1st years
>Blackmagic available on 2nd semester
>RED and ARRI for 2nd year
Time to sell my 600D
So who /filming/?
I don't wanna hear stories about how you've got panasonic's awesome vlog shit for free for when you finally get motivated, I wanna know who's out there making shit
I literally have a day of filming left before I will have finished this project and then all I have is to edit it (as if that's a small task)
Kinda excited cause it's shaping up well but scared as shit in case the transitions look shit or I'm missing something key
2nd real project btw
What festivals do you guys go for?
>>2687368
wtf kind of uni lets 2nd years roll around with reds and arri
dafuqqqqqq
I need super-cheap m4/3 lens, my good ones broke, and I only have ~400$ max to spare right now.
LUMIX G VARIO 14-45 MM
Sigma ART 19mm
Panasonic G 20 mm f/1.7
Olympus Zuiko 14-42mm
One of those or something diffrent? Any recomendations?
>>2687391
L CUT
C
U
T
I haven't filmed in a fat minute. Yesterday I was on a shoot doing B camera for an event thing but other then that I'm just editing and working on a MV right now, then will be doing another one once this one is finished. Have a small micro grant for a short film that I keep putting off as well I should get around to doing.
>>2687394
NY film school probably. Had someone from there come to my city (their hometown) to shoot their film with the schools Red.
>>2687395
>he doesn't use vintage
>tfw no Arri Alexa
>>2687405
>tfw you don't have an Alexa to shoot local music shartist music videos for free.
>>2687395
>Not going vintage + speedbooster
>>2687405
>wanting to shoot on alexa instead of glorious 35mm
pleb
>>2687417
they're almost identical tbh, if anything I prefer Alexa footage
>>2687419
>almost identical
>digital video and film
JUST
>>2687419
>almost identical
>>2687422
>all emulsions are the same
>the only difference between film and digital are highlights and colors
>>2687424
>implying any other minuscule differences can't be concocted in post
silly boy
go back to films Tarantino
>>2687425
You think the VHS video app actually makes it look like VHS don't you.
>>2687425
>there's barely any difference between an image generated from a digital sensor and one generated from a photochemical process
I really don't get these people spouting how awesome digital is and then do everything they can to make it look like film. Sure must be a great format if you need to make it look like something else so it doesn't look like shit.
also
>>2687426
>>2687426
>minuscule differences
clean video to VHS video is not minuscule
>>2687428
>missing his point this much
>>2687431
simulating VHS video is a hard problem, simulating grain/"happy accidents" is not
>>2687432
>to make it look like film you need to simulate grain
so pleb it hurts
>>2687434
okay, then what other differences are there besides color rendering and highlight rolloff
no meme answers like "it's the fact alone that it's a natural process that makes it better"
>>2687436
>image is formed by randomly situated grains that change position in every frame, vs pixels that are always in the same spot
>for that reason, edges look different, "softer" if you will, since they are dependent on the position of grain in every single frame, which is what makes digital look so "hard"
>color rendering is more natural at the moment of capture, allowing for more natural looking color adjustment in post
>better tolerance for over/underexposure w/o need to shoot flat/log (whatever it's called in english) mode and w/o needing obligatory post to make it look good
film can look good without post
>>2687436
film generates the image with a radically different process, all digital does is try to emulate that look. must be because it looks like shit compared to film.
>>2687443
>thinks development and printing aren't post processing
Friend, shooting film and not doing your own processing is like shooting digital jpg.
And no, I'm not hating on film.
planning on buying a camera stabilizer as a gift for a friend max $200.
anyone got any recommendations?
>>2687411
They are excellent, especially considering their very low price.
There are of course, even better ones, but they will cost more, accordingly - the likes of leica, zeiss, nikkor etc
Well worth it though, in my opinion
My entire setup consists of M42 mounts
You need to bear in mind as well that vintage lenses are better for cinema purposes than ordinary modern lenses, as they are fully manual and can very easily be declicked, as I have done with all of mine.
>>2687461
Feiyu G3
You literally have to be an elitist mouth breather with too much money to possibly think that film is better than digital
>b-but plebs trying to make art!
No one gives a shit
The convenience and time saved alone more than makes up for the miniscule (and it is miniscule) difference in dynamic range and the "grain effect" is bullshit in the first place
I don't know why you would want images that contain imperfections because of nostalgia
It's like those dipshits that claim that 60fps is unnatural and that cinema needs to stay at 24fps
>>2687573
You should probably kill yourself
>>2687573
Thanks for your input.
You can go back to wherever you came now.
>>2687573
I agree with you but cinema does need to stay at 24fps
>>2687594
Why?
No troll, seriously curious why you think that.
>>2687573
Film isn't about being quick and fast. Shooting it, processing, and splicing it (while similar), is a completely different system compared to you shooting on your GH4 for your youtube videos.
Sure, shoot digital. But for all the fucks who want their HD footage to look like "film" or like "VHS", just shoot the actual format because trying to make it look like a different format is spottable and looks retarded.
>VHS app
>Post digital processing adding film grain or edge softening
Might as well kill yourself trying to be an "artist" doing that.
>>2687597
60fps just looks amateur/shitty to me
I know it's because I've been made used to 24fps by Hollywood but that doesn't change anything, I can't go back 90 years and change the way films were shot to adjust the modern public's mindset
>>2687599
>Sure, shoot digital. But for all the fucks who want their HD footage to look like "film" or like "VHS", just shoot the actual format because trying to make it look like a different format is spottable and looks retarded.
Or, y'know, and this is just a thought, don't try and purposefully give your movie imperfections... just saying...
>>2687599
obviously low-end cameras like the GH4 will never look filmic but something like an Arri Alexa + proper color correction/post techniques can easily achieve the look: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrvkCS0ZGPU
also please fuck off if you've never even used a cinema camera or 35mm film and are talking out of your ass
ITT
>/p/ once again proves it has no actual knowledge of the industry and just wants to sound smart for the sake of internet cred
>>2687603
>Have used Alexa.
>Have used Red.
>Have used Arri SRII/III
>Have used Arri 535B
Pic related. Maybe you, Anon, should blast out your ass a little less.
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Apple Camera Model iPhone 5s Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh) Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 29 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 2448 Image Height 3264 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 72 dpi Vertical Resolution 72 dpi Image Created 2015:10:18 18:58:57 Exposure Time 1/17 sec F-Number f/2.2 Exposure Program Normal Program ISO Speed Rating 320 Lens Aperture f/2.2 Brightness -0.8 EV Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 4.15 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 2448 Image Height 3264 Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Auto Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2687606
>too BTFO by the first line of my post to respond properly
alright fam
>>2687597
Because the general audience is accustomed to 24fps and most people will react negatively to higher frame rates(see The Hobbit). Sure there's a whole generation of people, mostly gamers, who know what 60fps feels like, but most people don't, and won't take it well. You also have the creative aspect to take into consideration. Does the narrative call for 60fps? Do you as the creator want to use 60fps for any particular reason outside of simply using it? No one is forcing you to stay at 24fps, but it's been a standard for so long that the workflow and audience are a very compelling reason to stay there. That said, use it if you want to, but don't be surprised if some people don't like it because it doesn't look right to them.(or it's shit//)
>>2687606
Does "have used" actually mean "got coffee for guys who have used"?
>>2687593
>implying opinion is fact
fayum
>>2687615
I touched it so it counts.
>>2687609
But isn't the best way to change convention to do it all at once, weather the initial bitching, then enjoy the new standard?
>>2687647
Percerption is the biggest factor when it comes to frame rate. Most people prefer 24-30fps because it is believed to be the "frame rate" the average human can see in. It looks more natural because it shows motion blur and it isn't perfectly (almost creepily) smooth.
Does anyone use Resolve for anything more than color grading? Should I try to make it my default NLE or is that pants on head retarded? Loving the color grading but it seems to be lacking some general editing areas(audio, lens correction)
>>2687668
Yeah that's pretty retarded fam, just use premiere
>>2687658
>24-30fps because it is believed to be the "frame rate" the average human can see in.
>>2687706
the key is the quotation marks fam
>>2687573
As a viewer, I prefer film. It just looks and feels better, there's no two ways about it.
However, as a poorfag filmmaker, I definitely prefer digital. Way more convenient, and obviously way cheaper.
If I had the money though, I would only shoot on film.
>>2687810
I think you accidentally used "tbh" in stead of "imo" and forgot to actually say why or show examples! Proof read your posts in the future to avoid mistakes like these.
>>2687899
Excuse me?
I just want to loudly annpunce I FUCKING LOVE COLOUR GRADING
Don't get me wrong, I've been grading for over a year, but it still impresses beyond belief when I compare my ungraded shots to the graded versions
>>2687958
How do I into grading???
>>2687958
do you shoot flat?
Does anyone have experience doing porn? I reckon its pretty much frowned upon within the artistic community and kills any credibility and career ambitions with ypur name attatched to it, but right now I'm really depressed,bored,unemployed and havent come up with an idea/screenplay to work with for a while so I am pondering on doing something experimental but with unsimulated intercourse.
Sorry English isnt my 1st language
![moto-back-crop[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/QUgd43c.jpg "moto-back-crop[1].jpg")
Considering starting making movies with my moto x. Would this be a bad idea? I have a t3i but it's annoying to haul around sometimes. I like the idea of being able to record anything at any time conveniently on my phone. The quality won't be an issue right? Story is king?
>>2687997
yes, as flat as is possible on a gh4
>>2688003
post some grades so i can rate
Have any of you had experience with cheap 3-axis gimbals? The likes of 'Beholder', 'Came TV, and 'Dys' etc.
How are they?
So I have this possible job lined up. Part time to full time as needed as a multimedia production co-ordinator. Pay is decent but I really don't know if I want to do it. I could use the money for sure, but its basically making videos for the local catholic school board and stuff like that. I mainly just like making stuff for myself, and work in G&E mainly, but I'm really on the fence about doing this job if doing it full time will kind of bum me out when I'm making my own stuff.
>>2688041
What kind of story are you expecting to create with anytime random unplanned moments?
>>2688307
i started four years ago shooting and editing weddings because it was at least a way to practice what i loved and make a little money while doing it. it only encouraged me to work harder towards producing the films/videos that really mattered to me. i now direct commercials with $100k+ budgets.
if you can't overcome a little tedium at work to do the thing you purport to love, then you're in the wrong field.
>>2688368
>if you can't overcome a little tedium at work to do the thing you purport to love, then you're in the wrong field.
I disagree. I love to make projects I want to make, not making videos for other people. I like shooting and making my own content, but I never had intentions like you to want to make 100k+ budget commercials. That's not particularly in my goals. Personally I would love to keep working for my film co-op part time and doing G&E, except there isn't too much going on over here lately except some concerts rolling through and stage calls.
I don't necessarily wan't to make producing content for clients a career, though in this case I am capable of making the content that they would like. Really, I would love to keep doing crew work in camera/G&E and work on my own projects in my time, I just don't know if I necessarily want to produce client work for corporate.
>inb4 I answered my own question.
>>2688041
OG Moto X FTW
I'm in the same boat except recently changed to the new Moto X Play. Anyway I guess it depends on the content of your work?
>>2688371
Listen dude I'm just now starting my own business doing video and we had some big clients - producing content for clients is actually a VERY good way of learning (whatever that may be, perhaps workflow improvements, you see what you're not very good at and can detect and improve upon it et al.) and it will not be detrimental to your work if you're not a fucking panzy and are willing to put in the time necessary to get shit done.
Tbh fam you sound like an entitled shit who isn't willing to make sacrifices to get where he needs to so unless you get a lucky break somehow you really are in the wrong field.
>>2688533
>you're an idiot entitled shit if your outlook isn't the same as mine
>>2688595
somebody should photoshop this picture...
>>2688602
how's this fam?
>>2688602
this any gud?
>>2688613
better?
>>2688625
aaaaalmooost
>>2688533
>Tbh fam you sound like an entitled shit who isn't willing to make sacrifices to get where he needs to so unless you get a lucky break somehow you really are in the wrong field.
>>2688371
>I don't necessarily wan't to make producing content for clients a career.
Nigga can you read? I don't want to make a career out of making videos and producing content for people.
>isn't willing to make sacrifices to gt where he needs to so unless you get a lucky break
>needs to so unless you get a lucky break
>get a lucky break
>lucky break
nigga where the fuck did I even say that.
>I never had intentions like you to want to make 100k+ budget commercials.
>>2687424
>Implying you can get any film stock that isn't Vision3.
>Implying Vision3 isn't wayy too saturated anyway
>>2688041
The fact that you consider a t3i to be annoying to haul around of all cameras says more about your work ethic and dedication than anything and using "story is king" is your sad attempt to justify your ethic. If you get far enough wait till you have to deal with REDs and Alexas that need tripod two times as heavy just to support them
Cameras thread.
Anyone here knows a lot about DSLRs for video?
I am looking for a DSLR for video recording.
I need a camera that can keep up with rapid continuous movements.
My budget tops at around 3k dollars.
Any specific suggestions? Any good forums you know that are reliable?
>>2688644
>I need a camera that can keep up with rapid continuous movements.
You need something with a global shutter then. Most DSLRs don't have that, you're gonna want a dedicated cinema camera.
Is there a good affordable compact camera that takes acceptable/good video? I need something that I can always have in my pocket.
LX100 any good?
>>2688655
BMPCC if you can step up a little bit for the price.
>>2688660
thanks but I need a compact that can also take pictures
not to mention that the bmpcc becomes everything but compact once youve attached all the extras that make it usable
>>2688650
Which one would you recommend?
>>2688665
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/buy/digital-cine-cameras/ci/28624/N/3744103231
look at the ones there which fit your specs and your bucks
>>2688650
What about the "Blackmagic Micro Cinema Camera"?
How will its small sensor size effect image quality?
>>2688678
I have no experience with it or that sensor size, though I believe it is identical to the bmpcc, which people generally seem to be happy with
I don't know how other people around here feel about it
Bear in mind though that it doesn't have a screen or anything like that and is practically unusable out of the box
>>2688650
So even if i use a gyro stabilizer it still wont be any good?
>>2688692
Doesn't matter. If the subject matter in front of the lens is moving fast, rolling shutter will fuck you up.
>>2688664
RX100M3 for best 1080. RX100M4 for 5min 4K. LX100 doesn't exactly fit in a pocket.
>>2688707
i've heard that the 4K of the rx100m4 is practically unusable and will make your camera melt
>>2688693
So stuff like go pro have global shutters?
>>2688710
that's why I said 5min. for a pocket camera, do you really need more than 5min of 4K at a time? It'll start to melt if you do consecutive 5min 4K around the 7min mark, but should be fine if you give it like a 1-2min rest before the next shot. and if you really need pocketable 4K, just use a phone. Xperia Z5 has good 4K and the DIS better than OIS in most other phones. but then again, do you really even need 4K? RX100M3's 1080 is really nice because of full sensor readout.
>>2688716
I don't know, probably not. I'd imagine that they have some software to minimise rolling shutter, though I don't know how effective it is.
>>2688732
I'm finding it quite difficult to choose between the LX100 and the RX100m3
>>2687573
Obvious b8
I hope you enjoy fast food and avengers tier movies all the time anon
>>2688865
Well you'd probably need a trench coat for the LX100, while non-skinny jeans would fit the RX100 line. Depends on how portable you want it. Also for videos and tilting LCD screen really helps.
>>2688891
I mean I guess what it comes down to for me now is whether I need portability or superior video capabilities...
How do they compare in terms of stills?
>>2688716
Not that guy, but I never thought about this. Why do you never see any jello in gopro vids?
>>2688961
small ass sensor
>>2688922
both are tack sharp even wide open. same zoom range, but LX100's got close to 1 stop advantage for light gathering, as well as a bit faster AF. Otherwise more buttons and dials on the LX100. If you don't mind larger size, go with the LX100. If you want portable, RX100.
I use a Nikon d750 to film, am I cool enough to hang with you guys
>>2688996
Only if you use it ironically
>>2689145
Honestly the d750 is pretty good, sharper than a 5d mark iii and just a stop less of video ISO performance. Clean hdmi out too, for them 4:2:2.
i recently got a 700d with the standard kit lens.
I wanted to get into creative short film making. But i am sort of lost. Any tips for some things to get started on?
Should i get some gear, a prime lens? a recording micorphone? a tripod?
Any recommendations would be very much appreciated anon
>>2689554
Don't worry so much about the gear. Learn how to write stories and make them good.
>story above all
But to answer your question, you should have a tripod, mic (videomic or other external like a shotgun or Lav), and maybe a shoulder rig.
>>2689554
lol. you goofed.
should have went with a panasonic g7.
Stupid question, would I be able to use on of these on an ursa? with a really really sd card of course
>>2689605
No. You gotta go fast.
who /VJ/ here
>>2689605
Best you go fast m8
Can anyone recommend me a good tripod system for a £150 budget off eBay in the UK? I'm taking advantage of the 20% off deal for today.
Is the DVX2000 the soon to be crowned budget 4K -broadcast champ?
>>2689842
It has potential to for sure. Great thing about cameras like that is you can get a servo control that attaches to the tripod handle which controls focus, zoom, and iris which is extremely handy for doing live video. It will definitely find a place somewhere in broadcast or streaming, considering the flexibility of streaming in 1080 and having masters in 4k. Would love to try one out for sure on a shoot.
>>2689852
it beams straight to the internet?
bouta cop a vx1000 to film skating. vhype guys...nothing beats those warm fuzzy colors.
>>2689865
With SDI out you can go to a broadcast system like a Tricaster and live stream.
>>2687391
Why are you such a faggot and dont post what exactly youre doing yourself.
Me?
Doin a stop motion movie because need a crew for much.
>>2690630
forgot picture
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make PENTAX Camera Model PENTAX K-50 Camera Software K-50 Ver. 1.00 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Focal Length (35mm Equiv) 75 mm Image-Specific Properties: Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 300 dpi Vertical Resolution 300 dpi Image Created 2015:10:18 01:26:05 Exposure Time 1/50 sec F-Number f/6.3 Exposure Program Aperture Priority ISO Speed Rating 6400 Exposure Bias 0 EV Metering Mode Center Weighted Average Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 50.00 mm Color Space Information sRGB Image Width 4928 Image Height 3264 Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Auto White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard Contrast Normal Saturation Low Sharpness Normal Subject Distance Range Macro
>>2687706
I feel you.
This board not though
>>2687573
Because grain adds a very natural feel to the picture. It makes the picture easier to look at in some cases for some people.
>>2690630
>Why are you such a faggot and dont post what exactly youre doing yourself.
...I did, I'm finishing editing now
Have a couple of shots I need to reshoot though
Why are you such an angry fuck?
>>2687368
What kind of rich kid you are, my school has 550d and Sony pro camcorder (don't remember the price, pretty expensive but shit quality)
is RX100 IV fine for starting out if I just plan on making experimental short films with high frame rates?
>>2691024
if you insist on getting a compact (even though you should just get a regular interchangeable lens camera), get the Panasonic LX100 instead, it's much better
ART USB Dual Pre + Rode NTG1 into BMPCC.
Yey or nay?
I can spend only 240$. It will sound like shit, but is there a combo to make it less shit or its a decent idea?
>>2691148
Also, i already have a zoom, i need something to record straight into the camera.
>>2687609
>>2687647
>>2687597
>>2687594
Just adding to this discussion,
Things you need to take into account:
-Recording at 60FPS you are also increasing your shutter speed to 1/120, compared to 1/48@24FPS which greatly increases the amount of light needed (unless compositing the frame). Not the biggest issue, but it does mean a substantial increase in cost on that front (lighting takes time, time is money)
-Data Rates - 2.5x the frames= 2.5x all your data (doesn't seem too bad if you're shooting h264 variants, but if you're shooting less compressed acquisition codecs you start to get into trouble). This costs a lot of money & time at both ends - both in on-set data & backups, and with pretty much everything (To give a bit of scale http://www.digitalrebellion.com/webapps/videocalc ). You also add 36 frames per second that need to be rendered, which means more time in post as well (VFX [you're doubling the amount of work needed here], rendering etc).
-Audiences haven't responded well to it enough to justify using it
I've thought of experimenting with 60FPS but I can't quite justifying/finding story based motivation for using it (I have an idea for it down the line).
>>2691148
>>2691149
You could run a line out from the zoom to your your camera if you need to record straight in (I'd dual record anyway though - backup audio is always important [lower your input volume on the BMPCC, around 40% seems to work best and up the gain in your recorder]).
>>2689605
No.
1) Not Recognized by the cameras firmware [Blackmagic has a list of approved cfast 2.0 cards in their support section]
2) Read/Write speeds
>>2688041
Story comes first, but I will add that you need to play to the strengths of your equipment and work around the weaknesses (phones are problematic, but can be used effectively if you work within their limitations).
>>2691239
wow you're still alive
1K budget for all of my shit
I don't know shit about what lights are good and what are bad.
- 300 dollars gets me a Sony NEX-5n with an 18-55
- 100 dollars extra for a Zoom H1.
- 600 dollars for the rest of my shit. Any suggestions?
>>2691446
Cheapest cam you can find and pay people who can actually act, unless you just care about how it looks.
A shitty looking film with good acting, good wiring, and good direction is infinitely more watchable than a perfectly shot film with none of the above.
Go watch the scenes in battleship that just have Brooklyn Decker and that veteran in them for a painful illustration of this point.
>>2691458
Alright, I've heard the Sony NEX-5n produces a good image, that's why I chose it. Do you know any easy ways to make money off of filmmaking? I know there's Tongal but none of the projects make me motivated to get off my couch and onto the drawing board.
>>2691465
Cart before the horse friend.
Make something first.
Try your best, then don't get bummed when it's shit. The important thing is to see that first project through. Come back when you've done at least that before asking about money.
>>2687144
Guys please help me. I need the best video recording dslr under 1500 dollars.
I've read several articles, I've read about rolling shutters and global shutters, about ISO, about exposure, about magic lantern, about lens selections but im so confused....
I want to shoot independent low budget films but I must make them exceptional. My film school will be able to give me gear but I still need my own decent camera to not have to rely on it all the time(I will use them for accessories like stabilizers etc..).
I've read some good stuff about the Canon EOS 70D.
What about the Canon EOS 6D?
The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4? I have read some good reviews of it but also some buyers who had some problems with it that rendered it unusable.
What about the Sony A77II?
I have read that Sony have less lenses but if im not looking for anything on the fringe will their lenses do? should I even be worried about it?
I might want to do some rapid movement shooting with it so I prefer it to be as capable as possible in that regard, even above overall image and color reproduction qualities.
Can anyone help?
>>2691709
G H 4
H
4
>>2691769
The body is ~$1400, so he can't buy any lenses or anything else (assuming he has none). But a GH4 would be pushing his budget a bit for flexibility.
>>2691709
For almost a third of the price you could get a GH2 body or w/kit lens and with the extra money get accessories to your needs (vintage lenses, tripod, shoulder rig, media, extra batteries, etc.) You can also hack the GH2. Its a pretty decent camera honestly if you're just starting to make films.
>>2691798
you can get a few decent vintage lenses for $100
>>2691709
panasonic g7 + speed booster
or
used a7s.
>>2691769
>>2691798
>>2691813
Guys I can get lenses and almost all peripheral equipment from my film school. Scratch the 1.5k dollars cap, Its 3k(folks said they would help out).
Now the question is, should I still get 70D? should i go for a 5d III or its equivalent? Maybe at this price range I should start thinking about semi professional cam corders?
1 major question I have is, do i need autofocus?
Can you even use autofocus for video? What about say, when running after a character?
Should I even care about autofocus capabilities? Cause the 70d apparently has better ones than even the 5d III.
>>2691825
URSA MINI
R
S
A
M
I
N
I
>>2691825
if you're serious about cinematography, forget autofocus.
and forget DSLRs too. go mirrorless or get a proper cinema camera
>>2691827
>>2691831
"hey i want to start making films"
URSA. 4K. MONEY. CINEMA.
Fantastic suggestions.
>>2691827
>URSA MINI
How does it perform with natural light? as in outside the studio.. I need a camera i can shoot outside with.
>>2691831
Mirrorless? Something like the GH4?
How does this usually work, do i put it in a cage and add an external monitor?
>>2691827
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI1ax3oxaBc
Will cages for dslrs fit for something like the URSA? What about lenses? What lesnes can it use?
>>2691857
How are you in filmschool with so little knowledge of cinematic gear
Not being a dick, just genuinely curious
>>2691825
>3k
>for video
>canon
hahahahahahahahahaha.
what are they teaching you?
buy a canon?
hahahahaha.
stop living under a rock.
>>2691861
I just started(first year just finished first week).
>>2691825
M8 some of these guys are being total dogshit but I do recommend that you get the URSA mini 4k. It's 3k and you will need some more for lenses (perhaps school gear can do the trick, it takes canon EF lenses) but right now it'll be your best bet and it will make your shit look stellar as long as you learn how to edit/grad/properly shoot etc. Not only that but it comes with DaVinci Resolve (latest vers) and shoots ProRes. There is absolutely no better deal out right now, and the problems (fixed pattern noise being the biggest) are planning on being solved through firmware updates.
Now, I will say that Blackmagic is very god damn shaky when it comes to releasing shit on time, but their product, despite their shortcomings, are incredible.
Want to know how much they are wrecking shit with their products? All major manufacturers have new models coming out this year and early next year, and all of them have dropped their prices by several thousand dollars in order to compete with Blackmagic.
>>2691878
I simply need something to carry me through my own short films and exercises i get during my education.
>>2691899
Just buy a DSLR with a small budget if you have no idea what you're doing. Save your money and invest in something once you're done school. There is no point in buying something like an URSA at the moment if you're just starting school and don't know how to vidya. Or just use your schools gear and save for something once your done.
>>2691900
http://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B00NEG09GM/ref=cm_cr_pr_hist_2?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1&reviewerType=all_reviews&filterByStar=two_star&pageNumber=1#
Sounds scary, also its way above my price.
>>2691902
I think i might get the sony a7s.
>>2691906
Had not read this review. Wonder how much credence there is to these guys claims, have no reason to doubt and I have had issues with BM and their hold times.
One thing I will say is that for the Mini the investment is a little safer. Understand that getting a regular ursa means you'll need - a very expensive tripod (shit is heavy as fuck), all the peripherals to make it work, expensive as hell batteries, and the media to get the footage.
I'm not apologist for BM, but again the Mini is in the hands of some people already and they have had zero complains. Here is some footage to make that case:
https://vimeo.com/139130557
And tbh I do think that you are better off getting a GH4. The A7s is nice, but lenses are fucking expensive and it can't even do 4k unless you get an external.
>>2691911
And to clarify, I have had experience with both the GH4 and the A7S, much prefer the GH4 for usability (but A7s has better colors bar none). Auto-exposure is fucking trash on A7S but you wouldn't be doing that if you knew what you were doing anyway.
>>2691912
What about the a7s II. I could got non sony prime lenses that fit it, but yeah, the gh4 is much cheaper than the a7s II.
>>2691911
Mini 4K/4.6K Camera
Which one?
>>2691918
also what about peripherals(like a cage or a monitor)? Will i have to buy everything from blackmagic?
Just fuck my life reading these comments.
>>2691918
If you can afford it go full 4.6k. Be wary, there is no test footage other than the one BM has released (which looks stellar).
Some things about the 4.6k ver:
Different sensor from 4k ver (new, developed for this camera)
Bigger sensor than Canon C300 Mark II (which costs 9k more)
15 stops DR in rolling shutter, 13 claimed in global
4.6k res allows for mastering in 4k while allowing vigorous image manipulation
Sources who have had experience with the 4.6k sensor claim that FPN has been taken care off, as well as the black hole sun problem
Can shoot 5 more types of resolutions than any competitor
Future proof resolution (4k won't be standard till maybe 4 years from now if that)
>>2691923
No, the URSA mini has standard 1/4 (I believe, might be 3/4 which is also standard anyway) holes so any peripherals that work with DSLRs and can handle the weight (which is nothing, mini with nothing is 5lbs) + the space (mini is quite long, can reach a foot with a normal prime lens) will work with the camera.
Do your research before getting CFAST cards and batteries however, can't point to anything directly but stick with proven products, go through the BM forum, far more helpful.
>>2691916
Lens support is just way better for the GH4, and the recent v-log availability makes it superior to the A7s. A7s has that god tier low light with crazy high ISOs and it can shoot shit beautifully, but again anything sony is just a huge pain in the ass to deal with.
>>2691929
>le i won't post anything helpful but i'll just rage over nothing posters
care to comment as to why any of these comments are trash m8? or are you just going to roll your eyes and type out an ill-mentioned, passive aggressive "ugh" and say that we're problematic?
>>2691930
OK, so i definitely cannot afford the 4.6 version, nor do I feel I need its capabilities.
The 4.0 seems like an option now but only if it can use regular dslr peripherals. Also what about its storage cards? They seem to be very expensive.
>>2691933
Yeah as I said the CFAST are quite an investment, but they provide very long recording times if you shoot in say 1080p or 2k, even at 3k you get decent times.
Again, that's going to run over your budget so I do recommend that unless you can come up with the extra money (don't put yourself in debt man, start easy) you go with the GH4. Keep the Mini in mind for the future however, by this time next year the camera will be either proven to be fantastic or proven to be shit.
I'm taking a plunge with the 4.6k. I'm working on a full length film and most of my work (as in my company) is commercial so I need that extra res (clients are mostly camera illiterate and don't know what the fuck 4k is but they always ask for it and WILL look you over for somebody that has it due to buzzword prestige).
>>2690911
Not rich at all, that's why I own a fucking 600D.
Just Yuropoor education tbh fam
>>2691930
panasonic g7.
seriously.
just save the money for something else.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJKRgMPk1BU
>>2691446
-TRIPOD (yes, get a tripod [WF717, Sandford & Davis Provista, Magnus VT4000 are fine] see notes) 100-$200
-get some can-lights from your local hardware store (make sure you note what type of bulbs you're using), a painters pole/dowel and a china ball or two (google it), and some dimmers for practicals - about $75 See note below.
-Grab some Foam Core (cover or paint one side with reflective material for cheap bounce board/reflector combo) - $10-$20 tops
-Thick Gauge Extension Coords - $10-$40, grab a few of these to be able to run lights easier
-A Fire Extinguisher (Yes, keep at least one of these with you when you shoot)
-A pair of gloves to handle the lights $10-$50
-A Knife/Multitool
- CTO/CTB Gels, Diffusion paper, & some C47S/clothespins (somewhat optional along with blackwrap, there are substitutes out there that are cheaper) - $20-$50 see notes
-A pole to attach your Zoom recorder (poor-mans boom-mic, DIY it to start) - $10-$60 see notes
-Black Posterboard/Foamboard or Cloth (poor mans flags to block light & make cookies/cuculoris) - $3-$20
-TAPE (paper tape, duct tape, gaffer tape [gaffer tape optional]) - $10-$30
-Extra Batteries & Cards for your camera
Notes:
1) Tripod is basic. You may want a lot more movement (that's fine), but you'll find it to be a very versatile tool. Don't buy a $20-$70 stills tripod, get one with some drag/counterbalance.
2) Bulbs are tricky, I know that Kino Flo now makes some nice 100W equiv CFL's with high CRI but there's plenty of options (the kino flo bulbs are around $25/per). Remember to keep the Color Temperature the same if you can so you can avoid mixing up gels (or at least label the cans with their Color Temp/Wattage).
3) Gels/Light Modifiers are where you can shape your light, this can help improve your production value (and teach you a lot of great trade craft) greatly and help you control your light.
4) Mic Placement is Key to good sound (get the mic to where it needs to be).
Guys, is there a market for freelance video editing? I'm semi-competent, can learn AE/Premiere if I have to. Do I have to bust my ass for free at first or can I start working like a big boy immediately?
>>2692469
You're going to have to bust your ass depending on your market.
Here at least, most people would rather hire someone to produce, shoot, and edit something than to hire 3 separate people. One of my biggest gripes with this industry is that 30 for 3 ideal.
>>2692469
Is there a market for being a freelance mechanic? I'm okay with cars, and I can learn about wrenches and transmissions if I have to. Do I have to actually put in effort and try? Or can I just go be an engineer at Ferrari immediately?
>>2692469
>can learn AE/Premiere if I have to.
>>2692606
Is there a market for being a freelance architect? I'm okay at drawing, can learn design if I have to. Do I have to learn to design things good and draw pictures for free or can I start at an architectural firm immediately?
C500 is at C300 price level
Hey /p/
Our company (nightlife/concert photography) has recently moved towards video with one of our photographers.
Now that word has gotten out that we are also doing video, we are now seeing more demand and I am wondering what would be a good set up to buy for the company to start using, and to train more people on?
Currently our Videographer uses an Sony A7s with Rokinon 24mm T1.5. But i'm wondering if there is a more cost effective set up for low light videography?
Our work isn't considered high value production, and the clubs want the lowest cost ($200/min of video) so I am trying to find something that wont break the bank but will still let us create a decent quality product.
Any ideas?
>>2693201
thats actually probably one of the cheapest and best setups for low light video
>>2693201
You already have the best low light setup. At a low price point the A7s is the best thing that you can get for low light. Even at higher price points it's still better.
>>2692806
Surely if you think those projects are not hard to do, you'd be making money doing them.
I have these nikkors:
24mm f2.8 ais
35 f2 af-d
50mm 1.8 ais
55mm micro 3.5 ais
80-200mm f.4,5 ais
135 f3.5 ais
I mostly shoot video with a7s
do I miss something?
>>2692974
Then um, buy one..?
Midaswell wait for somebody to swoop in and suggest a Sony product to you though.
>>2693304
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Camera Software Adobe Photoshop CS6 (Macintosh) Image-Specific Properties: Image Width 456 Image Height 320 Number of Bits Per Component 8, 8, 8 Pixel Composition RGB Image Orientation Top, Left-Hand Horizontal Resolution 96 dpi Vertical Resolution 96 dpi Image Created 2015:10:26 23:30:58 Color Space Information Uncalibrated Image Width 456 Image Height 320
Any YouTubers here?
>>2693382
Yeah I watch the videos on that.
>>2693285
working and shitposting here
::obamasweat::
poorfag here, do you know where I can torrent the NeatVideo OFX plugin? I see up to version 3 available for Vegas/Premiere, but I can't use those DaVinci Resolve 12.
I use DaVinci to balance all my footage before I export to DNxHD for editing in another program
>Go to film school they said
>>2694417
>media production
what did you expect m8
>>2694310
You should be editing first and only after that grading your edit. Editing first will cut down on the length of the footage that will have to be graded. This is very evident when you have to rotoscope specific moving regions in a frame to apply the grade there - doing this for footage or portions of it that will not get used is a pointless time waste.
The comments on this got pretty heated:
http://nofilmschool.com/2013/07/video-add-depth-to-your-shots
Reminds me, that as much as I find these spark notes for filming, I'm always better off playing around on my own and getting personal experience. Same thing with Post-Production color. I spent way too much time last month trying to be Tony Hawk's Pro Grader. "Apply this amazing Kodak 2383 Lut in DaVinci, my epic film look!" Ultimately, what I learned, and what was mentioned in 2 generals ago, get over the "flat" look, and it's helped my recent footage tremendously. Also, don't force shitty color schemes.
What's been most persistant/annoying/or unhelpful advice you've heard, whether it's with gear, lighting, or post?
Sorry for the noob question, but what is the difference between using ND filters vs built-in exposure compensation?
What's better and why?
>>2694441
I go back and forth between transcoding everything first and editing/balancing later (for longer projects), and only using/transcoded footage I know im going to use so it might as well be balanced (for shorter things, I usually do an 8 second heads and tails for each clip)
Still, any idea where I can get neatvideo for DaVinci 12? I know the professional DaVinci 12 has noise removal but I don't have that kind of money. I'm trying to do what this video does: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=degEMVPLPdU
Given Samsung's no longer committed to the NX system I'm surprised their cameras haven't gotten any price drops
>>2694518
Maybe because they didn't.
With their profits up, the system might live a few more years.
>>2694530
The only problem is that their mount has the same issue that Fuji's does, which is that it can't fit an FF sensor. Though they should still do price drops, and release that goddamn 300mm f/2.8 already
>>2694533
>problem
gearfag pls go
>>2694533
>FF
>in video
When will the 5d crowd give up?
>>2694643
They never will mate. They're lost souls, no hope.
I know that for the most part this is a gear thread, but from what I read there are a lot of active creative people here, so does anybody have experience writing?
I haven't really written anything since I dropped out of college about a year ago. Does anyone have any writing exercises? The only writing type thread I've seen is on /tv/ and from what I can tell it's a joke thread.
>>2694656
For 10 minutes a day, sit down and write anything. Stream of consciousness.
>>2694517
wubalubadubbump?
can't find the OFX plugin anywhere, and it's more expensive than the individual plugins.
Howcome only the highest bitrate of DNxHD can be 10-bit?
Wouldn't it be worthwhile to allot their lower bitrate options to also have 10-bit?
>>2694656
The exercises here did wonders to help me:
http://smile.amazon.com/M-Epiphany-Uncommon-Exercises-Transform/dp/1582973512/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1446227052
>>2694643
>video
>not film
>>2694656
I just hate sitting and writing stories. I prefer to write a detailed synopsis of the stories action and events and just sit down with a friend and go over the plot while he writes the script. But that's on the occasion if I make a short, I'd rather do visual work over narrative.
Can you come close to matching similar dimensions with film and digital cameras? I want to make a short film and I wanted to film a long take with a DSLR but use a 16mm for the rest of the film (hard to explain my idea but it requires most of the film being shot in one long take but have excerpts in a different scene/setting).
I know it's been done before, but not really one a small scale that's not a large format like 35mm/2K+
>>2694916
4K raw is the nearest you'll get to film
>>2694916
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16_mm_film#Digital_16_mm
Your blackmagic pocket cam will do ya, but it's hardly cheap...
(i always thought micro 4/3 was the equivalent of 16mm but I think might be wrong there)
>>2694932
as far as sensor size it matches 16 but i thought the niggy was talking about approximate res
>>2694935
>Thanks to advances in film stock and digital technology—specifically digital intermediate (DI)—the format has dramatically improved in picture quality since the 1970s, and is now a revitalized option. Vera Drake, for example, was shot on Super 16 mm film, digitally scanned at a high resolution, edited and color graded, and then printed out onto 35 mm film via a laser film recorder. Because of the digital process, the final 35 mm print quality is good enough to fool some professionals into thinking it was shot on 35 mm.[citation needed]
>The BBC considers Super16 a standard definition film format,[6] but other broadcasting and production companies may have different outlook. In particular, Scrubs has been shot on Super16 from the start and is aired either as 4:3 SD (first 7 seasons) or as 16:9 HD (seasons 8 and 9). John Inwood, the cinematographer of the series, believed that footage from his Aaton XTR Prod camera was not only sufficient to air in high definition, it "looked terrific."[7] However, the BBC has recently[when?] announced that it would no longer accept 16 mm as an origination format for High Definition video transfer.
In terms of resolution, just shooting at 1080p will have you covered
>>2694932
M43 matches S16
>>2691446
nex 5n is fine, but id spring a little more for the a6000 because its significantly better with XAVC recording-- you can find it on CL for 400
if i have the option of shooting either in AVCHD or MP4, which one should I pick and why?
also where can I learn about this stuff so that I don't have to pollute the thread with my noob questions
>>2695161
Google.
>>2693285
Ultra-wide angles
>>2695161
Heres a video on codecs.
https://vimeo.com/104554788
Just google anything you want to learn, you'll find resources.
>>2695310
thanks
![dji-osmo-02[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/b8OSq6q.jpg "dji-osmo-02[1].jpg")
Should I buy?
>>2695318
no.
>>2695269
I had a 14mm samyang, hated it
im thinking about 85mm
>>2695318
no.
get a diy kit.
>>2695471
Terrible bokeh.
>>2695318
boner nigger
>>2695471
Go for the helios 40-2 instead, it gives you that 1920s silent movie bokeh, it also has better build (all metal vs plastic with metal mount)
>>2695471
The 85mm 1.8 non-ai is fucking beautiful, but it only has 6 aperture blades, so stopping it down with lots of lights in the background is gonna give you hex shaped bokeh. If I could add more blades I would, but I don't have those kinds of tools.
people who aren't posting here it's because theyre busy on a shoot or are in post/pre production,right?
I have kind of a noob question:
I'm working on a project where I'm going to have to shoot an outdoor action sequence, something I've never done before. Is there any good way to go about using a prop gun in broad daylight without causing people / police to freak out?
>>2696396
Be very obvious it's a film shoot. Don't point the prop directly at people or towards them.
Maybe someone else can give more suggestions.
Can you recommend some good books on cinematography? Composition, lighting, production, etc.
>>2694475
Decreasing exposure is literally just pulling everything down artificially. ND filters cut the highs.
Change source > Filters/lens > ISO/shutter angle > post
>>2696384
Production here.
>>2696523
I see, thanks
>>2696523
How does it cut the highlights without affecting mids or lows? I thought it was just a tinted piece of glass
>>2696437
>>2696396
I'm gonna have to disagree here. It's not cheap but make sure you have a permit. Actors and even crew depending on the size of your production LOVE playing with prop guns. I tried to implement leaving all the guns in one spot but unless it's hidden people, ESPECIALLY the actors, love to fuck around with it (one broke cause they were constantly firing it) so if you decide to go out there make sure everyone gets the routine and keeps them hidden or in a box. Prop masters exist for a reason. Also all it takes is one resident or bystander to spot a gun that even though you think there's 10 people and a bigass camera people WILL call the cops and nowadays it's shoot first and ask questions later. Is not paying $300 for a permit worth risking you or one of your crewmembers getting shot?
>>2696549
They dont increase dynamic range, he's just full of shit
>>2696549
>>2696523
>>2694475
>>2696592
ND's reduce exposure by reducing the amount of light going into the lens (and therefore reducing the amount of light striking the sensor or film plane).
They do not specifically target any particular part of the frame (it will reduce exposure both in the highlights, midtones, and shadows). However a Grad ND (or half-ND with somewhat worse results [my opinion]]) allows you to reduce exposure for a portion of the frame (say, the Sky).
This allows you to reduce exposure without having any extra side-effects on the image (will not go into IR pollution/softening to avoid TL;DR ).
Comparatively, If you reduce the exposure using the "Built-in Exposure Compensation" - which I interpret as ISO, Shutter Speed, & Aperture (the exposure triangle) does greatly affect your image otherwise.
ISO: lower ISO's (depending on the camera) may be below the native ISO, which can lower Dynamic Range on digital sensors or require additional light to compensate for the mids/shadows being too dark to preserve highlights (you can make some adjustments in the grade with this but it's best to limit these to minor adjustments rather than pushing the mids/shadows). Check for documentation regarding the native ISO of your camera and perform tests for safety.
Shutter Speed: Less shutter speed=less motion blur which may make your image feel a bit weird if the subject doesn't call for it
Aperture: stop lens down = deeper DoF which may or may not be desirable, and still ND will be required for extremely bright situations (if stopped down too far it will reduce some performance on most lenses, optimally you want to be somewhere in the middle)
If it's a consumer-camcorder where you can't individually adjust these things, and ND will be better than the in-camera exposure compensation (as these camcorders tend to use all 3 to make up for it, and cameras will tend to only adjust SS & ISO due to their fixed-aperture lens).
I have a noob problem in After Effects. I'm trying to render a comp from a bunch of .png images of an animation I made in Blender. I Import the images as a sequence, play the preview, it's all good. But when I set all the output format options and framerate and I try to render it, somehow it renders it instantly and I get a 0 bytes .mov file.
>>2696722
I mean, it just renders a single frame.
>>2696727
Settings?
>>2696396
Get a Permit, Ask the office about it and they will know who you should contact. Unless you're in California/New York, chances are your permits aren't that horrifically expensive and there won't be that much red tape.
Do NOT film action sequences with prop firearms without a permit & controlling your location. They will shut you down, ticket you, confiscate equipment, or shoot you (worst case). >>2696575 is right here.
I would also add to make sure that you have signs & people controlling your location to make it absolutely clear that you are filming to avoid someone with a conceal-carry pulling a gun on your actor(s). The permit office will help you with these things as well.
Do not fuck around with this.
>>2693285
28mm (the f3.5 or series E 2.8 work great).
>>2694656
I know a few.
1) Read your script out loud with a few friends/collaborators - 'cast' them as the character and assign someone to read sluglines & descriptions. This is my favorite, as it allows you to hear the words out loud - which gives you a real idea of how your script will play out.
2) Magic Notebook, go to your local dollar store and grab a comp notebook and write ideas down by hand
3) Bubble-Chart Brainstorming - come up with a central idea, expand all the things related to your idea
4) Scene Cards [flash cards --> write/draw the scene, and then write it in screenplay format]
5) Describe a Familiar Place, and then an unfamilair place
>>2696722
Set in/out points for the render?
>>2694460
That is a pretty cringe worthy NFS post.
I'd say the one that bugs me most is "move the camera for more dynamic shots!", yes and no - moving your camera and making it look good costs more than moving your actors or composing your shot better.
I'm also annoyed whenever I see hyper-shallow DoF (particularly why I'm not a fan of the 5d) used improperly and called part of their 'vision' or 'creative style'. I can tell the difference between laziness & style, don't lie to me.
Hey brahs I'm going to disneyland/universal/etc from Australia next year...
Just wondering if a 'cheap' handicam (<=$400) would be worth buying over an RX100 strictly for video?
I have a 6D and will also be bringing a gopro. I have no issue doing video on the 6D but would prefer something quick and easy for video so I can give it to my sisters kids/etc as well.
