The pandemic is ending any second now... edition All video related questions and discussion is intended for this thread. Here we discuss techniques, gear and anything else related to capturing video footage. Please don't pretend to be an expert if you don't know what you're talking about. Kindly leave your ego at the door. Posting short films/scripts or other work you've done is encouraged. We tend to use and recommend DSLRs/mirrorless cameras because they provide phenomenal picture quality for their price, have large sensors (ie the same size used in high-end cinema cameras and higher) and have interchangeable lenses. In contrast, consumer camcorders normally have much smaller sensors and a fixed lens. >STICKY - https://pastebin.com/35u6DcnF >Helpful guide, additional books and more in-depth FAQs - https://web.archive.org/web/20200926115310/https://pastebin.com/kG0gRmTZ >NO ONE CARES WHAT AN EXPERT YOU THINK YOU ARE. IF YOU’RE ASKING BASIC-AS-SHIT QUESTIONS, YOU CAN’T BE ALL THAT GREAT. SEE ABOVE Previous thread >>3836187 Quick FAQS >what’s the best camera available on a “budget”? The blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k >>what’s a good beginner video camera? Anything that works, shoots at least 1080p and preferably has interchangeable lenses. Any recommendation beyond that will cause arguments so read the fucking sticky if that isn't satisfactory. >Can I use a zoom lens for video? Yes >Do I need cine lenses? No >Do I need 4k? No. It will make your footage look sharper if it’s in focus, and it gives you breathing room in post. But 1080p is still absolutely fine >Can someone tell me if my video is any good? Yes, but be prepared to receive harsh criticism. If you're going to waste 5 minutes of our time with a shitty out-of-focus montage of nothing then we'll tell you that it's crap
Is the jello effect actually that noticeable to most people?
>>3853819jello cam only affects content where people whip the camera about like autists, so music videos, sports action or YT/social media vids
just bought a Lumix S5, rly loving the video quality on it and I'm planning on getting an Atomos Ninja V to use with it to get ProRes Raw. It was a choice between that and the 6k Pro but I kind of prefer the highlight rolloff on this one coz it feels a bit more filmyI dicked myself over though coz I forgot L Mount lenses are stupidly expensive so currently just gonna be using a lot of my vintage glass, but I don't rly need autofocus anyway
So what fucked up the perspective in these shots? was it really long lenses? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p76AW6x3P0I
can someone pls post examples of scenes with 85mm lenses? i'm new to filmmaking and trying to get the hang of stuff but i can't seem to frame anything with 85, probably because i'm too used to a wider focal length from taking snapshits
>>3854228Nothing weird about it, just a couple of people side to side, maybe the aspect ration cropping both their lower bodies make it confusing for some people
>>3854234It depends on your sensor size but on super35 85mm is best for closeups. You can get some cool compressed space wide shots but you need to be really far away.
>>3854260similar to pic
>>3854260>>3854263thanks, pls keep posting more when you have time, i'm filming on d800 so i guess approx full frame
>>3854287In that case it's not as extreme, it would be generally suitable for medium to close shots. I definitely recommend having a few wider focal lengths.
>>3854234Long shot/extreme long shot, mainly for establishing scenes. You need a good location with plenty of room. Can be hard to match up with other lenses, unless you've a good set.
>>3854228they're standing next to each other lad
>>3854228It's a lack of perspective cues. If they had a wide shot to establish geography or used more layering in the frame it would be easier to read. Also if they had some "business" like grilling it could do double duty of visually separating them and the blocking would seem less stagey
>>3853819Rolling shutter effects are extremely noticeable (to me at least) on pretty much any pan that's even slightly aggressive. I don't know if you'd consider that the jello effect or if you're talking more about the effect where the shot is moving up and down rapidly alternately stretching and compressing parts of the shot. That I don't notice as much in films because you typically only get that when you have GoPro's mounted to car windshields and stuff. The old ASC manuals actually had tables that showed recommended panning speeds- I wonder if more recent manuals have added similar tables that pertain to maximum recommended speeds based on rolling shutter properties.Why global shutter isn't an absolute priority in motion picture cameras these days is beyond me. I'd rather have 1080p and global shutter than 8K rolling.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeEPSONCamera ModelPerfection 4490Camera SoftwareSilverFast 8.8.0 r24 (Oct 29 2020) 30c8121 29.10.Image-Specific Properties:Image Width1000Image Height1206Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution150 dpiVertical Resolution150 dpiImage Created2021.04.03 20:08:09Image Width1000Image Height1206
>>3854228It might not be just the lens or perspective but rather the line crossing. The camera jumps across to the other side of the actors which can be disorienting and cause your brain to disassociate the information it had from the establishing shot showing exactly where they were standing relative to each other. It doesn't help that the framing and acting in the close-ups does in fact make it appear as though they're looking at each other when the whole point of the blocking is that they aren't.
>>3854228It was /tv/'s desperation to meme about manlets.
>>3854457>Rolling shutter effects are extremely noticeable (to me at least)That's complete nonsense. If you know what you're doing, you'll have no visible rolling shutter effect on every shot that you can imagine. All that without even doing correction in post. Commercials, tv shows, movies, all use cameras that have rolling shutters, and you don't see it anywhere. For example, Deakins 1917 is pan nightmare and it was shot on a large format camera without global shutter.>I'd rather have 1080p and global shutter than 8K rolling.Fact is that you do have that. Cameras that do 8k will exhibit minimal rolling shutter effect when shot on lower resolutions. Rolling shutter becomes prominent when cpu and storage can't keep up with sensor capture, so it's just about processing power in combination with sensor and capturing technology. So if you're really anal about it, 8k camera and shooting at 1080p is your best option.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXQN1Arnav0Compare Red Monstro 8K to it's 2K sample.
Can someone pls help. Premiere pro just maxes out CPU and ram whenever I try and do anything.Gpu driver is up to dateFresh re install on pp, still happens. Help?
>>3854815well that's adobe shit, try enable video card acceleration in preferences or something alike, limit hardware usage, enable multi core usage if that's an option
>>3854815It could also be that you're running out of ram. Try enabling virtual memory, preferably on ssd disk, and see if it helps.
>>3854302lmao more like the rocklet
is the d800 any good for video? I've modded it so it records 64mbps fhd, is it even worth filming anything today? mostly interested in shorts/small reel clips as a beginner in filmmakingif anyone has decent examples of videos shot on d800 pls post, thanks
>>3856062Why wouldn't it be good? Outside of no ND filter, log, and other exposure tools (which you can get a with an attached monitor), the d800 is pretty good picture quality wise.
>>3856068do you know if it's possible to have it record in log or higher res video through other mods i may not have heard of?
Hi, this is pooranon again.What's the absolute minimum aperture lens you need to film acceptable 24p video with a 5D2 in low light? Best I have at the moment is f/3.8 and to get a decent low key exposure I need to use extreme ISO values and get banding pattern noise.
>>3856543First mistake. Low light is not for poorfags.Second mistake. While common sense would tell you to crank up the ISO on low light as much as possible before noise, and lower it on bright light...assuming no dual iso, the truth is you have to do exactly the opposite.For low key YOU LOWER THE ISO, and that will get you better dynamic range on the shadows and thus more detail. Here you will be forced to use good lighting.For high key, YOU CRANK UP THE ISO as much as possible before the noise starts shitting your picture. This will get you maximum detail on highlights. Here you will be forced to use ND filters.Just buy lights in your case.
>>385606264 mbps is far enough. Just try it. 10 years ago I made a 25 min short at 25mbps and with good lighting the film looks great
>>3856548>Just buy lights in your case.Do this
>>3853817please leave. You are not welcome here. /p/hotography is NOT videography at all.
>>3856548>While common sense would tell you to crank up the ISO on low light as much as possible before noise, and lower it on bright light...assuming no dual iso, the truth is you have to do exactly the opposite.Stop giving this advice. You can post graphs showing that it technically results in better dynamic range, but for 90% of people posting here (especially someone who's a poorfag) it will do a lot more harm than good and is stupidly impractical.It's the sort of thing you might do on a high budget set where you have several thousand-dollar lights that you can position however you want. Not for an inexperienced anon who's shooting on a nikon and wants to overcome lowlight with aperture.
>>3856759It's still a good advice. Light > ISO. You should never crank iso. It'll always look like shit. You don't need to spend a ton on lights, well placed weak and cheap sources will always outperform idiots going for night vision.
Does anybody have any good resources for learning to edit with davinci resolve?
>>3856769anything more crash-course like? the reason i ask is i have to put together a trailer in a week using resolve, so i need the basics of how the interface works etc.
>>3856628awesome, i'd love to watch it if you've got a link
>>3856767the official blackmagic introduction course is actually pretty goodhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEuFP7U7tB8&list=PLURZdvzBgI3r3CnaSPrG5JbhCpjn46cMX
I hate working with audio so much bros
>>3856793Amen to that.The workaround I use is to just use lav mics and a couple of zoom h1s. Works for 90% of situations.
>>3856795It's a pain in the ass to mix without it sounding like garbage. Any good guides on doing just basic mixing with background noise, music, dialogue etc.?>>3856800Yeah I'm using 2 lavs and a small shotgun mic. The audio is good but I just despise mixing it
>>3856771Try filmsimplified or learn color grading on YouTube. He has a bunch of tutorials both paid and free about how to use resolve for editing, sound design, vfx and whatever else you might want to do using resolve.
>>3856806Will do, thanks
>>3856769>>3856780>>3856806One thing these tutorials don't mention is how exactly is source media treated in resolve? I'm switching from FCPX and here when you import you can choose for it to use the original files in your source folder, or copy all the necessary files over into a dedicated 'library' folder for that specific project? How is this handled in resolve? I don't want to accidentally fuck up my original files
>>3856848Resolve doesn't copy or move anything anywhere, it may create proxy and 'optimized' files to an user specified location, but other than that it just works with the given file structure. Means if you move your media or the whole project afterwards just relink the files and you're good
>>3856793get an actual sound guy. if you are a broke boy do a work trade
>>3856867I see, thanks
how do you guys backup data? I bought a new external HD and figured I'd keep my stuff on my computer and on there just in case. But if there was a fire or something I could lose both. I really hate cloud technology because of how insecure it is, but I'm really thinking of uploading my footage just so I don't lose months of production in a worst case scenario.
>>3856900I got a synology nas for all active projects and another older one it auto-backups tothe moment a project is done it goes to a pile of pairs of mirrored hdds in the drawer and I delete it from the nas and backup
>>3856114There was someone years ago who made a custom profile for the nikon d800, I tried it once and it's okay. IMO, just record in a neutral or flat profile and in that profile, turn the saturation and contrast down a bit. Field test it first.
>>3856759>GraphsWho cares about graphs, show some irl results.
>>3853817>The pandemic is ending any second now...(i wouldn't hold my breath there pal)
>>3856955That's the joke
>>3856548 #I'm cranking the ISO to see something, otherwise it's nearly pitch black. This is dashboard illumination on a face I'm going for.
Guys, no one gives a shit. Shut the fuck up about burgers' retarded attempts at democracy.>>3856955just 2 more weeks...
I got some money coming in. Any new cameras coming out?
>>3857782Yeah, the one you have on you that you never use.
>>3856759pc to shitpost from, phone, phone bills, internet bills, camera, storage, lenses, cpu strong enough to run resolve... he's go enough for lights
Pricedrop of the S5 means GH6 is coming soon right?
>>3858187>GH6Meh, It'll be 8k hybrid. Best cine m43 is already here.
are speedboosters worth? I see a viltrox v2 for 94$ on my local listing and I got some canon lenses I could adapt
>>3858261get a metabones, viltrox is trash
>>3858267I've seen a lot of reviews saying Viltrox is 5% worse than metabones and like 1/5th the price. And tests I've seen of both adapters have breathing issues, if you own metabones what is your experience with it?
>>3858273>breathing issues>on an adapternoI own bothviltrox is a firmware roulette, in some combinations of body firmware and adapter firmware IS works, in some focus, in some both, in most neither. good luckalso the back focus adjustment is crap because you have to touch the lens elementit's noticeabely softer than the metabones below around f2 and mine and the play on the mount is shit as wellit's overall a very poorly made piece of shit
>>3858261That's a good deal, go for it, you'll learn it's advantages and shortcomings, just know that metabones are a lot better.
>>3858267>>3858296Is metabones worth it if I only have a couple lenses (4) to adapt? or should I just sell them and go for native glass. the best lens I would be adapting is EF 24-105 4L IS USM.
>>3858327Certainly not for autofocus performance, and not for portability, but it does genuinely improve image quality of the adapted lens.The idea behind speed boosters is sound and logical. It comes from adapting and adjusting cinema lenses to different setups, and it's still used today in that capacity.
>>3856971put a light in there, even if it’s your phone screen.
>>3858267this, poorfags stay btfo
why boost over native glass? are these ment for someone who fomo'd into a different brand or something?
>>3858327If you're going to adapt it's worth it. Don't Washington your time with viltrox and other garbage, they flare up and rob you of contrast.
>>3858477Because sometimes adapted glass is better or easier to get. Canon FD SSC is kino in a can.
>>3856971>This is dashboard illumination on a face I'm going for.Use a light with a gel to mimic the dash light color. Or do what >>3858367 recommends with a phone set to full brightness.
Here is a colorist masterclass you might enjoy:https://www.tacresolvetraining.com/eventsWalter Valpatto, from company 3, master classDARREN10 code gives you 10% offThanks to Darren Mostyn from YouTube for the code.Enjoy!
Best option b-cameras for little interviews?
>>3859781reasonable>>3859800wtf these aint interviews for the pres man
>>3859680https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D73g6RbfzikHere is a video about the colorist master class.Enjoy!
>>3859680>>3860053Are you getting paid to shill here?How about I post the link to the tracker that has the masterclass?
>>3860055It isn't my channel, I wouldn't try to profit off of /p/ I would try to red pill people on /p/ My channel is Wakko Warner the cringy channel with weird Q and Trump stuff on it. I just thought the class looked cool,
Could someone please link my a download for Fulltime Filmmaker course?Or recommend anything else to watch?Thanks
Anybody know of a good windows equivalent of iffmpeg/ffworks on macOS?
>>3853817Should I give up my dream of making a film? Is it as hard as I'm imagining it is? My idea for films are simple just people talking no big sets no big lighting I think I can work with the smallest people crew for just people talking. Is this actually feasible or am I just wasting my time?
>>3860350if you got to ask this question right here then you know the answer aleadyyou'll find another hobby in no time
>>3860354This was my plan tell me what I'm missing 1. Write a script or adapt one if I'm not a writer2. Storyboard every single possible scene. Know every single shot before I do anything3. Find locations and film to try and see how I will make shot before getting actors4. Read book on how to talk actors and like what snacks I need and how I pay them or whatever5. Hire actors give them script6. Film all scenes.7. Edit all the bad part outs8. Upload to vimeoWhat am I missing
>>3860358once you got the rest of your crew together they will help you and tell you what they need to do their job
>>3860361Thanks for the reassuring words. Never thought of that
hi guys, I 'm making my new short poster, and I would like someone to make this effect. Any of you could give it a try ? Or maybe give me hint on how to do it ?
>>3860365Some guy did tried on /wsr/ pic related. If anyone want to give a try here is the pic to modify https://1drv.ms/u/s!AmWzdmb_936cgUyqC4hRvcTbVyBU?e=PHm9AB
>>3860589Also the "final" poster
>>3860365>>3860589>>3860593Pretty sure the best way to do that is to take a photo of a hand doing that with a sheet from the right angle and then shopping that onto the picture of the tv.Doing it purely in ps will look shit unless you get someone extremely talented
>Work your ass off on a narrative project.>Pouring your soul on the edit, the audio, and grading>Version the producer shows was not the version you sent themHow do you guys deal with this shit?
>>3860835>Working your ass off and pouring your soul on a project not even your own>And with a producer being the commissioner instead of him working for youDeserved it, you got your just desserts for pretending you were important
>>3860835just burn in a big fat timecode on every render except the final one
>>3860365>>3860589The problem is that the your shot has too much contrast. Its a dark room with a bright white screen. You can't really get the same skin texture. If you look at the videodrome pic, the tv and the screen itself is well lit so the flesh parts have detail and its not just blown out glowing white. Think the /wsr/ job is as good as you can get it, could be better imo if it didn't had that swirly painty filter on. a Retrace horizontal lines filter along with some static would be better fitting of the VHS era imo
>>3860365They did it practically with front projection and some kind of stretchy material
INT. LION CAVE - DAYPrisoners who refused to kneel to Zeus are thrown into a dark roomGUARD #1:Since you refused to kneel, you’ll become the lions meal.A metel door is opened. Lions come through the door and eat the prisoners.GUARD #2:I guess their God didn’t save them. People who don’t pray to Zeus become the lion’s prey.The lions roar and run around the room.
>>3863207Oh my goodness, this is amazing, we LOVE it! But we just have a few notes. You know how marketing is, always trying to hit their metrics and the like haha. So we have a few minor changes, additions really, to help appease the money guys. And we feel they help improve your story. Honestly, you probably won't even notice that we changed anything. >INT. PRISONER'S PIT - DAY>Prisoners who refused to kneel to Athena are thrown into a dark room>FEMALE GUARD #1:>Since you refused to kneel, you’ll become the dragon's meal.>A metal door is opened. The roaring of the crowd thunders through as the prisoners are pushed out in an arena.>3 huge dragons circle the skies, ridden by 3 strong naked women with huge knockers>The dragons descend rapidly and breathe fire on the prisoners and eat them violently>The crowd cheers>FEMALE GUARD #2:>I guess their balls didn’t save them. Men who don’t service Athena become the dragons’ prey.>The dragons roar and fly around the stadium as the all-female audience break out into a lesbian orgy
>>3863232A lesbian orgy now that’s fucking as kino as fuck, it will break bank at the box office. :-)
>>3863232Ok marketing let's go do that shit !
>don't have camera >think I'll take tons of photos and videos >taking a bit but not nearly as much as I thought Anyone else?
>>3863232wtf this sounds based
got the canon RPwhat now?
>>3863638You shoot with it and get decent results but then see some shitposters who convince you that your camera's shit because the 4k is cropped so you end up buying a meme camera with awful ergonomics and a smaller sensor just to fit in and then complain that it's impossible to break into the industry
>>3863655you need a hug?
is there a vscoe filter for the video world? I use their film presets in lightroom and i'm a big fan, id like to buy some film-like presets for Premiere
>>3865104is there a good site to download these, the 16mm look is naturally popular
I'm about to obliterate my credit to debt ratio and get a Sony FX3
>>3865250whyit's just an a7s3
>>3865253I don't totally know. I would have to test drive both cameras to know if the $500 price difference was worth it. The youtube meme seems to be that most people wouldn't bother replacing an a7S III with an FX3 but if they had neither they would get an FX3 over an a7S III.
>>3865103i use tom bolles cineprint16 to get this kinda look -- though i must warn you1. i am a total noob when it comes to video/grading (i probs shouldn't even give advice), and cineprint promised to get me "that look" quickly, so i bought it. i bet you could achieve the results without buying ANYTHING so up to you really2. i apply the preset but it looks SO BAD that i need to tweak absolutely every stage of it in resolve to make it work. so there is still a lot of work involvedbut yeah here's the latest example i used it on and i think it looks pretty good (gh5, sigma 18-35, probably 100iso, f1.8):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMs3rig9-2M>pic related is the original image out of the camera(also if anyone could help me know what is wrong with my music product, i would appreciate it, cos we started 3 months ago and have not gotten an audience at all. sometimes i think the music's not good enough but other times i think i'm just not attractive enough to be successful. any criticism would help)
>>38659021. It's going to be hard to pull a natural looking image with those mixed colored lights2. You're overexposed. Turn on zebras and protect your highlights
>>3865906thank you for giving directed and actionable feedback, i've never thought to use that tool in a situation like this but ur totally right. thank u anon
>>3865902>overexposed>try getting at the same level as the musician because your video looks like what you see when your are in the bar, from the bottom.>activate ibis or find some sort of tripod>get your zoom-dezoom smoother
Anyone fuck with anamorphic? Don't see it mentioned much here. I just picked up a cheap Proskar in shitty condition to celebrate the new 2.0 firmware on the S1. My clamp hasn't arrived yet but I'm curious about others experiences. Is double-focusing as big a dealbreaker as the shills make it seem?
>>3866349>Is double-focusing as big a dealbreaker as the shills make it seem?yeah, absolutely unusablegood luck finding an hcdna
>>3866354Damn. It definitely doesn't fucking help that the focusing scale on the Proskar is in feet while all my lenses are in metres
>>3866368even if it was in meters the specific flange distance it's calculated for exactly matching up with the lenghts of your taking lenses and whatnot is highly unlikely so it's always off
Does anybody have material on the latest thared from the American Cinematographer?
>>3860350If you get a chance, watch this.
>>3860358Make small bits first. Free marketing videos, 3 min stories for vimeo, etc. You lear a lot by doing.
>>3866466You mean the magnet link?https://archive.nyafuu.org/p/thread/3836187/#q3846306
>>3866746Yes exactly.But the magnet link is dead.Maybe some new ?
>>3854457>Why global shutter isn't an absolute priority in motion picture cameras these days is beyond meThey are, at least for for the high end market. The thing is that for majority of productions. Having higher dr and high ISO over a global shutter is better value proposition to eng and indiy work. Especially when current sensor technology near minimal roll that clients don't care or notice the artefact. Especially now days where cg has taken over the 2 works that need this type of camera, car commercials and crash cams.
>>3867423>They are, at least for for the high end market. Not really. If it's Red, it's rolling, if it's Arri, it's rolling. Global is pretty rare as in digital. Sony has it, but nobody uses Sony and their nocolor science. It's worth mentioning that Arri tests really well, so it's almost as globa, but Red can be warpy as fuck at higher resolutions. They're moving to global, though.>car commercialsIf they're using a drone, it's a rolling shutter. It doesn't matter when you're following and panning along with a moving car. Rolling shutter is a meme anyway. Just be smooth while panning and you'll not have it on any camera that's made in this century. I've even heard director and dp recently in conversation talking about preferring rolling shutter blur for some reason. Made me chuckle a bit, but they do drugs, so whatever.
>>3867430> but they do drugsDoing drugs, especially psychedelic drugs, is part of the Hollywood lifestyle.
>>3867703I was listening to a podcast with the DP from Joker and he was saying how when he first got his shot in the industry as a film loader, the guy who was his supervisor was smoking weed all the time in the trailer.
>>3867430>Sony has it, but nobody uses Sony and their nocolor science.What are you, from 2012? The Venice does have a rolling shutter. Current Sony color science is respectable, and plenty of movies and TV shows use it, not just Sony-produced ones.
>>3867823> smoking weed all of the timeWeed is a psychedelic, and is used by many creative people. You only need shrooms or acid if you have a major case of writers block. Weed just helps you relax like drinking but using a ton of weed is much safer than drinking a ton of alcohol (which is something a lot of writers like to do. cf. Hemingway)
>>3867991> Weed just helps you relax like drinking but using a ton of weed is much safer than drinking a ton of alcohol (which is something a lot of writers like to do. cf. Hemingway)Well, they're both bad. But weed with fry your brain, while alcohol will only fry your body. Sticking to water and waiting for druggies to fall over is fool proof plan.> Current Sony color science is respectable, and plenty of movies and TV shows use it, not just Sony-produced ones.lol, no
Hello, newfag here Looking for a small portable camera to film travels and make small cinematic videos for myself just to edit and capture memories, with a gimble. Nothing too professional. Read the sticky and it says>get the m50Was wondering anyone tried the sony zv1? I know its basically for youtube vloggers and such, however I like the small form factor and you just point and shoot. However some drawbacks like micro-usb and the shitty battery life doesn't let me to pull the trigger. Was thinking to wait a couple months and see what Sony does with the Mark 2 of this camera. Since they're rumors they will use some kind high-end tech from the A1.Also I could get a G7X Mark III barely used from a friend but when I checked the reviews I like the Sony video quality much better.I don't intend to spend more then 1k since I'm not a professional nor I intend to be. Any tips ?
>>3868525You should get an interchangeable lens camera. Being able easily upgrade your lenses if you want a fast prime or something is pretty nice. Also a larger sensor will give you a better image and more ability to control depth of field.You can get a good deal on a used one.
>>3868525the most annoying thing about being a videographer is how fast the amount of junk you haul increases, especially as your camera gets bigger. if I was trying to shoot and travel I would buy the smallest contained system I could afford and just learn to live with whatever limitations that system has. also, the more legit your stuff looks, the more unwanted attention you get and it can be harder to film in places.
>>3868645>if I was trying to shoot and travel I would buy the smallest contained system I could afford and just learn to live with whatever limitations that system hasThis. I figure after I finish the film I'm working on I'll grab a small point&shoot that does 4k (badly) and go travelling with it
>>3853817Pricing question>I'm shooting a series of medical instructional videos for a client, and need some help with how to price myself.Context- Client hired me to film a bunch of educational videos on medical procedures- these videos are used in an educational course that the client runs for learners looking to get ahead on examinations- course costs $1500CAD per person, and they get about 50 participants per course- course runs multiple times a year- Client is better-than-an-acquaintance to me, closer to a friend/mentor/potential future business partner to my gf. So I don't want to gouge them, but I do still feel comfortable giving them a proper price- I have already done two days of filming out of the four scheduled- I am also editing the videosOkay, so I'm filming 12 procedures/examinations. This will be, at a minimum, 12 exported videos -- perhaps more. The videos will also have text on screen. I am using two cameras and multiple angles. There are four filming days total, we've already completed two of the filming days. Each day has been about 12 hours each of work. What is a fair rate to charge this person? Should I go hourly? Or should I go for a "per item" basis. Normally I would charge $1500 for a single day of filming, then about $1200 for an edit (All Canadian dollars). But that was usually when I would be hired for single day/single video shoots. This is multi day multi video. Not to mention, the client is going to using this for their for-profit course which brings them considerable money (this course is on top of their current health care job. That is to say, this is a side-gig. Though, I think this may be what brings them most income). Any help is appreciated, anons <3
>>3868664Just get an lx100
>>3868721I too want to know what would be a fair price to charge people.
>>3868721How much are plumbers and carpenters paid in your city?How much would they charge for a 4 day project?For "creative"work i charge £45.00 an hour minimum and anythnig on that is my profit margin.
>>3868664>I figure after I finish the film I'm working on I'll grab a small point&shoot What are you working on?
>>3868721>you didnt agree on price before filming>doing it for a good friend>hes really good friends with your girlfriendI'm not a vid businessman, but this is stupid in so many ways.
>>3870071OP is going to end up taking macros of his own tears.>As his "Friend" rails his girlfriend while his camera records the procedure.>As he whores himself to fat old men to make rent.
>>387007Filming his girl boneing another dude>>3870076> cuck pornThat’s so kino.
Should I get the BMPCC4K?I need to be making more videos and my current camera is just not cutting it.I shoot in some harsh and ugly environments and I'm hoping that raw and proper color correction will help me alleviate that.I have watched alot of reviews and comparisons of the Black Magic and other hybrid cameras like the gh5 and Sony and but they are either alot more expensive compared to Black Magic or the reviewer has some soulless job that requires him to "run and gun" it and plop out videos in a few days for his clients.I guess what I'm trying to ask is are the criticisms of the Black Magic valid for a hobbyist? I don't want to make a video every few days at the cost of quality, I can redo the shots if I have to and I don't mind carrying some extra gear no matter how inconvenient if I have to.
>>3870066I've been making a low-budget feature film for the last couple of years. It's going surprisingly well but that might just be cope.When I finish, I need to force myself to take a long break so sometimes I like to fantasize about what I'm going to do
>>3870552If you're prepared to deal with the obvious shortcomings (bad battery life, shit af etc) then its image quality can't be beat for its price.That's not the same as saying that it will magically fix shit cinematography/lighting
>want to cut and convert a small candid clip>see that AE got an update>edit it and start rendering>15s 4k clip takes 9minutes to render>going from average 12% cpu usage before update it's now pic relatedWhat the fuck have they done? My entire pc is struggling like a bitch.
What is the best way to make kino videos as a one man band filming my self? Should I do voice overs, and montage footage of good looking images?
>>3871232>Adobe Ae>Adobe Meyou've done this to yourself>>3871323>kino videosvideos of what?the answer would be different depending on whether you're making vlogs or guitar covers or a TV series commentary or an instructional video on how to make a trumpet sound with your mouth
>>3871323Make a series of short nature documentaries that parody planet earth and blue planet, using your garden/local park. It will only work if you do it super seriously though.
>>3871335Could I make a parody of planet earth by filming Street Workers in my city and do it like a natgeo film talking about their habits and habitats ...
>>3871339yeah that sounds extremely funny
Hi video autists, I'm looking for some practical advice on lights.I've read the portion of the sticky dealing with lights but I don't have any experience with lighting for video so I'm wondering, are those cheap-ish (~€100-140) battery powered led lights like the Aputure AL-F7 powerful enough to convincingly light up a scene made up of, say, two people in a 4x5m room, if I get two or three and set them up 2 to 3m from the subjects?They look a lot more convenient to set up and tear down and carry anywhere than a homemade set (or more) of fluorescent tubes attached to sockets bolted on sheet metal, even if the latter would cost a fair bit less, but I have no clue how many AL-F7 (or similar) I'd need to really light up a scene, nor how much I can cheap out on those by getting chink knock offs before the leds' quality plummets.Ease of use outdoors is more of an added bonus that an important factor I'm considering, so those mains powered, serious looking things like the Godox SL-60W are also an option and one of those costs just about the same as an AL-F7 (or similar), will their significantly higher power translate to that much more light?Any help figuring this out will be much appreciated as I don't know shit about video lighting, thanks.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:
>>3871339you could do whatever you want really
>>3871343>will their significantly higher power translate to that much more light?of courseF7 are way too weak to be used for any type of keylight other than maybe extending some candlelight, don't bother with anything under 60ish watt (non- bicolor, for bicolor double that and for rgbw at least triple) for keylightsfor a normal table scene with two people you're looking at least at a 120ish watt led china ball if you want soft overhead or two 100ish watt 60cm led softboxes if you want crosslight, that's the very least to get a typical iso 800 f3 ish exposurestuff like F7s are great for small versatile accent lights, but that's all
>>3870552>I shoot in some harsh and ugly environments and I'm hoping that raw and proper color correction will help me alleviate that.garbage in, garbage out. sounds like you should learn CG instead.
>>3871352I see, thanks.Given that I already own a few octaboxes, umbrellas, stands, barn doors and such props I use for stills work would there be a significant advantage to the rectangular led arrays over the chink prophoto knockoffs inside octaboxes?To my uneducated eye the former look like they might take a bit less time to set up and occupy a bit less space, but they're more expensive for the same amount of power and the bigger ones are still mains powered.
>>3871361yeah I'm not a huge fan of panel lights either, especially all the low power ones are useless, of course something like an aputure nova or a skypanel is nice because you just pop it on a stand and got a nice soft surface with no shit dangling around and hardly any space required, but that's about italso pretty shit to boom since all the good ones are rather heavy, using them overhead is not easy
>>3871362Gotcha, I'll see what deals I can find on prophoto-looking lights.
>>3871441the second generation of godox 60, 150 and 300w ones is pretty okay, just hope that you don't get one with a shitty loud fan like in the first gen, way too noisy for audionanlite forzas are quite alright and top of the cheap stuff is still aputure, pretty much everything they make is pretty legit and all their modifiers from fresnels to softboxes are great
>>3871232Adobe is using your cpu to mine etherium.
>>3860358between step 1 and 2 is marking setups, making shotlist, and creating progressive blocking chart. those are normally directors job, and very essential. you dont want to hire and artist and should be wary OF hiring an artist who will do storyboarding without these specific guidelines, and even then your crew is not going to be looking at the storyboard. that previs is for your sake to see if you want to change anything honestly. the crew will go off those first three i mentioned, and they need to be correctly labeled and organized to be instantly legible to another person
How can i get good lighting when theres something directly overhead casting a strong shadow? Im filming porn essentially and i have a close up causing a body to be in front of the camera blocking out basically all light
>>3872701learn to bounce light nigga
I just got some funding to revamp my videography set-up.I currently have an A7sii on a tripod and a Ronin S that doesn't get enough use.Should I buy an A6300 and downgrade to an SC, for a second, ready to go rig? What would I need for autofocus?
>>3872721it's all fineget more lights
>>3870046>>3870055>>3870071I'm honestly starting to think tens of thousands for this thing isn't ridiculous. But I'm still getting anxiety over asking for this amount of cash because I normally work with University departments where I'm funded through grants. And whatever they get is what they can pay -- and I'll often just agree because it's usually a very cool/interesting shoot.But in this case I will have:>4 days of filming>12 examinations>2 cameras + 1 go pro (and lighting and wireless mics)>Multiple shots and takes per scene in order to properly show how a procedure runs (ex. where hand placement is, etc.)>Will be producing, at the minimum, 13 videos, perhaps more>Each exported video will be at minimum +3 minutes (for shorter exams) and upwards of 10 minutes for the longer ones>The videos are for a person who created the course, and they will be making money using these videos since it will enhance their product (the course they offer)The videos will have text and arrows on screen, and maybe some light animationI'm thinking of asking for $2000 per day of filming, and then multiple thousand for each finished video. Any thoughts?Looking online, I'm seeing production companies charging, at minimum, thousands per minute of exported video. The least expensive I've seen is $1500 per minute of finished video. The only thing is I'm doing multiple videos for this person, and perhaps I should give a discounted rate for the batch?
Canon EOS M + Magic Lantern. Are there any adaptable lenses (thinking c-mount) which will provide a wider angle view when using 2.5K RAW? I really like the look and aspect ratio of 2.5K RAW, but fuck me it's a 3x crop on top of a 1.6x crop. Canon's own 11-22 ends up at 52mm equivalent.
>>3867991>duuuude i like smoke weed to get the creative juices flowing man i like have great ideas high manAnyone who does this is a completely uncreative retard
>>3871343I have F7. Spilling it against the white ceiling feet away from subject at 100% translates into merely okayish exposure at around iso1600 on modern FF with 2.8 lens. With multiple of those I can see it being merely workable but its still hackish, I guess you can make it work better with a bunch of reflectors or if you bolt multiple panels together, since it still gonna be cheaper. Overall, proper fixture with a softbox is the way to go.
>>3872998Why don’t you ask for a percentage of the profit? That’s what a lot of DOPs do if they think what they are filming in going to turn a profit. I think that asking for a percentage of future profits from a video is called points or something like that.
>>3872998>I'm still getting anxiety>any thoughts?No reason to be anxious about asking for the price your work is worth to you.Here's a fun heuristic: the more money I spend the higher the worth of what I'm buying is.Plus if the client isn't an expert the best he can do is ask around and look up the price of similar services, and if your prices are comparable he'd have no reason to be spooked by your asking price.Taking pictures has been a side gig for me for years and I have had all sorts of people ask me for quotes, close friends included, and most of them had no idea how much a photo shoot would cost, though after they say "Wow that's a lot!" I just say that's my asking price, and they're surely not the ones getting offended.I live in Italy though, which is one of the places with the highest number of "I have a cousin with a google pixel 5/eos 40D who can do the same for a pizza and a beer!" per capita, so your client is likely going to be more respectful than most of the ones I've done business with.As for your particular gig I have no clue how much video makers charge in Canada, and 2kCAD per day + ~3kCAD per video seems steep to me, though the price you can ask for will depend on the market and also how professional your services are.Everybody can buy two cameras and three lights, but not everybody can arrive on time, look and sound presentable day in day out, make it sound like the client's needs are 100% understood...Video production companies have the big advantage of being companies, so on paper they look bigger, more organized, more capable... and they are more often than not, so consider that when looking at their asking prices.I'd personally charge the man my going rates + a premium because of the commercial nature of the project - a modest bulk discount.
>>3871448>>3873105I'll keep that in mind, thanks.Anyway, back again with a color management question:if I'm working (on location) with low quality, low CRI lights and taking stills using a single camera I'd import a few photos in a RAW converter, fuck around with the color editor/curves until the colors are convincing, and then apply the same color correction settings to all the pictures as a starting point.Wanting to go above and beyond I might get a color checker card, shoot it, create an ICC profile for that particular scene and gear set and load it in the RAW converter to use for the set.How would I go about doing something similar with video, maybe with multiple cameras?I'm using Resolve to edit amateurish videos and as far as I understand things I can't import an ICC profile inside it, though there's a "color matching" option allowing me to create a sort of color profile to apply to clips using either a datacolor, xrite or DSC color card.Me being a cheap fuck I'd rather not spend €80 for one of those when the chinks offer a similar product for €15, with slightly different colors, for which the RGB values are provided, and that's usable when creating an icc profile because I can manually select which values the colors I shot (should) correspond to, but I can't use that in Resolve because there are only color card presets without custom options.Is there a way around this, or should I just shell out for a brand name color card, or should I stop giving a fuck about this since I'm only making amateurish videos anyway?
>>3873280a grey card is cheaper
>>3872745To be fair, lighting is rarely my issue when it comes to videography.
>>3873330I have recently bought a grey card, though that doesn't help with matching color between cameras or getting more accurate colors from one.
>>3873280I bought a color card and it helps me a lot. I tend to shoot outdoors and for long periods of time which means constant changes in color of light. I have a nice camera, an average camera and a below average camera that I shoot all at once. I'd never be able to match anything without a card. I'm not good enough to do that.
>Atomos Ninja V can now record 8k prores raw externally for the canon r5Holy shit, that's kind of insane. The r5 is a legitimate 8k cinema option now
Hey vid, my camera has just been collecting dust (metaphorically) and I want to use it to make a film. However I have absolutely no ideas. Can you guys give me some ideas of fun shirt films I can make by myself in like a day?
>>3873800>fun shirt filmsof the wet variety
>>3873800Film yourself jerking off at funny angles
>>3873800Make a snuff film.
>>3873800>>3873802>>3873804>>3873833I wish we could have more non-shitpostey answers when someone asks a question like this, finding writing prompts for short films that can be done solo or with a small crew in a day or so is legitimately one of the hardest parts of being a beginner in filmmaking
>>3873836I'm not telling you to NOT make films and don't want to come off as shitting on you, but what the fuck do you even want to make a film for if you don't have any idea what you want to make? Why do you want to make art if you have nothing to say? Any writing prompt you would get from here or anywhere else is most likely generic garbage. Do you want to make student film #2489385 about a guy talking to his doppelganger about depression or make something that represents you and your interests? If you're only interested in videography, go work as a DP for someone, I'm sure a lot of amateur productions are looking for people all the time.
>>3873843I'm not even the anon who asked the original question, but having a certain vision of the themes and tone you want to go for with your film does not necessarily translate to always knowing how to transcribe them into a cohesive short narrative. I'm pretty sure he has something to say, he just doesn't know how to do it within the limitations he's given, and that's a common plight amongst starting directors.
>>3873843No you don't understand. He has super original ideas and loads to say but he just needs us to do the easy part of figuring out a story and telling him how to do everything>>3873858Being a director is literally just problem solving. 90% of the job on set is figuring out solutions to problems quickly. If you can't figure out how to start, then you've failed the first hurdle.I'd even go further and say that anyone who starts off trying to figure out how to make a short using only themselves as an actor should reevaluate their entire trajectory because they're clearly too much of a pussy to follow-through and actually look for actors.I don't say that to be mean, but people have this unrealistic expectation that you can just pick up a dslr and film shit and suddenly gain critical acclaim without putting in the work.
>>3873800>>3873836There are no easy answers to that question. It's basically a meme at this point.If you're actually new and trying to figure out where to start, get into street photography and go from there. Try talking to people and taking their picture. Then slowly move into capturing some video footage at the same time.
>>3873858If you have even anything resembling an idea of what you want do thematically writing prompts will be completely useless to you. Learn the basics of screenwriting (structuring a story, characterisation and whatnot) and if you STILL can't form a short film maybe film-making isn't for you. I think the obsession with gear most amateur filmmakers have has caused everyone to forget that film is ultimately a creative field.
Hey so basically i started making a no budget Action/Horror film with my friends as a joke, but the thing ended up with a lenght of 60min+. It was made using a canon 7D with basic canon lenses, just sharing the trailer here (english subs btw), right now im stuck on postproduction hell because im on a learning curve of After Effects.https://youtu.be/IXwWkRYDz60Anyone else enjoys making movies with friends?
>>3874481Do you have a friend who knows fusion or after effects who could help you with post?
>>3874501No, im the only one who has interest in making movies, my friends are just along for the ride, helping with anything i ask them but actual filmmaking knowledge zero.
man fuck you guys, not useful at all. Just watch imma make something badass today.
>>3874520>>3873800For now, here is something I made a month ago.
>>3874530It's not bad. That 3mb limit is fucking with you, am I right?
>>3874530It just means I have to keep my clips short and export them in really low quality.
>>3874535>>3874538well apparently so, since I replied to the wrong post.
>>3874481Looks goofy but fun! Hope you get to post the result here when it's completed.
>>3874567Thank you, i would love to share it. We tried to make a movie using the least effort possible, trying to get funny results and laught at ourselves. But the joke kept getting bigger until we ended up with something watchable.
>>3874530Holy shit, someone posted a vid. I'm impressed. I didnt realize this board can do webms. I'll make one sometime. Anybody have a theme suggestion?
>>3874481I like your pacing. The scene cuts does not feel amateur at all. Good job.
>>3874481Cool project. I bet you learnt a lot. I will make one horror short this summer. Some friends are into acting, other into make-up, directing... and I will be behind the camera. Any ideas of cool shots you always wanted to see I could put on the movie? Got gh5, a couple of lens, a gopro, a lot of lights, tripod, rig-cage...
How do I make a GoPro take better videos. Hero 4 to be exact.Obviously the vibrations are a physical thing, but there's gotta be a way to make the video look better right? https://files.catbox.moe/qzn0rb.webmI guess I'll also ask how do I stop vibrations. Some kind of sponge or something?
>>3874571Cute girls[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:PhotographermocahImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpi
>>3873060look at getting a speedbooster, the viltrox one should be fine and is pretty cheap. other than that i would say look at a 12mm, the cheap option would be a 7artisans, quite a few test vids with the eos m on youtube
>>3875108Anything less than on a 12 c mount isnt that great apparently. I wanted to do this same thing. I've always wondered about fisheye and lens correction in post. If that is viable.
>>3875139i'd definitely check on youtube cause i've seen a ton of c mount tests, most of them with vignetting but only on 1080/5k frtp
I'm having a difficulty choosing between the xt4 and a7siii.I do equal amount of photography and video, hence these two since they stick out in the crowd.Don't have a worthy amount e-mount lenses to stick to sony.Kind of clouded in their pros and cons at the moment, any of them would be a great choice but I don't want to make it a coin flip either.What's /p/s take?
>>3875161Do you need to record long videos? Because the Fuji tends to overheat
>>3875161Personally, I really wouldn't want to go back to 12mp for stills. OTOH, I wouldn't want to lock myself into APS-C. Though if I had to choose between these two and could only shoot with one for the next year I would take 26mp crop over 12mp FF for stills.If you can push your budget the Canon R6 is awesome on all points for stills and video, you just have to watch the record times OR record externally.
>>3875161I would go for the A7S, 12mp is more than enough even if some piss babbies tell you otherwise and the capabilities in both image and focus outperform the Fuji.But problem is editing, the files are easy to manage but need their proper tweaking because Sony is not very good at colors and skin textures.
>>3875201slog works transforms just as well as the fuji log, it's all standardized and well supported at this point
>>3875172They fixed that already with the latest patch.>>3875161Xt4 for better ibis, siii for better slomo. 12mp is honestly a little low for a hybrid, but should still be usable.
>>3875161wait for the A74 unless you really need 4k 120p
>>3875172>>3875197>>3875201>>3875240>>3875622I think the 12mp is the dealbreaker now that I've given it an overnight thought.There will always be a steady stream of new sony fullframes, waiting on a feature that really makes it an obvious pick and sell the xt4.
>>3875727>12mp is the dealbreakerwhy would you need a bigger resolution exactly?
>>3875740For the photography part. Most of the stuff I shoot there's moments where I don't have the time to get closer/switch lens and need to crop.
>>3875745eh I guess that makes sense, but still 12mp is quite a lot of pixels
>>3875753not reallythe absolute baseline since a couple of years seems to be around double that
>>3875754and for what exactly? zooming more? billboards and posters are printed in single digit mp values, 12mp is more than enough for 99.8% of cases.
Guys any recommendations for lenses when I'm vlogging? My YouTube channel just reached 1k subs and i want to start improving the quality of my videos. I own the sigma 30mm and i can't vlog well with that so I'm using a 12-35mm mft lens with the gh5 but i don't like that small seasons cause of 'muh bokeh' although i know is a good camera
>>3875800there are a few Laowa wide primes with decent reviews. the 17mm 1.8 is pretty cheap, but you'll have to manual focus
>>3875846>17mm 1.8it's mft i'm looking for an aps-c lens
>>3858191I really want one of those.I can’t justify it at all.
>>3875756I can't agree with this. 12mp is only about 180 ppi at 16x24 with zero cropping. That's pushing it for a lot of subject matter, though it is fine for some subject matter.Personally I'm a pixel whore. Jumping to 50mp felt like jumping to MF digital...which I could never afford for my personal kit...and I fucking love the detail and natural sharpness that you get with good glass. And of course the ability to crop heavily while still ending up with a 25-35mp image.XT4 is a hell of a machine. Again, if I had to choose between the A7sIII or XT4 and only shoot with one for a year or two, I would choose 26mp crop over 12mp FF. The A7sIII leans towards video because of its lower resolution. If this guy >>3875727 was primarily interested in video but only a little bit in stills, the A7sIII. But equal interest in both? 26mp makes a difference.I still think he should consider the R6 since it hits every box (FF, decent photo rez, great 4k IQ, fantastic AF, flippy screen, IBIS).
>tfw camera limits video to 10 minutesI think it only applies to 720p+ and not 480p, I might have to film in 480p and then edit it later to make it look like it was filmed to VHS or smthing
>>3853817>manual focusgeneral question, not intended as a slight or direct response but why is manual focus such a big issue? coming from a film perspective, why does manual focus appear to be such a chore to some photographers? isn't it just basic photography? are new gen photographers and videographers so lazy as to solely rely on the autofocus crutch?
>>3876024>why is manual focus such a big issue?>are new gen photographers and videographers so lazy as to solely rely on the autofocus crutch?I can't speak for everyone, but from my own experience it's a semi-dated thing due to older dslrs having shitty screens and no focus peaking. Back in 2014 I owned a canon 550d. About 70%-80% of my shots nailed focus. Which is good, but not good enough. When I upgraded to a canon 70d, which had decent af, suddenly I was nailing focus 95%+ of the time. Dslrs don't have optical viewfinders so you had to use the shitty live mode screen that was often relatively low quality.Bringing it forward to the present, even if you have a camera that has decent focus peaking and all the rest, it still takes time to focus a lens properly. If you're a one-man-band, that time can be crucial. Decent af that works well makes a huge difference. It's one less thing to worry about knowing that, when you look at your footage, nothing will be out of focus. Combine that with using your histograms to get exposure right and suddenly cinematography is sorted.
>>3876024>>3876030To add-on/reiterate, most photographers are used to focusing using the viewfinder. This is drastically different to using the live-screen.The best way to understand is to try taking photos using only the screen and focusing manually without any assistance.
>>3876024It's just pushed as important by youtoube influencers that rely on autofocus to keep their mug in focus at f1.8 for some reason.
>>3876024Even before digital became so ubiquitous, camera manufacturers were moving away from focusing screens to just relying on the camera's increasingly advanced autofocus tech.
>>3875753For normal use, yes 12mp is ok. But I just can't dump all the money into the body and lenses for such a gimped feature.>>3876013I never looked at the canon r series after that overheating fiasco.Have they fixed it?
>>3876060>Have they fixed it?Not him but yes, except in the case of the r6.The r5 is fine (arguably the best hybrid on the market atm). The r6 is fine if you use an external recorder. It's not good for serious video work if you plan on shooting in 4k internal. It's more predictable than sonys and fujis that overheat though.
>>3876060>I never looked at the canon r series after that overheating fiasco.>Have they fixed it?They improved it quite a bit. The initial firmware used fixed timers to manager overheating so no matter what the ambient temperature was you got shit recording/recovery times. Just turning the camera on started the timer.Now they use the internal thermometers so the R5/R6 behave like they should. Here's a text summary of what dpreview found:https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/canon-eos-r6-record-times-almost-triple-thanks-to-new-firmwareHere's the actual DPReview video: https://www.dpreview.com/videos/9616667577/dpreview-tv-canon-eos-r6-firmware-update-1-1-1-did-they-fix-the-overheatingThe XT3/XT4 are still admittedly better here if you're not using an external recorder.
>>3876030>>3876031>>3876049>>3876056Thanks for the responses. It does seem rather every lens review I see on YouTube does make it a point, which I find a bit baffling, but they are more videographers than photographers. I do see a lot of people on this forum also making the point, which I find odd b/c it's a photography forum. I mean, when I see/read the downside to a particular lens is it has no autofocus capabilities, I interpret as the poster is unable or unwilling to manually focus his shots.
>>3876066>It's not good for serious video work if you plan on shooting in 4k internal.The R6 can continuously record 4k longer than the R5 can record 4k HQ, both with the latest firmware. Reminder that all FF R6 4k is oversampled and equivalent to the R5's HQ mode.
>>3876074>The R6 can continuously record 4k longer than the R5 can record 4k HQOkay? So the big difference is that when the r5 overheats, you can immediately switch to normal 4k (which is still 10bit 4:2:2 and proper 4k) and record indefinitely. When the r6 overheats, you're locked out (I'm not even sure if you can record 1080 before it cools down).>Reminder that all FF R6 4k is oversampled and equivalent to the R5's HQ mode.This isn't true. The r6 downsamples a 5.5k image to achieve its 4k. The r5 downsamples an 8k image. There are numerous tests on youtube which show how much sharper the r5 is.What is the case though is that the r5 in crop mode records indefinitely in 4k as well. And in that mode, the camera downsamples from a 5.1k image and is indistinguishable from the r6's image in terms of sharpness.
>>3876077>>The R6 can continuously record 4k longer than the R5 can record 4k HQ>Okay? So the big difference is that when the r5 overheats, you can immediately switch to normal 4k (which is still 10bit 4:2:2 and proper 4k) and record indefinitely. When the r6 overheats, you're locked out (I'm not even sure if you can record 1080 before it cools down).You can continue to record in either one at 1080p.>This isn't true. The r6 downsamples a 5.5k image to achieve its 4k. The r5 downsamples an 8k image. There are numerous tests on youtube which show how much sharper the r5 is.Pic related. The difference is tiny. In the next post I'll show R6 vs. R5 non-HQ 4k.>What is the case though is that the r5 in crop mode records indefinitely in 4k as well. And in that mode, the camera downsamples from a 5.1k image and is indistinguishable from the r6's image in terms of sharpness.If the R5 was oversampling in APS-C 4k it would overheat. It's binning or line skipping.
>>3876077>>3876085R5 4k HQ is a tiny bit sharper than R6 4k, but R5 4k standard is way softer. How much better is it really than 1080p? This is an issue for someone who shoots a lot of 4k60 because you can't go HQ at that rate. R6 4k quality is the same at 30p and 60p. It's a strange mix because the R5 offers 8k and 4k120, but because only 4k30 can be put in HQ mode I can see someone going for the R6 if they're never going to shoot 8k, given the price difference.Any way, anon is looking at cameras at lower prices than this so I doubt he's going to want to spring for an R5.
>>3876077>>3876085>>3876089>How much better is it really than 1080p?I downloaded all four frame JPEGs and displayed them full size on my 4k monitor so that I could switch back and forth. There is a jump in IQ between R6 1080p and R5 4k standard. But there's a big jump to R6 4k which I can't reliably tell apart from R5 4k HQ.If you do any long takes without an external recorder the R5 is going to give you better IQ. If you do short takes the R6 is basically a match at 30p and better at 60p. If you look at the price of the R5 you can buy an R6+Ninja and bypass thermal/time limit issues.
the main problem for me with the R6 is the gimped logit can only shoot the old ass original c-log 1 which is a gamma curve that only holds a bit less than 12 stops and therefore truncates quite a bit of latitude the sensor can put out
>>3876234Yeah, they were supposed to add clog 3 at the same time as the R5. It's fucked up that they didn't.
Redpill me on these expensive cube cameras with zero stabilization in them?
>>3876240easy to strip down and balance for gimbals, car mounts, cable cams and easy to rig up for anything elsemuh modularity
>>3876085>You can continue to record in either one at 1080p.Can you read or are you purposely being retarded?AFTER the camera overheats, you can continue to record 4k indefinitely on the r5.>Pic related. The difference is tiny.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrKoMMq48UMThere is a clear difference between all 3 modes that is ultimately negligible when it comes to post production.>If the R5 was oversampling in APS-C 4k it would overheat. It's binning or line skipping.No. The r5 has a better processor than the r6. It can easily be tested by seeing that it is as pretty much as sharp as the 8k when compared at equivalent zooms (since it's literally just the 8k cropped down and then downsampled)If you have evidence to the contrary I'd love to see it.>>3876089>R5 4k HQ is a tiny bit sharper than R6 4k, but R5 4k standard is way softer. See the video I posted above, the difference between all 3 is pretty negligible.>How much better is it really than 1080p? This is either a troll or a major cope. A lot.> This is an issue for someone who shoots a lot of 4k60 because you can't go HQ at that rateNo, but you can shoot in the crop mode at 60p which is as sharp the r6, and the non hq 4k is indistinguishable to anyone who isn't pixel peeping.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnzahkYZ084>but because only 4k30 can be put in HQ mode I can see someone going for the R6 if they're never going to shoot 8k, given the price difference.I can't see any serious video shooter choosing the r6 unless they use an external video recorder due to the overheating times. I've seen some wedding videographers say that it works very well for them as they use external recorders anyway but that's not something I would personally recommend when there are so many other, better, cameras for the same price range that don't have this problem.
>>3876095>There is a jump in IQ between R6 1080p and R5 4k standard. But there's a big jump to R6 4k which I can't reliably tell apart from R5 4k HQ.The jump between 1080 on the r6 and non-hq 4k on the r5 is much bigger than the jump to the r6's 4k>If you look at the price of the R5 you can buy an R6+Ninja and bypass thermal/time limit issues.Sure. I think the main issue is dealing with additional batteries/charging and the increased weight when it comes to gimbals. It's definitely viable but adds another level of annoying wires/etc to deal with.
>>3876240Avoid at all costs unless you're on a film set with multiple crew membersPretty much the ergonomic opposite of the dslr revolution
>>3876243>>3876270Ah, that makes sense.I guess the sigma fp fall into that category as well?
>>3876306not reallythe fp has an asymmetric case, a screen that's bad to access and bad ergonomics, it combines the downsides from both the minimal cube form factor and the mirrorless form factor with none of their upsides
>>3876267>>You can continue to record in either one at 1080p.>Can you read or are you purposely being retarded?Can YOU read or are YOU purposely being retarded? My reply was to this statement made in reference to the R6: "I'm not even sure if you can record 1080 before it cools down">There is a clear difference between all 3 modes that is ultimately negligible when it comes to post production.Then the difference is tiny.>>If the R5 was oversampling in APS-C 4k it would overheat. It's binning or line skipping.>No. The r5 has a better processor than the r6. You are correct that it is oversampling in crop 4k, and that 24p/30p are resistant to overheating in this mode (60p will overheat).
>>3876267>See the video I posted above, the difference between all 3 is pretty negligible.The studio test scene shows more fine details than his casual shots of his face or a brick structure. I can reliably see the difference between R5 4k and R6 4K / R5 4k HQ, while I cannot reliably pick between the latter two. His tests do not in any way change this.>>How much better is it really than 1080p?>This is either a troll or a major cope. A lot.It's soft as shit and I'm not the only one to point that out or complain about it.>No, but you can shoot in the crop mode at 60p which is as sharp the r6, R5 4k60 crop mode overheats.>and the non hq 4k is indistinguishable to anyone who isn't pixel peeping.I don't have to pixel peep to reliably tell them apart. Just displayed normally on a 4k monitor.>I can't see any serious video shooter choosing the r6 unless they use an external video recorder due to the overheating times. It depends entirely on how you shoot. If you do short takes it's no more an issue than on other cameras. If you have to have 100% reliable all day takes including longer takes, then the R5 is also NOT the tool for a serious cinematographer, absent an external recorder. No one is going to spend that kind of money to be forced to fall back to mushy FF 4k or cropped 4k30.Anon was considering the XT4 which can also overheat, so I suggested the R6 because it's FF and I personally wouldn't want to be locked into an APS-C mount. If anon must have 100% reliable, no overheating 4k then he should get the A7sIII. The R5 is presumably not even in his budget. If it was he could get a BMPCC 6k + any number of 20-24 MP FF bodies for stills.
>>3876574And I'll add, if that anon is even still reading, that if he doesn't care about being 'locked into' APS-C then the XT4 is an impressive machine. As I said earlier, if I were forced to choose between it and the A7sIII for hybrid (equal emphasis on video and stills) shooting I would grab the Fuji.
>>3876568>My reply was to this statement made in reference to the R6: "I'm not even sure if you can record 1080 before it cools down"Oh wait, I actually am being an idiot. Fair play.>Then the difference is tiny.Never said it wasn't. It's clear if you look for it but camera image tests are largely concentrated autism and mostly irrelevant when you're talking about cameras that are generally good. You cannot tell if a film in a cinema was shot with a camera that has 15 stops of dr or 11. You can't even tell if the projector is 4k or not unless you have something to compare it to.(Don't get me wrong, there are several benefits to using a sharper camera with better dr, but those benefits are diminishing returns compared to everything else. I have the luxury to say that only because the tech inside cameras has come so far that even relatively shit cameras can do amazing things)
>>3876577>>My reply was to this statement made in reference to the R6: "I'm not even sure if you can record 1080 before it cools down">Oh wait, I actually am being an idiot. Fair play.Thank you. Snippy 'retarded' comment withdrawn.>>Then the difference is tiny.>Never said it wasn't. Fair.>It's clear if you look for it but camera image tests are largely concentrated autism and mostly irrelevant when you're talking about cameras that are generally good. You cannot tell if a film in a cinema was shot with a camera that has 15 stops of dr or 11. You can't even tell if the projector is 4k or not unless you have something to compare it to.I wouldn't agree to that point, though I would agree for smaller differences. But in the grand scheme of things a great piece of work is not going to fall flat because it was shot even at 1080p with 11ev. And a shit piece of work is not going to be great because it was 6k RAW with 15ev.>(Don't get me wrong, there are several benefits to using a sharper camera with better dr, but those benefits are diminishing returns compared to everything else. I have the luxury to say that only because the tech inside cameras has come so far that even relatively shit cameras can do amazing things)I agree 100%.For the record: I think either the R5 or the R6 can be amazing or shit cinema tools depending on what you need (and whether or not you want an ext recorder). And this autistic side debate between raises an issue no one thought to task anon: does he need reliable long takes? That would point him towards the Sony or force him to add an ext recorder, and that question is more important than how big/small the difference really is between 4k modes when filming under water basket weavers for a Korean basket weaving forum. (Again, I'm assuming the R5 is out of his budget. With an R5 he could fall back on 4k30 cropped and have nice, sharp output for long takes.)
>>3876574>The studio test scene shows more fine details than his casual shots of his face or a brick structure. I can reliably see the difference between R5 4k and R6 4K / R5 4k HQ, while I cannot reliably pick between the latter two. His tests do not in any way change this.One of the videos I linked is literally footage of 4k vs 4k-hq with a lot of people mentioning that they couldn't tell the difference or only barely. If you want to say that you have super sharp eyes that can do it, then go for it. But for 90% of people, it's negligible.>It's soft as shit and I'm not the only one to point that out or complain about it.It's line-skipped and equivalent in sharpness to pretty much every 4k camera more than a year old. It's a big step up from 1080. You also have to realise that the r5's 4k hq is literally the sharpest 4k in any camera under 5 grand.>I don't have to pixel peep to reliably tell them apart. Just displayed normally on a 4k monitor.I'll take your word for it but see above.>It depends entirely on how you shoot. If you do short takes it's no more an issue than on other cameras. If you have to have 100% reliable all day takes including longer takes, then the R5 is also NOT the tool for a serious cinematographer, absent an external recorder. No one is going to spend that kind of money to be forced to fall back to mushy FF 4k or cropped 4k30.Again, several people use the non-hq r5 4k and people don't complain about it being soft.>The R5 is presumably not even in his budget. If it was he could get a BMPCC 6k + any number of 20-24 MP FF bodies for stills.I'm not saying this as a recommendation for that poster, just why the r6 is, in my opinion, not a viable camera for anyone serious and why I'd defend the r5 as considerably better and probably the best hybrid on the market.
>>3876586>One of the videos I linked is literally footage of 4k vs 4k-hq with a lot of people mentioning that they couldn't tell the difference or only barely. If you want to say that you have super sharp eyes that can do it, then go for it. Subject matters. I explicitly said that the DPReview test scene has more fine detail. Ergo, on subject matter with a lot of fine detail you can reliably pick between them.>>It's soft as shit and I'm not the only one to point that out or complain about it.>It's line-skipped and equivalent in sharpness to pretty much every 4k camera more than a year old. And those are soft compared to oversampled sensors. I can think of several which are more than a year old.>Again, several people use the non-hq r5 4k and people don't complain about it being soft.It's soft. Not so soft that it ruins a film. For that you would have to drop to pre-DVD levels. But there is a significant gap vs. oversampled.>>The R5 is presumably not even in his budget. If it was he could get a BMPCC 6k + any number of 20-24 MP FF bodies for stills.>I'm not saying this as a recommendation for that poster, just why the r6 is, in my opinion, not a viable camera for anyone serious Are the XT3 and XT4 not viable for anyone serious? Because they have thermal limitations as well. They've also been used to make movies. The firmware update took the R6 from being damn near unusable for 4k to being roughly on par with the XT3, XT4, A73, etc.>and why I'd defend the r5 as considerably better and probably the best hybrid on the market."Best hybrid" depends on whether you lean a bit more to the stills side (in which case I would agree) or the cinema side (in which case there may be better options, depending on how much you value EF/RF glass and/or DPAF). I think the R5 is a phenomenal camera, but I can absolutely see why someone might go with the R6 depending on their video wants/needs.
>>3876602>But there is a significant gap vs. oversampled.I mean, at this point it's just an argument of opinion. Personally I wouldn't have any issue with it and I don't think there would be any reasonable fear that any audience member would be able to notice, assuming you applied some sharpening in post.>Are the XT3 and XT4 not viable for anyone serious? Because they have thermal limitations as well.I don't know the overheating conditions for fujis, at all, beyond their existence. I assume that they function in a manner similar to the a7sii which has a significant difference to the canons in that they can be cooled fairly easily and quickly. But I literally don't know and have never recommended a fuji because of this.> The firmware update took the R6 from being damn near unusable for 4k to being roughly on par with the XT3, XT4, A73, etc.What's the actual recording time for an r6 at now then? My understanding was that it was around 50 minutes with 5 minutes of off-time translating into an additional 10 minutes recording.Following what I said above, the major reason I specifically dislike the overheating in the r6 is because the camera doesn't cool down unless it's switched fully off (and of course it was much worse before the update). So now you can cool it externally, but I'm pretty sure that the camera's normal functions when switched on are enough to keep it at whatever temperature it's at (or at least, that's what every review I watched said).The r5 has the same problem I do acknowledge, but the ability to use normal 4k after really sets it apart for me.>but I can absolutely see why someone might go with the R6 depending on their video wants/needsI think the r6 is very capable with an external recorder. I think it's more than capable as is for an amateur hobbyist or family home videos. But I would never be comfortable using it for serious work.I'd rather take a canon r (or even rp) to be honest. But I also never use high framerates so that's just me.
>>3876624>I don't know the overheating conditions for fujis, at all, beyond their existence. I assume that they function in a manner similar to the a7sii which has a significant difference to the canons in that they can be cooled fairly easily and quickly. The Canons can be cooled as well now that the firmware is using the internal thermometers instead of a hard coded countdown timer. Canon shipping with firmware 1.0 was one of their dumbest marketing blunders ever.>What's the actual recording time for an r6 at now then? Depends on your scenario and ambient temps. DPReview has gone over this in depth.>The r5 has the same problem I do acknowledge, but the ability to use normal 4k after really sets it apart for me.That's fair, but for the price difference if you need really long takes, just get an R6+Ninja. Again, I'm not saying the R6 is better overall, I'm saying I can see why cinema shooters would choose it.
>>3876632>>3876624>>3876602Why not just save up for the a7siii?
>>3876904Because this started with an anon asking about the A7sIII vs XT4 for 50/50 stills/video and not really wanting 12mp for stills. But of course XT4 is Fuji crop with no FF path. So I suggested looking at the R6.
>>3853817how the fuck do I use a gimbal and get super smooth movement. I keep getting some bobbing up and down like you can see where I'm stepping. all the footage I see it looks like a smooth almost dolly like movement
>>3877154Literally just practice. It's easier on flatter surfaces, and try and walk with your knees constantly bent to keep yourself more level. But it's not something you can just develop like that.
>>3877154One interesting tip I saw was to have the handle at a diagonal so some of the vertical movement is displaced by the handle pivoting around the camera instead of pushing it straight up.
>>3876066>>3876074>>3876077>>3876085>>3876267>>3876574>>3876586>>3876602>>3876624>>3876632This is why you get a Canon PowerShot ELPH 300 HS
It seems to me the best course of action (for someone who is a hobbyist and patient) is wait for the successors to the R5/R6, Z6ii/Z7ii, A7siii/A7riv. Because they all seem to have a mixture of amazing features but also missing features. In addition to hefty first adopters tax. Like the ibis for the canon is absolutely stunning and Nikon/Sony haven't caught up yet, what with sony needing a crop to stabilize with software to approach Canon's level. But the overheating with Canon is unacceptable for the price point. Sonys A7 line with the whole constantly blowing dust off the sensor multiple times a shoot is ridiculous. Nikon is playing catchup but the lenses pricing and quality is stunning ofc theres still focus breathing in the Z line but honestly that always struck me as a stylistic gripe like the obsession no with bokeh. It just seems like I can just play around with my d3300 until a solid best hybrid can be crowned thats 2-3k instead of double that. Its a 3 way mirrorless race with a lot of innovation happening every year it just seems incredibly unwise and impatient to buy especially when all these flagship features are gonna trickle down in the next 2 gens. (A1 shutter preventing dust, R3 eye controlled autofocus, 4k60fps no crop potentially even downsampled from 8k with no overheat standard, even crazier auto focus (quad pixel af) and ibis, EVFs with 1x mag standard 4k resolution 360fps, models with removable screens that can flip or tilt, android OS, internal NDs, I mean yeah my d3300 aps c is cropped but itbtakes pictures it takes video all the wild features that justify the price aren't here yet so I'm fine waiting a half a decade or more
Is the Canon PowerShot ELPH 300 HS 12.1 MP still actually the best pocket take it with you everyday camera for cheap ($100)?
>>3877401Wat isMany of them seem to be larger
Do you guys have a goto screen calibrator, hardware to recommend?Only brand I've heard about throughout the years is spyder. Only seeing spyder 4 for sale.
>>3877441Aay, that was the only one available in my favorite store with fast shipping.5 years old though. I have no idea about the technology of this, guess there isn't really things to improve upon hardware wise, like microphones?
>>3877446pretty much, especially since xrite is eating up everyone else and their tech anyways, gretag mcbeth, pantone, all the same thingsure they got more specific and 'better' stuff for print calibration and automated processes, but the i1 is the good enough thing for almost everything and now that many higher end dells, LGs and even stuff like atomos field recorders can use it to calibrate to their internal luts it's fully the standard
>>3877459Thanks. It's arriving tomorrow. Time to watch tutorials.
How do you guys familiarized yourselves with a new lens without actually shooting a project. Is it worth to join a photo shoot and capture video even if its not a narrative work?
>>3877554I just go out and shoot whatever to get a feel for the focus, see how it balances on my setups and set up some lights in the garage to get a feel for the flaring and contrast at various angles of light hitting it and what kind of matte box size and flags I'll likely need to bring along with it
Where to go to talk about video editing?
I’m a video baby, but I shot some super 8 that I’m trying to grade. Can someone tell me if this flow is dumb?I have ProRes 422 Log scans from Pro8mm. I throw the clips in Resolve, and then I have a 3 node setup for each clip. First is very slight exposure adjustment via curve and saturation bump is needed. Second is a random generic Log to Rec709 LUT I found on the internet. Third is WB adjustment via cool/warm, tint, and offset adjustment, as well as adding contrast. With WB, I’m trying to get the skin tone line to line up, but also for the “middle” of the spectrogram to not get too skewed, which is where I add the offset if needed. If I want to add a “look”, would I just start adding more nodes and do split toning? What kind of adjustments usually go into adding a look without destroying skin tones?How do I know what color/gamma space to work in? I have my project timeline set to Rec709 Gamma 4.2, but not sure if I should be using something else. Is there a way to check in the properties of the video file?
>>3877970why are you using a lut? Resolve has Color Space Transforms to lets you change color spaces non destructively
>>3877527Got it and calibrated all screens very quickly. They all match too.Neat.
Anyone else have a good weekend of filming/editing?I'm 1 filming day away from completing my first feature film now
>>3879380congrats. are you editing yourself?
>>3879415Yeah. With the amount of hours I've put into this, I can't imagine how expensive it would be to hire someone else to do it and go back and forth on key decisions
>>3874834Looks fine. I'm on a phone though.>>3876095All those anons are going to spend more hours researching IQ, but less hours completing a project. If they like gear, that's fine, but /p/ should not conflate specs with talent. And talent comes with finishing projects.
>>3877154Is ibis turned off? It should be. >gimbal w/ out ibisOr >no gimbal with ibis
Bump limit reachednew thread>>3879650>>3879650
>>3853819Viewers will perceive it, but it won't even register to them beyond that unless it looks out of place.