"I hope you've all gotten your 3rd booster shot" editionAll 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 ABOVEPrevious thread >>3917469Quick 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
>>3931727I guess this depends on where do you put the line between porno and erotic dramasDavid Hamilton, Joe Sarno, Tinto Brass, Nagisha Oshima, Vilgot Sjöman... in the 70s the limits were more blurred. I personally like the aesthetics of the japanese pinkus.
>>3931727There's a chance I'm confusing it with a different scene, but Kenna James and Scarlett Sage did an amazing scene that felt more like an indie film where the two actresses were actually having sex with each other than a porno.But most porn is shot differently to films because they want to prioritise different things. It's like how The Olympics isn't shot the same way as The Departed which isn't shot the same way as Good Time. It's not because the cinematographers/cameraman are less gifted, but they were each trying different things to each other and wanting very different results.So basically I consider any porn that's properly exposed, in focus and doesn't have random crewmembers accidentally in the background (or their voices at random times) as well-shot. They get bonus points for using gel lights to create a specific mood.
Hey /p/, i have got two questions :I have been shooting video outside lately, so I bought a variable ND filter that just goes very well. I took a 82mm diameter and a couple of size adapter so I can put that filter on any of my lens. So far so good. Except that I can't use my 82mm polarizer filter with it. My question is : how do you manage to use both ND and polarizer filter ?I have a couple of vintage lens like the FD 35mm f2 S.S.C. that I adapt to my GH5. How do you manage to stabilized the shots ? Compared to my Lumix f2.8 12-35mm, the footage are very shaky.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:PhotographererrorImage-Specific Properties:
>>3932010>how do you manage to use both ND and polarizer filterWith a matte box or similar rig no?Outside of that, you'll have to get dirty with some diy shenanigans as far as I know
>>3932010>how do you manage to use both ND and polarizer filter ?I don't use variable NDs, that way it's not an issue
>>3932017I didn't know that mate box manage filters directly. I will look into that. Thanks.>>3932020How do you manage to reduce the light when shooting outside so the sky isn't too bright ?[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image Width3200Image Height2400Image OrientationUnknownImage Created2019:06:29 20:34:12Metering ModeUnknownLight SourceUnknownFocal Length4.60 mmDate (UTC)2019:06:29
>>3932025>How do you manage to reduce the light when shooting outside so the sky isn't too bright ?normal NDs
>>3932010a variable nd is already made out of 2 stacked polarizers making another one redundant
>>3931184Thank you I will >>3931301They are very stupid. It's a wedding company. I work for another company that accepts log footage. These people want me to use handbrake to compress the footage which looks like ass OOC. They are robbing people and I have terminated any future events with them. >Getting pimped by dumb middle menShut up I understand how to do my own marketing but I needed the footage for my reel.
>>3932046with ffmpeg, the split max filesize files is trivialffmpeg -i input -c:v copy -c:a copy -preset medium -crf 23 -fs 10485760 output.mp4
Hello, /vid/I'd like some feedback/comments on a pair of videos that I've made.https://youtu.be/Z8mi0sGUpWQThis is the first one. I know it's boring, I know the fly is the most interesting thing, I know the soda shots weren't great and I know that the lighting for the soda shots were kinda crap.I just wanted to make an atmospheric, aesthetic video kinda like in the style of those tech demo videos you see in television stores.https://youtu.be/vOt9HGYVFzEThis is the second one. It's maybe slightly more vloggy... kinda... I took a bunch of videos while on a day out to an aquarium. The fish were hard to do in lower light - I went to ISO 3200 and widest aperture f/1.8 and just manual focused.The otters were easier with a zoom lens.I know the ferry is boring, which is why I sped much of it up to 3× speed.I'm also thinking about inspiration for anything I could do also. I'm not very good at coming up with something fun to video, but I guess it's fun to just make something that'll keep someone's attention for longer than a still image.I know my gear sucks, and I know my editing software sucks, but fuck it... I just wanted to make something.
>>3932122>I just wanted to make somethingclearly way better than not making anything, absolutely. keep going, matewhat I don't like about it all is the 60fps and high shutterspeed look, especially since you'd call it cinematic I think it makes it way more home video-yget some NDs and some of that sweet 24 or 30 fps and 180° shutter action going, also probably helps you out with your iso3200 situation as well since you're getting at least one stop more light in there
>>3931697How good is the Luxli Viola2 5" On-Camera RGBAW LED Light for an on-camera light for filming simple talking head interviews.
>>3932287probably good as a small backround accent light that's easy to hide and battery poweredway too weak for anything else
>>3932263>high shutterspeedI went with 1/125 SS. That is the right SS for 180° angle, right?>24 or 30 fpsIs it """bad""" to do 60fps? Everyone I know wants to see 60fps content on their TVs or PCs for "butter smooth" motion.>NDsWouldn't that get expensive pretty fast with obtaining multiple kinds of ND for each filter thread size?I've been debating with myself as to whether or not to get a GH5 2 or a BMPCC. The GH5 has nice ergo and stuff, plus it can do livestreaming now. And it can also do vertical video.The BMPCC has built-in ND and it has native BRAW.
>>3932294>Is it """bad""" to do 60fps?it's not, I just think it looks like shit and serves no purpose with that kind of static footage. it's nice for videogames and sports IMO>Wouldn't that get expensive pretty fast with obtaining multiple kinds of ND for each filter thread size?just get a large size use step down rings, or use square filters>The BMPCC has built-in ND and it has native BRAW.only the 6k pro has NDs built in, the other variants don't
>>3932289I wanted to use it in a run and gun situation as a one man band conducting street interviews and stuff like that. I don’t really want to drag studio lighting with me when I interview people at news events.
>>3932307why would want a full color light for that? a bicolor one like the aputure f7 is much cheaper and more powerful in that situation
>>3932303>static footageTrue. I suppose I just wanted something that looked fairly realistic on screen.The second video had way more action tho, especially with some of the animals. >step down ringsDon't those have vignetting? Or am I thinking of something else?>6k ProI'm dumb then...At any rate, there's a bank holiday weekend coming up, and I'm thinking about what stuff I could capture. I'm just thinking of any kind of inspiration. I'm not really aware of any big events, but eh... I also don't want to "creep" on people with a telephoto and then post that on YouTube.Macro video is really neato, but sometimes the problem is a mix of flying insects being unpredictable, and also that I haven't seen many ants around this year. Shooting insects at about 1:3 - 1:2 reproduction ratio does look good in video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bi1Kf-1qd6YIs this kino?
>>3932319american favelas are kino as fuck
bros..I think I'm in loveskip to 3:05https://youtu.be/8lub5CbnIbo?t=185
>>3932617fug she's cute
is this a good deal?
Any advice?Filmed a scene with partial nudity a while back and now the actress wants to back out. We have a signed agreement specifying the level of nudity but also, I'm no lawyer. Also, has anyone else ever dealt with anything like this before?
>>3932617/p/ is such a coomer hobby board
>>3933519can't give you any legal advice but Id consider how big your community is as word could get around and could get harder to get people to work with you in future projects
>>393264920 bucks per month? get a real computer you homo
>>3933519I wouldn't insist on keeping it in, as >>3933970says it might just make it harder for your future projectsI'd say offer something like splitting the costs of a reshoot of the particular scene with her, of course she might just be insecure for no real reason but chances are she wants out because the scene really doesn't look all that good, so you can take that chance to make the film better for less additional cost
>>3933519Go with it but make sure to donate a public and substantial amount of moneys to your local branch of lgbt community.
>>3933519>We have a signed agreementShe's fucked then, you just need to inform her you will do what the contract says but like some anons say, get to know why she backed out, sometimes pussy ramblings against you are worse than publishing trash or controversial pictures.If she doesn't want the pictures to be widespread then manage to accept putting them in small works (prints) but with less pay, or sometimes with a little more money they can keep quiet, they are nude models after all, not that far from the oldest profession in the book.If she has tons of simp strings then do not publish at all but condemn her for the shitty professional she is, you lose money but inform your scene she's a grifter.
>>3933970>>3934097>>3934128>>3934133Thanks for the advice. It turns out it's fine and I was massively misinterpreting her position; she just wants to distance herself from the project but isn't trying to prevent its release or anything like that.The whole experience has been very scary though, I suddenly have an understanding of less than a fraction of what the Room Full of Cups guys have been going through for the last 5 years and it wasn't pleasant
>>3934138>she just wants to distance herself from the projectNot a good sign, buddy, but glad you didn't waste moneyWorking with women as objects is tough nowadays, understandably so but still a bitch
Any recs for /vid/core films like Nightcrawler?
>>3934214>/vid/core films >like Nightcrawler?Boy Band, Thrill Me, Daddy Teenage Turn On, Trucker Fuckers
>>3934214/vid/core are films like Stalker, 2001, TGTBATU etcBut similar to Nightcrawler:>Drive>The Guest>Blade Runner 2049>Good Time
>>3934221>/vid/core are films like Stalker, 2001, TGTBATUBut all of those are made with film!
>>3933544Scorpions can survive underwater for up to 48 hrs
>>3934221>>3934214Benny's VideoI'm sure many 4channers will identify with the main character
>tfw finally finish my feature film>it's actually quite good>don't have money to make a dcp>unvaccinated so can't travel internationally for a film festival even if I somehow got it into one>not connected to the industry so can't call any contacts to try and help me sell the filmWow. I think I'm fucked
>>3936067get vaccinated then
>>39360871. Fuck you2. That wouldn't solve my problems since it still wouldn't provide a dcp for my film nor suddenly give me a bunch of connections
>>3936067>it's actually quite goodProofs?
>>3936104I watched it and thought "hey, I quite like this, go me"
>>3936067Take a loan. Gotta take some risks
>>3936067why do you need money for a dcpjust click the button in resolve
>>3936135Because I have no way of checking if the end result is anything good. I read an article where some guy was talking about how he spent ages figuring out how to make a dcp, and then after that he tried and failed 4 times before he got the correct results.I feel like (since I only have the free version), I'll export it as a 300gb dcp and send it off and then, when they play it, there will be a massive watermark saying 'EASY DCP TRIAL VERSION' and awful sound and broken colour grading or something
>>3936196just open it again and check
>>3936197You can't check DCP's without special software?I thought the entire point was that they're made for theatres and to avoid piracy issues?Am I mistaken?
>>3936199there's freeware players, resolve can just re-import it and even VLC can play it these daysOf course you can encrypt, lock and individually sign your file to hell and back to try and protect your latest capeshit from being leaked but in the context of small film festivals a DCP means nothing but a fancy file type with good Bitrate that plays well on a cinema server and is somewhat color managed to look as intended
>>3936196Just fuckin use levels and graphs. Proofing is no magic, if you've shit correct on your end, it'll play well no matter where.
>>3931697Oh sages of /vidg/, I don't know shit about video but I've searched for some cameras but I'm looking for something that works really well in low light, so far I've looked into the already suggested here Blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k, the Canon XA40, and the Panasonic LUMIX GH4, the camera I'm looking for it's gonna be mostly used for low/mid budget music videos and concerts of the same quality. What can you guys recommend? tl;dr I'm looking for a good low light working camera for music videos/recording concerts.
>>3937038>>3937038Also, forgot to mention that my budget is between 1.5k to 2.2k
I'm not a p browser so can anyone give me a full downdown on general opinion of BMPCC 4k for filming a short?
>>3937198It's good if you know what you are doing and have a controlled environment
>>3937203>>3937206Any lenses recs?
Does BMPCC6K have enough dynamic range to have a sunet in frame and lift shadows on actors without them looking like crap? Using some bounce would be acceptable.K-dramas like to show off like this, presumably on an Arri Alexa or something with similar specs.
>>3934632Did they fix audio import so it doesn't have to be PCM linear? It's tiring to have to run footage through ffmpeg to convert the audio to PCM linear before importing into DR.
>>3937242it supports a whole bunch of audio types other than just plain 48k wav since 2013 or so
When you rent a HMI light does the rental fee include the HMI bulbs? I wanted to buy a cheap HMI to play around with, but since bulbs cost over $300 each, it would probably be much cheaper to rent an HMI if the rental fee included the bulb.
>>3937387yesyou get one used, tested globe and one or more spares depending on the duration
>>3937416How long does one HSI globe (bulb) last?
>>3937448depends on the wattage, the ballast and the amount of abuse in hot strikes and banging around the hot fixtureusually the original osram ones are good for about 700-800h, the lower wattage ones more the higher less and with the big bois above 4k the lifespan goes down a lot, I think a 4k is 500h the very most
I want to buy a camera. I will mainly use it to make Videos because I want to make semi-professional short films. The way I will film can be explained as being mainly documentarily in nature, i.e.: I will film with a tripod but not run around as someone who makes Vlogging videos would do. I do not have a lot of conditions for a camera but the things I mainly want are high quality of the footage I take, the video not getting fucked when I film in somewhat low or a little bit higher light and good zoom though I am aware, that that has mainly to do with lenses. (I don't know how many of my problems can be solved with lenses as I am fairly new to dealing with cameras.) Battery life is not an issue because I am aware that there are battery extensions or just spare batteries that I can take with me when I go filming.This is the camera I have decided to buy after reading the sticky and some additional research: https://www.amazon.de/Panasonic-Lumix-dmc-g80-3448pixel-schwarz/dp/B01LWMMF2U/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8Could you please tell me your professional opinion if this is a logical purchase for me to make considering my requirements?
I'm editing to music a lot, is there a way to get Premiere to display the sound spectrogram instead of the waveform in the timeline? Or replace the time code with beats and bars? Or some kind of beat detection system that would automatically mark the beats? Wasting a lot of time staring at the waveform.
what video file formats/codecs get fucked up the least by youtube uploads?
>>3938823doesn't matter, it all gets transcoded anyway
>>3938823The most important thing is just having a high enough resolution so you get bumped to the vp9 codec. 1080 gets the shitty default codec
>>3938823Years ago, YouTube used to state that their preferred format was .mov or "QuickTime" as it was more commonly known then.In those days, it wasn't unusual for people to output video from the likes of Windows Movie Maker in .wmv, .mp4 or even .avi and uh... the compression back then was pretty god awful.These days, I don't think YouTube outright claims that any particular format is preferred, but I'd hedge a guess that the likes of .mov in some kind of ProRes codec would be processed by YouTube the fastest, but you also get a larger file that'll take longer to upload. But back in 2007... YouTube could take 2-3 hours to process the average 10-15 minute video, probably why shorter videos less then a minute long ended up becoming the most popular kind of video back then.
Is the rumoured Canon R5C going to be worth the wait if its essentially the R5 with no overheating issues and more video features?
What's a good documentary camera preferably under 2k but I can go under $3000 if it's really worth it? This is for run n gun.
>>3939049You forgot the thousands of dollars of cinema lighting you’d need to make a fone look good.
>>3939066Implying people on here are budgeting for lights when they're dumping all the budget on the body and not even thinking about lenses
September 2021International ProductionVolume 102, Issue 9https://transfer.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/ac/ac0921/offline/ac_ac0921.pdf
>>3939026For me personally, the r5 is already satisfactory for 99% of situations. Moreso since the latest update which allows unlimited 8k prores raw recording externally.I think the r5c will probably be a great camera that's slightly let down by dynamic range (compared to the c70 for example) but the majority of people shooting with it would never notice. So it'd be a great b-camera on a big budget set and a more than adequate a-camera for most productions but with a smaller form factor that leaves you questioning if its pros (autofocus, 8k, full-frame) make it superior to the bmp6k
>>3939070lighting is a memeabsolutely not needed for test charts and cat videos around the home
Did tax laws change in Europe? R3 doesn't have a time cap on it's video feature.
>>3939232yeah that shit is gone since 2015ish already
How good is the aperture amaran 100d and a softbox or other type of diffuser? Would it make a good key light for a small YouTube studio? What benefits would I get from the 200d? Could I just use the 100d and a few reflectors or would I need to invest in more powerful lighting?
>>39388234k H.265 was almost equivalent to DNxHR it these tests.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_7KFuCN8oz0&t=600s
>>3939252>How good is the aperture amaran 100d and a softbox or other type of diffuser? depends>Would it make a good key light for a small YouTube studio? likely>What benefits would I get from the 200d? double the output>Could I just use the 100d and a few reflectors or would I need to invest in more powerful lighting?depends
>>3939070>not buying food quality lights That explains why so many people’s videos posted to this cesspool look and smell like shit.
>>3939289thisorganic, grass fed, pasture raised HMI and tungsten are where it's at
>>3939189I agree the quality is there but I'm a longform videographer and my autism will not allow me anything less than the highest detail image which leaves the R5 squarely insufficient if I want both long length and high quality to not interrupt my workflow with overheating. The R3 seems to have 1 hour~ of shooting and that's workable but since its not as video centric I'm still waiting to see what kind of splashes the next mirrorless bodies will do namely the R5C and R1. If the R3 gets a firmware update to enable eye controlled AF for video that will certainly peak my interest however. All in all that feature will need a year or two to become perfected and hopefully becomes standard for future mid to high tier mirrorless bodies
I feel like a secondary objective of this camera was to cockblock video studios considering the Red Komodo/Sony FX6 and I'm about it.Finally no record limits, no overheating in the practical video modes, almost no rolling shutter, great internal battery life. I am going to going to open 3 tabs of Gerald Undone reviewing this camera, play them at different speeds, and edge for 20 minutes before I bust all over my calibrated monitor.[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 80DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop Camera Raw 13.4 (Macintosh)Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Image-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2021:09:13 21:43:29Exposure Time1/200 secF-Numberf/16.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/16.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length100.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBRenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>>3939422Gerald's review is out?
>>3939433Not yet. My loins throb with anticipation.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't feel much excitement about the canon r3.It's basically a perfect camera (for me at least) but we've known about it for like 6 months, every spec leaked ages ago. There's nothing to get hyped about. It's too expensive for me to go out and casually buy one. I struggle to decide if it's even worth the extra price over the r5.I guess it doesn't help that I finished my film and am dealing with bullshit contractual issues with one of the people working on it. And because of that, I literally have nothing left in my life. This film was literally the only thing that kept me going so now that it's gone I'm basically like "well cool... why am I alive again?" And like some new camera being announced doesn't really change that. Especially when that new camera is an old camera.And I find it weird that no one else feels like this. Everyone else is all trying to make money to get a gf/wife and have kids and make a name for themselves in an industry and like that just seems really shitty. I just want to make films because I like expressing myself and I like films. Everything else is bullshit. And I feel like I'm not the weird one, even though that's how I've been described my entire fucking life. I'm not the one who's pretending that this existential nightmare of nothingness is a fun party full of joy and miracles. But apparently that line of reasoning is "cynical" and depressing or some shit, so I'm the one who needs to see a specialist to prescribe some pills so I can be fucking happy like everyone else who isn't even happy by the way since depression and suicide are at all time highs and the media's like "we need to normalise mental health checks" instead of maybe wondering why everyone's so fucking miserable these days.But I'm the weird one for saying it.I don't know. Maybe the sony a7s4 will bring me meaning. I don't have the a7s2 or 3, or any sony cameras, but they seem like fun.
>>3938823Import a seperate click track
>>3937878Import a seperate click track
>>3939458What kind of movie?
>>3939515It's a very 'straightforward' psychological drama about a hitman who's depressed with the story being an allegory for the monotony of everyday life and our struggles in harshing it out, clinging onto the few moments we enjoy, in hope that eventually we'll be able to stop and live 'our real lives' or something.But I might be autistic so that's probably not clear and it probably just comes as an excuse for random bouts of violence
>>3939713So it’s a real life story where you try to turn your insanity into art. Welcome to art house indy cinema …
Quick question: I need to record something with my shitty webcam, to do analysis on later. The recording softwares that come with windows is absolute sheit, and doesn't even let me pic the output format, or compression.What is some free recording software?
>>3939713Sounds like a good premis, I’m looking for inspiration for a short film to make but in the meantime I’m just doing music videos.
>>3939863Do you have any ideas?With short films, I always took the outlook of quantity over quality because I saw them purely as experiments and practice so I tended to only focus on a couple of aspects.Normally just one or two scenes I really want to play with is enough of a basis for a short film for me but some people prefer to really put their all into everything they make
>>3939875That’s a good way of thinking about it, I would like to do something of an alegory of our current decent into dystopia.
>>3939875Doing one scene extremely well seems like a really good plan. As a noice doing a whole movie would be way too hard, but doing one scene would be something that anybody could do if they put in enough time and effort; which means it’s something that most people who post on here won’t do.
>>3939940I want to expand on that a little bit, not because it's a bad idea, but because it's not exactly what I meant and I want people to realise that there are multiple ways that can effectively achieve the same result.When I say 1 or 2 scenes, I don't mean total, I meant that you have 1 or 2 scenes that 'justify' the short and that you care about, while the other scenes are just there for the sake of a story and practice. And the reason I say this is because constant practice is important.So I have made a few shorts that are literally just one scene, but most of my shorts are entire stories where I made them because I had something in particular I wanted to do, and I wanted the short to justify it.Eg. After I rewatched the Departed a few years back, I figured out a way how I could replicate Matt Damon's death, so I put together a short just for the sake of having a scene like that. But the rest of it was redoing some stuff that I'd previously done in a way I thought could be better, along with playing with some different story elements.The point I'm sort of trying to make is that constant practice in every area (writing, directing, composing shots, sound etc) is necessary and vital. And it's also important to detach yourself from a need for perfection straight away (because everyone's first short film is shit, no exceptions unless someone else makes it for you).
*Excited Vibrating*[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakesamsungCamera ModelSM-G973UCamera SoftwareG973USQS5GUF1Maximum Lens Aperturef/1.5Sensing MethodNot DefinedFocal Length (35mm Equiv)26 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image Width4032Image Height3024Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2021:09:15 13:19:01Exposure Time1/40 secF-Numberf/1.5Exposure ProgramNormal ProgramISO Speed Rating400Lens Aperturef/1.5Brightness-0.3 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModeCenter Weighted AverageFlashNo FlashFocal Length4.30 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width4032Image Height3024Exposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardAltitude0.00 mTime (UTC)00:00:00Date (UTC)1970:01:01
>>3939953> everyone’s first film is shit unless someone makes it for youOr you take years and years reshooting until it looks good. But making it look like shit will allow you to make many more films.
https://youtu.be/jpL5wlXjt5cmade this last week, gonna be working on a larger short horror film soon. any criticism for technical issues is much appreciated.
>>3939953This actually really helps, thanks anon
>>3939953>Eg. After I rewatched the Departed a few years backShould've gone Infernal Affairs>because everyone's first short film is shitt. pleb
>>3939975basado. you're already one step ahead of most of this board
>>3940005About that. Video work for corporate clients (and weddings) is going to be my main source of income soon. I'm really into grip stuff, color grading, and lighting since I do everything myself.I'm feeling increasingly isolated and lonely because I don't have anywhere to discuss detailed topics or celebrate new expensive gear besides here.Are there any other serious online communities anyone can recommend?I can't find any discords that with a focus on videography. They all target photo + video and photo conversation dominates all the channels.
>>3940018Retarditt and FagbookRetarditt for filmmaking and colorgrading groups (r/colorists) but most people in that group are pro colorists who think nothing of paying north of 5k for a properly grading monitor and north of 25k for a monitor to use for 4k hdr grading. and Fagbook for local filmmaking groups
>>3940018liftgammagain, creativecow and the resolve part of the blackmagics forums can be very nice for colorist topics, since some very helpful pros like walter volpatto post there relatively often.camera specific forums like reduser or the cinematography part of the blackmagic forum can sometimes be helpful for the same reason, but are generally more insufferable because of brand war retards.Honestly the best conversations I had about more broader topics like rigging, lighting and whatnot were always directly, either in DMing someone on a forum about something I've seen, sending the rental a mail asking how they would this and that and what gear I should take from them or just during pickup at the rental place fumbling around with them getting some specific to work and two other dudes chime in and in the end we all exchange contact info.Finding some good rental places that care and help you out around you is essential imo
>>3940033Reddit is full of larpers.>>39400182nding liftgammagain
>>3940018lowepost.com and mixinglight.com are two great resources in you want to dive deep into color grading and DaVinci Resolve
>>3940133If you don’t live in California and live in the farm lands in the Bible Belt or Upstate New York or the Appellation Mountains or some other rural area, how do you find such an amazing and helpful rental house.
>>3940173check the next bigger city, I guess