Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pool Shark. New footage.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kholi
    replied
    I disagree with just about everything David says, especially regarding the GH2 color, DR, etc.

    But, different eyes for different people.

    Leave a comment:


  • Joe Giambrone
    replied
    I agree with most of what David says above. Although I don't hate on Red so much. The skin tones have a lot to do with the colorist, and of course the light. They chose that pallete for the most part.

    However, when bright highlights hit the skin, the sensor makes all the difference. Film is still the most natural-looking medium for capturing that, but these latest generation are quickly catching up. I can live with BM, Alexa and even Red if done right (slightly underexposed). The only one I can hope to afford, however, is this one.

    I'm really hoping that BM is using this time extension to push that sensor to its max. dynamic range and get the number up above 14. It is supposedly feasible with that sensor, so why not?

    Leave a comment:


  • David
    replied
    The GH2's resolution is not enough to overcome all it's other short comings most of all poor skin tones even with the hack. Look at all the resolution and detail in this turd! Not what I want. 5D Mark III is soft as can be. Having owned a 5D Mark II, Mark III, GH2 and a 7D (already sold the 5D Mark III and 7D to pay for the BMD CC) I'll be shooting with the 5D Mark II until I get my BMD CC. The 5D Mark II with the vaf-5d2 filter and magic lantern looks pretty damn good despite lacking the resolution of the GH2. The AA filter in the 5D Mark III ruined that camera for me. Way to heavy handed. I was all excited about that camera too but after having it for a month I had to stop lying to myself that sharpening up the footage in post fixed things for 5D Mark III. It didn't the cammera is soft. Have some one coming to look at the GH2 tomorrow. Hopefully I can get rid of that one as well. The 5D while having it's own issues with skin tones as least is pleasant looking and with both Tungsten and HMI Lighting even though not accurate. Florescent and other lights not so much but hey what can you do? The Alexa is the only camera I have seen that produces good skin tones. Not as good as film but at least they are in the neighborhood. That is the biggest reason why I am so excited about the BMD CC! Skin tones look way more like the Alexa instead of looking like the ghastly RED skin tones or the skin tones on DSLRs which just don't cut it including the 5D Mark II which I do like but is still not right. Look at the Pirates of the Caribbean movies shot on film versus the last on shot on Red. What a GIANT step backwards! Then compare Ironman shot on film with Avengers shot on Alexa. While not as good as Ironman, The Avengers holds up really well in terms of skin tones. Most of the stuff I shoot primarily has people in it even if they aren't the main focus. People's skin has to look alive! This is not my original comment but I'll do my best to quote it or better yet paraphrase it from a friend of mine who is fortunate and talented enough to work on mainly big budget stuff. "Working with Red footage is great in that you can grade it to look just about any way you want it to but it's like dying or painting clay any color you want, it still looks like mud. You can have muddy skin tones in any hue or shade but the tonality is still that of mud or clay." I am leaving his name out of this on purpose because the last 3 movies he has worked on have all been shot on Red and I don't want to compromise him in any way being that he hates RED skin tones.

    If you look at people's faces under good lights close up it's amazing all the wonderful things that are happening in their. It's like the light slightly penetrates the skin and bounces around before being reflected back out and skin is not the same thickness or same level of translucency all over. That is why tonality is so important. Film does a glorious job with this. Alexa comes close and BMD CC seems to be headed in the right direction. I have no inside information and have not seen anything that the rest of you have not seen but I am very, very excited by the little we have seen. I have very little doubt that the footage delivered by this camera will deliver good skin tones which is something that can only be said of Film and the Alexa. Good skin tones is worth a hell of lot more than 3 grand my friends. This really is the big game changer for me. Access to good skin tones for $3000. If you don't shoot humans then their are a ton of amazing cameras already out their for you. If you have human beings in most of what shoot and can't afford to shoot on 35mm film or rent an Alexa for every shoot then salvation is on it's way and it's called the the Blackmagic Cinema Camera!
    Last edited by David; 07-31-2012, 12:37 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Taikonaut
    replied
    GH2 is very poor DR even when compared with entry level dSLRs

    Leave a comment:


  • Brian@202020
    replied
    Originally posted by Kholi View Post
    To me, it's a step above or at least on par with the GH2 and Alexa in that regard. I don't know how it could not be obvious to others, it's akin to someone not being able to tell the difference between pink and coral I guess? Haha

    And, yeah, I have no intention to participate in that discussion anywhere else, any longer... unless someone drags my name into it again. xD

    Anyway, motion's a major deal for me. Brian@202020 stated the things that were most important to him, I'd say for me:

    1. DR
    2. Motion
    3. Resolution or Resolved Detail
    4. Semi-Low Noise Floor
    5. Larger Sensor

    Everything else I can get around, but the top three are what brings me to the yard, so to speak. I feel like I'm going to be overtly satisfied with the Magic Cam, once I change the mount.
    Your #2 "motion" falls in line with my list as well. I just said I hate Long-GOP, mainly for the motion issues that go with it. I agree that the motion looks really nice here.

    Leave a comment:


  • Roman
    replied
    Originally posted by Kholi View Post
    I have no intention to participate in that discussion anywhere else, any longer... unless someone drags my name into it again. xD

    Anyway, motion's a major deal for me.
    Agreed. I think after sharing my opinions that last time, Ive learned my lesson : ). But in regards to the BMC, I feel they just nailed it. From the first few seconds of jb's original test footage, I knew this was a winner.

    Although it is interesting how the gh2, alexa and BMC seem to be the only digital cameras capable of pulling it off almost perfectly.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kholi
    replied
    Originally posted by KyleMcConaghy View Post
    Haha, you read my mind. Totally. I just watched it again today and thought, "man, that motion looks so much better". What do you think?

    Of course, we won't share any of this with dvxuser.
    To me, it's a step above or at least on par with the GH2 and Alexa in that regard. I don't know how it could not be obvious to others, it's akin to someone not being able to tell the difference between pink and coral I guess? Haha

    And, yeah, I have no intention to participate in that discussion anywhere else, any longer... unless someone drags my name into it again. xD

    Anyway, motion's a major deal for me. Brian@202020 stated the things that were most important to him, I'd say for me:

    1. DR
    2. Motion
    3. Resolution or Resolved Detail
    4. Semi-Low Noise Floor
    5. Larger Sensor

    Everything else I can get around, but the top three are what brings me to the yard, so to speak. I feel like I'm going to be overtly satisfied with the Magic Cam, once I change the mount.

    Leave a comment:


  • KyleMcConaghy
    replied
    Haha, you read my mind. Totally. I just watched it again today and thought, "man, that motion looks so much better". What do you think?

    Of course, we won't share any of this with dvxuser.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kholi
    replied
    Originally posted by KyleMcConaghy View Post
    It is! How you doing?
    Haha Just checking. I'm curious... I know this would cause a huge stir on DVXuser, but can you see any difference in the motion characteristics with this footage versus the FS100 or FS700?

    Leave a comment:


  • KyleMcConaghy
    replied
    Originally posted by Kholi View Post
    Is this fs100 Kyle from dvxuser?
    It is! How you doing?

    Leave a comment:


  • Kholi
    replied
    Originally posted by KyleMcConaghy View Post
    Thanks so much for the footage, John. I think it looks great. More importantly, it's so much better than pre-release footage we saw from the FS100, FS700, DSLRs, etc.
    T
    Three. Thousand. Dollars.
    Is this fs100 Kyle from dvxuser?

    Leave a comment:


  • KyleMcConaghy
    replied
    Thanks so much for the footage, John. I think it looks great. More importantly, it's so much better than pre-release footage we saw from the FS100, FS700, DSLRs, etc.

    Three. Thousand. Dollars.

    Leave a comment:


  • JIKIJI
    replied
    Originally posted by Roman View Post
    Curious... what does "gold footage" mean? Just footage that will be used for a production?
    High Quality footage used with the final version of the camera?

    Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
    The dng footage will be shot with the release version of the camera.

    JB.
    Thanks a lot John.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cedric Akins
    replied
    Thanks John

    Leave a comment:


  • Roman
    replied
    Thanks JB, sounds good.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X