Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pieces. A new selection of footage.

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

  • Maybe not relevent in filming as I never tried but I use to have a polorizer filter call "Moose filter" for stills photography that protects highlights bringing out the clouds and warm the landscape without any effect on shadows, it does increase saturation but if you are shooting RAW you can dial that down in post production.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
      25FPS is the frame rate that's used in this part of the world by and large.

      We only shoot 24FPS if it's specifically going into a cinema environment.

      jb
      I preordered it just because of the motion in your early footage and ofcourse the DR

      what went wrong here ?, the 25fps only ? or there is something else?! .

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cinema-E View Post
        I preordered it just because of the motion in your early footage and ofcourse the DR

        what went wrong here ?, the 25fps only ? or there is something else?! .
        PAL standards, which is used across most of the world, follows 25/50fps. If anything, the NTSC 24/60fps standard common in 'merica and few other select countries is the oddball.

        PAL-NTSC-SECAM.jpg

        Comment


        • Originally posted by RyGuy View Post
          PAL standards, which is used across most of the world, follows 25/50fps. If anything, the NTSC 24/60fps standard common in 'merica and few other select countries is the oddball.

          [ATTACH=CONFIG]538[/ATTACH]
          NTSC isnt 24/60, its 29.97/59.94 (30/60 roughly)

          23.976 is more a general cinematic standard. The reason SOME people prefer this frame rate is that it makes converting to NTSC and PAL standard rates easier - allowing for a more global compatibility.


          (SORRY TO GO OFF TOPIC)
          Tom Majerski
          Cinematographer / Photographer / CGI Artist / Filmmaker

          http://www.TetraGrade.com
          http://www.imdb.com/name/nm5157752/

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Cinema-E View Post
            I preordered it just because of the motion in your early footage and ofcourse the DR

            what went wrong here ?, the 25fps only ? or there is something else?! .
            25 FPS is the dominant frame rate in this mart of the world. And the majority of the world if you're not shooting specifically for Television.

            It's only 4% faster than 24 FPS and you don't have of the stupid cadence 3:2 garbage that 60Hz 30 FPS / 24 fps markets have.

            The camera shoots 24, 25, and 30 FPS.

            jb

            Comment


            • It shoots 23.98p, 24p, 25p, 29.97p, 30p to be precise (straight off the website).

              NTSC is actually whole framerate/1.001. Whole bunch of stuff to do with why they did that. Hence the 23.976, 29.97 and 59.94fps framerates. Not sure about the difference between 23.976 and 23.98 but hey.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tom View Post
                NTSC isnt 24/60, its 29.97/59.94 (30/60 roughly)

                23.976 is more a general cinematic standard. The reason SOME people prefer this frame rate is that it makes converting to NTSC and PAL standard rates easier - allowing for a more global compatibility.


                (SORRY TO GO OFF TOPIC)
                Oh my bad you're right. Its 4am here and I'm up late working to finish an edit. Now I'm scared what my edit will look like when I look at it the next day haha! As you were gents.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by nickjbedford View Post
                  It shoots 23.98p, 24p, 25p, 29.97p, 30p to be precise (straight off the website).

                  NTSC is actually whole framerate/1.001. Whole bunch of stuff to do with why they did that. Hence the 23.976, 29.97 and 59.94fps framerates. Not sure about the difference between 23.976 and 23.98 but hey.
                  23.976 vs. 23.98 is just rounding. 29.97 is similarly rounded from a impractically longer decimal.

                  Comment


                  • Well, 25 fps is also the TV standard in Germany. When we shot my theatrical shortfilm, we had to convert it and ran into massive problems -- mostly due to inexperience and the tight schedule.

                    Appearantly, with the new SMPTE DCP standard, 25 fps is possible. But not all cinemas have it yet, right?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
                      25 FPS is the dominant frame rate in this mart of the world. And the majority of the world if you're not shooting specifically for Television.

                      It's only 4% faster than 24 FPS and you don't have of the stupid cadence 3:2 garbage that 60Hz 30 FPS / 24 fps markets have.

                      The camera shoots 24, 25, and 30 FPS.

                      jb
                      I am aware of this , my country follows the european standard i have been shooting 25fps with my dvx 102
                      and the shots compared to 24fps was very close, but here there is a huge difference between the two

                      maybe its just me , I dont know but when I saw your first beach footage under the sun set, I said to my self this is no way coming out of a digital camera I mean yeah the DR was crazy and all that but the motion of the waves hitting the rocks man when I saw that I was completely taken away by it
                      however with this footage here I thought it was shot in 30p to have this look !, maybe the shutter speed has something to do with it ?.

                      thanks for your time any way .
                      Last edited by Cinema-E; 08-09-2012, 11:47 AM.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by John Brawley View Post
                        25 FPS is the dominant frame rate in this mart of the world. And the majority of the world if you're not shooting specifically for Television.

                        It's only 4% faster than 24 FPS and you don't have of the stupid cadence 3:2 garbage that 60Hz 30 FPS / 24 fps markets have.

                        The camera shoots 24, 25, and 30 FPS.

                        jb
                        I absolutely loathe 3:2 pulldown for 24 to 30 conversion. Used to shoot 16mm film for TV at 30fps whenever I possibly could just to avoid it. Especially in NTSC analog video days, a frame for frame transfer produced much better results.

                        Comment


                        • so there is no 24P footage yet. ok.
                          Facebook - Angelis Digital Studio

                          Comment


                          • For the later footage I have seen from John on BMC camera, as all DSLR camera, this ones seem to have the same limitation recording medium to fast camera motion, where the presence of side effects are always interfering with the story to be told. I remember reading on April 22, at John's blog a response from John to Daniel Natzke about Rolling Shutter issues, saying: "It is closer to the GH2." http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/201...rabs-for-leah/
                            I haven't seen a noticeable improvement in this regard since.

                            I played a little big with the camera at the NYC event, and panning with it revealed a similar degree as the GH2. As an owner of a hacked GH2, I can say that it is not useful for medium to fast motion shooting without taking the risk of having all types of side effects attributed to DSLR camera.

                            It seems to be a fact that choosing this camera for action film genre, live concerts or any live event that requires shot-gun shooting style will become the wrong selection. Blocking still type of camera and slow panning shooting seems to be the right choice, as it is shown at 02:41 to 03:01 in John's later footage.* However, the footage at 00:19 to 00: 23, 01:25 to 01:29, are suffering from these know side effect, unless it is an Internet repeatable playback issue in my HDTV connection, which I doubt. The footage at 03:25 to 03:29 are more distracting to the story because of the combination of a longer lens (in close up) and the limitation of camera sensor, which exaggerates the issues. As John well stated at the mentioned response at his blog: "Rolling shutter is always going to be present no matter what the camera in this price range. It’s just a function of the sensor technology."

                            Perhaps it is necessity to add that the reason for me to upgrade from the GH2 to BMC was/is to overcome these type of issues. Comparing the price side by side: GH2, $799.00 to $3000.00, I was expecting better performance on this regards than the GH2. The other pluses, like native recording file formats, better dynamic range and resolution on the BCM are unquestionable compared to the DSLR in general. then, let's keep in mind to choose the right camera for the right film-story genre to avoid future disillusions.
                            Last edited by Willian Aleman; 08-09-2012, 11:03 PM.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Willian Aleman View Post
                              For the later footage I have seen from John on BMC camera, as all DSLR camera, this ones seem to have the same limitation recording medium to fast camera motion, where the presence of side effects are always interfering with the story to be told. I remember reading on April 22, at John's blog a response from John to Daniel Natzke about Rolling Shutter issues, saying: "It is closer to the GH2." http://johnbrawley.wordpress.com/201...rabs-for-leah/
                              I haven't seen a noticeable improvement in this regard since.

                              I played a little big with the camera at the NYC event, and panning with it revealed a similar degree as the GH2. As an owner of a hacked GH2, I can say that it is not useful for medium to fast motion shooting without taking the risk of having all types of side effects attributed to DSLR camera.

                              It seems to be a fact that choosing this camera for action film genre, live concerts or any live event that requires shot-gun shooting style will become the wrong selection. Blocking still type of camera and slow panning shooting seems to be the right choice, as it is shown at 02:41 to 03:01 in John's later footage.* However, the footage at 00:19 to 00: 23, 01:25 to 01:29, are suffering from these know side effect, unless it is an Internet repeatable playback issue in my HDTV connection, which I doubt. The footage at 03:25 to 03:29 are more distracting to the story because of the combination of a longer lens (in close up) and the limitation of camera sensor, which exaggerates the issues. As John well stated at the mentioned response at his blog: "Rolling shutter is always going to be present no matter what the camera in this price range. It’s just a function of the sensor technology."

                              Perhaps it is necessity to add that the reason for me to upgrade from the GH2 to BMC was/is to overcome these type of issues. Comparing the price side by side: GH2, $799.00 to $3000.00, I was expecting better performance on this regards than the GH2. The other pluses, like native recording file formats, better dynamic range and resolution on the BCM are unquestionable compared to the DSLR in general. then, let's keep in mind to choose the right camera for the right film-story genre to avoid future disillusions.
                              Looks like Digital Bolex would be the camera for you.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Willian Aleman View Post
                                For the later footage I have seen from John on BMC camera, as all DSLR camera, this ones seem to have the same limitation recording medium to fast camera motion, where the presence of side effects are always interfering with the story to be told.
                                While I don't discount the idea that some are more sensitive to temporal / rolling shutter issues, is it really "always interfering with the story" ?

                                Personally, I don't think so.

                                I think, as image makers, we have a much lighter threshold or tolerance for things like this. Most of Joe Public probably doesn't go "hey what's with all the rolling shutter - I want my money back"

                                Whilst I would never underestimate an audience's ability to detect minor "flaws", I think that they are way more sensitive to audio imperfections than visual ones. 5Dmk2's with their soft line skipped moire laden images have been wowing people for a few years now. Has that stopped them becoming the default indie camera of choice ?

                                I honestly thing there are way more irritating things in an image to me than SKEW from a rolling shutter. Yes...i hate seeing "jello" when a camera is hard mounted on a vibrating car or helicopter. But skew...These days i don't even blink. I accept it as part of the personality of the image.

                                jb

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X