Jump to content

Timccr

Member
  • Content Count

    58
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Timccr

  1. Feeling right is a pretty good reason. It's all a bit subjective.
  2. Sorry, I got interupted by my elderly Mum in the middle of that last post. I don't know if you can still get it but The Technique of Film Editing by Karel Reisz is good to read. Of course you have to have the shots to start with so remember to shoot your cutaways. Happy editing guys.
  3. There are a few basic rules about cutting pictures together, for example not crossing the line to maintain the geography. Cuts on action are always nice if you have the shots and as I mentioned there were a couple of nice ones in this video. Of course rules can always be broken so while you might think it is good to start with a wide establishing shot it can also be nice to start with a close up and then zoom out to a wide shot. Perhaps it is simplest to explain what I mean by considering a simple interview with one interviewer and one interviewee. You cannot cross the line, which just means that the interviewer for example must always stay on the same side. When you select the interviewee's interesting answers you could of course just mix between them but I think it looks better to cut away to the interviewer listening. I see so many videos where the shots could be in really any order. This one started off very refreshingly with those 2 cuts on action but then when the mixes started it rather felt as though perhaps there were not the cutaways needed to keep the sequence going. Oh and just one more thought - when cutting to music you don't always have to cut to the beat Hope that helps Tim
  4. Too many mixes in the opening sequence. Have a bit more confidence in your ability to cut a sequence because it looks to me like you intuitivly can do it but had a little crisis and bottled out. You have a nice cut on action at 0:29 and another one at 0:32 but then start with the mixes. Mixes are really for people who cant edit or dont have the cutaways. OK maybe that is a bit extreme but it is sadly really very rare to see a proper sequence these days. Tim
  5. Thanks guys. Only slow pans on wrecks then. Thani your stuff has suddenly made me want to return to Southern Arabia. Tim
  6. Thanks Drew that is much appreciated. Tim
  7. I am wondering whether global shutter is something that would be good to have underwater. When I think about it the dives when big stuff has come whizzing by have not been that often and now that I am based primarily in the Med it is a pretty rare thing. It would be very interesting to know what others think. Thanks Tim
  8. The underwater samples that I have found have all been shot on prores. The out of water RAW samples I have found have been posted by people who honestly admit they are not really experienced colour graders. I think it would be nice to see what the camera can produce in the hands of experts.
  9. What si missing from this discussion for me is the 2k RAW footage from the Blackmagic Pocket Camera. From the samples I have seen I think it looks nicer than 4k. I would love to see some well graded underwater footage from it but can't find any.
  10. I too am into deep wrecks. In my case in the Med and I am interested in both stills and video and I like ambient light whenever possible so the A7s looks very interesting. But I think 2k RAW video would be a lot more interesting than the 4k and I am wondering if the compressed Sony RAW stills would be a problem underwater. Apparently it's no problem on land but shooting underwater might reach its limits. Has anyone tried?
  11. In the days of film there was 35mm for features and 16mm for docs and low budget stuff. The advantages of 16mm were not only stock and processing costs but also the size of the gear, and its interesting to see Alex Mustard writing elsewhere on this site that he probably won't upgrade his EM5 to an EM1 because he expects a housed EM1 to be bigger. So I was wondering if anyone can see any advantages to NOT using 4k?
  12. I really appreciate your replies, Drew. I don't think Lightworks does support CDNG yet but for me personally I don't think having to transcode will be a deal breaker and hopefully it will be supported before long.
  13. Thanks Drew. I want a wide gamut monitor for stills because I've tried printing stuff done on both standard and wide gamut monitors and the ones which I did from wide gamut monitors look a bit nicer to me. There isn't a lot of difference but enough to make me think its worth doing. For the video because of the way I am planning to shoot I will be trying to match shots at the same location on different days so think it would be sensible to shoot in RAW. My reasons for looking for an alternative to a MacPro with FCPX are purely financial because this is all out of my own pocket. I think Lightworks looks pretty good and that with perhaps an HP Z420 would be nice and cheaper - well until I buy their really cool consol so I can pretend I'm cutting film again.
  14. Hope I'm not getting off topic here, but I am trying to work out an edit suite for footage from the Pocket Camera. The MacPro seems like overkill and the problem with an iMac is the sRGB monitor which while fine for editing won't be so good for stills. So I'm now thinking about an HP workstation, so I wouldn't be able to use Final Cut anyway. Media Composer would be great but it is a bit expensive and I don't want to use Adobe's subscription based cloud stuff. Any thoughts or suggestions???
  15. Personally I don't think I'm so worried about distortion correction or even the lack of stabilisation. CA might be a problem though. Anybody know how to deal with that in post?
  16. Thanks Phil. That is really cool. So it looks like getting wide establishing shots is not going to be a problem after all and with careful framing the Panasonic 8mmFE should be a nice lens to have.
  17. The m43 sensor size is 17.3 x 13mm and the pocket camera sensor size is 12.48 x 7.02mm, so if I take a sample shot on an m43 camera and open it in Photoshop with a size of 17.3 x 13 and then crop it by reducing the canvas size to 12.48 x 7.02 will that show me what the lens used would look like on a pocket camera?
  18. Yeah, I'm hoping that it would lose some of the FE effect. But I'm not sure that the 8mm refers to full frame equivalent. Anyway, hopefully now that the camera is shipping, albeit apparently only a few, before long we'll see some samples. I guess Nauticam must have one so lets hope they post a few - not only the 8mm but also the 7 - 14mm zoom would be good to see.
  19. I just spotted that the Nauticam housing for the BM pocket camera is on the Nauticam Australia website as coming soon. Here's the link: http://www.nauticam.com.au/products/housings/pro-video/blackmagic-pocket-cinema-camera/index.html So now I am wondering about a WA lens again. Does anyone know how to figure out what the 8mm FE would look like on a Pocket Camera? Can you just use the same crop factor as for a rectilinear lens with a fisheye? Tim
  20. Hi Davide, I am living in Palermo and want to film some of the nice deep wrecks here so your videos are really interesting. I am not sure that the 7 - 14mm would always be wide enough on a S16 sensor and that was why I wondered what you might use on a pocket camera. Since there are not any housings yet it is all speculation but we can hope.
  21. But which one because I don't think there is m43 that would give enough angle of view.
  22. Hi Davide, I've just been watching your video of Henry Desprez and wondered what lens you would use on the Pocket Camera to shoot that.
  23. Sure a 21 - 42mm zoom (35mm equiv.) is good but what about for example for establishing shots of wrecks? I think something a bit wider would be good to have.
  24. I agree that it would be nice to be able to use lenses like the Arris but I don't think many of us will even rent one very often so what can we use for WA? It has been suggested above to use FE but is it possible to de-fish video? There will be a m43 Speedbooster before long I think which might help. It would be interesting to know what others think.
  25. Not sure that I've got this right but I think a 7-14mm m43 zoom becomes 10.5-21mm on this camera. Or a 21-42mm FF equivalent. This is so confusing!
×
×
  • Create New...