What the fuck is a tariff 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 often have much smaller sensors and a fixed lens.

>STICKY - https://text.is/QZ1J
>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 >>4407161

Quick FAQS
>what’s the best camera available on a “budget”?
The blackmagic pocket cinema camera 4k, or the Panasonic gh5 (can pick one up for like 500 bucks atm)
>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.
>What's a good sound solution that won't break the bank?
Zoom h1
>Can I use a zoom lens for video?
Yes
>Do I need cine lenses?
No
>Do I need 4k?
No. 1080 looks great on a cinema screen. 4k looks better.
>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 it okay to dox myself?
...Personally I wouldn't but what do I know?

more like jello cam enjoyer edition

>>4421119 (OP)
You could have posted a close up image of cum dripping off a moustache and it would have been less gay than that image.

>beginners who already bought the most expensive gear
Do twittertards really do this?

>>4421163
Know of alot of beginner photographers who buy Mamiya/Hasselblad as their first camera.
What would be the video equivalent? RED and Zeiss?

I want to start learning about editing video, the tutorials are everywhere but i need a camera, i have a shortlist but my main dilemma is:
Should i start ASAP with RAW editing or should i start learning with HD and Logs? also using Windows 8.1 and planning on getting the latest version of DaVinci for that OS.

>>4421180
Raw is easy mode, if you shoot log you have to pay attention to your white balance / iso etc. You will learn more this way.
Get the free resolve and fuck around, its the best way to learn.

>>4421168
>want to get into videography
>have zero experience with photography, let alone videography, aside from some shitty pics you taken with a phone
>buy a red komodo x and an arri prime 50mm
>"so when do I start making money?"
Jokes aside, people frequently come in these threads asking which out of 3 $2000+ cameras is the best for someone with no experience

I had this idea that sounded cool in the heat of the moment, where I would make a short film about me auditioning for the role of myself as a metaphor for how I sometimes feel like I have to perform and live up to certain expectations when I interact with others.
I fired up sunglasses, a suit, reflectors and camera and set everything up in my living room, but when I was actually acting I realized I felt so self conscious I could barely do it, even though I only had a camera in front of me, let alone other people.
I took a quick screenshot but haven't had the courage to watch what I recorded yet.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand

>>4421279
If you are neurodivergent that metaphor would fit perfectly. Just keep on shooting retake after retake until you get it right. Or use revolver to do a voice over with your own works if you ain’t comfortable talking on camera.

>>4421168
>>4421264
There’s literally nothing wrong with this btw

Relative to a successful persons income its the same as you poorfags buying used panasonic junk. You’re just angry that smarter, harder working people than you dont need to save all their money. Stop screeching whenever their throwaway toy could have paid your rent. If you’re bothered, try living more within your means before you judge a guy who makes $250k+ for buying a mere $3000 camera. save money, start a business, and invest smart, and before you know it you’ll be that guy.
poortip: high speed internet, air conditioning, food delivery, video games music and streaming, cable tv et al, nice computers, bluetooth headphones, apple products, and cars made after 2010 are luxuries not needs. So are most services. You can fix your own car and cook your own food believe it or not. Yes it is harder and yes you do have to leave the house. No we do not sympathize.
>inb4 consoomers say they cant use $5/mo internet because then they cant watch gear reviews on youtube
Im just tryna help you pull yourself up by your bootstraps so you can afford rent and basic investments so you can get rich too bae. No cap skibidi. You think houses were cheap in the good ol days because they were mcmansions? We worked hard and washed clothes in buckets. 90s kids complain about the cost of chinese junction boxes and brackets while keeping the roman pillars, 6000sqft, flatscreen oled, newest best appliances and top of the line hvac…

t. Rich boomer that retired early off a septic tank business and furiously saving money

>>4421264
>>4421168
ironically more interesting than the insufferable poorfag questions, always posters with no drive or ambition. the rich boomer is more likely to actually film something

>>4421305
You are lucky. I had to file for bankruptcy twice because clients I did work for couldn’t pay. I guess if you own the gear from your savings and not from anticipated earnings from your clients that ain’t something you need to worry about.

>>4421305
this isn't even good b8

>>4421305
its true, even poor people overconsume a ton, and there's nothing wrong with rich people buying nicer toys than anyone else can afford

but who the fuck would sell their AC unit to buy 10% sharper images

>>4421337
> who’d sell their ac to buy a better camera

The spergs that post on here.

>>4421343
no one, it's a made up boogeyman

the spergs that post here don't even use doordash and they're all using used computers already because that's not where their priorities lie. it's just where twitter NPCs priorities lie. 4chan hobbyists will always look like high flying rich fucks compared to twitter NPCs.

>>4421322
How do y’all anons deal with clients that won’t pay so you don’t need to end up like the cuck that needed to file for bankruptcy twice because of shitty clients.

>>4421355
Not him, but only give them a lower res proof of concept (with a watermark) until they actually pay you.
This way you can prove you've done the work and they can make suggestions, but they don't get the actual video they need until they've paid. Also, be prepared to take them to small claims court (easier said than done).

>>4421322
>Paying for gear via future hypothetic funds
Risky

>>4421355
contracts, don't do that under the table shit, that's for musicians lol

24 or 23.98?

>>4421452
24 is finally the standard, back to film origins, fuck this 23.93746372826;6282 digital fucking bullshit I’m sick of it

Nikon ZF for travel kino - yay or nay

>>4421521
As a fashion accessory? Yes.
As an actual camera? No but sort of.

>>4421521
no, get the z5ii

the zf feels like shit. it's twice the size of an fm3a and has no grip at all. it's like one of those budget medium format rangefinders but without the cool factor of being medium format, and all the good lenses are extremely front heavy.

>>4421524
Sort of?
>>4421533
z5ii is too expensive, I can get the Zf for 300 eur less

My other choice is an S9, which I can get for another 300 eur less than the zf

>>4421548
>Sort of?
There is, in fact, a camera sensor inside the ZF, and it can, in fact, take photos. So yes. Sort of.
So can your phone.
So can some chinkshit surveilance camera sensor rigged with a shutter release.
My point was that there are better options, and buying a ZF because it looks kino is like buying a shitty old porsche to do a lap of the U.S.. Does it look cool? Sure. Is it the smartest/most effective thing for the job? Fuck no.

>>4421550
Technologically, it's the smartest and most effective thing short of buying a Z6III, R5 or Z8, or a "real" video camera. It's the exact same camera as the Z5II. The ergonomics are just kind of gay.

>>4421548
300eur is not a lot of money to save up for a purchase that you could easily keep for over 10 years. D200s are 20 years old now and people are still using them.

Anyone who recommends a nikon for video is either a shill or has a mental retardation.

>>4421553
>nikon is bad for video bcuz.... if you push nraw shadows 5 stops after fixing a white balance that was 3000k off it looks le bad!
Color science and lens selection matter more for video than salvaging such a massive elementary school student tier fuckup

You can use adapted leica M mount lenses with focus confirmation on Nikon. That alone makes them significantly more valuble than any panasonic gimmick.

>>4421551
Like, I get it. I can agree with the fact that it's basically a Z5II lite. What I can't agree with is why anon would want to pay more for a nikon just to have AF issues and a meme-tier mirrorless setup.
Inb4 blobmera and all that, but an R6II is less than a ZF where I live, and a used R6 is like 3/5ths the price. Could walk away with a banger lens and body for a system that actually has the ability to hit focus.
>Also wait a fucking minute, this is supposed to be about video
Fuck all of that sideways. Anon should be buying a panasoyic for video or vlogging if money is tight, or an actual video camera.

>>4421557
>AF issues
Their AF is fine???? Skill issue. It's not a Z6 mk1 retard.
>le R6II
Speaking of lens selection, imagine buying into a brand where your only choices are somehow as bad as sony lenses or out of production stuff. And canon is actually the least reliable brand (highest failure rate, err 20, r5iis broken on launch etc) right next to sony. You really might as well buy a panasonic if you're considering that. Their colors aren't even "le good" (too orange) anymore.

>>4421551
Well there's a couple problems with that. The ZF is already pushing my budget, originally I was looking at cameras around under 1k
Secondly, like I said, it's a travel camera, not main. I already have a large main blob camera, so no need to recommend those

>>4421561
Just get the zf, 28 f2.8, 40 f2, 24-50 kit lens, and stop being autistic then

>>4421562
I have vintage lenses I plan to use with it

>>4421565
Autofocus, sharp max apertures without blooming/haze, and zooms that aren't total shit are nice to have sometimes.

Also nikon is literally the only brand other than leica that can use leica M wide angles without modification

>>4421567
Yeah if I were to get it eventually I'd probably get some, they sound goof
So anyway is it good for some travel kino or no
And some photos
Or should I get an s9 or an xm5... those are my choices

>>4421521
>Should I get an N-Kino?
no the autofocus literally doesn't work just look, it totally missed my overexcited dogs nose and focused on the eyes instead

such a horrible camera with way too much low light performance and shitty autofocus that locks on to eyeballs. do not recommend. buy a fuji so you can crush your blacks and focus on backs of heads instead.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON Z fCamera SoftwareCapture One WindowsSensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaFocal Length (35mm Equiv)50 mmImage-Specific Properties:Horizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiExposure Time1/250 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1800Lens Aperturef/2.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length50.00 mmImage Width3000Image Height4500RenderingCustomExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlLow Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessSoftSubject Distance RangeUnknown

>>4421571
This is the cringiest shill so far and it's pretty fucking high bar

>>4421571
Sadly most shills won’t see the sarcasm. Good job anon.

>>4421571
>crushing the blacks
u racist shitlord

>>4421571
>z7ii
>d750
>d200
>now a zf too
how many fucking nikons does this dog have? is this just sugar fucking with us? is he a youtube nikon shill?

>>4421567
why buy a bunch of cameras that focus in the wrong direction

https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/studio-rtx-ai-garage-davinci-resolve-flux1-nim/

DaVinci Resolve Studio 20 beta has added support for hardware-accelerated 4:2:2 encoding and decoding on GeForce RTX 50 Series and RTX PRO Blackwell GPUs — and comes at a time where 4:2:2 is becoming more available in consumer cameras. Now, creators can shoot footage, import it quickly into their DaVinci Resolve projects and export their finished project in 4:2:2 color.

>>4422124
Super glad you're finally putting af in your cameras. When are you putting in ibis?
The af beta demonstration was like a shaky Stevens concert!

>>4421119 (OP)
I been trying to nail down which camera to get, and it's essentially boiled down to either an OVF, or 10bit video.

I'm either going for a Pentax KF / K1 or a Panasonic S5ii, already considering size, lenses, cost, per-system details, etc. On one hand, there's a camera with no screen for a viewfinder, and on the other there's a camera that's super practical for everything.

I already work with computers a lot so an OVF is compelling, but so is practicality of a complete camera.

>>4422258
>meaningless image quality autism or meaningless enjoyability autism
is it not obvious

>we're back
How have you held up these past 2 weeks /vid/?

>>4422465
Tested out some slog 3 footage.
+1.0 on the exposure index is the sweet spot.

>>4422465
I tinkered with my handheld rig and finally have a setup I'm content with

>>4422465
I was forced to use Retarddit and Failbook. I’m glad 4chan is back.

>>4422465
Shot more test footage on my BMCC6KFF. Found a weird bug/glitch thing with using the Film Breath effect in Dehancer (will occasionally “flicker” on dark areas), debating emailing them about it. Running out of editing/backup space, need to buy another SSD. Thats about it, thanks for reading my blog.

>>4422465
I had a much needed break. I also found that 8kun's /p/ is basically dead, the most recent post I saw was from December.

>>4422465
My film got into a film festival! This one is moderately sized too. I'm actually so excited which is weird since I had sort of relegated to the idea of permanently being a depressed failure.
But they haven't confirmed they've received the film file and if they don't get it in the next week then I lose my selection. So my anxiety still has a lot of material to work with.

>>4422582
Congrats! Would you mind sharing a few basic details about the short, like genre, budget, and gear? Always curious about that.

>>4422608
Thanks! It's a feature, not a short. But sure. I won't share anything that might get me doxed (the festival or an in-depth summation of the plot).
>Genre
Crime thriller. Surprisingly similar to Havoc actually in its premise, but more of a drama than an action film.
>Budget
A little less than 10 grand.
>Gear
Shot on a lumix s5iix. Used a 32bit float audio recorder along with a couple of mics (one very good, one less good) and a zoom h1. Cheap lights that supplemented practical lighting fixtures. A gimbal that I only used for a couple of shots. A decent tripod for my camera, a shit one for the mics/lights depending on the scene.
Allowed me to work with a skeleton crew and keep costs down. I'm definitely punching above my weight with regards to this festival where the average budget for features will be more like 50k

>>4422609
Apologies for assuming it’s a short, good job on making a feature. Your first or do you have experience? Able to attend the fest?

>>4422610
No sweat man.
>Your first or do you have experience?
Technically my 2nd. 1st made very little impact though. Between the 2, I feel like I've learned a lot more than I could have if I went to film school or something similar. And the lessons I learned from the 1st film really helped with the 2nd.
>Able to attend the fest?
Hell yeah! As long as they confirm that they've received the film and all that shit then you couldn't keep me away.

>>4422637
Isn't the a7siii literally exactly what you're asking for?
Also, can't you cool the camera down with a fan?
And also also,
>sony
lol

Guys, I've decided that fuck pessimism. We're all gonna make it

>>4422778
>least based life enjoyer

>>4422582
Fucking sweet. Nice job, dude. That's a great feeling.

Alexa update.... I got another one.
$2700 AUD, Alexa XT + Viewfinder. Came with a soft bag, road case, AC power, vct.
Guy I bought it from reckons RAW is cooked, but I have still been yet to test that out, got some codex cards on the way, based yahoo auctions.
He also recons the sensor needs calibration, it looks pretty close to the classic but I'll be doing more testing along the way, probably not worth getting ARRI to look at it.
Its got a bump is resolution vs the classic, and does open gate, so that's cool.

>>4422465
The editor and producer and producers are ignoring my editing notes, my film is slipping away from me
I also bought an S9 for fun
That's about it

>>4422977
What's your endgame, big guy

>>4423008
>The editor and producer and producers are ignoring my editing notes
Damn. Any more details you can share?

>>4423030
European art doc, decently big budget
At the editing stage, went through a couple versions
Suddenly getting rushed by producer to finish editing (after previously being assured to take as much time as I need)
After preview screening loads of notes from producer (most of which I don't agree with), editor is producers dog because they've worked together loads and will work together more
Wants to show coproducers as well for them give their opinions, even though none of these people should have any creative input imo
At the end of the day I should have final cut, but it might have to get ugly for me to get my way, which I'm not sure I want to do because I don't want to burn bridges
Will have to figure out some kind of diplomatic compromise

>>4421119 (OP)
tl;dr

WHAT DOES VID THINK OF THE NEW IG360?

>>4423040
>At the end of the day I should have final cut
Was this written into the contract?

>but it might have to get ugly for me to get my way, which I'm not sure I want to do because I don't want to burn bridges
Sounds like a shitty situation. Are you physically able to meet the editor and be there in person during the edit?

>>4423009
This
>>4422977
Gonna shoot a high end commercial for Australia tourism?

>>4423056
I swear to god I'm going to be hiking along in the blue mountains and stumble across a beergut bogan dual-wielding arris for the new VB commercial.

>>4423040
>but it might have to get ugly for me to get my way, which I'm not sure I want to do because I don't want to burn bridges
Producing a better documentary at the cost of a producer's ire seems like it would better for your career than to appease a producer and turn in a subpar product. But I guess it depends how well you expect the documentary to do in terms of festivals/awards/viewing figures.

>>4423051
>Was this written into the contract?
uhh.......
>>4423051
>are you physically able to meet
yes I've been sitting in with the editor for months
>>4423069
Unfortunately contacts and networking is king and you'll get further being on good relations with big people than making something good
Anyway the producer has plenty of A tier festival experience so they're steering it more in that direction

>>4423098
>yes I've been sitting in with the editor for months
This helps you, your physical presence and immediate input should outweigh any notes sent by email/text/app, unless the producers are also physically there or meeting with the editor on the side

>>uhh.......
Nevermind, you’re fucked. Do you “own” the film or footage? You’re double fucked. I always make sure to write in I have final cut authority on projects that I care about. But if I’m just a hired gun, I don’t give a fuck.

>>4423105
I mean it's my film, I wrote it and I own the footage
I don't remember if we ever discussed Final Cut specifically because the whole thing is mine
Regarding the editor and producer, they do meet in person occasionally as well, but the bigger problem is they've worked together before a lot so they have greater rapport

>>4423129
When you say “producer” I’m not sure if they’ve contributed funding and again what that means contract wise as to who has ownership for sales, distribution, etc.
If the film is truly 100% yours then you could literally fire them as producers and completely walk away with the footage and do whatever you want with it.

>>4421322
how does that work anon? do you keep the gear after filing for bankruptcy?

>>4423136
Producer as in they're producing the film and they got us government film funding and organised shootings etc, there is some contract idk what it's for but I'd assume I can't fire them nor do I want to

>>4423195
>there is some contract idk what it's for
…how do you get this far and not know what contracts you’re signing? If they’re going to destroy your film according to what some shitty preview response cards say, you might start considering it.

>>4423196
Because I'm doing it in a foreign land and the contract is in a foreign language and I'm just hoping I don't get screwed...

>>4423157
If you are honest you probably can’t keep shit. In the real world the awesome stuff such as Arri lenses and super baltars and vintage glass and good cameras tends to “get lost” and only shitty stuff nobody wants is left to get sold to pay off the debts.

>>4423201
Couldn't even hire a 3rd-world attorney to read it for you?
Anyway, sounds like you're just along for the ride now. Creative vision means fuck all if you're not the one conducting the train.

>>4423259
We'll see, it's probably not as bad as I made it sound in my initial post, just annoying

Is it a retarded idea to get DJI mic 2 for a little portable travel filmmaking setup for primarily ambient/environmental audio?

>>4423467
If it'll work for you, and you've checked your options, it isn't retarded. Just make sure you aren't going to experience buyers remorse. And get it before tariffs kick in.

Scared and excited. I've got my first ever red carpet coming up in a few weeks for a film festival (not cannes, but decently-sized).
Any tips for containing my autism? This is the biggest thing in my "career" (if you can even call it that, lmao) so far so I really don't want to fuck it up. Anyone with experience of what to do at these sorts of events?

>>4424150
>any tips
Dress in a way that makes you stand out, best if it's also fashionable but the most important thing is that you should be comfortable in it, so don't rent a tuxedo if you're not used to wearing a suit or you run the risk of looking and feeling like an odd penguin.
Even jeans and a white t-shirt can work well if they feel good to you.
>containing my autism
You have an occasion to go there and tell people about what makes you passionate, you have no reason to be stressed out.
If you meet someone you want to build a relationship with, simply find them, shake hands with them, say your name, tell them you loved their work on this or that, and that you'd love it if they could give you their input on whatever you brought to the festival.
>what to do at these events
Network in the form of talking to industry professionals and the press.

>>4424150
have been to a few because I work in the film industry, unless you are a producer or youre pitching something no one really cares, enjoy the free booze if there is any
Enjoy watching the movie, otherwise it's more a business type of event
So either prepare your pitch or just don't stress and enjoy making fun of the suits

>>4422977
there are around 300 new Alexa 35 laying around at Arri because no one has money or projects to buy/use them
Wait a lil and you might get a sweet deal

>>4424223
I love how every few weeks instagram reminds me that the film industry is in an unimaginably dire situation with apparently almost everyone out of work.

>>4424251
Makes me very happy to see. Burn in hell Hollywood/Industry, rot while I piss in the mouth of your corpse

>>4424220
>dress well but not over the top
>speak with enthusiasm about film
>network with the knowledge that everyone is there for the same reason
Good advice. At the last festival I was at it was kind of disheartening when not only had noone seen Anora (right after the oscars), noone even knew what it was. Love it or hate it, it's weird that at a gathering of filmmakers/alleged cinephiles, noone would have any knowledge about the film the academy had just voted best picture. But that was a really small festival so maybe it will be different this time.
>>4424222
>don't try too hard or expect too much
>just enjoy yourself
Also good avice. Seems a little counter to the above, but is probably a good outlook.

Thanks!

Opinions? 998 CAD for 24, 35 and 55mm cine lenses from Sirui. I really want to start getting into video, I have a Canon 24-104 f4 L and Canon 70-200mm f2.8 L but feel like buying these would give me more desire to shoot more stuff. Am I putting too much into the "character" of cine lenses? Also kind of limiting that they are RF mount no EF mount option and also only for APSC so if I ever upgrade to full frame...but for 1k could easily sell for similar to that in a year or two if I get rid of them I would assume.

>>4424353
If you want to shoot video, shoot video.
If you want to make excuses as to why you can't shoot video yet, keep spending thousands on additional gear that you're not going to use

>>4424404

That T1.2 would make shooting in low light way easier and I feel as though I want to shoot a lot of low light night stuff. But I do agree, the lenses I have already are good enough to shoot stuff with. Maybe I will just buy one of the Sirui lenses like a general purpose 24mm or 35 to just have as they are on sale and quite cheap really. The F4 of my 24-105mm seems to kinda limit me a lot I find but i've done a bit a couple videos using the various lenses. Also have a Canon R10 and was thinking of "upgrading" to FF but really I don't think it's worth it, just find it hard to get motivated to go shoot stuff especially with the massive white 70-200 that always attracts kinda too much attention sometimes the small cine lenses might be nice.

>>4424325
>At the last festival I was at it was kind of disheartening when not only had noone seen Anora (right after the oscars), noone even knew what it was. Love it or hate it, it's weird that at a gathering of filmmakers/alleged cinephiles, noone would have any knowledge about the film the academy had just voted best picture.
That’s actually fucking based. Sounds like they just proved you’re a pleb. I’m aware of the film but would never waste my time watching garbage like that. Maybe they only watch good cinema like experimental/avant garde and don’t give a fuck about Hollywood trash? Good on them.

>>4424353
> buying these would give me more desire to shoot more stuff
This is 100% always a trap
If you aren't engaging actively enough with video already, it will only surge your interest for a month or maybe two, and then they will sit on your shelf
Buy stuff to improve what you actively like to do

>>4424422
>Maybe they only watch good cinema like experimental/avant garde and don’t give a fuck about Hollywood trash? Good on them.
This was unfortunately not the case. They were all very versed about capeshit
>proved you’re a pleb
Knowing about the industry I'm trying to break into is a very elitist and dumb way of defining a pleb.

>>4424429
>>4424404

I don't know bros...kinda want to do it but you guys are probably right. I was wanting to maybe buy a older used lens or vintage cine lens but they are all basically more expensive or the same/similar price to one of these siruis brand new. I still may just order one lens maybe the 35mm to get close to 50mm after my canons r10 1.6 crop and have it as an all rounder. But if you by all three you save 200 bucks which is half the price of one of the lenses themselves, I just don't usually swap lenses that often and don't know how much I would swap them in and out etc. I don't know, probably might be a mistake I did splurge and spend about 1600 CAD on the Canon EF 70-200mm f2.8 L and 24-105mm F4 L about a year ago and used them a bunch and again kinda stopped doing anything photography/video related for months but it's hard with work etc.

I just want to know what a cine lens is like to use, what they would look like for what I shoot maybe I shoot rent one or something.

>>4424435
I never change lenses. It’s way too much work. I use a 24mm-104mm f/4 for everything and I add light if the scene is too dark. Cine lenses are mainly for show. They make your client think you are a pro. They are only really needed if you are working with a crew.

>>4424432
Oscar trash and films/filmmakers like Anora is a world I want no part of, and I don’t wish to speak to you further. Goodbye.

I genuinely don't give a shit about MUH soap opera effect. 60FPS DOES LOOK BETTER ON VIDEO. I'm tired of dated geezer standards invading everything.

>>4424515
It also shows the flaws more openly. 24fps masks movements and jerkiness that are inherent in how people actually behave. If you want a reality that's not as polished or photographic, then high frame rate is good. But it's harder to control.

>>4424515
>60FPS DOES LOOK BETTER ON VIDEO.
No, it looks like video game dogshit and is being pushed to keep you buying garbage you don't need.
Let me be perfectly clear:
No one asked for 4k60. No normal, art producing person ever said "we need more 4k60". Some nerd in the vfx department probably said he preferred it as source material once, before being told to go get the coffee already.

Everyone was TOLD to want 4k60. Repetitively. Every talking head with ties to a marketing department, every sponsored person, has not been able to SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT 4k60. None of these people were ever, once, purely photographers, filmmakers, or any sort of working creative. They were all bloggers and those who were not were basically wearing a hat that said "this face sponsored by sony" (like how sony paid good money for their The Creator+FX3 marketing stunt)

If you didn't want 4k60 camera manufacturers would never be able to sell you another four fucking thousand dollars of useless consumerist gear by changing the 4k60 crop factor in firmware. If no one knew what a 4k60 was and was never told it was good, and you simply showed them 4k60 and 4k30 footage everyone would prefer the 4k30 every single time.

>>4424585
in the next five years we are going to be bombarded with trucker cap sporting retards telling us that 4k120 is the future of video just in time for sony to start prioritizing 4k120 pixel peeping quality

>>4424585
If you don't understand why videographers value 4k60 and 4k120, then I can only assume you have no experience or understanding of the work done by a large majority of professional videographers.
(PROTIP: a lot of videographers work in weddings and advertising)

>>4424589
I don't consider weddings and advertising to be "real video" or real anything
>but i need muh impromptu slomo for le bride
Fuck brides. Most worthless people in society. 50% of them will be divorced soon anyways.

>>4424590
Why do you think anyone gives a fuck about what you consider to be worthwhile?

>have Canon R10
>seems based and great got it for like 900 CAD 2 years ago
>hit with the cripple hammer for video no c-log etc cucked with 4k50fps

Why are they like this.....

>>4424598
>r10 doesn't shoot clog
Oh shit. I thought all the current gen canons did. Fuck. Have you tried using hdrpq?

>>4424585
my gramps always turn on interpolation. it's clear people want it. just liek they want insane contrast & saturation.

>>4424577
just make the motion blur 24fps like and no one will notice anything

>>4424607
early digital films like Collateral also suffer from this SOAP OPERA effect yet they're NOT 60FPS. it's all about the motion blur.

>>4424601

I haven't used it much, it's kinda hard to edit and watched a bunch of stuff on it and you have like no ability to recover highlights and it kind of seems like a pain in the ass. But I might go out and try to film some stuff today to mess around with it. People say to download the cinestyle profile and use it as a poormans c-log but people also say it's kind of shit.

>>4424613
I used to use cinestyle on my 70d. Got some incredible images out of it. On my 5d4 I just shot in standard profile and found it quite maleable to grade (but that was 4:2:2 mjpgs with a very high bitrate)

>>4424150
Figure out the dress code and network. Network is the best thing about these events.

>>4424223
Or snag one at Auction from rental houses declaring bankruptcy.

>>4424515
>VIDEO
yeah video isn't film, id rater watch a youtube vidya 4k60 but not a movie hey

>>4424765
I'll put money on most zoomers never having sat down in a movie theatre with a 23.97fps viewing experience. It's all 60fps youtube at this point, and they're two different mediums which people gloss over.
Also frame timings on whatever you're viewing the content on matters a lot. I remember reading something about a lot of 2010s and later LCDs boosting frame rates by basically doubling the frame count, but it made shit look uncanny. Imagine trying to watch a proper film on that.

I really like my DJI Osmo Pocket, but the battery is shot. Looking to upgrade to the Pocket 3, which can shoot in 4k/120fps. Has anyone tried anything else with a similar small form factor and price?

>phone cameras are usele-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKbmmf4QBzw

>>4424802
now show the rig.

>>4424826
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMp84mk3SE4
the only thing I see in front of the lens is a ND filter

https://www.yedlin.net/DebunkingHDR/

>>4424840
Do people really not realize HDR formats are just apple trying to force more compatibility issues for no reason? When has the DR of a 14-16 bit camera not produced good results on a standard display?

>Have Canon R10
>hate it doesn't shoot CLOG
>considering upgrading to the R8 or maybe R7

Am I being a retard? I keep seeing all these people that make very nice video etc saying no clog is a game breaker and shit. Kind of like how much you can change the vibe and feel with clog and seems like your way more limited shooting in like a profile even in standard plus 8bit vs 10 bit colours.

>>4424861
>people
Just say youtubers.
Youtubers (and fanatics) are retards trying to sell you something. Cameras hit diminshing returns years ago but they have to keep selling new cameras so they come up with new bullshit and then convince influencers to pretend like the new bullshit is super important.
Just film some fucking clips. If the quality isn't good enough FOR YOU then you need to upgrade. Otherwise you're fine.
Stop falling into the trap of letting other people decide what is and isn't acceptable.

>>4424861
R8 is an overheating meme. Don't do it regardless of if you sneed CLOG. R7 also has IBIS which don't forget is a video feature.
But, while you're not being a retard, I find that unless you're going super hardcore with video that any sort of LOG isn't really needed. It's nice for recovering shadows or doing fancy colour grading but otherwise fuck off with that GAS.

Advice/tips on how to get rid of the “milky/hazy digital look” when color grading?
I feel like it’s a contrast issue, but dont want to go overboard on contrast in the image.

I just bought a sony ZV-E1 with the kit lens
going to make some youtube videos

>>4424840
That's a good video explanation, especially at around the 1:24:00 mark where he tells you why it's a waste.

>>4424862
>>4424863

Yeah It would probably be kinda retarded to buy the R8 right now, and if I was to buy anything the R7 would make more sense but again keep getting the FULL FRAME MOGS CROP hammered into your head all the time so I would almost feel like a cuck paypigging 1700+ CAD for a crop sensor when you the R8 is the same or cheaper in some cases but it also has quite a few drawbacks. I don't i'm really even at the point of needing or being able to utilize half these features and benefits really. I tried messing around with the HDRPQ mode on my R10 yesterday, and I don't know...seemed really hard to get the colours back when editing them premiere auto converts them into rec.709 which is nice but then you have to completely slam the contrast, blacks and usually dump the exposure a bit to even get an image that was close to what you shot and then it's like....you don't have much room past that point to start adding anything but it's the first time I have used it so probably just not good with it at all, maybe I should just stick to shooting in the neutral profile in 8bit.

https://files.catbox.moe/ly02vt.mp4

These are a few clips I took yesterday excuse the wind noise didn't put a mic on as just wanted a quick test, pretty crappy snapshit stuff but just wanted to try out the HDRPQ. Seems like everything came out kinda soft but that's also because I was shooting wide open at f4 on my Canon EF 24-105mm F4L but again also obsessed with bright lenses hence I was also the guy wanting to buy the Sirui Cine lenses which at t1.2 so you could shoot in like t2-2.8 and it would still be nice and bright and sharper. I just think I am falling for consecutive memes in a row and it's sending me down money pit rabbit holes when I don't even have the skill to do anything with any of that stuff. I have some other vids on my channel but those are using pretty basic lenses and it's only recently I got any decent glass. I don't know, just want to get better.

Redpill me on the Panasonic GH4.

>>4424874
I'm sure people are more likely to be able to help you if you post examples of what you're talking about, because from your description I can't image what it is.
>>4424882
>buying a photo/video hybrid mirrorless without IBIS in 2025
>buying cine lenses to use without an external focusing system ON AN R10
I recommend not to.
Rather, you should figure out what your goals are, what's holding you back from achieving them (it's likely not your gear, which is nothing special but modern enough and definitely usable), and then addressing that.
What is it that you want to do that you're unable to do now?
>>4424893
It was a great piece of gear for the money when it came out, nowadays the only reason why you would buy it is your budget is too limited for anything worth buying but you still want to buy a camera for video, regardless of the much better options available for still relatively small amounts of money.
I believe a used S1 with v-log goes for around $1000, and an a7iii for about as much.
If you don't care about a big sensor, IBIS, battery life, ..., a used BMPCC4K goes for maybe 2/3rds of that.

>>4424902
>It was a great piece of gear for the money when it came out
This, I remember renting it when it came out and shooting 4K blew my mind, even the 1080p looked better. And being able to shoot 4K to purposely recrop and zoom for 1080p was a game changer.
This was quite awhile ago, so I’m sure you could get better for cheaper now.

>>4424902

Main thing holding me back is probably A skill/experience and then obviously motivation. My main motivation to even get into photography/video was cars and usually I can not pick my camera up for months then some big car event happens and I pick it up to go shoot pictures or take videos. But my main goal would be to just take more """CINEMATIC""" videos to post to youtube I know just like my instagram no one will look at them or watch them really but I just want to make like clean crisp cinematic stuff that's well made. But yeah I often find myself going out to drive around in my general area with my camera bag and a lot of the time I just end up going for a drive and not even taking the camera out. My two best lenses right now are my Canon EF 70-200mm F2.8L and my 24-105mm F4L. I honestly end up using the 70-200mm 90% of the time for anything I do as it's just...such a nice piece of glass but on a crop sensor it's pretty hard to use it's so punched in and in video...it's even harder getting anything useable without crazy shakes. I don't truly know what I want to film, I just want to make comfy looking videos and learn to colour grade better, I still want to buy those stupid cine lenses as they are relatively cheap....the 3 lens set is what like the cost of a half decent prime not even....at 998 CAD before tax. They are for APSC only and quite small, so I can kinda go incognito a bit and feel more comfortable walking around crowded places. Anywhere I go with my 70-200mm zoom it's a massive white lens and people ask me left and right if I want to do photoshoots of their cars, how much I charge or think I am some amazing photographer and it's like I'm not and is always very awkward where almost no one ever asked me anything with my shitty lenses before.

I bought a sony venice solely to shoot skibidi toilet tiktok videos
was this a good call

>>4424911
>>4424882

I binned the silly Sirui Cine lens idea for now....I opted to buy an old Canon FD 50mm 1.4 for 80 USD and an adapter for 40~ as they seem to well regarded and have "character" Should come in the next week or so, and at least it's nice cheapish bright lens I can use in low light although don't like how it's gonna be closer to 80 because of my sensor but oh well....will make do. If I like it maybe I will splurge on buying a 24mm FD or something. I'm trying to sell all my old glass I don't use anymore, Canon EF-S 55-250mm IS STM and EF-S 18-135 IS STM but no one really seems to want to buy them which sucks as I could recoup like 600 CAD selling the two and put it towards something.

>>4424911
>I want to take more """cinematic""" videos to post on yt but I know nobody will look at them
So do you want to shoot video or do you want people to engage with your content?
Why did you put cinematic between that many quotation marks?
Is there anything specific that you want to shoot, like, a short movie, a documentary, comedy sketches, ... (and how much of this would you like to film at dusk or night)?
As I said before, it's important that you FIRST figure out what you want to do, so that you can figure out what's preventing you from doing it.
>my hands shake when using the 70-200
>I want to get better at color grading
You can fix that for free with practice.
>>4424985
>I bought a lens that was average even when it came out 50 years ago even though I already have multiple lenses that cover the same focal length, that's for sure going to help me achieve my goals, whatever they are
See >>4424404

>>4425004

I don't really know what I want to shoot, I like when I see really nice atmospheric shots on youtube or social media that have a lot of style and character. Now 50%+ of that character is probably just good colour grading and how the shot was taken but still, even if this Canon FD is a blunder it's like 160 bucks invested including the adaptor and it will at least get me out a few times to shoot some stuff. Much better than spending 1100 CAD on the 3 set Sirui's and realizing i'm just not skilled enough to make real use of them yet. Anyways, I watched a 2hr video from the Media Division youtube channel on the Canon FDs and how they are very based and saw lots of examples also how they are very similar and optically the same as the K35 Cine lenses etc video seemed pretty convincing. Now i'm sure they had the lens attached to some insane ARRI Camera or something and I'll be a bit disappointed with it on my R10 but still.

tldr: Just want to take/learn how to take more atmospheric shots, get better at colour grading and setting up vibes/atmosphere but still don't have any real idea of a concrete thing I want to shoot like a short or things like that. The most I could think of is going to a car meet and taking some atmospheric establishment shots capturing the vibe of the meet, then take "cinematic" video of the cars spliced in with some more atmospheric vibe shots to then post on Youtube or Instagram but I don't really like posting on instagram because your basically forced to shoot in portrait which I don't like in video at all.

>>4425065
I don't want to discourage you but hundreds of people do that and upload their shitty videos to youtube and they're so fucking boring.
What would be a million times more interesting (and actually help you develop as a filmmaker): try interviewing people.
>grab a friend/family member
>ask them to tell an important story from their life, or talk about a hobby
>try and make it interesting
This is an incredibly hard challenge. It will teach you basic colour grading, editing, sound mixing (and microphone placement) and make you actually think about your shots instead of just pointing at things you think might be sort of interesting.

>>4425067
>grab a friend/family member
>ask them to tell an important story from their life, or talk about a hobby
Jesus this sounds even more boring and I wouldn’t waste a second of my life watching something like that

>>4424607
I regularly shoot and edit material that's 50fps with a 1/50 shutter speed. It's not the same as 25/24fps with the same shutter speed. It's not only the shutter speed but the frame cadence as well. Between the two lower cadence is more important. 50fps at 1/100 shutter looks like garbage though.

>>4425067

I know it's pretty saturated, but I wouldn't exactly be looking for views or acclaim just kind of want to be able to do it in general. I agree that would be much more interesting, but I'm also for the most part pretty anti-social and reserved, and almost no one in my family even knows I am into photography/video. It would be a massive step out of my comfort zone to do something like that, but maybe for the better. I wouldn't mind figuring out how to properly use mics and things like that though. I think I still need to truly figure out what I even like filming etc.

>>4424607
>>4425108
what the fuck am I reading?
50@ 1/50 is 360 degree shutter, shit's gonna be a blur

movies pretty much follow the 180 degree rule, aka shutter is double the frame rate because we don't use mirrors anymore

>>4425067
>>4425065
>>4425004
>>4424985
>>4424911

I went out and tried to take some more videos with my EF 70-200mm f2.8, it was really hard to get anything good handheld I was just too shaky even trying to stay still and hold it. I had a top mounted grip on my camera cage which helped for some shots. I bought a monopod yesterday but it did not come in before I went out to take some shots, will try to use that as it looks pretty useful and less cumbersome than a tripod. I mean the 70-200 on a crop is like...112-320 so without a solid tripod not ideal at all to use it for video a lot I would think but it's my fastest lens and also still pretty sharp wide open at 2.8 I was using 3.5-4 for these shots. My 24-105mm f4L just seems too soft and shitty wide open at F4 and shooting higher seems kinda gay.

Here are the snapshits

https://files.catbox.moe/i8i726.mp4

for what purpose

>>4421119 (OP)
what's the best setup that still goes with casual chill social gathering settings or vacations?

I feel like as soon as I have 1. a real sensor (fullframe, super35 etc) 2. a real lens and 3. a gimbal its's already way way to far.

>>4425404
Why do you need a gimbal? IBIS and correct in post.
Just get a normal camera body and pancake lens.

>>4425404
Real camera but slightly smaller

It's a stupid thing to want cameras to be invisible. Why should cameras be invisible? Are you doing something wrong? Invisible camera people are always, always ducking behind it, never letting it go, and at the end there's 20 candids of someone drinking a pepsi and none of them are good.

>>4425404
easy rig still uncontested

>>4425426
Invisible cameras are for creep shots on crowded subways, and up skirt, and down blouse videos. A lot of people on here would love an invisible camera.

>>4425404
The latest RX100 you can afford.

>>4425404
R5/ii/c

Hi, I have a question about color management.
I may shoot or receive footage for editing that's been shot in V-Gamut/V-Log, REDcolor/REDlog or what have you, and when I open up Resolve I see two options to get started: going into the project settings and changing the color science to Davinci YRGB color managed, the input and timeline color spaces to the one corresponding to my video files gamut/log, and the output color space and timeline working luminance depending on the delivery medium, OR importing the clips directly, and in the media pool applying a LUT to each clip that converts the color from whatever-gamut-and-log to something that looks like Rec.709.
Are there advantages to the first method, or it's all the same since I'll do some grading anyway later, where I can correct for any odd color caused by the misinterpretation of some colors in the input file?
Also, will applying two LUTs in series like, say, V-Gamut/V-Log to 709-like and then 709-like to a film look, cause some loss of information, clipping or what have you?

>>4425682
If everything you get is from the same camera color managed would be easier for you and if you get a mix of footage from many different cameras applying a lut would be easier. If everything was shot in raw, which it probably wasn’t, color managed will figure out how to convert everything to your desired output rec709 for YouTube or dci-p3 for cinema

If you want everything film like the best thing to do is use a cst to convert the clips to Cineon film log and then apply a film look lut to make your footage have the film look just make sure you used a filmlut to convert the footage to your desired output or use something like Dehancer to do it for you.

>>4425209

I took some more snapshits, my monopod came in and gotta say for a crappy 25 dollar k&f seems pretty good and useful def going to keep using it. Used my EF 24-105 f4L was kinda dark for it but still tried to get some okay stuff. Don't really have any interesting places to film so just going to parks I know and stuff. Really wish the R10 had clog, kinda has me seething. Anyways know no one is watching the snapshits but going to keep dropping them trying to get better.

https://files.catbox.moe/voa95l.mp4

>>4425796
>for a crappy 25 dollar k&f seems pretty good and useful
Lol I bought the same thing because I just wanted *an* monopod. Good value and quick to readjust length thanks to the lever system.
The one thing I noticed though is at full extension it's quite wobbly, but I found keeping the thinnest tube slightly retracted helped.

>>4425682
the color managed workflow is great when you have a bunch of bm cameras, but i don't know how well it would with a bunch of other log profiles

>>4425682
>>4425684
Not sure if it's related or not, but used to screw me over was the gamut option. I think it defaults to 2.4 gamma when I need it to be 709-A for Apple computers.

>>4426011
I edit on Apple and always use 2.4. Am I being retarded?

>>4425144
Here read this:
https://www.wipster.io/blog/debunking-the-180-degree-shutter-rule
>shit's gonna be a blur
It's only a blur if you're trying to slow the footage down. Otherwise, when playing realtime it's absolutely fine and is essentially the same as the filmic 1/48 shutter speed that's used for 24fps productions. 1/96 or 1/100 shutter at 48/50fps is too jerky and you can't convert it to 24/25fps without it even looking worse (unless you're spending time trying to add missing motion blur in post).

>>4426064
Well for me, the output would always look like the lift was a tad high and lack the contrast I thought I applied.

>>4426261
Interesting. I’ll fuck around with it and see what I think

>>4426261
Is this as simple as applying a CST node at the end of color grading to turn 2.4 into 709A? Or do you have to grade under it from the beginning?

>>4426268
In Resolve, it's in the color management menu.
Click on the cog at the bottom right and look for color menu or something like that.
There's also a way to change it in the preferences where every time you start a project, it defaults to that setting.

>>4426297
One more thing, I think the color transformation effect will work, too but, I usually don't do it that way, the node tree gets too crowded.

How important is 10bit video? I wanna get more into the video side of things and my current camera (sony a6600) only shoots 8bit video. Mainly want to shoot travel stuff and If my understanding is correct shooting in log gives better dynamic range but its bad to do it in 8bit (correct me if I'm wrong im new to this). And if 10bit is definitely recommended and better should i upgrade or get a second cam for video? I guess upgrading to an a6700 would be the cheapest option because i could keep my e-mount lenses but im open to other suggestions.

>>4426404
>How important is 10bit video?
Not very unless you're serious about colour grading.
>Mainly want to shoot travel stuff
You don't need it.
Shoot your shit. Stop making excuses. If you film shit and find your image is breaking when trying to grade it then you have justification to get a camera with 10 bit codecs.

>>4426406
but anon, he has a sony. it NEEDS graded.
>sony colors bad? ss-ss-ss-s-s-skill issue just spend hours editing literally everything. after i spend hours editing you cant tell which one is sony ;_; -every snoyboy ever

>>4426408
>but anon, he has a sony. it NEEDS graded.
Obviously i dont need to grade it but want to because i find the process more interesting. Same reason i shoot in raw instead of jpeg. If i wasn't interested in the process i would just shoot everything with my phone or just not take pics or vids at all and just remember

>>4426406
>Not very unless you're serious about colour grading.
Lets say i want to take it seriously. What do you recommend then?

>>4426422
>What do you recommend then?
FX30 or FX3
Get a B+W ND filter, either a single 6 stop or the variable that goes from 1-5.
I'll send you an invoice in the morning for the advice.

>>4426422
>Lets say i want to take it seriously. What do you recommend then?
That you learn how to use a camera first rather than whining that your gear still isn't perfect for the next ten years

Do I do it bros? Want to "upgrade" from an R10 to full frame. This is in Canadian dollars.

>>4426445
>buying cannot ewaste brand new
lol you can get a barely used r8 for $800. $1699 is glorious z5ii money.

>>4426447
oh wait i realized you’re chinadian
thats still too much

>>4426449

Doesn't seem that bad to get into mirrorless full frame, like 1400 USD. I already got some decent Canon L glass and don't really want to change mounts...but Canon does seem like the gayest manufacturer for cripple hammering shit etc. The r6ii which seems like the only logical next step is just such a step up in price....like I'm still pretty hobbyist and would be salty having to shell out 3k CAD for a r6ii and even a used one is still going to be like 2500 bucks.

>>4426452
The r6iii is about to be announced in the next couple of months. It's rumoured to have clog2, 6k internal raw and 4k120 (to compete with the z6iii).
Probably out of your price range but imo it's a silly idea to consider an r6ii atm
>>4426445
I was in a similar situation a couple of years back and ended up buying a lumix s5ii and a lens adapted. Still came out cheaper than an r6ii and had better specs.

>>4426455
I have a feeling the R6III's dynamic range will be as fake as the R5IIs
>forced NR at every ISO. actual stills shadow recovery abilities are the same as a sony APS-C sensor. even heavier NR in video. do we win, reviewer-sama?
Just like the R3 having micro four thirds DR in clog...

>>4426455
>>4426447

I heard about apparently the r6iii coming out, the r6ii is like not even two years old....I guess I just wait or something I don't know...I've only ever used Canon cameras and all my lenses are EF right now adapted to RF. I just want to get into full frame and be done with it.....even if I find out it was a skill issue and aps-c was fine. A guy has a Canon R8 up for 1500 CAD bucks...pictures are literally just the box and nothing else so I will have to go check it out in person. But if that camera turns out to be okay then it would be a decent buy 1500 no tax, can turn and sell for r10 for at least 900ish CAD I bought it on a good sale for 950~ two years ago so basically get my money back. A higher end camera seems cool and like a buy once cry once scenario but the price jump just seems too much after tax and stuff...maybe if there is a super good deal used. Maybe the R8 will go on sale or something soon, but it already seems pretty well priced in CAD so it could go up for all I know. I will buy the R8 and the R8 fucking 2 will come out probably.

>>4426458
I think that's inaccurate. (note: talking about video, don't care about photography which is calculated differently)
The r5ii without nr has decent dr. The problem is that the sensors it's compared to (mainly sony cameras) mostly have forced noise reduction that you can't turn off and the tests done by cined and the like don't account for this (the fx3 being a great example). For years canon cameras had pretty much none (or very very little) in the way of noise reduction so people had it in their heads that their sensors were considerably worse. So as soon as they put nr in their cameras, everyone gets on their case for using nr while giving everyone else a pass for the same thing.
Additionally, the r5ii noise reduction is actually good nr unlike something like the z5ii or the iphone. You can tell by the fact that there are still additional stops below the noise threshhold that can be recovered.
But more importantly, and applicable to the r3, the imatest tests aren't actually a great indication of dynamic range in the first place. Exposure latitiude is what most people mean when they talk about dynamic range. And the r3 has much better latitude than almost every other sub 10k camera aside from the the sony a9iii.
/rant because I see people complain about canon dynamic range a lot

>>4426459
>>4426455
>>4426445
>>4426447

Went out and bought the used r8 for 1400 CAD it was in mint condition, would have been 1900+ CAD to buy the r8 brand new after tax so saved over 500. We full frame now bros, feels good going to go test it out tomorrow and got a cage on order for it and stuff.

>>4425684
I can apply LUTs just as well when I'm working with a color managed project, and if I select the color managed option in the color settings with an intermediate gamut for the timeline, like DaVinci Wide Gamut Intermediate, I definitely have to apply a LUT or do some heavy handed grading just to bring the footage to a usable state.
>color managed will figure out
How does that work?
>>4426011
I seem to understand this is only relevant if you're exporting video for viewing in Quicktime.
Also aren't the gamuts of Rec.709 and Rec.709-A the same, and the difference is only in the gamma? If that's the case you could use any working color gamut and independently select a gamma of 1.96.

>>4426144
This page is like if some second year film student made a blog post DEBUNKING the rule of thirds with FACTS and LOGIC.
>>4426404
Better than 8bit video and worse than 12bit video.
>do I need it
Shoot some video, and if you get banding and clipping when grading to the desired extent you might want it.
If not, you have no reason to care.
>>4426479
Wow, you really went and followed everyone's advice!
Good on you anon, your videos will be next level now that you have more expensive gear!

>>4426552
>This page is like if some second year film student made a blog post DEBUNKING the rule of thirds with FACTS and LOGIC
The longer you do this shit for, the more you learn that the vast majority of "professionals" have a rudimentary-at-best understanding of their own gear and the tech involved.
As a quick example, back when "full-frame" started being thrown around in a video sense, I ran into numerous people who thought that the s35 sensors were full frame (like the arri alexa). I was at an event recently with masters/phd film school students where they were filming and didn't understand that a shotgun mic on a camera 3 metres away from their subject wouldn't pick up good audio of the interview they were filming.
It's a shitshow because the artistic side of filming and the technical knowledge are so divorced in terms of what people are taught. Ie people who consider themselves "artists" are by and large shit at understanding numbers or technical details. And the actual nerds/gearfags are artistically devoid and have no imagination.

>>4426583
Worse the autists who understand how all of the gear works, would only want to use the gear to make shitty remakes of sonic and the artist who wants to use the gear to make his art probably doesn’t even understand how to turn the gear on?

>>4426589
So why don't the both combine and make some damn kinos.

>>4426702
i mean, that's why the director has a DP who does all of the camera work, on larger productions. it's kinda what's you're asking for more or less.

>>4426583
> And the actual nerds/gearfags are artistically devoid and have no imagination
they would make great photographers
just give them leicas and fujis and no one will be able to tell they have no soul. for photographers even the soul is in the gear.
>platonic ideal photographer: this camera makes me
>platonic ideal videographer: i used the camera to

>>4426404
10bit matters with how much you're going to grade. If you're only doing some slight corrections, 8bit is enough, but anything major and 10bit is essential or else that banding issue will creep in.

>>4426408
>snoy rager autist strikes again
Based.

>>4426705
Fucking lol, I work as a camera assistant and can tell you a lot of DP’s have no clue about how to navigate the camera they shoot with, it’s my job to do all the changes etc, all they know is how they want to frame it and what colours they want

>>4426702
The vast majority of film jobs come down to personal relationships. They might put an ad out or whatever, but they'll still need a personal interview before hiring you. Camera autists are too awkward and uncharismatic so it makes people reluctant to hire them. Additionally, because of said autism, they're not very extroverted and aren't constantly trying to find jobs and interacting with people.

>>4426726
framing, colors and light are what matters, the rest can be done by apes

>>4426747
AC here, totally agree
Am doing it as a way to make money and buy food, but assistants are mostly nerds who are the worst gearfags ever
Also they think they are the cool department on set

>>4426583
I would add to this that while the artfags can learn technical stuff and evolve into more rounded filmmakers, the button pushing spec-monkies tend to stay confident until the day they die that all they know is all anybody needs. You can't even talk these people into swapping which half of the PB&J the jelly goes on without having to measure dicks.

>>4426874
>the button pushing spec-monkies tend to stay confident until the day they die that all they know is all anybody needs
This.

>>4426874
it's a pointless distinction to worry about

its not like one likes micro four thirds, fuji, etc and the other doesn't. the spec sheet bro will always dislike them, and the artist will learn to.

>>4426742
The ideal team would by an autistic cameraman who knows his specs inside and out and an NT director who can get anything out of an actor but nothing out of the camera. Working together and knowing that they need each other if they want to make “real” art. Sadly such combos of talents are sorely lacking in Hollywood and it shows.

I doubt anyone can help but I just want to rant about colour spaces and luts.
When the gh7 got arrilogc3, I get obsessed with getting the "arri look" in a cheap cam. I looked at all the available luts like phantom etc. I learned all this shit about arri colour processing, how they have colour tones shift depending on exposure etc.
Don't love arri but their colour science is cool. Obviously not paying some dipshit 80 bucks for a lut. But there are retards jizzing themselves over how similar their gh7 looks to an arri now (with provided footage).

Ffw later, I see dipshits smugly commenting "or you could just apply a cst in post". And I'm suddenly really intrigued. Can I just make my footage look like an arri with a couple of clicks in resolve? No. People saying this are idiots. Changing your colour space won't make your colours transform to arri colours, it just remaps them (sometimes will actually make it look less like an arri).
Colours come from reading the raw data and interpreting it in the right way. If they're already interpreted, you can't just remap them with a cst and expect anything special.
Right. Ffw another few months, panasonic puts cinelike a2 in their cameras and I get interested again. More research and I see a detailed explanation from someone who actually knows his shit explaining why a cst into arrilog is dumb.
Okay, settled. Are there seriously no free luts that imitate arris though?
Then I see a new discussion where a lot of pro colourists like to do a cst to arrilogc3 not for colours, just so they can apply arri luts etc. Okay... makes sense if it's not destroying the image I guess.
AND THEN I see them laughing about how putting arrilog in the gh7 (and now s1ii etc) is a gimmick because all it is is a cst inside the camera and won't give arri colours. Apparently the look happens based on the sensor design and has nothing to do with the lut applied. What the actual fuck? I'm sure they're wrong but also, I just don't fucking know.

>>4427273
You're starting from questionable assumptions.
ARRI colors don't exist, it's all graded to hell and back, and if you look at 10 different films shot on ARRI gear you'll see 11 different looks.
The advantage of ARRI cameras is that they offer a lot of flexibility since they're good quality cameras that produce good quality files that can conveniently be manipulated to achieve any desired result.

Yes, you could very well apply a CST to go from your footage shot on anything to ARRI log, provided that your original footage contains enough data to do it satisfactorily (this is unlikely to be the case because most cameras have a significantly lower dynamic range and can't produce video files that could contain such a high DR even if they could record it accurately) and you have a CST function that accurately maps your original footage to ARRI log (this too is unlikely because I can't see anybody having both a reason and the means to produce it).
With Resolve's color editing tools you can achieve anything really, even your fabled shifting color tones that shift depending on exposure (see the curves section).

Shooting ARRI log on a GH7 could be an advantage if you're already working with ARRI cameras and want to streamline your workflow, maybe you want a b-cam for a big production and can't afford to rent an Alexa for two weeks, so you buy a GH7 instead and now you barely have to do any color matching.
Or you want to apply the least possible amount of transforms to your footage to use LUTs that expect ARRI log as input.

The point of using a log gamma in general is to be able to squeeze a higher dynamic range into a file that would otherwise not be able to contain it (say 12 stops of DR into a 10bit file), and any brand-name log profile works well enough for it, so unless you already have ARRI cameras you need to work with I don't see any reason to pay €200 for ARRI log when V-Log works perfectly well already.

>>4427416
Thanks for that explanation.
Okay, I might be really off-base here in assuming that if 99% of youtubers all say the same thing they must be mostly correct; different camera log profiles create different "looks" when only a basic rec709 lut is applied. So like some are inherently quite contrasty, some have a lot more green in the shadows etc etc.
Ie. If you film with 2 different sony cams in slog the footage will be almost identical colour-wise and only need minor corrections, whereas a canon filming the same scene in clog will have a much greater variance.

You can match these different looks by knowing how to grade and spending time (as long your footage is high enough quality to not break under stress), but that takes time. Colour space doesn't affect that (or not in a consistent way). And the point behind the "fabled arri colour science" that people talk about is that the inherent look is a lot more pleasing than most other cameras. (So the theoretical advantage of arrilog in your gh7 or whatever is the assumption that the base "look" will resemble the base look of an arri - even if there's less latitude)

Is that completely inaccurate or am I conflating lots of different things?

>>4427421
A LUT is a simple enough file that contains what input values should correspond to what output values.
It expects a certain input and produces a certain output, so if you apply a LUT that expects footage shot in ARRI log to footage shot in V-Log you'll get odd/inaccurate results.
Camera manufacturers develop their own log profiles and offer specifications or LUTs to go from log footage to realistic/natural/accurate footage.
A "basic rec.709 LUT" doesn't exist, every manufacturer has their own specs about what color and luminance value in the log footage should correspond to in a 709-like environment (this usually means color that look natural on a rec.709 or sRGB display, encoded in a color gamut wider than rec.709), and that's where a "look" comes from.
Note that this is very far removed from anything inherent in a camera or sensor.

Most manufacturer LUTs going from their own log profiles to 709-like colors are quite neutral, and for all I know NLE developers might tweak them to make them even more neutral, so in practice if you apply a log-to-709-like CST to footage shot on two different cameras in Resolve, the resulting looks will be quite similar.
Not the same, but quite similar.
I'm not sure what you mean by "color space doesn't affect that".
Are you quite sure you know what a color space is?
Again, you're not talking about anything inherent here.
I recommend you either use simpler words or you look up the definition and usage of the words you're using in this context.
You're right in the second to last paragraph, that's the reason why someone would want to use ARRI log on any other camera.
>paying some dipshit 80 bucks for a LUT
>retards jizzing themselves over how their GH7 footage looks like it's from an ARRI
Why would the guy selling a LUT for 80 bucks be a dipshit, and why would someone who managed to make their GH7 footage look like it came from an Alexa be a retard?
Take a chill pill anon.

>>4427427
>A "basic rec.709 LUT" doesn't exist
I meant the basic luts that each brand offers for their log profiles. Sony, panasonic, canon etc all have "basic" log->rec709 luts.
But I'm getting the impression from what you're saying that this is actually the area I'm most confused/wrong about. I'll come back to this.

>I'm not sure what you mean by "color space doesn't affect that".
I mean that taking a file shot in vlog and applying a cst to put it into arrilogc3 won't give the footage the same colour science that an arri uses. It won't reinterpret the colour curves, it just changes the "space" the colour exists in (the limit of my technical knowledge I guess, but in my head it's like turning a jpg into a png, or a txt file to a doc file - you're keeping the same information just in a way that can be read/understood by different metrics allowing consistency in the way grading will change them).

>You're right in the second to last paragraph, that's the reason why someone would want to use ARRI log on any other camera.
I guess this is my confusion. So if I bought a gh7 and the arrilog profile, would the base "look" be more or the less the same as an arri (accounting for differences in latitude/dr)?
Does that look come from the log profile, the arri rec709 lut or somewhere else?

>Why would the guy selling a LUT for 80 bucks be a dipshit
I guess when there are multiple people providing it, and the product is literally a small file that's an imitation of someone else's work, 80 bucks seems like a steep price. Plus the way they market themselves irks me. But fair.
>why would someone who managed to make their GH7 footage look like it came from an Alexa be a retard?
They wouldn't be for that. But I have a hateboner for youtubers because (generally) they say so many things that are inaccurate so confidently. So when you get a slew of videos titled something like "An arri alexa for SUB $3000?!!!" I reactively call them retards because I'm immature and posting anonymously.

>>4427432
>I reactively call them retards because I'm immature and posting anonymously
Based

>>4427432
Color science means the way in which real colors are reproduced digitally.
As the name suggests it's not magic, and if you have an accurate CST function/LUT you can very well go from V-Log to ARRI log or from anything to anything else.
>it won't reinterpret the color curves
>does the ARRI look come from the log profile, a rec.709 LUT or somewhere else?
You should put in the effort to learn how color management works, what color models, color spaces, color gamuts, CSTs, LUTs and gamma are, otherwise you won't come to any real understanding of this stuff and you'll keep being annoyed by how some people get their footage to look cool/professional/cinematic while you spend your time on a mongolian flipbook teleconference.

>>4427553
>You should put in the effort to learn how color management works, what color models, color spaces, color gamuts, CSTs, LUTs and gamma are, otherwise you won't come to any real understanding of this stuff and you'll keep being annoyed by how some people get their footage to look cool/professional/cinematic while you spend your time on a mongolian flipbook teleconference.
That's pretty patronising.
You could just answer the question instead of being a dick. Believe me or don't, I'm actually pretty happy with how my films look visually. But I obssess over small things. The idea of being able to say to myself that my cheap hybrid produces arri colours is cool to me, regardless of the fact that I would barely use it (hence why I don't buy any of the arri imitation luts). I'm not annoyed that people are able to make their footage look cool because I believe I can already do it myself (and get external validation on that front). I'm annoyed that people talk about it inconsistently which makes researching it difficult since half the answers are contradictory and factually wrong.
But thanks?

>>4427563
>The idea of being able to say to myself that my cheap hybrid produces arri colours is cool to me, regardless of the fact that I would barely use it
lmao

>>4427563
You fucking mongoloid you were already told that there is no such thing as “arri colours” and yet you insist

>>4427709
Arri colors is just a marketing term used to sell morons shitty luts so that they can brag that the footage they shot on thier potato looks like it was shot on an Arri.

>>4427709
>you were already told that there is no such thing as “arri colours” and yet you insist
The base "look" from applying the arri provided rec709 lut to their cameras (normally called "arri colours") absolutely exists and it would take you 5 seconds of research to know that.
If you're denying their existence then you're an idiot. Canon colours also exist as do sony colours. There's a sizeable market dedicated to replicating these looks on different cameras.
The way arri colours come through is different (correcting for the same white balance and exposure) and there are several articles and videos that explain some of these differences, as arri spent millions replicating the look of their film stocks.
I don't why you would so confidently post something that's objectively not true.
>>4427722
The marketing is the widespread meme that arri colours are inherently superior to everyone else's. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

Is it possible to make a career as a narrative filmmaker without being a mainstream director earning millions? (And without earning most of your money doing other videography projects like weddings and corporate shoots?)

>>4427732
Why would you want to distract yourself with narrative if you’re not trying to be a mainstream director earning millions? Fuck narrative, & quit trying to conform your imagemaking into a marvel bible story shaped box.

>>4427736
What? I am trying to be a mainstream director. The point of my question is that there's a fucking huge gap between making films that are well-rated, airing at lots of festivals, and being a mainstream director who makes studio flicks with budgets in the millions.
So can one succeed financially even if they never manage to break into the mainstream?

>>4421119 (OP)
can someone refer me to some good documentation about gamma/color modes in general as well as specific to sony cameras?
i keep hearing that i should film in log and then edit it in post, but whatever i ends up looking worse than if i had just not used any picture profiles
this makes me think that there's something i don't understand

>>4427755
make sure your white balance is right
if you have resolve look into some videos about colour space transform, if you search sony specific it might be easier to follow.
you can also download a slog to rec709 lut, they are all brand specific

shooting log is good if you really want to edit and make it look good, if you are just shooting travel/family stuff log sucks imo, just more work

>>4427755
Ask yourself if you need log to begin with. Are you shooting scenes in extremely contrasty light conditions where it is absolutely important to show both the low and the high brightness portions? Maybe only one of the portions contains things of interest and you can get away with a more limited gamma? Turn on s-cinetone and experiment, it may be enough for you (it certainly is enough for me).
Also, here's some reading, better than Sony's documentation:
https://www.veresdenialex.com/post/master-sony-picture-profiles

>>4427754
>I am trying to be a mainstream director
Then I do not wish to continue speaking to you. Goodbye.

>>4427759
>just more work
>clicks 2 (two) buttons in post
OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

>>4427764
>>4427759
>Ask yourself if you need log to begin with
yeah, exactly, i want to learn to answer this question to myself, right now i don't know

right now only the following logic makes sense to me:
>do i want to recreate some specific color look
>am i going to use multiple camera
>am i going to tweak colors in post
if the answer is yes to any of these, then i should film in log

>>4427804
Oh no. I'm gonna really miss your brilliant insights about how narrative films are all shit. Darn, I really shot myself in the foot with that one.

>>4427808
>>am i going to tweak colors in post
I extensively colour grade everything I've ever shot. I only started shooting in log quite recently. You can colour grade without shooting log. Log just gives you more breathing room and means the image won't break as easily.
I really recommend you shoot something (preferably involving a human subject) and try grading it just to give you an idea of what you can do and what visuals appeal to you. There are numerous tutorials on youtube as well, especially if you want to recreate the look from a certain movie

>>4427823
>I really shot myself in the foot
Wish you had aimed higher

>>4427831
Is this autism or just seething?

>>4427845
Narrative is fine, it’s the mainstream trash that we don’t need more of

>>4426552
>>4426479
>>4426455
>>4426447

So after a few days of using my R8, I can officially say why the fuck was I listening to so many cropcopers for so long? This sensor is mogging my R10 in literally every aspect possible, I shot a bunch of video at pitch black night at some car meets and the footage looks amazing and CLOG is great. Never going back to being a croplet ever again at this point.

>>4427884
bbbut the 4k60 crop… muh g9ii… the equivalence ;_;

>>4427884
and imagine if you'd gotten a non-gimped camera with IBIS ahah

>>4427893

All those were too expensive really, especially Canon ones. Basically the only upgrade that made sense as a R6 II but the 3 is like a few months ago so no point in buying it especially new. I got my R8 used for 1400 CAD avoiding any government tip which is like 1k USD and the retail for the R8 right now is 1700 CAD plus 13% tip so almost 2k. Yeah not having IBIS is kinda gay sometimes but most of lenses have OS and for this price point I don't mind.

Guys I just need to post the casting call
I wrote it, the page is open, I just need to press post
Fuck
Last year I couldn't do it and missed the summer shooting window
I don't want this to happen again
What's wrong with me

>>4427989
It sounds like either general anxiety, or anxiety and executive dysfunction caused by latent adhd.
Either way, the only way to do it is to do it. Do it and worry about the consequences later.

>>4427903
Maybe Canadian winters are better than Aussie summers, but my brief experience of the R8 was overheating and a shitty feel. I'm glad you're liking it, but my tryout of it is the sole reason I'm hanging on for an R6/I/II/III

>>4427989
Hello fellow ADHDfag. Do it. Put whatever the fuck it is you're doing as you read this away, turn the 4chins off, let the fuckin' lasagna burn in the oven, and do the thing.
I get it mang. Literally start doing it and suffer through the first part of the task while you'd rather peel your balls off with a peeler, and by the time you're half way, you'll be calling yourself a retard for not doing it sooner.

Or don't. I'm not your mother.

>>4427989
I hope you’re using a separate contact email, because you’re going to get spam junk mail for years after
t. posted casting calls before

>>4428031
>>4428042
>adhd
say it ain't so...
idk i think im delaying doing it because i feel kind of embarrassed and also afraid of failure, i guess. Also because that will actually start the process for real, everything else so far has been theoretical and on paper. I don't know if that's an adhd thing or not...
>>4428077
of course

>>4428105
Reality is you’re going to get a ton of applicants who aren’t close to the character traits, are horrible actors, or both. Then you’ll have to sift through the trash to pick out the best ones, then still pay out the ass for it.
Welcome to hell

>>4421168
Arri

>Albert Serra shot Pacifiction on three BMPCCs
>Lav Diaz uses GH5 and A7Siii
fucking based

>>4428964
>Pacifiction
Cringe
>Lav Diaz
>"Known for 4+ hour narrative movies with little narrative movement"
'the fuck

>>4428964
Primer was shot on 16mm film and Upstream Color was shot on a GH2, but anyone would be an idiot to buy a 16mm film camera or a GH2 because of that.

>>4428998
?

>>4428964
There's an incredibly long list of acclaimed shit filmed on "accessible" cameras now. I was tempted to add a section to the sticky but it'd be way too long.

>>4429038
such as
I can only think of those two and horse money off the top of my head

>>4429050
Including everything? Off the top of my head,
House - an entire season shot on canon 5d3s
Black Swan - subway scenes were all shot on canon 7ds
Civil War - half the film was shot on dji Ronans (with sony a7s3s as b-cams)
The Creator - entire thing was shot on sony fx3s

From a bit of research
Frances Ha - Shot on a canon 5d2
Act of Valor - also 5d2
Sound of My Voice - canon 7d
Like Crazy - also a 7d
Wilfred - first season canon 7d, second season nikon d800 (also used in Dexter)
etc

>>4428964
I believe Hong Sang Soo also uses cameras along those lines

>>4428998
Correct, because those movies are fucking garbage

>>4429084
Were they really?
The only example I know for sure because of the amount of BTS on it was Fantastic Mr. Fox (Nikon D3x) and Isle of Dog (Canon 1dx)

>>4429092
Yes.
Over the last 10 years, hybrids have basically taken a permanent spot as c-cams on every film. It makes sense.
Imagine you're a big production company and you rent an arri for your big shoot. You've got a/b-list actors and dozens of crewmakers on a set where you're paying a lot by the hour. And then your arri breaks down because sometimes shit happens.
Arri are great, you call them and they'll deliver you a replacement. But how long is it going to take for them to get there? An hour if you're doing well? Are you really going to have everyone sit around doing nothing for an entire hour while you wait for a new camera?
Now imagine you have an fx3 or a pocket 4k in that same situation. Suddenly you don't have to wait an hour because you can just film on the fx3 (or use it as your b-cam, and your normal b-cam as your a-cam). The quality might be slightly worse, but when you've lit and exposed everything correctly, the differences aren't noticeable at all.
And imagine you're not renting an arri, but a red or a sony and it takes far longer than an hour for them to come out and deliver a replacement camera.

Or imagine you're a big director working on a huge-budget film where you're filming a very expensive and precise scene like a chariot duel with complicated choreography and pyrotechnics that you only have one or 2 takes max to film. Sure you film it on your big arri 65 or whatever. But you also set up 20 other cameras in every conceivable position at every angle so that there's no fear that you didn't get the shot you needed. You're not setting up 20 arris. Too big, too clunky. You need small cameras that won't be visible (or can easily be edited out), that fit in small spaces and that can serve as crash-cams as well.

>>4429084
No I'm more interested in (artistically significant) films that were shot wholly on these types of cameras rather than in part

>>4429097
>You're not setting up 20 arris.

>>4429158
> 20 arris
Most people posting here can’t afford one Arri. Let alone 20 of them.

>>4429091
Seethe brainlet, also not his point, you can deliver an ok product with any decent camera
>>4429097
>Are you really going to have everyone sit around doing nothing for an entire hour while you wait for a new camera?
Yeah, if you have the power to move a-b listers and the money to shoot Arri then you have the power to do that, also the power to have a backup Arri to be honest.
>>4429168
>Most people posting here can’t afford one Arri
Most people here are long way to work with a-listers, and hypothetically those who do then aren't shooting with a single main camera. Your argument is invalid.

>>4429158
This

>>4429190
>also the power to have a backup Arri to be honest.
Is this the result of falling literacy levels? If you have a backup arri it's likely there as a b-cam. Which means if your main arri fails, you use the second arri as your a-cam and need (ideally) a new cam for your b-cam.
There's literally no downside and a multitude of upsides for any decent-sized production to have small hybrids/mlcs on set (and I'm including blackmagic pockets in this case). Which is why they do it.

>>4429324
Having cheap cameras is needed if you risk destroying the camera in the shoot. That’s why they’re called crash cams because if something crashes into the camera during the shoot you didn’t destroy an Arri.

>waiting for a film festival to announce the award winners
This is so stupid. I'm not there because I only got the one nomination and there's no way I beat out the competition that was far more competent (expensive to get there). But still. On the one hand, I'd love to win for obvious reasons. But on the other, it'd be really embarrassing if I won but I wasn't even there to collect the first ever 'big' award I won
/blogpost

>>4429191
>On my mark, release the doves

>>4430288
Festivals are to meet people, and be festive about it
Waiting for the winners alone on a remote location seems counter intuitive, might as well call it a competition.

Resolve 20 out, pumped to try this new AI shit

>10bit and HEVC supported on Mac version of Davinci but not the Windows version
The fuck is this shit? Why is the Windows version so cucked in comparison?

>>4430714
Its a windows thing, same thing happened to me with my gopro on mac / windows using the free resolve.
don't quite remember how i did it but you either have to pay for the HEVC windows thing or sideload it
https://github.com/Fox8284/Microsoft-HEVC-Video-Extension (something like this, but not sure if this one worked)
good luck fren

>>4430716
that works for hevc but not the 10bit editing for whatever reason.
free on mac but not windows.

>>4430714
It probably has something to do with licensing fees. I bet windows charges for it and Mac offers it for free.

>>4430714
This was unironically the thing that made me buy resolve. You can work around it by converting your files with something like handbrake (there are a couple of 10 bit codecs that are supported in the free version). But ultimately the convenience just seemed worth it to me.

>>4430714
The windows version or resolve lacks ProRes support. I bet that’s because of apples licensing. Why does the windows version of adobe support ProRes when the windows version of resolve doesn’t support it? Wouldn’t apples licensing apply to adobe too?

>>4430791
i use prores on windows, maybe it's just the free version lacking

https://x.com/Blackmagic_News/status/1927532423480258672
https://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=222285

DaVinci Resolve 20 final release now available

GPU accelerated H.265 4:2:2 encodes on supported Nvidia systems.
GPU accelerated H.265 4:2:2 decodes on supported Nvidia systems.

There should be a festival where the only accepted submissions would have to be filmed with CCD cameras.

>>4430791
ProRes works for me on windows and I have the free copy.

>>4430791
Applel Prores is patented and proprietary and requires licensing and royalties, of course you have to PAY, Blackmagic isn't retarded to subsidize Prores retards

>>4430791
>The windows version or resolve lacks ProRes support
No it doesn't, ProRes is one of the very few 10bit codecs the free version on Windows does actually support. I've been converting some of my footage to ProRes just so I can keep using the free version on my Windows desktop.

So this makes it all the more confusing that Macs allow every type of 10bit footage while Windows allows Apples proprietary version of 10bit.
I don't understand at all.

>>4430973
>So this makes it all the more confusing that Macs allow every type of 10bit footage while Windows allows Apples proprietary version of 10bit.
>I don't understand at all.
maybe it's because modern windows is tablet/mobile first now

>>4430968
some bm cameras have had prores for a long time, it wouldn't make sense if you bought the cam and couldn't edit. pretty sure you could always edit it

>>4430940
>>4430968
>>4430973
>>4430991
I’ll have to check resolve on windows again the last time I checked I’m resolve 15 I needed to use dnxhq avids codec because ProRes wasn’t an option. I have only edited on mac not windows after that.

>>4431001
I mean to deliver my footage not to edit it. If that makes any difference.

>>4431001
>last time I checked I’m resolve 15 I needed to use dnxhq avids codec because ProRes wasn’t an option
ProRes has been supported since Resolve 18 when the iPhone 15 Pro made big waves about all the RAW capabilities.

>working with 4:2:2 V-log footage in Resolve.
>trying to recover detail in highlights
>either muddies the pic or just darkens and loses all detail across the shot
>aiming for: highlight control like in Adobe Camera Raw
>photoshop's CR just works, recovers the detail, end result looks nice
>doesn't turn into a weird featureless grey patch
>can import said raw clip into Photoshop and slap a camera raw on it
>looks damn good compared to what I can get in Resolve
>not gonna editing videos with Photoshop. come on.
I'm retarded I know, but is resolve just not up for it, and what is, what can mimic Camera Raw's shadow/highlight control for video editing. Premiere? Something else? Resolve perhaps?

>>4432108
>is resolve just not up for it
>Resolve perhaps?
>I'm retarded I know
You answered your own question twice

>>4432110
Why is it so shite at preserving details tho compared to camera raw, no matter the workflow towards controlling the blown highlights?

>>4432113
Works on my rig ;)

I read the sticky and saw the recommended cameras... but... how much should I actually spend if I'm just getting into it? Never done any sort of photography or filmmaking before. $500? $1000? $300? Like where is the bang for buck sweet spot here?
A lumix g7 so I can do full 4k? Seems like you can get em for like $350 with no lenses or extras.

>>4432113
skill issue

>>4432126
I spent £200 on my first dslr 10 years ago.
500 bucks is probably a good sweet spot but it depends on what you can afford.
You want to spend enough that you've got something half decent and are financially committed, but not so much that you're financially struggling over a new hobby you have no experience with.

>>4432138
More like adobe is still the king despite all the poorfags whining about muh subscription rates

>>4432489
Photoshop is boss for video editing, but I find it easier to use Resolve for video editing. I love color grading so that might be the reason I find Resolve to be boss for video editing. I find adobe audition easier to use then fairlight when dealing with pure audio stuff. I am not into adr or foley or other sound stuff used for movies so that might be why I don’t get fairlight.

>>4432624
I meant that photoshop is boss for photo editing, not video editing.

So what do you guys take videos of? I got a new cam and was thinking about trying video. I'm not sure what I would take video of though

anyone got a current torrent version of FCPX? updated my mac and i cant find a newer version that actually works its just a bunch of bullshit
Any crack sites that aren’t just pointless click farms with non working downloads?
thought I might as well ask here

>>4432662
Cats. You can’t go wrong with cats. Meme videos of cats are probably the best thing you could film. Make something epic for cinematic Caturday.

>>4432706
where do you find cats?

>>4432662
I want to buy a camera but there's literally nothing around me that's interesting to film. Even the sky is gray and uninteresting here.

>>4432819
Is there a more entitled attitude than complaining that art isn't naturally occurring around you for you to capture and pass off as your own?

>>4432819
learn lighting and camera techniques to bend what is there toward what you want. the lens is a lie.

>>4432108
https://waqasqazi.com/blog/highlight-recovery-mistakes-every-beginner-make-davinci-resolve-17-tutorial
Does this help at all?

>>4432878
onions

>used blackmagic pocket cinema camera 6k pro ~$1600 on ebay
>battery grip ~$165
>dji rs3 pro ~$620
Should I?
What should I go for in terms of mics and lenses?

>>4433157
not really a great camera to buy if you don't have your shit figured out

>>4433189
why

>>4433254
You need to know how to color grade to get the most out of that camera. It’s not a point at the pretty object and shoot. The footage you get is log footage or raw footage and it will only look good when you grade it.

>>4433269
Can't I just learn how to do that? Isn't that like half of the work of videography?

>>4433294
You can just use someone elses LUTs with different white balance for style its fine no one actually cares or notices

What do you guys use for compressing/converting footage? I have some x264 LOG footage I want to compress to x265 while retaining LOG/10bit, but shit like ShutterEncoder never seems to let me make it 10bit, even when setting the profile to Main 422.

>lumix s1ii uses the same sensor as the nikon z6iii
>somehow has a full stop more of dynamic range
Someone explain this bullshit

>>4433359
Forced noise reduction. I notice the videos are the usual influencer lies panasonic has following the script (this time we swear its better than snoy!) and dpreview is holding off on their autofocus segment. I wonder why? Did panasonic threaten to cut them off from review samples after how brutal they were on the s1rii being essentially useless?

>>4433359
>nukes sensor speed
frame stacking or noise reduction
>$3200 for a panashit with no autofocus
lol what are these idiots smoking. om shitstem tier price/performance.

>>4433372
>Forced noise reduction.
Cined tested the raw files. Canon are the only ones who include the ability to add nr to raw video.
Additionally, there have been comparisons with the fx3 showing significantly less noise reduction in compressed modes.
>>4433373
>frame stacking
The dynamic range boost was broken in raw recording when cined tested it so not that.
>panashit with no autofocus
It has autofocus. What are you talking about?

>>4433389
In autofocus tests, dpreview discovered the s1rii missed focus almost 75% of the time within a week. This tine they’re holding off.
Panasonic is notorious for refusing to provide review samples to anyone who points out problems from their camera or otherwise deviates from pre-scripted praise.

Put 2 and 2 together. Panasonic cant meet sony in utility. They may as well stick to box cameras and manual lenses. Anyways, it has a "stop" more dynamic range because its not the same sensor or they figured out how to cheat the tests. Simple logic. Its panasonic so im guessing they found a way to cheat.

>>4433391
I literally don't care about dpreview being retards.
Cined tested the dr of the raw video (without dynamic range boost) and it had a full stop more of dr than the z6iii. I'm asking how this is possible. Not if panasonic are dishonest or how dpreview are retards.
>it has a "stop" more dynamic range because its not the same sensor
That'd be interesting. It raises a whole new question of how they got that sensor from sony with identical specs to the one given to nikon except dr performance.
>or they figured out how to cheat the tests
This is stupid speculation. If you have a theory on how they cheated I'd love to hear it. But saying "oh they cheated somehow" is just dumb.
And for the record, I think something about the test must be fucky since I've seen side-by-sides that show the s1rii with better dr. But unless you have an actual theory on how this was done then it's pointless speculation.
>Panasonic is notorious for refusing to provide review samples to anyone who points out problems from their camera or otherwise deviates from pre-scripted praise.
I mean they still give GeraldUndone review cameras despite all the controversy (including the rolling shutter debacle with the s1rii recently that caused every lumix shill to damage control by pretending that rolling shutter was a stupid metric that doesn't mean anything in real-world situations)

>>4433393
>How is this possible?
Panasonic is cheating, or it's not the same sensor.

>>4433373
>Panashit with no autofocus
I'm surprised people buy them, and in fact, I think no one does, and panasonic's market share comes entirely from the cheap small sensor cameras. I've never seen a professional videographer in the wild with anything but a sony brick or a canon blob.

>>4433396
>I've never seen a professional videographer in the wild with anything but a sony brick or a canon blob.
B-but muh Netflix certification! What about RANDOM INFLUENCER who gets millions of TikTok views? They wouldn’t lie to me

>>4433430
>netflix certification, truly the mark of superior quality
have you actually watched a netflix original
>analog literally not allowed
>cameras hollywood is still using to shoot blockbusters are not enough for highly compressed 720p streaming
>more moire flickering than a soap opera
>i can see a boom mic
>hey there's a camera guy
>nice shaky hands
>continuity error!

>>4433435
>>i can see a boom mic
>>hey there's a camera guy
Give me 5 examples of this happening

>>4433437
>committing netflix originals to memory
i remember they were shit i dont waste time remembering the specifics

other than the smartphones laying around in the last kingdom. that was funny.

Bump limit reached, new thread
>>4433528

>>4421279
You get used to it. Watch what you shot, cringe, hate yourself for like fifteen minutes, get over it, try again.

Finish it. It's a challenge, a stepping stone to something greater. I'm in a similar situation so I get it. Putting yourself out there is very freeing. You'll see.

>>4425099
What if the hobby was really interesting?

How can I get rid of my fatfuck heavy breathing when I film? Other than losing weight what can I do regarding mics or settings on the camera to get rid of my heavy ass breathing? I have a Lumix S5IIx

Obvious answer is lose weight/have better cardio but I am working on that now. In the meantime should I just film without sound?

>>4436926
directional mic

>>4436926
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYNOyy06MrQ