'Who here has accurately observed that nikon probably won't put half as much effort into cinema cameras as they will into moving cinema camera features to consumer hybrids and getting a global shutter flagship out, so RED is effectively DEAD, consumed for their technology.';

'>>4294747
>getting a global shutter flagship out
not unless they want to make their flagship $15K';

'>>4294749
>cheap nikon thai manufacturing + RED technology
$6500, bet';

'>>4294751
RED gets their sensors from Towerjizz like Nikon gets theirs from Sony and Nikon doesn't have a CMOS fab in Thailand.';

'>>4294747
I think the industry would love it if nikon just scalped red for its tech and put it into consumer mirrorless bodies. That would shake up the market something fierce and put blackmagic and panasonic on their toes.
However, I fera that nikon is a bit like canon and wouldn't want to risk galvanising their more expensive cameras by putting tech that's too good in cheaper cameras. There are a considerable amount of people who are prepared to pay ludicrous prices for red cameras. I think nikon will want to take as much money from that group as possible while only slowly feeding that tech into their cheaper cameras.
>tldr; I doubt we'll be seeing a nikon z1mii that's actually a baby red raptor anytime soon';

'>>4294715
>less sony dependence and buying global shutter
If Nikon's previous assertations that they fully designed the sensors that they buy from Sony were true, then they didn't need to buy RED just so they can buy global shutter CMOS sensors from Tower Semi. Nikon has sensor patents but who knows if they've actually made it to production.
https://petapixel.com/2022/03/18/nikon-designs-sensor-that-has-both-a-global-and-rolling-shutter/
RED doesn't manufacture their own sensors, and I highly doubt with a team of 200 they even designed the sensor. They most likely sent Tower some requirements and some fat stacks and left it up to them. This whole mess smells like Nikon got scammed by Jarred right as he wants to retire.';

'>>4294761
The z8 and z9 are also cowering before the a1 and a9iii at the moment and nikon keeps losing customers to sony

Because holy shit
Sony does video very well (if you pay)
Nikon simply does not.
Nikon has also been making the d750 and d850 but mirrorless forever now.';

'>>4294763
Buying a company also means buying their supplier contracts
>nikon designing sensors
Lol.';

'>>4294764
A9III is a halo product that Nikon won't be able to match anytime soon, but Z8 and Z9 have internal N-RAW recording whereas Sony doesn't support X-OCN outside of Venice and Burano.
>>4294765
Why they fuck would Nikon give a shit about supplier contracts when they are a FAR larger company than RED and could just negotiate their own, and at far better rates than what RED could get due to economies of scale?';

'>>4294763
I know very little about the production of red's sensors, but I assume it's more complicated than that otherwise why doesn't anyone else buy the same sensors? Like don't red sensors have much better dynamic range than pretty much every consumer ml on the market?';

'>>4294771
They probably contracted Tower to design the sensor, just like ARRI contracted Onsemi.
https://investor.onsemi.com/news-releases/news-release-details/onsemi-imaging-technology-enables-next-era-digital
And sure, RED has better sensors compared to be consumer cams, but their sensors are only comparable to other similarly priced cine cams from ARRI and Sony.
https://www.cined.com/camera-database/?camera=ALEXA-35
https://www.cined.com/camera-database/?camera=V-RAPTOR-8K-VV
https://www.cined.com/camera-database/?camera=VENICE-2-8K
Cine sensors just cost magnitudes more than consumer cam sensors since they were designed for higher DR and lower rolling shutter, among other cine needs, which is why no OEM will put them into a consumer camera unless they want the camera to cost $10K+';

'>>4294770
>Why they fuck would Nikon give a shit about supplier contracts when they are a FAR larger company than RED and could just negotiate their own, and at far better rates than what RED could get due to economies of scale?
you do realize that nikon uses sony sensors';

'>>4294770
Economies of scale with nearly bespoke cinema cameras, do you hear yourself? k3k
Everything will stay the sale except for who gets RED's profits.';

'>>4294781
This, the reject rate at the fab facility is much higher and that drives the costs way up. Much worse than so-called full frame even.';

'>>4294781
I have a habit of ignoring cineD because the results are fake
>le noise threshhold
>le arbitrary firmware decision (codec base iso)';

'>>4294830
so you believe RED's marketing bullshit instead? lol';

'>>4294837
I believe dynamic range tests are irrelevant because I will run a little noise reduction later which is literally free dynamic range if my eyes can ever so slightly discern a difference below the computer's line in the sand noise floor. Simple as.';

'The big question is whether Nikon will stop suing people over internal raw. I don’t think Nikon is as big of a patent troll as Red was so I hope that we start seeing more video cameras with internal raw.';

'>>4294781
>Cine sensors just cost magnitudes more than consumer cam sensors since they were designed for higher DR and lower rolling shutter, among other cine needs, which is why no OEM will put them into a consumer camera unless they want the camera to cost $10K+
But the sensor in the canon c300ii is really impressive and they happily shoved that into a relatively cheap c70?';

'>>4294992
tech tends to get cheaper after 4 years mate. by the time the c70 came out the c300ii already dropped in price from $16k to $7.5k, which is only a bit more than the c70's $5.5k launch price.';

'>>4295018
But that's missing the point since arri's sensor is well over a decade old at this point, and the c70 is barely behind the sony venice 2 in terms of dynamic range.
By your reasoning, nikon would happily put the red monstro sensor in their mlcs because that's 7 years old now.';

'>>4295026
you're missing the point that the venice 2 was optimized for rolling shutter performance over dynamic range, and that even consumer level sony sensors have better DR than the C70 now.
you're missing the point that canon and sony are vertically integrated and can basically update their pricing whenever with little difficulty, while arri(onsemi) and red(tower) aren't and would either have to have negotiated the price cut over time in the original contract, or would need update their original contract.
you're missing the point when you're comparing originally $16k MSRP cams to originally $80k MSRP cams.
you're missing the point that unless Nikon was going to make CX00 or FXY competitors, they're not going to drop a 41x22mm sensor into their 36x24mm without respinning the design and having Tower either repurpose an existing manufacturing line or spin up a new one which will cost even more money.
you're actually idiotic if you think nikon even wants to drop a monstro sensor into their consumer cams for a marginal dynamic increase while increasing BOM costs multiple times over';

'>>4295040
That's a lot of words to say "it's different because it just is and stop asking about nikon and red".
The red monstro sensors outperforms the majority (all?) of nikon sensors. Nikon has a similar corporate structure and size to canon.
If your argument is that canon can drop more expensive sensors into cheaper bodies because they manufactured the sensor themselves, then you should have said that in the first place as opposed to patronisingly going on about how tech gets cheaper with time. But it now looks like you're back-tracking and moving the goalposts and getting mad at being called out on it.
Leave your ego at the door and shut the fuck up because you're clearly a fucking retard.';

'>>4295041
imagine being this much of a midwit. canon put a sensor that was originally in a $16k body 5 years prior into a new body that's $5.5k. what the fuck do you think the price of a nikon body be if they put a monstro sensor that was originally in a $80k body into it?';

'>>4295040
Where does the C700 FF rank?';

'>>4295069
never tested by cineD. you can make a educated guess when canon advertises the c70 as having 16+ stops of DR and the c700 FF having 15 stops';

'>>4295043
Nikon sells enough cameras where they could make that sensor cheap. Red charges a lot of money for it because they don’t make that many monstros. Economy of scale at play.';

'>>4295097
answer the question midwit. and what do you think RED's margins are on these sensor upgrades?';

'>>4295097
>>4295102';

'>>4295097
or these upgrades?';

'How do I achieve this look without buying a minidv camcorder?';

'>>4295123
forgot link
https://youtu.be/DmeUuoxyt_E?si=5PRyo6uPhZeyJg42';

'>>4295097
There's no reason for them to do so, they'd probably make less profit cheapening the RED tech than keeping things as they are.';

'https://www.redsharknews.com/the-reasons-why-nikon-didnt-buy-red-for-its-sensor-technology
Does Phil Rhodes browse /vid/?
>tldr; he talks about the same thing as the last 20 posts, trying to clarify where companies get their sensors from';

'I just want shutter angle, false color, open gate, anamorphic de-stretching, a tally light, and wireless timecode sync without a dongle in my next Nikon body. Would be ace.';

'>>4295350
>shutter angle, false color, open gate, anamorphic de-stretching, a tally light,
All pretty reasonable and likely in upcoming nikon hybrid cameras. I'm surprised if cameras like the z6 don't already have these to be honest (well except open gate, that's a relatively recent feature that companies have started adding)
>and wireless timecode sync without a dongle
That's not happening for a few years. I don't know why exactly. Maybe because timecoding is such a 'thing'. Like you can't just sync a zoomh1 to a timecode easily (can you?)
I imagine that after 6k becomes more normalised over the next year, that timecodes might be the next feature they start adding in all these hybrids.';

'>>4295134
Yes, he's cANON';

'>>4295134
>it totally wasnt the sensor tech
>and yet no one simply buys each others sensors (except for pentax, who used the same sensor in the k-1 as the sony a7r mk1, right down to the color science, because pentax is so broke they lied about being dedicated to DSLRs after they went double broke trying to migrate to mirrorless)
RED doesn't design sensors, they pay other people to design or alter sensors and have exclusive rights to models as specced. Nikon could not simply buy those sensors without negotiating for them with RED, or just buying RED (a failing patent troll company that nonetheless still makes at least some money)

It would be more accurate to say that when Nikon bought RED, they purchased all of their deals with suppliers, and now have access to those supplies. Which does mean Nikon received RED's sensor contracts.

Like Nikon doesn't design sensors at all, even though their marketing material position says otherwise. They provide sony with specifications and sign off on the result. And there IS a conspiracy element when you buy from sony. No amount of "my sers, sony semiconductor is not the camera division!" cope from actual snoy shills can change that. They can and do negotiate backdoor deals with cripple their competition if they want any sensors period. Fuji knows xtrans sucks, sony knows xtrans sucks, therefore fuji keeps using xtrans if they want cutting edge sensors. Sony knows Nikon is a threat so they keep receiving third rate semiconductors and coping with firmware and signal processing. Canon does not deal with sony for this very reason.';

'>>4295401
>Fuji knows xtrans sucks, sony knows xtrans sucks, therefore fuji keeps using xtrans if they want cutting edge sensors. Sony knows Nikon is a threat so they keep receiving third rate semiconductors and coping with firmware and signal processing. Canon does not deal with sony for this very reason.
you are here';

'>>4295406
Seethe.';

'>>4295406
>even though xtrans is objectively lower resolution and less color accurate than bayer and requires aggressive chroma smoothing to make a presentable image, fuji keeps using it because... a regularly repeating pattern is "more random" bro! it really does magic out moire, not the chroma smoothing!
>That has NOTHING to do with why their APS-C sensors are allowed to be several generations ahead of the ones used in their supplier's APS-C cameras because sony sensors and cameras are totally made by totally separate entities who do not cooperate at all!
>and their use of a normal CFA on their pro cameras that don't directly compete with any sony products was just a stylistic decision, i promise.
its because if fuji had a bayer array on the xh2/xh2s sensors sony would never, ever sell an a6anything ever again. a fuji with a normal ass CFA would be absolutely technically stylistically and ergonomically superior to every single APS-C camera on the market for stills and cinema, especially cinema, and would likely take a massive bite out of full frame as well.

but xtrans is 2/3s bayer resolution with more color issues for the same reason bayer is worse than foveon, so here we are, with artifically crippled fujis that still have moire (and more false detail) but just wipe out tonality to remain consistent with their marketing claims';

'>>4295413
who are you quoting, schizo?';

'>>4295414
>Noooooooo sony doesn't cripple competing companies that buy their sensors! Backroom deals never happen in corporate japan!';

'>>4295401
RED sensors aren't anything beyond Nikon's capabilities. You won't be seeing RED specced sensors on Nikon stills cameras.';

'>>4295413
Fuji has invested so much shilling X trans that their userbase demands it and looks down upon Bayer. And yes, the pattern does reduce moire.';

'>>4295418
>A regularly repeating pattern reduces moire
It just shifts the moire from one pattern to another. If you process xtrans raws in darktable you'll have the opportunity to see more of it but most xtrans processing options include some color NR-like step so base ISO images don't have a shitton of color flecks in things like thick black hair. It's really noticeable on things that were bright red in real life. In fuji's well processed video what's left of the moire after they corpsify everyone's skin is faint diagonal lines.';

'>>4295418
that's because bayer looks like shit';

'>>4295425
And xtrans looks worse

3ccd for me! Enjoy your ai generated colors';

'>>4295450
I don't shoot xtrans either, retard';

'>>4295350
>wireless timecode sync without a dongle in my next Nikon body';

'>>4295450
>3ccd
Based. Cinema will always be fake until they start to develop and employ 3 chip cameras.';

'Some retards just got an arri alexa mini camera so expect a very cinematic film staring trumps very special child to be made soon. She is so special that she can tie her own shoes and count to potato but I will be filmed on an arri and not on a potato.';

'undefined';

'my g85 has AWFUL video autofocus
i do wildlife, mainly birds with 800mm telephoto handheld only
using MF basically always causes shaky footage

is there anything to help with MF other than a follow focus?
you cant really use it with a long lens handheld

or do i just have to get a g9II for the video autofocus';

'>>4296271
Plot twist is that the girl from red is a lawyer who’ll sue your pants off if she catches you using an atamos recorder to record video raw externally.';

'security footage https://youtu.be/ozDJeTE8IL8?si=ZSKjcfspgknHUS0n';

'>>4296271
Switch them around

>>4296274
Now is not the time to buy a g9ii. Buyers remorse and lack of demand is still chipping at the hilarious price. It’s the full frame age, so only people who know it’s really a camcorder will ever love it, so pretty soon it’ll be $800 on ebay.

A gh5 could be an ok stopgap.';

'>>4296199
They are also getting some arri ultra primes and hopefully some cooke mini/s4s as well. Expect some kino retardation very soon. Boss tier cinema + an arri Alexa sensor would make anything look cinematic even a video of a tard taking a dump in a group home. Right?';

'>>4296437
By “boss teir cinema” I mean lenses made by arri or by cooke … the only thing left to get would be a set of super baltars (maybe next year)';

'>>4296279
>the girl from red is a lawyer who’ll sue your pants off
She doesn't have to sue me to get my pants off.';

'>>4296279
>>4296447
This is my fetish, to have my pants literally sued off me. The Judge will instruct me in front of the all female courtroom to remove my pants and show my "pathetic little cock" to the court. Then I am ordered to jerk off, at first refuse, but then I am threatened with being held in contempt of court.';

'>>4296447
>>4296453
It’s all fun and games until you realize that the female lawyer from red has a dick and is about to fuck you up your ass in the court room because you used video raw without giving red its due.';

'>>4296454
>the female lawyer from red has a dick
How big is it?';

'>>4294804
But Nikon will put the sensor into consumer-tier mirrorless cameras. They own the right to the sensor so why wouldn’t they put that sensor into all of their cameras so that they could beat out canon and sony and get more customers.';

'>>4296305
>Now is not the time to buy a g9ii.
yeah i know, will wait a couple years first';

'How good are Cooke Mini s4 cinema primes and Arri Ultra Primes for a set of cinema glass?';

'>>4296457
I laughed';

'>>4296495
Good enough.';

'>>4296437
Not really. A cinematic look is more down to the interaction of all the various departments working together, not just a nice camera.';

'>>4296559
So, in other words, if I film a bunch of retards acting retarded their is no magical camera lens combo that will turn what I am filming into cinematic gold or into an awesomely epic kino masterpiece.';

'I just ordered a few Arri FF-04 follow focus units off of eBay for my “b” and “c” cameras? I’m still waiting on the bright tangerine revolvr follow focus unit I got on b&h. It should arrive by the end of May.';

'Can anyone tell me if the mounting plate/quick release system for the Zhiyun crane m2s is interchangeable with the m2, or if there is a compatible mounting plate that I can buy?
Bastard shipped it to me without these.';

'>>4296199
The retards scored an ARRI Zeiss Macro 100mm T3 Lens PL Mount for 8k worth of bitcoins now you can see a close up of trump’s special child’s toothless meth-addled mouth. It will be as epic as fuck.';

'>watch hours and hours of videos before I get my camera about exposure etc and setting up my camera blah blah
>finally get my first camera and I feel like I'm retarded and dont remember anything

Welp';

'>>4296828
you have to watch the videos while you have the camera in your hands, or at least I do or nothing sticks';

'>>4296829
thats fair

I'm not trying to do anything wild, just take nice videos of city mundane shit and nature for my own fun';

'>>4296831
watch the video again and practice a long with it and you should be good to go.';

'>>4296828
Make sure you watch videos about the exact camera you own. If you watch videos about other cameras it might not work the same way your camera works. If you are watching theory stuff or creative stuff or basic techniques that work for all cameras forget what I said and watch the videos. But practice practice practice. Because you need to go out and shoot stuff and practice using your camera to really get good.';

'>>4296855
>>4296855
some were general theory stuff, but ya I will need practice, all the different layers of setting up a simple shot are overwhelming when behind the camera';

'>>4296829
i did this and kept going
>WHY THE FUCK IS IT JUST A BLACK SCREEN
because there's nowhere near enough light in my room';

'I'm thinking of getting a Zhiyun MOLUS X60
A youtube vid said it has around 2000lumens at a 1metre distance at its brightest. Can anyone confirm if that's bright enough to light a medium sized room if I'm going for atmospheric and moody but still need faces to be exposed?
(Basically, could I use this as my primary lighting solution?)';

'>>4296561
That is correct. You may as well use a cell phone or consumer grade mirrorless if you’re going to make something low effort anyway. An Arri in shit lighting with shit set and shit styling and shit talent is going to still be shit.';

'>>4296984
If you need a key light on a budget, try to stretch to a 300W unit at least. Godox and Aputure make pretty cheap decent units.


A 60W might be enough for like a streaming setup but not a set of any decent size.';

'>>4296988
You are right. My talent won’t let me light anything. “It’s too hot. Turn off the lights.” Frame anything or do any type of set decorations. She’s more iPhone or GoPro then arri material but I love big cameras. I could “accidentally” light her. Put an HMI out the window blasting the room and telling her it’s the sun. She’s so stupid she’d believe me. But fighting with talent ain’t no fun. I just wanted to fcuk around with coloring stuff—that’s the only reason I even use a big boy camera with her. For video raw to play aound with in resolve. If only I could find talent ok with me using proper lighting, set decoration and camera placement so I could actually create something good. How much trouble could I get into for convincing a moron that Trump wanted me to light the scene; she’d let me do whatever I wanted to do if I said Trump wanted it done: I just wanted to know how much trouble could I get into for lying to my talent/actress to get something kino made!';

'is there something like a safety mattebox? I need some plexiglass in front of my lens/rig for some shots. I don't want to damage it.';

'>>4296828
I remember calculating a 60 second exposure instead of 1/60 the first time I shot a film camera because I kept forgetting about fractions.';

'My crypto went up turning a $1,000 investment into $30,000 so I just impulse bought a Flanders Scientific XMP310 Hero Display because I want to start color grading my own stuff and it would be so neat to have a Stupid Sexy Flanders in my el-cheapo apartment just like people in the inner city have sound systems that cost more then a millionaires yacht in their $600 beater cars and I just had a few questions about the rumors that I have been hearing about Flanders Scientific calibrating any monitors you buy from them for life.

Does Flanders Scientific still offer that service where you can send them one of their monitors and they’ll calibrate it for you? How would this compare in quality of calibration with hiring somebody to come on-site and calibrate your monitor for you? How would would it take for Flanders Scientific to get the monitor calibrated and shipped back to you and how would you protect the monitor during shipping to make sure it doesn’t get damaged? How long would the calibration last if you had Flanders Scientific calibrate the monitor for you?';

'>>4297570
You could just go out and buy some plexiglass or ballistic glass or whatever you need and cut it to fit in your matte box. You will take a hit in image quality but if you are in a dangerous environment such as a war zone or democrat ran city the peace of mind in knowing that a stray bullet won’t destroy your precious cinema camera will be worth any hit you take to image quality. I don’t know if they sell such a solution but you could alway order the plexiglass or bullet proof glass or bomb proof glass or whatever you need to protect your camera and have it cut to the proper size needed to fit into the filter holder that came with your matte box.';

'>>4297570
is this a real image';

'>>4297697
yes

>>4297695
I thought about that, but the matte box itself might get damaged. I'm surprised there's no Smallrig rail-mounted plexiglass.';

'>>4297719
The matte box is supposed to get damaged. Its job is to protect the expensive lenses and camera. Its job is to also make your rig look bad ass so you can charge your clients more for a job.';

'How do I break the subject of nudity to potential actresses I'm casting...';

'>>4297834
Include it in the casting call?
That's what I did. But this was a few years ago, right before intimacy coordinators became really commonplace (and I still had a few applicants ask about that).
If it's a nude scene without intimacy, I'd just write that in the casting call and then bring it up on the first meeting you have with any potential actresses after you've talked a bit about the film.
>so this is an awkward subject to broach, but as the casting call stated this role requires nudity. Are you comfortable with that? Do you have any questions about that?
If it's actually a sex scene, you probably need to hire an intimacy coordinator or risk getting shamed on social media';

'>>4297834
>the scene I'm casting for calls for nudity, are you comfortable with that?
Be conscious of your tone and don't immediately lead with it, wait until you're both settled in and comfortable.';

'>>4297834
Easy there Harv';

'How bad is it truly in terms of image quality to go from like native 400 iso to 1200 to correct for poor indoor exposure

Should I be that worried about it or that like pixel peeping territory to really notice';

'>>4297865
Just shoot it and see. No one really cares about noise in video anyway';

'>>4297865
i can be really happy with iso 25,600 video, and i see a lot of netflix films and small productions using clearly super noisy, ambient lit footage, so 1200 is probably perfectly fucking fine.

video has a neat effect that stills doesn't get, where the random nature of noise lets people see through it.';

'>>4297844
>>4297854
Alright, thanks
It's just tasteful artistic nudity without sex, so hopefully that should make things simpler...
>>4297856
The dick does what the dick wants';

'>>4297897
>The dick does what the dick wants
Careful. Women can sense when you're just using your camera as an excuse to see them naked. Make sure you actually have a vision for what you're trying to accomplish.

t. ask me how I know';

'>>4297879
>>4297872
thanks for straightening me out lads';

'>>4297902
I know I'm just joking';

'if I get one of those mini matte boxes and a compatible 15mm rail mount can I skip clamping it to the lens? I'm assuming there'll be a gap I'll have to deal with, is there a standard way?
I have threaded filters I still want to be able to use as well.';

'>>4297844
> intimacy coordinator
They actually have that role. A person to coordinate that.

/sarcasm mode on
I thought most pornos were made because a friend of the director wanted to get fucked and filming it made it legal because it’s legal to fuck a pornstar to make a porno while illegal as fuck to fuck a whore. So if it is being filmed, it’s 100% legal.

/sarcasm mode off';

'>>4298308
I would like to coordinate some intimacy between my boot and your ass.';

'>>4297719
Make some rail mounted plexiglass your self. That way you can get the protection w/o needing to buy a matte box.';

'>>4298308
I don't know how long the role has existed. But it started getting traction post metoo. The position serves 2 purposes:
>put the actors (mainly just the actresses really) at ease by having an "advocate" that they can freely talk to about this stuff without the pressure of pissing off the director/producer
>give the director/producer lesser culpability in being accused of being creepy/predatory by allowing them to officially be hands-off in that area - so they can't be accused of coercing an actress into doing a rape scene she wasn't comfortable with, for example
It got a lot of prominence during covid because of the whole fears of spreading the virus so they had to be really anal about actors' interactions in general. And nowadays, most actors won't do an intimate scene without a coordinator on set because the lack of it is a sign of low budget filmmaking and potentially creepy people being creepy.
(But no, the role doesn't have any official qualifications so you can literally just hire your creepy mate if you want)';

'>>4298330
pretty much this, diy is mandatory for filmmakers because it's always some bullshit';

'>>4298378
So a creeper opps I meant an art house cinematographer could literally hire a homeless dude off of the street for a case of beer or drugs or both to fill that role.';

'>>4298423
Yes.
(This isn't legal advice. Probably check your local laws before doing this)';

'What lens for a Sony A7iv starts getting into "cinematic" look?';

'I need a fucking drone';

'>>4298529
cinematic is lighting and composition';

'>>4298530
no you dont';

'>>4298929
he really does though. How will he get those cinematic shots? He simply can't compete otherwise';

'>>4298530
>need
That's a strong word.

>>4298930
You're being sarcastic, but for just a couple hundred bucks you can have on call aerial shots that were once only achievable by having a high budget and a helicopter pilot.

But I agree, the anon does not NEED a drone.';

'>>4298957
Unless anon is shooting real estate videos or maybe high-end wedding videos or stuff like that I see no need for a drone. If you are doing narrative films and need an areal shot you could alway buy stock drone footage and call it a day.';

'>>4298983
What if you're making a Hotline Miami fan film and need an aerial shot of Jacket murdering a bunch of people in a room?';

'>>4298983
I don't agree with the guy *needing* a drone but what you wrote is absolute nonsense';

'im using davinci resolve on a pc to edit serious projects and its great. no problems with it, but it takes a lot of time.

i want to record quick things and get them to youtube as soon as possible without having to edit much. some ai-driven thing that takes a series of clips from the day, and makes a suggested edit that is X minutes long. i think imovie and gopro quik are good at this, but i don't have a mac and quik basically doesn't work. it hangs at "preparing your edit" or whatever most of the time. its a piece of shit.

suggestions on something like imovie/quik for fast minimal effort edits?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

'Has anyone here used M42 to L mount adapters? Any good ones to look out for or anything to beware of?';

'>m42 to L
>not absolutely degenerate';

'>>4299593
why';

'Hey videobros, I recently discovered that DFD-AF of my original S5 works miles better when shooting with Like709 and other standart profiles. Something tells me that camera uses monitor feed for AF measurements, and for a some time I was trying to figure out a way to create ViewAssist LUT that completely replicates Like709 one. But so far no luck.

Basic VLog-to-Rec709 vlt LUT that comes with Lumix cameras doesn't provide enough contrast (presumably, because they still wanted to give shooter a better understanding what hides within dynamic range), but every single time I try to make my own LUT with slightly compressed dynamic range and use it with camera, image starts producing banding. Also, even shadows keep looking bleached somehow — is it because of legal range or something? Send help, me too much of brainlet for this kind of technical bullshit.';

'How good are super baltar lenses? Is it worth it to get a set of rehoused super balters?';

'>>4300297
A bunch of photofags are about to get real mad at me, but all you need is a couple of (barely) decent fast lenses.
Seriously, an f/1.8 50mm and 28mm, along with an f/2.8 28-75mm zoom will cover 90% of situations. Get an f/4 70-300mm for the other 10%.
Investing in anything more than that is a waste of money unless your kit is perfect in every other regards.';

'>>4300323
I just wanted them because they were used to film the godfather and they were built in a factory in my home town near where I live. Will they go up in value like a fine wine?';

'If somebody used an arri alexa mini paired with arri ultra primes for the crowd scenes and cooke mini/s4s for the speaker could they go to a maga rally and create a modern remake of “triumph of the will.”';

'>>4294761
tourist here, so panasonic are le bad guys? I thought they played fair';

'>>4300400
Most equipment is a depreciating asset. Buy it because you dig it and will use it, not as a speculative investment.';

'>>4299255
CapCut is what most people are using for quick social edits. It’s a nightmare. Enjoy!';

'>>4300424
Oh. I thought cameras went down in price and lenses either held their value or went up in price if you took care of them.';

'>>4300444
Lenses get fungus, mold, and coatings get scratched or worn off. They’re also obsoleted by newer better lenses. Cine lenses are a slight exception, but even rehoused vintage lenses need to have a lot of money sunk into them before they’re worth the asking price.


Also, the only people buying lenses are usually rental houses. Why would a DP sink a bunch of money into a specific set of lenses when each project may call for its own look? It makes more sense to rent, especially as the production is paying for it anyway.


So go for it, but know what you’re getting yourself in for. Maybe put them on Sharegrid or similar for rental to recoup some of your cost.';

'>>4300459
I just wanted a set of good quality lenses that I can use on passion projects and to do events such as bands near where I live without needing to keep on renting them. I want something better quality than a kit lens but not ones that cost as much as a car. Is their a way to consign my lenses to a rental house so I make money when I’m not using them or did covid kill things like that!';

'>>4300459
I was always told to buy a set of good lenses and rent the body or get a used body. Is this only true for photographers and not for cinematographers?

I definitely will only rent anamorphic cinema primes because a set of those can cost $100,000 or more for PL mount lenses.

I might get a set of MFT anamorphics just to play around with but I won’t pay as much as a house for a set of meme lenses. If I want to use some meme PL mount anamorphics, I’ll just rent them for a weekend.';

'>>4300472
The last time I saw a service that would hold your gear for you and rent it out to give you passive income was way before Covid. Now, need to DIY an worry about insurance and your gear getting stolen.';

'>>4300417
I don't know of them doing anything particularly dishonest. They have the most aggressive shills for video that I've seen though (it could be the case that sony shills just don't frequent this thread like panasonic ones).
For years they'd argue that autofocus wasn't needed in video and real videographers would never use such a feature. Then their cameras finally get usable autofocus and suddenly it's the best feature and what makes their cameras so good. This is an ongoing pattern. When the gh5 released, they'd all shout about how gimbals were dead because the ibis was like using a steadicam. In their defence they do make good cameras for cheaper than almost everyone else.
I kind of hate them but I still bought an s5ii because I needed to upgrade and it outclasses all of the competition price and feature wise except blackmagic (who are less 1-man-band-y)';

'>>4300492
Most of the lenses that produce the best image quality are manual focus only lenses so unless you do live events and use a zoom with autofocus, I don’t see why you’d need autofocus at all.';

'>>4300518
>Most of the lenses that produce the best image quality are manual focus only lenses
This isn't true. Older lenses have more "personality" because of their imperfections (which is why a lot of DPs like them). But in terms of sharpness and vignetting, newer lenses drastically outperform old lenses.
>I don’t see why you’d need autofocus at all.
You don't "need" autofocus. Just like how you don't "need" false colour, or histograms, or ibis, or 10 bit recording. It just helps, especially if you're working in a smaller production team or a one-man-band.';

'>>4300527
I like swirly bokeh because it looks as boss as fuck. I have not found a good autofocus lens that produces that sweet ass swirly bokeh. I don’t care if my lens is clinically sharp as long as it produces some delicious swirly bokeh, I’d use it.';

'>>4300530
So what the pros actually do is use follow focus systems which can be used on pretty much any lens.
Current lidar technology, used in the DJI 4d for example, combines follow focus with lidar. So if you have a Ronin 4d, you can use essentially perfect autofocus with literally any lens.
But not everyone cares about af and that's fine too.';

'Long time ago, I used to use a Nikon V1 to make video from stills bursts. Like shoot 30 or 60fps bursts of raw images, then edit, export and import to video editor as image sequence. I liked it because I could use the same editing processing for stills, and results felt like I was shooting +4k raw footage.
Curious if this technique holds up at all nowadays, or what I'd be missing with doing so, seem like there are a fair amount of cameras that do similar stills bursts now. Obviously no audio, and limited to like 3-10 sec segments depending on buffers. Would let me shoot at lower base ISO (opposed to higher log minimums), and require ND's less, and raw flexibility without needing an external recorder. Seems a lot more convenient for picking up a little footage while mostly doing stills.';

'>>4300540
That process works fine. It's what the og Blackmagic Pocket camera did and what dng raw is.
There are a few cameras these days that can do the same thing but with far longer buffers (like the canon r3 literally has an unlimited buffer I believe they've said). And there are a few cameras that literally just let you record internal raw video at 4k, 6k and 8k.
The thing is, these cameras tend to cost upwards of $3k on the cheaper side (except for blackmagic cameras of course). And for me personally, raw just feels like such a meme considering the stupidly large file sizes. If you properly expose your footage when shooting (big if I know) then raw doesn't really add much that 10 bit 422 is missing.';

'>>4300543
Unless you plan to do some insane color grading and want to push the fuck out of your image I see now need for raw video.

If you are just using raw video to fix white balance issues you need to stop using raw for that and start learning how to properly use your camera.';

'>>4300538
How good is the lidar autofocus system that turns manual cinema glass into autofocus lenses and where can I buy a system that is not tied down to a gimbal so I can use it with any camera I want to use it on? Is it as good as the autofocus on mirrorless cameras yet?';

'>>4300693
You can buy the lidar separately and use it as-is I'm pretty sure.';

'I need to cast some actors. I've never done a casting before. I don't have any friends or family I can ask to do this so I will be asking strangers that I find in local acting groups etc, hoping to tap into acting students and enthusiasts etc. Europe, if that makes any difference.
Do you have any pointers or advice for doing this? From posting the actual casting call itself to what you do during the casting and so on - for instance, am I supposed to make them act something out on the spot?';

'>>4300961
>use facebook or find a casting website
>state the role, a logline of the story, the dates required (don't be vague about this thinking it will entice actors if you're flexible - pick a date and stick to it)
>say if it's paid or not (and how much you're paying)
>accept that if it's on facebook you'll get a bunch of crusty boomers whining that you aren't paying enough - make sure you answer any legitimate questions though
>put a contact email and say what you expect (you probably want them to have a showreel of some variety, or at minimum a headshot)
>you'll get applicants emailing you with headshots, showreels and their credits
>narrow down to the ones you like
>at this point, it's your choice
>personally I like to have a self-tape submission from each shortlisted actor as well as a video call to make sure they're not a dickbag (no method is perfect unfortunately)
You can ask for multiple self tapes/meetings but the less you're paying, the less hoops they'll jump through for you.
If you don't have any previous shorts for them to look up, you'll find it harder to attract talent. In that situation, I'd really recommend producing a couple of monologues and advertising it as free showreel footage for them being honest that you're just starting out.
Good luck!';

'I've wrote a script for a full length film to make with my friend who will be the leading actor with me directing and camera operating. I've never made a short film in my life and only now am realising just how ridiculous this all is as we plan to make it next month.

Next week we will travel around the countryside talking to locals to cast in the film and also find a lead actress. The film is in French despite the fact I don't speak the language (translated by my friend). So I'm relying on the adversity of it all giving me something to work with armed only with my heart, my ignorance, a freewheelin spirit and a strong sense of righteousness.

The film will be in black and white, 4:3 filmed with a Canon XL2 (mini dv).

Does anybody have any useful advice?';

'>>4300997
>Does anybody have any useful advice?
lmao
It will be a good learning process for you';

'>>4300977
Ok that's pretty much as I had assumed, thanks
Would it be unreasonable to attach an application form to the post and ask them to submit it when applying - I was hoping to get some basic questions answered to save everyone some time. Or would it be better to ask them that during a video call? I was basically planning to have a post > video calls with applicants who match the looks > in person meeting with the most hopeful candidates
I dont have any shorts available for viewing but I do have one completed (docu) feature and one in production, about which there's articles out that they can look up. I hope that's enough pedigree for them...';

'>>4301079
If they are SAG actors or the equivalent (pro actors who work for movies) they will care about what you shot in the past and how your film will improve their reel so they can get better acting jobs.

If they are community college theater kids they won’t care as much about what you shot in the past and they’ll only care about being able to act. You won’t get as great a performance out of them as if you’d get if you used a SAG actor but you won’t have to jump through any hoops to get them to stat in your family.

You could pay the theatre kids beer and pizza but a SAG actor won’t even talk to you unless you give them a few keys of good Columbian coke.xk2j';

'>>4301082
I'm an eastern europoor, there's no SAG here. There probably is a local equivalent, but anyway I'm aiming to get actors as cheap as possible (free) so I guess I'm aiming at the theatre kids. I also need them to get their tits and dicks out, and I feel they would be more open to that than pros';

'>>4301079
I wouldn't attach a form just because at least half of the applicants won't fill it out and then you'll be left with the awkward situation of trying to figure out if you want to talk with an actor who seems perfect but couldn't follow a basic instruction. If you give them a shot despite that, you've now established a weird power dynamic where the words you literally say can be ignored.
>>4301083
I don't know what it's like in your country.
Where I am, the uk, it's pretty much impossible to get half decent actors for free. You'd fail badly if you were also expecting nudity.';

'>>4301172
Good points, fair enough
Things are a bit more lax here than in the UK, so I hope I'll be better off
>You'd fail badly if you were also expecting nudity.
I was always under the impression that, no matter the country, low budget indie films sometimes with even just nonprofessional actors, had the most overt and gratuitous nudity of them all';

'>>4301180
If they aren’t pros just give them drugs like Molly and coke as payment and you’d get people willing to get nude to be in your flick.';

'>>4301180
Low budget indie films aren't restricted in the sense that they need to censor themselves for the mainstream. So a 5 minute scene of a women walking around topless because that's what the writer/director wanted woud be fine.
Whereas in a large budget film, the actress would uncomfortable with that length and have a specified duration in her contract for how long her nipples/butt would be visible for, and the producers would make sure the film conforms to standards allowing it to receive the rating it needs.
So in that sense, yes.
But these films with gratuitous are very rarely no budget. Especially these days. Put another way, if you pay an actress the equivalent of $500 usd, you should easily be able to find a bad actress/model who's prepared to get naked in front of the camera (probably even a good one if you're prepared to look properly). $500 is a tiny amount for a large budget film. It's a small amount for most "indie" films. But it's considerably more than nothing.
You won't know until you try, but I can't imagine you easily finding girls who will want to get naked for no money for a film by someone with an almost nonexistent portfolio. I could definitely be wrong though.';

'>>4301189
500 is within my budget for some tits n ass...';

'>>4301189
> $500
Does it need to be cash or could you pay them in crack rocks or meth; the risk of that is that it’s illegal to do and your actress will probably be toothless';

'Anons, rate my new camera.

I am getting a 32mm master prime
A set of 6 ultra primes
A set of 7 cooke mini/s4 primes
A set of 5 super baltars
The Zeiss/Arri 100mm t3 macro lens

Next year I’ll get more arri macro lenses for my kit because I love shooting macro. I will slowly build up my master prime set when I find good deals on master primes.

If I used this rig to film somebody getting a blompkin at a music festival would it transform from nasty porn into a cinematic masterpieces because I used an arri camera and arri glass to film it.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

'>>4301710
Perfect for filming cinematic gifs to post on /vid/';

'There are a lot of great deals on high end cinema glass right now on eBay. Is this because of the writer’s strike? I am getting glass I could only dream of owning now because the prices are so low. I got one master prime and six ultra primes and seven cooke mini/s4 primes and some vintage glass (super baltars and karl zeiss janas and nikon nikkors) too. I just want to know how long these good deals on glass will last and what is causing them. Could I wait until next year when I get funding to get more glass or should I snap up the glass now because the prices will raise in the future making high-quality cinema primes a good investment now?';

'any idea what kind of video camera this is? looks like a bnc out?';

'>>4302210
literally a generic handycam mate. the flap has a mic jack under it.';

'>>4302210
>>4302218
https://youtu.be/uJJq5CaR0ZY?t=378';

'>>4302218
>>4302219
Close, but I don't think that's right. If that was the same camera as the one I posted then the BNC cable would be coming out of the MIC input. The camera I posted is used exclusively in a video application, so there would be no need for audio to be involved like that. Thanks for trying to help me though.';

'>>4302210
Can't wait to see the snuff film, show us what you can do';

'>>4302224
bro you're fucking retarded.';

'>>4302283
>being this upset about being wrong
lmao
>thinking a bnc connector goes out of or into an audio port
Lmao
>being you
LMAO';

'>>4302306
prove that mic plug is a BNC connector, midwit';

'>>4302316
That camera is used to capture the video output of a 1970's era motion graphics computer. There's no need for the camera to record audio. Now, explain why there would be the need for something - anything - to be plugged into the mic port for a video-only application.';

'>>4302323
prove that mic plug is a BNC connector, dumbass';

'>>4302324
Thanks for proving that you can't explain shit';

'>>4302325
post the linkedin video, brainlet';

'>>4302326
>midwit
>dumbass
>brainlet
I guarantee that you only have an IQ in the 110's, if that. But go ahead and keep thinking you're a genius though.';

'>>4302326
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1aT_CqhyQs
The camera is at 6:56';

'The info's all there. It's up to you whether you want to keep baiting for replies. Come back to this shithole once in a blue moon and of course it's nothing but inane garbage. I'm out, for good. Enjoy your dying board and site.';

'>>4302505
so you watched the video, realized it was a video-only application, and you still think it's a port that they're using for audio? Just checking.';

'Since cameraboy did drop the video, I'll entertain you with one last post. Did your feeble mind really watch the full video and comprehend every last thing those retroboomers said? Did you really think that the ancient box of switches and dials was a video-only application? The fact that you still can't figure out why audio might be needed for the boomerbox that doesn't save its inputs is why you'll never rise above being a lowly cameraboy, and never rise to anything better in your pathetic fucking life.';

'>>4302505
>I'm out, for good.
>>4302523
>I'll entertain you with one last post.';

'>>4302523
whoa holy shit - did you see the word "frequencies" and think that pertains to audio rate frequencies?';

'>>4294747
Nikon isn’t doing dick with red, they’re bailing them out financially and keeping them where they’re positioned in the market now bc that works. They didnt acquire a competitor to shut down & they’re sure as shit not going to merge lines & tell everyone who wants a red to buy a z9 or vise versa. Nikon just got a piece of the premium pie to go up against canon & sony, nit destroy their investment in red. Remind me to never hire you as a business consultant unless i’m getting a divorce so you can bankrupt my bitch wife 3 months later.';

'>>4302635
Nikon could have also bought red out to kill the lawsuit about them using video raw in their cameras because you can’t sue yourself. Or maybe they won the law suit and red made it look like Nikon bought them so people would not know red lost in court.';

'>>4300693
The DJI Focus Pro has just been announced which is pretty much exactly what you're asking for.';

'>>4294747
Why would Nikon just ignore free money like that? They almost got driven out of business by fucking sony for ignoring crutches for retards like "autofocus" and "codecs". They're definitely going to use REDs sensor supplier contracts to make nicer consumer hybrids, yeah, but why the fuck would they just ignore a bunch of customers they now have lined up?';

'>>4302724
The one good thing about Nikon is their glass. They making fucking God-tier lenses that mere mortals can afford.

Did you know a lot of the Panavision primers that are only rented to top Hollywood elites are rehoused Nikon lenses.';

'>>4302736
>the one good thing about nikon is the only thing that matters';

'>>4302738
Normal video people would agree with you. Retarded vlogtards won’t agree with you.
Retarded vlogtards have videos that look like shit.
Normal video people have videos that look great.';

'>>4294741
can anyone recommend me some stuff to use for going tapeless? i think my tape head is fully fucked and i cant find anything good i have an hdr-fx7';

'>>4302950
What's your budget and what type of stuff do you intend to shoot?';

'How's this for editing 4k video?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

'>>4303161
im flexable with budget & i film skate stuff';

'>>4303308
should work for editing, depends if you're using resolve or not, if you are the gpu is a bit shit it'll probably stutter through titles and ultra autism grading pipelines. if you want to preview noise reduction good fucking luck.';

'>>4303308
Forget about using fusion the vfx platform that comes with resolve in real time, you’d need a nasa super computer to do that.';

'If my last gimbal purchase was a DJI RSC, would going for a RS4 be a good step up? Is the pro version worth the increased price?';

'best analogic cinema camera I can rent?';

'>>4302650
>red made it look like Nikon bought them so people would not know red lost in court.
this is such an insane line of reasoning. what's the point of saving your dignity if you're going to give your entire company up lmao';

'>last night
>right before I go to bed, check industry news
>new resolve beta adds ai shit
>blackmagic have 2 new cameras: a box version of their ff 6k camera, and a ff 12k cinema camera for under $15k
>cool, they've got a decent cine line to compete against sony and produce imax cinema
>think it'd be really cool if they'd make a medium format cine camera but know it's a stupid thought since no one has any plans on doing that except arri
>wake up today
>finally check industry news again to see if anything's come out of nab before I check up on the new davinci features
>blackmagic's announced a 17k 65mm cine camera
>expected to cost around $25k
>Holy shit';

'What's a good way to stop vertical bouncing? I have a 3 axis gimbal that works fine for my phone but it does cover being bounced.';

'>>4303908
You need some gadget like this

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

'>>4303908
is your gimbal set up properly? this can happen with too little weight';

'>>4303878
A 17k camera sounds so cool. But it would probably kill you with storage and lens costs. But now you don’t need to rent an Alexa 65 to get that 65mm look';

'>>4304395
This is basically my exact thoughts.
It's awesome that there will finally be a (realitvely) affordable alternative to the arri 65 for decent medium format video. But 17k is such overkill that it doesn't make sense unless you're shooting content for the las vegas dome or reality tv to cover a wide scene that you know will be super cropped when you deliver it. If Sam Mendes shot a new war film with hundreds of millions in budget, this camera would still be too much and would only slow production down because of that.
Hopefully it can record internal 8k (or 12k at the very least) but to get raw at a lower resolution would require link-skipping or cropping - both of which are antithetical to the entire point of the camera.
But on the other hand, if it does enjoy any success then it should push the other manufacturers into finally making some headway into the medium format space. Canon's reluctant because they'd have to design a new lens mount and new lenses for a market they've never entered digitally before.
Sony probably has the same reservations as canon. Fuji already does it but they're idiots/unconcerned with video. Panasonic might? Sony have a medium format sensor that you can buy, and panasonic seem to be trying their hardest to be like blackmagic but more user-friendly.
A panasonic medium format camera with decent video specs for like $5/$6k would probably sell like hotcakes.';

'https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6de4akFiNYM
It's fucking here. Fuck. Video creation will forever change from here on out.
I hate that adobe cc is so fucking expensive (inb4 just pirate it bro) but these features will be in resolve within the next year or so as well based on the already announced ai features coming in resolve19.';

'>>4304486
I would hate to think how much money quality cinema lenses for a medium format camera would cost. You can pay 20k or 30k for a lens that covers a super 35 sensor. I hate to think how much a similar lens for a 65mm sensor would cost.';

'>>4304541
They're actually relatively cheap.
They made a bunch of them in the 50s and 60s for medium format photography. Unlike other vintage lenses, these ones never exploded in price because youtubers and hipsters couldn't easily shove them on their dslrs.
One of the ones Nolan used in Interstellar is like less than $300 on ebay if I remember right.
(I genuinely don't know if there are "proper" cinema lenses for 65mm but it's such a niche that I doubt the price would be much more than cinema lenses for ff/s35)';

'Does the Canon 5D Mark II use the full width of the sensor while recording video in 1080p?

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

'>>4300997
Learn lighting, cut out half the script that's boring and cliche, rewrite it with a story. Beginning middle and end. The story grid is useful.';

'>>4300997

99,9% of people can't direct and DP or even operate at the same time. Sounds harsh but it is the truth. Especially if is your first time, prepare for the worst.';

'>>4302736
>Panavision primers that are only rented to top Hollywood elites are rehoused Nikon lenses.
Sounds like bullshit.';

'>>4303308
>estrogen cores';

'I just ordered some dog shit Trump cinema primes off eBay because they say Trump on them.';

'what's the key for good B&W photography?';

'>>4304678
>tfw I'm one of the 0.1%';

'>>4304562
A lens used on a Hollywood movie for only $300 and change. That’s less then it costs to rent a vintage s35 lens for a week.';

'>>4304806
Well sure.
But 65mm film stock is around $1500 for 8 minutes of shooting at 24p. That's $27.5k for 2 hours of shooting. Nevermind the cost of renting the camera itself.
And if I remember right, renting an arri 65 is something like $10k/day.
Also, you can definitely find decent ff/s35 vintage lenses for less than $1000 if you look in the right places. And because of the way hollywood accounting works, I'd wager that officially the production spent a lot more than $300 specifically renting that cheap lens despite this.';

'>>4304808
sorry, that should be $22.5k for 2 hours of shooting. Maths is hard';

'>>4304809
I know film is as expensive as fuck. That’s why I always shoot digital and add the spice in post using dehancer to give it that filmy vibe.

I bet it’s rehousing that lens to make it work with a follow focus unit and/or matte box that makes it so expensive to use in Hollywood.';

'Playback previews on Resolve are a bit of a struggle on my PC, is there anything I can do to improve the performance aside from buying new hardware?';

'https://www.redsharknews.com/the-ofg-customs-65-a-high-end-rebuild-of-the-fujifilm-gfx-100-ii-for-large-format-video
IT'S HAPPENING

>tldr; a company is modifying a gfx 100ii and atomos recorder into a combined box camera with a "medium format" (43mm wide) sensor, and fuji is supporting them';

'>>4304919
Why wouldn’t Fuji support them? It’s getting people to buy Fuji cameras. Only canon likes crippling their users.';

'>>4304942
I should've said showcased. Supporting isn't unusual. But showcasing it is.
Same way that blackmagic supports the nexus g1 but would never display it at their booth. It's arguably competition. It somewhat undermines the company's original product by saying that they can do it better. And it isn't developed by the original company so the company won't want to be associated with any potential pitfalls/issues that arise from the modification.
It's like every camera manufacturer shares lens mount designs (except when canon's being weird) but you'd never see sony showing off a Tamron lens in their booth.
-But I get that in this case it makes a lot of sense since fuji don't really have a cinema line and as far as I'm aware they don't make box cameras at all.';

'>>4304942
>Only canon likes crippling their users
Then tell me why the GFX bodies can't autofocus with H series lenses.';

'>>4304808

>And if I remember right, renting an arri 65 is something like $10k/day.

It's not that much anymore and studios especially get better day rates because they rent for significantly longer times than other productions & they usually rent shit ton of stuff. It isn't cheap but still on a big Hollywood movie the camera department rental budget isn't that big compared to everything else.';

'>>4294741
Hey all,

New to shooting video. Was trying to experiment with shooting CLOG on my Canon R8, but upon trying to import the footage into Premiere pro I got pic related, and a message saying I need a codec that comes with Adobe CC. Do I need to download a codec to edit CLOG footage, or did I do something else to my recording settings that did this?

Is there anywhere I can download the codec without paying for it? Currently using cracked Adobe products and cannot really afford to buy the whole CC right now :'(';

'I saw cinema primes called “Trump” for sale on eBay? Why is Donald J. Trump producing cinema lenses now? First sneakers now a set of cinema primes. What’s next a Trump branded cinema camera? Are the Trump lenses by Dog Schidt Optiks related to or endorsed by President Trump and if not why are they called “Trump.”';

'alister chapman the stupid fucking shill is so dangerous in the way he words things
sony's most valuable market segmentation asset';

'>>4305068
Pretty sure this is the same issue I had with resolve free.
If it is, it's because your footage is 10bit 422. And the short answer is yes. But I'm not totally familiar with adobe cc so google around to see if there's a workaround.';

'>>4304852
use the options for proxies or optimized media';

'>>4305068
Transcode your footage to Prores via Handbrake/ffmpeg and then import those.';

'>>4305200
Cool thanks

>>4305308
even if I am editing on windows?';

'I am buying a lot of cinema lenses from Europe off of eBay shipped via UPS and it keeps on getting stuck in a secure warehouse in Pennsylvania until I give UPS my EIN number for an LLC I own (it has not been an active business since the covid lockdown) why is UPS trying to get my social security number (which I won’t give to anybody) or an EIN for a business to clear customs. I never had problems with people sending me stuff by the USPS, It just sits in NYC for a day or two and then gets released to me without me needing to give them any personal information at all. Why is that? Why is UPS being so difficult about customs trying to get personal information from me to clear stuff through customs? None of the other shipping companies besides UPS asked for any personal information except for maybe my phone number. Last year this never happened. Why is it so difficult to order used lenses off of eBay now? I am just ordering one or two lenses for my own personal use, not a lot lot lenses to repair and resell. I just wonder what is going on with customs.';

'>>4305481
>I am buying a lot of cinema lenses from Europe off of eBay
>I am just ordering one or two lenses for my own personal use
which is it, faggot';

'>>4305489
>both
I order one lens or two lenses
But I buy them from 500 different sellers
But each should count as only one transaction.
It’s not like I am buying from one vender and having him send me 500 lenses. I am ordering one lens from 500 different people because they all have a unique and cool lens that I want to add to my collection. So as far as customs know I am getting boxes from 500 people not one large crate of 500 lenses from 1 person.';

'>>4305481
Maybe you've been flagged by value or number of transactions, or specifically because of your LLC. I don't get hit on overseas stuff, it just takes forever to get through processing. I would try to keep personal and business stuff as well separated as possible, you don't want problems with IRS and DHS';

'>>4305527
> you don’t want to give a phone number
Buy a burner or drop phone. That’s why I did. When they started wanting SSN numbers or EIN numbers. I made a shell (holding) company so I didn’t need to give them my SSN number or the EIN of a real company.';

'>>4305531
My LLC is just a holding (shell) company that holds expensive cinema lenses for me (super baltars, arri ultra primes, arri master primes) it doesn’t do any business-related stuff. It just holds valuable lenses for me? Is that legal to do?

Why would DHS even care about old ‘vintage’ lenses, don’t they deal with terrorism related stuff.';

'>>4305533
Customs is DHS, I hope you're trolling lol';

'>>4305532
>Buy a burner or drop phone
I did, but, apparently, you can't activate a prepaid phone without using another phone to call the support number or going online.
I tried using the online service, but their website blocks VPNs, so now I'll have to go to McDonald's just to activate this fucking thing on their Wi-Fi.

>>4305533
>don’t they deal with terrorism related stuff
Everyone's a terrorist until being found not-guilty.';

'>>4305534
I thought DHS was Department of Homeland Security. The people who keep terrorists out of America and make sure dangerous stuff like fentanyl and weapons of mass destruction and stuff like that didn’t cross the border. I didn’t think they worried about used camera lenses an autist buys off of eBay.';

'>>4305536
I activate mine at Starbucks. I pay cash for a cold caffeinated drink and activate all of my phones. I also buy psychedelics off of tor and that is why I got the phones but I use them for expensive camera lenses too.';

'>>4305547
>I didn’t think they worried about used camera lenses an autist buys off of eBay
They have a lot of time on their hands when they're not doing the things you previously mentioned.';

'>>4305536
This works best if you live in America. In America you buy the phone in Wallmart for cash. If you need internet to activate it you can go to Starbucks or a local library and hop on their wi-fi to activate it or pay for computer use at a Kinkos or FedEx office using a pre-paid credit card you paid cash for.

In Europe or other parts of the world it might not work.

I know people who have given fake phone numbers (212) 212-2121 or 867-5301 (in reference to a famous song) it works in a pinch but I wouldn’t recommend it for anything that costs more then a few hundred dollars. It did work for my friends who did it.';

'I updated the sticky if anyone cares.
https://text.is/PNZ7

No major changes, mostly just adding cameras to the dr list at the end.';

'>>4305547
>United States Customs and Border Protection is the largest federal law enforcement agency of the United States Department of Homeland Security';

'>>4305531
I’m probably flagged by the high dollar amound of the transactions. I made some nft profits which I am turning into vintage lenses. Some lens sets cost $75,000 and others $25,000 to $30,000 I would rather have bitching lenses I can hold and use then digital goods that are probably a bubble that’ll burst. Plus the baltars and super baltars were made in my home town and those lenses cost as much as a car. So the high dollar amount of the the stuff I am buying is probably sending up red flags at the local customs office.';

'>>4305551
We get it, you vape bro';

'>>4305569
I vape NN-DMT. DMT is fucking awesome. You smoke that shit and a 4k sci-fi film starting playing in your brain. Your brain turns the DMT smoke into the movie. Pure magic! That’s why I got crypto in the first places. When the value of crypto went to the moon that’s when I started buying over 100k in vintage lenses of Etsy and eBay.';

'>>4305574
I imagine that this might be satire, but at the same time it's subtle enough that I can't be too sure';

'Just finished a video project I shot and edited for a client. 6 minute doc-style interview piece on a project that was being awarded. Turned in the final deliverable two days ago, and it was screened today at a gala fundraiser event, which I also covered for them with a second shooter. Started filming on 3/6 and was fairly consumed with the project until 4/16. $12.5k USD budget. So fucking glad it's done and I can move on with my life. That's all.';

'>>4304502
damn, shits coming fast. im actually excited, i want to make a film with ai. will indie film be saved?

>>4305559
are you paying VAT taxes?';

'>>4305615

I live in the United States. I don’t need to pay VAT taxes. I had to pay customs fees on a few items. It’s weird. I paid a customs fee on an $800 audio interface for my computer and on a PL mount for my camera that costs around $2500 USD but I got $5,000 to $25,000 worth of cinema primes without having to pay any customs fees at all. I would think that the more the item costs the higher the customs fees would be. I don’t really understand customs fees at all. I am lucky that I am exempt from VAT taxes because I live in the USA.';

'>>4305308
I have another stupid question: if I encode my footage with handbrake do I lose the extra dynamic range that I gain from shooting in CLOG?';

'>>4305628
No. Also, as with everything, test and find out.';

'>>4305628
you don't lose your dynamic range until you go to rec.709, if you are in apple prores you can still hold a lot of data. it all depends on your settings';

'>>4305481
>>4305559
>what is a customs declaration
>why do couriers want to handle them
>is there a correlation between that and the vast amount of things I buy from the EU
it's outstanding that people this clueless about the things they do on a weekly basis manage to secure a higher than average income by doing the first thing that comes to mind
the gist of your issue is that the US government wants you to pay taxes on imported goods and you're annoyed by it without even knowing what's happening
dumb as you are I recommend you give UPS the info they ask and pay duties on the gear you're buying, otherwise risking to be fined and jailed for smuggling';

'>>4305615
>will indie film be saved?
Not immediately. In the same way that the dslr revolution didn't have as big of an impact as it should have.
However, the quality will start increasing massively in the no-budget sphere. The ignition will be when someone creates a platform for truly indie films that has proper curation and a way to rate videos. Basically vimeo but without the ludicrous fees and cliquey management';

'>>4305687
>However, the quality will start increasing massively in the no-budget sphere.
This is the bluepill, what is more likely is that there will be a rapid increase in absolute slop. Barely 1 of 8 indie films is any good as it is and when someone tries to make a platform it will get flooded with shit. Even small film festivals now are reviewing hundreds and hundreds of submissions, imagine that on a larger scale.';

'>>4305689
I should clarify.
The better stuff should be pulled up quite dramatically while the shit will stay shit. I don't think that this will increase the quantity of stuff in and of itself. (Eventually that will happen when sora and ripoffs are released to the public as independent software).
So the no-budget shit that's made by autists like you and me who actually care about quality will be dramatically better. Issues that are caused due to time constraints and budget concerns (people in the background who shouldn't be there, visible lav mics, bad vfx, bad sound etc) should all disolve. It should even help the aesthetic as it's teasing tools to match other films visually. But it won't make the acting or writing any better.
Maybe that's just me being optimistic. I do sometimes see low budget shit and wonder why easy-to-fix mistakes weren't fixed. So maybe there just aren't that many people who care?';

'>>4305678
I work a shitty minimum wage factory cuck job. The only real reason I have any money to buy gear is I bought a shitton of bitcoins in 2008 or 2009 for about $1000 to spend on the Hunter S. Thompson creativity enhancement toolkit. After spending a few nights in a local ER I forgot all about those coins and no longer tried to get the Hunter S. Thompson creativity toolkit. I recently found an old back up drive with the coins and I am converting them into gear because I no longer need or want drugs. Gear is my new drug.

I am clueless because eBay usually handles all of the tax stuff for me.

I just paid the duty fees. I think it was about $250 for the lens set. It’s just that eBay usually collects all taxes upfront so I don’t need to worry about it.

I don’t want to smuggle shit (at least not camera gear) I just want a site where I can buy the gear and they charge all taxes and duty stuff up front so I don’t need to worry about doing it myself.';

'>>4305697
Can you buy me a second Z9 homie? Gray market used Japanese body from eBay is fine.';

'>>4305697
I paid $250 in customs fees on a $6000 set of meme cinema lenses. They say “Trump” on them in a good ring. Don’t do psychedelics kids or you’ll fry your brain and end up like me spending way to much to get some meme lenses.';

'>>4305707
>good
gold

I would need to use vfx (either resolve or fusion) to change “Trump 58” to “Trump 45” and “Trump 47” for the lulz. They are rehoused Helios lenses. They have a “Trump 88” which would work because 88 has a meaning in Christian nationalism as well as cinematography.';

'>>4305678
I don’t mind giving UPS my info. I just don’t want to give my social security number to people. I got around it by giving them the EIN number for an IT web development company I started. They said it was ok to give them an EIN number. So that’s what I did. I paid the fees too. I just did not want to give them my social security number.';

'>>4305628
Prores will preserve all of the dynamic range, color resolution and bith depth that your camera records. The only thing you have to select is the compression profile. Go with HQ.';

'>>4305678
It is just annoying because it bounces in and out of the customs warehouse like its a pinball in a pinball machine. I paid another fee and it’s on my way to me now. I just hope it doesn’t end up back in the customs warehouse. Why can’t they just ask for all the money they need, I’d pay it, rather then playing pinball with my set of meme cinema primes.';

'>>4305678
I think they hold it at that wear house because they want my social security number. If I keep on giving them my EIN number they eventually accept that number and release the package. I paid all fees for the package. Why are they so annoying about getting my social security number. I just don’t like giving out my social because of identity theft. They eventually accept the EIN number if I keep on giving it to them. I just wonder why it takes more then a week of me giving the my EIN in place of my social for them to accept my EIN and give my package to me. Don’t they understand people don’t want to give out their social security number because of identity theft. If they steal my EIN I can easily make a new one; that’s not so easy to do with my SSN.';

'>>4305707
>>4305732
>DOG SCHIDT OPTIKS
>perro caca logo';

'>>4306025
They make for good props for macro shots (both macro videos and macro photos) they are basically rehoused Helios lenses that let you change the bokeh and flair color. They look pretty cool too.';

'>>4306041
I mean they could be rehoused Cooke S2 lenses and it wouldn't change that it takes an absolute madman to market them like that. Zero fucks given, t0p k3k.
Some brits are alright I guess.';

'>>4306061
The lenses look as boss as fuck. They look like pro cinema glass. If you make the shell of the lens look good you could sell lenses with dog shit glass in it for as much money as a high quality cinema lens. On large shoots it is about how your gear looks to clients. A follow focus gear ring paired with an Arri PL lens mount will make any lens increase in value.';

'>>4306098
Calling the lens “Trump” was a baller move. That name alone makes the lens valuable because people love the name Trump.';

'Why the fuck is resolve not syncing my audio and video clips with timecode';

'>>4305159
>>4306025
>>4306099
>it's real
lmfao';

'>>4305697
>>4305678
>>4305732
>>4305891
>>4306009

It finally moved away from the customs warehouse in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to a shipping hub in my home state near wear I live. This means I’ll get my package without needing to give anybody my social security number. I’m very happy!';

'>>4306210
You’re gonna be very unhappy when you find out how easy it is to get your SSN.';

'Thinking of replacing my editing PC and potentially my 2016 macbook pro with either an m2 ultra studio or an m3 max macbook pro
thoughts? Anyone use either of them?';

'>>4306404
I have an m1 ultra studio and it’s done everything I’ve wanted to do with stills editing and not left me wanting. Huge ps files, heavy Lightroom edits, pano stitching, no sweat. Handles video well also (caveat being it depends on codec). I like it and am happy with it. M2 can only be better I would assume.';

'>>4306429
I dont doubt that the studio is good, but I'm more curious if the macbook is a viable alternative with the m3 max chip...';

'““Both companies working together and injecting their technologies together is starting now, but will take a few years to release. It will take time. So new products will use RED features and technologies as well as Nikon’s. Nikon mirrorless cameras will integrate features of RED cameras, too,”
-new RED CEO Keiji Oishi

>fags whining that nikon will keep red and nikon cameras completely separate absolutely BTFO';

'>>4306566
He just essentially confirmed global shutter and 21 stop single shot dynamic range for future nikon stills cameras.

But what will Nikon bring to RED? Z mount lenses? Slightly dated autofocus? They make good glass, they have good SOOC colors, and their cameras are comfy and soulful, and only one of those things matters to the cinema camera market.';

'>>4306566
Why does Red have a CEO if Nikon bought them out? Wouldn’t Nikon’s CEO also be Red’s CEO?

Hopefully the new reincarnation of Red isn’t a patent troll because having “real” video raw on moar cameras would be super awesome.';

'>>4306574
> Nikon makes good glass.

I think Red is after Nikon’s good glass. Red used to sell cinema lenses and I think with Nikon’s glass they’ll do that again.';

'>>4306579
RED is Nikon, so Z mount cine lenses probably

I wondered why Nikon was correcting focus breathing in their S line lenses when it took them years to release a camera that could actually shoot video at a level where people might care';

'>>4306581
Other cinema lens companies used to buy Nikon lenses and rehouse them for cinema use. That’s probably why Nikon cared.';

'>>4306582
>Rehouse an electronic mirrorless wunderprime for cinema use
When was the last time someone did this and actually paid the originating company for it';

'>>4306585
I was talking about the old manual nikkor lenses not electronic lenses. They also took the glass out of Nikons macro lenses to make cinema lenses too.';

'>>4306588
I know, but when was the last time a cinematographer actually wanted modern mirrorless lenses for cinematography as art, not a taylor swift concert?';

'I just got an arri alexa studio xr camera with optical view finder because it looked mint and as boss as fuck. Imagine the looks I’ll get then I show up to shoot a wedding with that beast of a camera. :-) It came with an arri/zeiss 200mm macro lens. I got the camera for the lens but I’ll keep the camera because it looks so cool. The camera and lens combo cost 10k when the lens it self costs 12k so I basically saved 2k and got a sweet camera. Nice!';

'>>4306918
Enjoy breaking your back lugging that shit around a wedding 8-12 hours. Not to mention the monster tripod it requires. Hopefully you’re kidding.';

'>>4306959
I would use sticks and vintage speed baltars. I was only planning on filming one of my friends weddings because he is into the God Father. I wouldn’t film strangers weddings because I don’t wanna deal with bride-zilla.

I’d do it Hollywood style set it on sticks. Get deep focus. Hit record. Get drunk as fuck.';

'need some help lads, short film fag obviously for now. some light action, indoor/outdoor, 2-3 actors

current gear:
>a6300 + sigma 30 1.4
>like, 6 batteries
will be going for the sigma 16 eventually
so, some questions on things I can't wrap my head around:
I want stabilization for some light action and moving shots. what's the cheapest okay gimbal option?

Is in Atomos worth it? Should I get one used?

Any tutorials on how to work with an external sound recorder? what kind of workflow is needed to sync everything? I can't figure it out. is a mic connected straight to the camera the standard approach?

any other things I should look into/keep in mind

here's a short I made last year with a smartphone and gimbal:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiCYJHewzts';

'>>4306961
Even worse idea. If you’re doing it for free, why risk all that kit when all it takes is one drunk uncle stumbling into your Alexa to send it crashing into the ground. Hell if you’re drinking, maybe you are the drunk uncle.

If you’re doing it for pay, then do you charge your full rate and your friend feels taken advantage of, like they could’ve gotten a pro with a proper kit and assistant to do it for the same or less? Or do you charge a friend rate and waste a bunch of time on post and editing and end up resenting ever taking on the gig?


Don’t do it anon. Recommend a pro, attend the wedding as a guest, if you try to do both you’ll end up enjoying neither part.';

'>>4307238
Whichever DJI gimbal you can afford is good.

I don’t know your camera but I assume it can’t do 10bit in-body, so if you can get 10-bit with an Atomos, then yes it’s worth it.


Second system audio is good. Lots of good options out there now. Tentacles, Dji Mic, Rode, Zoom 32bit float recorders… basically you record scratch audio in camera, maybe put a shotgun on a cold shoe if you want that scratch audio to be slightly better, then sync them in post. I know Davinci will do it automatically by waveform alone. The high level way to do it is with timecode, there are ways to sync an Atomos device with a sound recorder, look up the Blue.';

'What’s up bros

I’m taking an editing course but I slacked off and didn’t go to any classes. My AVID media composer exam is in 5 days. Is it possible to self study for it from scratch in that time frame? How much time do i need to learn for a passing grade?';

'>>4307250
>Is it possible to learn to use an nle semi-proficiently in 5 days
Yes, absolutely
>Is it possible to learn to do the specific things that your course wants you to demonstrate in an exam in 5 days?
Unlikely but I have no idea since I never formally studied. I don't know why you'd take a subject that you didn't intend on actually doing but that'st just me.
Your best bet is to spend a day watching youtube tutorials and repeating each step as they do it.
Then spend the next 4 days checking your syllabus list and revise those specific things.
But you're probably fucked';

'>>4307241
I was going to do it as a wedding gift. I will probably just use a bmpcc 4k or gh5 to do it. I just thought it would look baller to rock an alexa but I’d be too drunk to protect the alexa and I’d probably also be the drunk that breaks it. I don’t think gear insurance would pay to replace gear that I borked because I was drunk when I was using it.';

'>>4307272
You’re finally talking sense.';

'>>4307272
i wouldn't even use the bmpcc, gh5 is smoother handheld and you get longer life per battery, you'd have to run v-mount on the bm, but imho onboard sound on the gh5 is worse';

'Would gear insurance replace or repair gear that I break while drunk? If I fill stuff while drunk would gear or rental insurance replace the gear I break.';

'>>4307362
Depends on your policy and insurer. If you just have renters insurance or homeowners insurance there's a pretty low limit on what you can claim in terms of photo equipment. Like, so low that it's pointless. You need a Valuable Personal Property Policy or a business umbrella policy with your equipment listed as assets. That's more expensive. You don't sound prepared for this. Don't do it.';

'got my new skate camera in, would post a clip but dont know how to post without it saying corrupted or unsupported

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

'>>4307470
You just need to convert the clip or post it as a YouTube or Vimeo video and share the link.';

'>>4307491
does vimeo do embedding on here?';

'>>4307494
Yeah but you need to email them first so that they let your account do it';

'>>4307470
lrn 2 webm';

'>>4307498
oh wait i was trying to convert it to an MOV';

'>>4307491
>>4307498
heres a kid airing over a fat kid, i like this camera alot & was better than my old camera & really like how blue the blues are';

'>>4307504
looks authentic, a little flare going on there';

'Is the Roger Deakins dream cam. The Arri Alexa Studio with the mechanical shutter (not the electronic shutter) and optical view finder, a global shutter camera. What advantages do you get from having a real mechanical shutter in the camera rather then an electronic shutter? The advantage of an optical viewfinder is it looks cool and what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG) without any lag time to put a signal on an electronic shutter. Why don’t they make more digital video cameras with optical viewfinders and real mechanical shutters. (Is their an advantage that an electronic shutter would offer people?)';

'>>4307734
what doyou mean by authentic';

'>>4307504
I see the vignetting moving a bit, is that due to auto-focus breathing or do you have steadyshot turned on?';

'>>4307803
Steady shot was still on, for got to turn it off';

'>>4307804
that blue is really pretty, 3CCD still proves itself as the king of all sensor combos. I guess it was just minutes after sunset, right?';

'>>4307470
3CCD master race';

'>>4307808
Yeah just as the sun went down';

'Bump limit reached, new thread
>>4307820
>>4307820';

'>>4307802
looks like old skate/bmx videos';