Luminous Landscape Forum

Equipment & Techniques => Motion & Video => Topic started by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 07:41:36 am

Title: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 07:41:36 am
Has anyone played with the F5. (Mr Cooter??)

Coming from the FS100 and disliking the image (but loving most everything else about the cam) and also some use of the Scarlet and disliking everything but the image, a "Sony Scarlet" could be just the thing?

I know everyone else is going canon but they just dont float my boat (bad form factor and C300 has the raw feed broken off)

My goal - sharp gradable wide DR images and XLR sound in a practical shooting package that will survive vandalism of many miles a year travelled.

One other thing, I need to NOT shoot 1TB a day for 90% of my work

S

Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 07:51:20 am
My other option is the BMC4k but..

-No slomo.
-needs XLR box
-needs for me HDMI/SDI converter or new monitor
-canikon adapters are janky

A BMC would cost me maybe 60% of a f5 once 'built'

Im suspicious that unlike a sony it could drop frames, clunk out, go fan mental, corrupt media and all the other stuff that these nerd cameras do.

I hold high regard for Sony in that my EX1 and FS100 (and NEX5n) have never missed a beat.

S
Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 13, 2013, 09:22:11 am
Jeez Morgan,

For 1/4 of the price of the fs100 you can buy a GH3 and box of lenses, for the full price you can buy multiple GH3's that focus better, have a much, much, much, much prettier file than the fs100 and fit in a carry on.

Check it out.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 11:30:48 am
I just don't buy using a photo camera for A camera - nothing to do with pretty pictures - all about everything else - for example I do not own a mini HDMI camera where the connection is not wonko.

A recent job we rolled more than 2 hours of interviews (I dont have a post crew to sort it). Another I left the FS100 going for 45mins at the back of the venue while I was operating another camera.

And as you said on another thread the GH image is not really there compared to RED

The 5 might offer many things, a clever thin codec, proper connections, sony unique ability to turn on every day, and raw and 2k raw could be a flexible file that is not a data killer.

Im gonna spend a day testing it just like I did with Scarlet which I did not buy.










Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 11:36:55 am
In the other thread you said this..

I don't suggest anyone finance a camera with all the changes going on, but I'd definatley stay away from the F5 for a year until it all shakes loose.

25k for a camera and viewfinder, that shoots an mpeg 2 codec and is waiting for a firmware upgrade, a module and somway to convert it and grade it (to come).

You don't need the viewfinder (unlike red) so I can use my existing monitors

The base 5 is $15k and it is a 10bit 100mbs codec that is very clever, for another $5k you can get the raw recorder that will shoot up to 240 at 2k or 4k at less FPS - the raw 4k drops straght into davinci or premier and plays back on a laptop

Going beyond the FS100 we have options of;

The C300 with 8bit50mbs and no upgrade path, no overcranking, dodgy formfactor.
The F5 with 10bit100mbs and an upgrade path to 4k raw, an upgrade path that you can buy today. good formfactor.
The Scarlet.. with raw only and other 'issues'
The BMC with no overcranking and all sorts of bits to make it 'work'

The 5 seems a no brainer in that lot.

As it happens Im shooting on the C300 on tuesday so that will be interesting.

S
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Peter McLennan on July 13, 2013, 11:56:45 am
Great thread. Keep this discussion alive, please.

After decades shooting Sony, I'm a huge fan of their reliability - as good as Arri.  I'd be going there first.

What's bad about the FS100 picture?  Never used one in anger.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 12:01:53 pm
Id keep like to keep it on the F5 if poss.

Simply the FS100 is very sony looking with problematic highlights
(wade through tests at vimeo/sammorganmoore)
All 8bit cams are IMO a bit limited but the 23mbs and early architecture of the FS100 probably make it the worst (and cheapest of the S35/XLR cameras)

An FS100 makes a 5d2 look like total wool though and ive been very well served by it considering the price point.

S

Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 13, 2013, 01:32:50 pm
Great thread. Keep this discussion alive, please.

After decades shooting Sony, I'm a huge fan of their reliability - as good as Arri.  I'd be going there first.

What's bad about the FS100 picture?  Never used one in anger.

The fs100, as far as a camera goes is good, or pretty good.

Dual sound channels and xlr inputs, nice autofocus with the few e mount lenses that are available, with good is.  A mount lenses have a locked down f stop I think 3.5 or something like that and though sharp do not offer IS.

That snorkel focus thing is in the center, instead of the side and is too heavy for the lcd and droops and drops as you try to move.

The lcd is small, though you can add a larger one.

The controls are very sensitive and very fiddley.  (is fiddley a word?)

The file, with studio lighting is good, though must be underexposed 1/2 stop minimum.   Outside the file is a different story. Shoot sun flar and then back to the subject and everything is pink.  In fact you get a lot of pink cast on the sony with high key backgrounds.

It also has a avchd wrapper which must be unwrapped with clipwrap until transcoded.

It is a sturdy camera, looks professional and works, but everytime I shoot with it my stomach tightens.  Then again it does some things really well.

The look of the file to me is challanged.  Even in studio light.   Yes I can grade it, but it's not easy.  

We did one shot in Italy on a semi cloudy backlit day with minimal fill of a group walking in green grass.  Their faces were totally green and it took days to correct the footage.

I've also seen tons of moire on the fs100.   Buildings, sweaters, window blinds, cause it to go nuts.

Honestly look at the file in color/tone/smoothness next to a pana gh3 and the difference is really night and day.

The Pana gh3 is not a real video camera, shoots a very good file, but the menu section takes days and days to learn and you really have to learn it, not just plug it in and think you got it because it'll throw you for a loop if you don't have it down.

I really don't understand sony, don't understand why they hobble their cameras until you get into RED range or beyond.

They could capture a lot of market with a real dot mov file, at least 12 bits and over 50mbs.  If they allowed prorezz without going into a third party box it would be killer.

Just for clarification the Sony file to me looks like video, the gh3's almost like film, the RED 1's, just like film.

All IMO

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 13, 2013, 02:10:58 pm
Also consider the FS700. That's Sony giving everybody what they want.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 13, 2013, 03:51:51 pm
The Fs700has a weak inboard codec, huge latency on monitoring slo mo

I don't really want to be trailing a recorder

And with the bits it is not that cheap!

To me I pretty much prefer shooting in the fs100 - apart from Nd and slo mo the 100 actually feels like a better camera

The fs100 is a Toyota yaris - very fine - in it's class - the fs700 is the same with wide wheels and a turbo - kind of stupid - I'm looking for a BMW now
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 14, 2013, 01:22:15 am

The fs100 is a Toyota yaris - very fine - in it's class - the fs700 is the same with wide wheels and a turbo - kind of stupid - I'm looking for a BMW now

Of course sir...may I present the forgotten but extremely capable Sony F3? :)

The F5 firmware upgrade plan is looking good. By the end of the year it will be a really powerful camera. But I don't think it is worth it, because once you buy a BMW 3 series, you immediately pine for the 5 series or a 7 series. Why not try to finance an F55?
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 14, 2013, 03:21:28 am
Ive always thought the F3 was a bit of a donkey - Id consider a really cheap used one but it would just be another stop gap awaiting the next gen or used 55s/C500 hitting the market.

Ive always known the FS100 was a stopgap and with tech advances we are going to have to stick or twist at some point. Like with stills I thought the D2x was a donkey for the money and scraped by using a D100 instead until the D3 happened.

As for the 5/55 saga..

Well my position is that i CAN afford a BMC4k and my thoughts had slid to pushing my budget to a naked F5 instead - to then slide into an F55 really kind of changes the game from getting that BMC4k

As a naked F5 owner I would be across the system (a certified shooter if you want) and could push clients towards rental of the 55 or recorder where required.

As for constant upgrade desires - I actually dont really have them - Ive been happy shooting stills (for adequate money) on my D3 for years now because it works.

When I got the D3 (from the kodak14n) I knew that we now had a DSLR that worked

Im looking for the same in a video camera.. something as good as a roll of film!

As for BMWs - I had a 750il never a 318 :)






 



Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 14, 2013, 04:01:32 am
Morgan,
Why don't you just consider a Red One?

There not easy to find but the price is just
Right for what you get.

The Red workflows are really adaptable
To different styles and film look.

Each time I got Red material in the editing
I smile.

I could write an entire essay here about
Why I thing Red workflow is IMO the most
Flexible and robust. You can have a fast
Straighforward approach, or a not so fast
Elaborate one. The level of flexibility is
Incredible. It's really good stuff to work with
In post.
Gosh, if I was operating cameras (i don't any more,
Thank god)
I'd get one of those R1 right now.

Coot was selling one no? S....t, it was the Scarlet...
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 14, 2013, 04:25:23 am
Simply and this is my needs..

The R1 is too heavy.
The Scarlet is too slow (ISO)

I know the image from them both and given enough light it is indeed great - all you could want

Actually I prefer Resolve to RedCiniX cos you can do secondaries.

Also they dont have an onboard data thin codec, and the reality is Im more likely to shoot thin for 90%

I could not DIT 3hours of RedRaw rushes easily on a low $ job.

Also with scarlet you are forced to buy thier monitor to control it.

I would need zero new accs. to run an F5

..and ND and XLR included - ND is quite a big deal to me there are a lot of IR issues floating around unless you have $3g of filters with the high ISO cams.

If however coots will take $4k for his (built) Scarly Im in :)

S





Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 14, 2013, 08:18:10 am
Simply and this is my needs..

The R1 is too heavy.
The Scarlet is too slow (ISO)

I know the image from them both and given enough light it is indeed great - all you could want

Actually I prefer Resolve to RedCiniX cos you can do secondaries.

Also they dont have an onboard data thin codec, and the reality is Im more likely to shoot thin for 90%

I could not DIT 3hours of RedRaw rushes easily on a low $ job.

Also with scarlet you are forced to buy thier monitor to control it.

I would need zero new accs. to run an F5

..and ND and XLR included - ND is quite a big deal to me there are a lot of IR issues floating around unless you have $3g of filters with the high ISO cams.

If however coots will take $4k for his (built) Scarly Im in :)

S







True. DIT comfortably hours of R3D means
The Red card yes or yes.

A note: rcx doesn't replace a proper
Grading app like Resolve as youmentionned.
I use it to generate the RMD i need to
Create the base looks so the time spent
On an external app is only for secondaries.

And yeah....ND, this is a big thing.

 


Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 14, 2013, 09:04:31 am
Create the base looks so the time spent
On an external app is only for secondaries.

I really dont get that because to me shooting raw would (for example) about getting the ND grad effect on a sky and you are going to have to do that using the full raw space (exposure -2 maybe) - once you come out of the raw space that info is lost

unless you output a dark and a light and blend them later.

S
Title: Re: F5
Post by: smthopr on July 14, 2013, 02:17:36 pm
I really dont get that because to me shooting raw would (for example) about getting the ND grad effect on a sky and you are going to have to do that using the full raw space (exposure -2 maybe) - once you come out of the raw space that info is lost

unless you output a dark and a light and blend them later.

S

RCx or in grading software, conversion from RAW should not involve loosing picture information. If it does, you are not using proper settings. It should be no
Title: Re: F5
Post by: smthopr on July 14, 2013, 02:20:41 pm
No problem to make a grad in grading software if your original clip is not clipped.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 14, 2013, 05:37:28 pm
Twoddle. Of course you discard information when leaving the raw space.

Put the temp slider to 2000k and try to get that back to 5000k from a baked export
Title: Re: F5
Post by: smthopr on July 14, 2013, 07:39:59 pm
If you exposed in 5000k light, leave the slider at 5000k. Then nothing should be lost. The RAW file is not a limitless bucket of data. And all can be preserved transcoding at the optimal settings. And one can not add a grad to RAW data. It must be transcoded first.

I'm just trying to clear up some misconceptions about working with RAW files. Not trying to have an argument.

If one exposes film with light that does not match the color that the film is optimized for, there is a limit to the corrections that are possible. Most digital sensors are optimized at about 4300k. Expose at 2000k and your corrections will be limited also. The transcode does not change this, nor limit the correction as long as one doesn't set the transcoding software (Raw converter) to clip. Hope this makes sense to someone here :)
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 14, 2013, 11:43:17 pm
Lets call it a debate.

Firstly I get that a scene shot with say a streetlight may not have any blue - so the blues may be lost to the sensor and therefore unrecoverable

Now consider a steadicam shot that transitions a location with a 2 stop change in light level and a 2k change in temp

In resolve you can ramp that shot in a way that cannot IMO be done after a transcode has happened - or certainly not to any codec that would by editable with my machine

Resolve you can add a grad or a million other things - unlike red cine x

It's why I like resolve and don't get rcx - i consider it first gen tech in the same way that ACR is first gen and Lightroom is second gen
Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 15, 2013, 03:27:06 am
Lets call it a debate.

Firstly I get that a scene shot with say a streetlight may not have any blue - so the blues may be lost to the sensor and therefore unrecoverable

Now consider a steadicam shot that transitions a location with a 2 stop change in light level and a 2k change in temp

In resolve you can ramp that shot in a way that cannot IMO be done after a transcode has happened - or certainly not to any codec that would by editable with my machine

Resolve you can add a grad or a million other things - unlike red cine x

It's why I like resolve and don't get rcx - i consider it first gen tech in the same way that ACR is first gen and Lightroom is second gen


There something most people forget about digital capture . . . there is always filters when shooting.  The deal is to know what color you want a scene to be before you shoot, which is difficult considering today's production requirements.

The RED's love warm colors, have a tougher time with blue, but that's just in my view, other's use may vary.

Red Cine X is not meant to be a real grading tool, (I guess it should be, could be, would be nice if it was), but it's just a way to quickly flip out a prorezz for proxy or editing.

But in the world of raw, still and motion, most people believe that color is on the backend and I think somewhere down the line we forgot that we could get the look we want on the front.

(I'm as guilty as most).

But hey Morgan, you really want to buy a Scarlet and realize I'm not in the camera selling biz, give me a call, but not at 5 grand.  5 grand I might as well keep it for MOS or a nice paperweight.

All the best.

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 15, 2013, 03:43:31 am
Ill swap it for my hassy H1 :)

Seriously - if you can afford 4kRaw workflow Id give this camera (F5/55) a run and tonk it into Resolve - I was pretty impressed - it just looked 'right'

S

Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 15, 2013, 04:58:39 am
What I found in motion,  and it was the same
In still, is that appart from cgi and fx,
When material is been shooted by
Experienced profesionals, the RCX stage of
Fine tuning and create a look is generaly very
Friendly. In other words, the footage is very
Close to the final look and requires little post.
Generaly just checking
The wb, the gama, and fine tuning using the
Rcx sliders gives optimum results in many cases.
It won't replace the capabilities of a color app
Like Resolve, but what rcx has is how well it works
Within the workflow if one is minimaly organized
With the bins. The implementation imo is great.
The only thing where I find Red a little strange
Is in their color science and the jargon associated.

It just depends on everyones mentality, my favorite
Workflow with Red do not pretend of course to fit
Everybody, but I really do consider rcx as a crucial
App into the pipeline.

As Bruce pointed, there are often misconceptions
On the raw. All this is metadatas, and they can be
Applied in the nle, but as well as in a previous stage
In camera. For ex: i can create a look in rcx and
Plug it into the camera for shooting. But, this is all
Non destructive, everything can be reverted or altered
But the way it's been shooted will define the range
Of action in post. So there is virtually no limits, within
The limits if I might say, to use a shortcut.
If one alters drasticaly the raw datas from the capture,
Info will be lost. And that of course will also happen
In the color application of your choice because it depends
On what you come from.
So raw or not raw, it's important that people on set
Know what they are doin and that people in post
Know what the ones on set have done.
Exactly like littin a green screen, it can be a breeze
In post or a complete nightmare.

Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 15, 2013, 05:39:22 am
What I found in motion,  and it was the same
In still, is that appart from cgi and fx,
When material is been shooted by
Experienced profesionals, the RCX stage of
Fine tuning and create a look is generaly very
Friendly

Well that depends what you call professional. Sure a professional pulls out his genny, sets up a tent with a big monitor, controls his DR to match a 709 LUT, using HMI lights and or scrims that needs 4 guys to hold down in the wind. That is making movies. Its big its expensive and with a wide DR camera.. its un-proffessional.

Then you have an unprofessional hooligan like me who learns his wide DR camera, pushes that to the absolute maximum, using the minimum possible light and resources on set - works fast spontaneous - can move - doesn't plasticise the talent with waiting for 'the machine' but lets them perform. What a loser.

Then you pull the second guys images into post - looks terrible - but the data is there to be recovered pushed pulled in post, a kid sitting in a room on minimum wage - not a huge machine costing $5k per hour.

Once the second footage comes out of post, it looks as good as 'professional man one' but its better, more natural and cost 1/5 the amount to shoot.

Now the true professional actually understands both set ups/methods and picks a fine line between the two, balancing on set costs with post costs in his head, shot by shot, location by location.

Anyone who thinks they can grade out from a transcode from raw is IMO fooling themselves, fine as long as the keep dragging the machine with them when they shoot, but fooling themselves as to the future. Look at the stills world to see that.

In stills I canned the machine within a week of owning the D3 - the first camera good enough to drop the machine, now I look for a camera that can do that in motion. Even more critical because HMI is a real pain compared to flash.

Repeat after me. Every stop of latitude should halve your lighting budget.

S








Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 15, 2013, 05:54:29 am
Yeah, when I refered to pros, i wasn't specially thikin
Of the ortodox trade-unioned arrogant crowd. ;D

When i was workin in stills with Pepe, the raw images
Were ready. The post-prod stage reduced to minimums.
He could well have been shooted jpegs. There was no
"recovery" thing. In fact, the retoucher was bored like
Hell because there was very little to retouch.

And more important consequences of that: less time
In post. I know a guy here (a 30 years old motion pro)
That when he shoots hand-held his Canon 5d2, the footage
Is just ready. I don't know how the guy does it, been tryin
To figure-out but it just works, it's just nailed.
Those people are priceless.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 15, 2013, 06:00:48 am
I guess 5d man nails it by a relationship with the director?

In the shade, in magic hour, in the right time the light just fits the camera. Do a spot in portugal at midday (as per the director) and you are playing a different game?

Or he's controlling the light with 'a machine' - a 5d is fine with a machine behind it.

S
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 15, 2013, 06:31:47 am
He is retired. He only shoots
Now his own stuff (reportages)
For his pleasure.
He does not rig, and exclusively
Mount Schneider glasses on the
5d2.

But it's like Pepe. I mean he lits
And nobody understand what
He does, and it's just the final
Look.
I remember anecdotes with the
Retouchers were he pointed it
Was badly done when it looked
Perfect to everybody else, me included,
And then he was right, but only him
Was seeing it.

I think it's more a question of natural
Habilities. I know i will never be a good
Camera operator, even if i try hard.
It's just not in my blood.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 15, 2013, 09:39:45 am
4k, 2k 4:2:0 to 4:4:4, 8 bit, 10 bit 14 bit, 100mbs, or 30, Intra, progressive, interlaced, MPG 2, 4, h264, Pro REZ DPX. whew?

The ONLY thing that matters is what you shoot looks good, hopefully damn good.

For two weeks we've been shooting the gh3's next to the RED 1's and Scarlets and honestly, you can flatten out any file, the RED's have a lot of control, but once you've slightly crushed it, worked the skin tones, and ready for at least primary grading, the GH3's are pretty, not exactly film like pretty, more digital still pretty, but regardless they look good.

We did a shot in Paris yesterday in an outside cafe with some silks and a few leds to kick some fillm running the gh3's next to the REDs.  Honestly I didn't see an inch of difference and the RED has amazing lattitude.  Actually, I had the crew set up two RED's considering the challanging light and I know when we get to first edit, the GH3 footage will be used the most at it is the most fluid and has really beautiful skin tones.

The RED's I love em, but they're a lot more work, cost a lot more and in the end, I'm positive I can shoot a gh3 and get so close to equal the RED's nobody is going to tell the difference.

I know, I've seen every pixel peeping, highlight blowing, shadow recovery test, but in the end the only thing that matters is the look.

If the GH3 has any one drawback is the menu is very difficult and the lenses which are good don't get close to most PL's in complete look.

But, If I was Morgan running a one man band I'd forget about the F5, buy a gh3, put some cash into a few large kino banks and a 4x silk for fill and not worry about it.

Personally the 2k 4k talk may have merit, (obviously the makers of 4/5k cameras want you to think so, but I'd bet we're at least 5 years away from real 4k TV and even then I doubt seriously if anyone will notice.

For the movies, well it's a little different, but a film like True Grit was shot with a 2k Arri and nobody worried about Roger Deakins work, or will say heck, why didn't he shoot it 4k and future proof it.

Actually I'm not in favor of future proofing because my goal is to shoot new stuff, not repurpose old.

In regards to the black magic being a game changer, well I hope so, but that's a lot of stuff in a little box and I know our RED's get damn hot running 18 minutes segments, the Scarlet blows the fan like a jet dryer.

Sony, they play too many games and they lost me with the FS100, never to return. 

I think the guys at Panasonic have the answer if they'll quit protecting territory and just make a super gh3.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 15, 2013, 10:15:26 am
...I think the guys at Panasonic have the answer if they'll quit protecting territory and just make a super gh3.

I really think so too.

Maybe there is a guy at Panasonic Head dep that is reading Lu-La
Title: Re: F5
Post by: smthopr on July 15, 2013, 03:27:01 pm
Lets call it a debate.

Firstly I get that a scene shot with say a streetlight may not have any blue - so the blues may be lost to the sensor and therefore unrecoverable

Now consider a steadicam shot that transitions a location with a 2 stop change in light level and a 2k change in temp

In resolve you can ramp that shot in a way that cannot IMO be done after a transcode has happened - or certainly not to any codec that would by editable with my machine

Resolve you can add a grad or a million other things - unlike red cine x

It's why I like resolve and don't get rcx - i consider it first gen tech in the same way that ACR is first gen and Lightroom is second gen

Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't think it's possible to apply a grading ramp to the raw conversion settings. When you grade from raw files, you set the raw conversion settings for the entire clip. When you apply a grade and maybe a grading change during the shot, it's a grade on the transcode. The transcode might be invisible to you, but it's there, cached in your computer. If you transcode first to an uncompressed format, without any clipping, you are essentially grading from the same material.

I have worked both ways grading features shot in red raw. One we graded from the R3d files and the other from a transcoded DPx file. There was no difference in the possible manipulation of the images. There were some effects shots that had a high contrast baked in from the raw converter, and these were impossible to fix.

So, don't transcode to a "finished" look. Transcode to a low contrast full range file or log format and you cAn change color temp and exposure the same as in the raw converter. That's my point and I'm sticking to it :)
Title: Re: F5
Post by: smthopr on July 15, 2013, 03:46:04 pm
Well that depends what you call professional. Sure a professional pulls out his genny, sets up a tent with a big monitor, controls his DR to match a 709 LUT, using HMI lights and or scrims that needs 4 guys to hold down in the wind. That is making movies. Its big its expensive and with a wide DR camera.. its un-proffessional.

Then you have an unprofessional hooligan like me who learns his wide DR camera, pushes that to the absolute maximum, using the minimum possible light and resources on set - works fast spontaneous - can move - doesn't plasticise the talent with waiting for 'the machine' but lets them perform. What a loser.

Then you pull the second guys images into post - looks terrible - but the data is there to be recovered pushed pulled in post, a kid sitting in a room on minimum wage - not a huge machine costing $5k per hour.

Once the second footage comes out of post, it looks as good as 'professional man one' but its better, more natural and cost 1/5 the amount to shoot.

Now the true professional actually understands both set ups/methods and picks a fine line between the two, balancing on set costs with post costs in his head, shot by shot, location by location.

Anyone who thinks they can grade out from a transcode from raw is IMO fooling themselves, fine as long as the keep dragging the machine with them when they shoot, but fooling themselves as to the future. Look at the stills world to see that.

In stills I canned the machine within a week of owning the D3 - the first camera good enough to drop the machine, now I look for a camera that can do that in motion. Even more critical because HMI is a real pain compared to flash.

Repeat after me. Every stop of latitude should halve your lighting budget.

S










Morgan, I think you miss the point of all that lighting equipment.

The director asks to see the faces of the actors in an apartment and he needs to see the church outside the window. How do you do that without big lights and crew? You can make a beautiful photograph using natural light, but it won't fit the story or the directors vision.

Or, I've had this experience: we walked into a large nightclub and the natural light looked spectacular with the light coming through the windows. We needed to get the actors into makeup and wardrobe and then spend 2 hours shooting the scene. While the actors prepared we brought in 7 lamps to recreated the window light. Which was good as the clouds came by in about 10 minutes.

The lighting is not about squeezing contrast to rec 709, it's to make the movie look its best and consistent from angle to angle. And to keep on schedule at the same time.

If you don't have lights, wide dr is your friend. If you do have lights and crew...wide dr is also your friend!
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 15, 2013, 05:17:23 pm
Bruce - truth is we are both right about lighting -.just I'm a couple of steps left of you

I'm sure your right about outputting a flat too

Coming from a decade inside c1 Capture one. I just prefer the davinci way

S
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 15, 2013, 05:52:23 pm
And can you ramp a raw grade in davinci?

Well I've gone through that with Peter chamberlain of black magic

You cannot ramp or use the camera tab in nodes but he suggests the space of the software means you have the same latitude outside of the camera tab

I'm not 100% convinced of that so the answer is sort  of maybe if you ask me and yes if you ask the people who make the software

I'd like it if different nodes could have different raw settings
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 15, 2013, 07:17:41 pm
If you transcode first to an uncompressed format, without any clipping, you are essentially grading from the same material
I think so

We could think of r3d as a digital negative

And i also don't thing it's possible to apply the
Grading ramp to the raw convertion settings.
Unless using the trick of having 2 or more raw settings
Of the same cut and use masks on layers, each
Layer being one raw convertion, and a blending
Mode, but for this kind
Of stuff i rather have an Avid DS.

Everything that is out of the source setting panels
Is not affecting the "digital negative" but the rgb
Conversion. So what Bruce pointed is correct.

And in my case, I like to use Rcx as a primary
Correction pass. Remember also that the rmd files
Can be mailed.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Christopher Sanderson on July 15, 2013, 07:18:46 pm
very interesting, inspiring and worthwhile discussion - thank-you.

My 'problem' is that I see two sides (not really the Sony...) I've been in both the old-tradition big crew, big $$ productions for many years and more recently a simple one-man-band affair. Yes, it has been an 'affair' of love and some tribulation.

It's great to see cooter doing his lovely work essentially as a successful new manifestation of the old trad $$ work and Morgan doing his as a guerilla. Keep up the great work - hope you are having as much fun as I am - and I did...
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Peter McLennan on July 15, 2013, 07:48:18 pm
very interesting, inspiring and worthwhile discussion - thank-you.

Indeed.

Film making has come a long way from calling the lab and telling them to "force one stop on rolls eight and nine."  You guys may not need to carry an exposure meter any longer, but you sure need to know a lot more stuff.  I'm gonna have to get me a GH3.

Do you miss the optical viewfinder?  Or do you guys actually operate?

Electronics aside, I was interested to see in the credits that the US$200M+ "The Lone Ranger" is film-originated.

Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 15, 2013, 08:05:07 pm
Honestly Chris, I like motion, love it when there is a decent storyline AND the time to really craft a shot.

For this the RED's were pretty good, but now I see it all differently.

First, it's all becoming a one man band show.  Sure there is large production out there, we do a lot of it, but with much less people that I ever dreamed imaginable.

I don't have a single person that can't wear multiple hats.   DT that can grade and hang a light.  Grip or swing that can mount a camera, hang a light, move 4,000 lbs of stuff and maybe not with a smile, but at least do it and don't quit.

We shot today in France, two interview sessions, one lifestyle (different locations) one voice over then packed up, took the eurostar got into London at 9, set up and pre lit for the next day, it's now 12:46 pm and will start at 9am with a scheduled 12 hour day tomorrow.

That's today's reality, so Morgan's style probably is becoming everybody's style.  I may have more crew, but considering the scope of what we're doing we are all one man bands.

That's why I bought the GH3's and will probably buy two more and one more bit of honesty.   The RED's impress so we put them on set most of the time, but with the gh3's 90% of the footage will come from them.

Clients like big cameras, but they really like a fluid shoot and it's expensive to move 24lbs of camera, with no IS vs. 2lbs.  

In fact I've spent more time riding around in a wheelchair lately as a defacto dolly than I have shooting on sticks, dollies, sliders and gibs.

At first I thought the RED's and raw were great, get close, fix it later.  Now, with the timeframe we work under I want every camera to be set as close to the look as possible, every camera set exactly at the same settings and locked and if the colour needs tweaking do it with filters.  I see the GH3's as transparency film and   I consider on set to be our primary color and only want to tweak after final locked edit for secondary color, unless there are effects or an elaborate edit.

We don't work sloppy, but if a shot requires detail through a window and crafted light, that is discussed, budgeted and signed off on.  If it's not, then we let the windows blow and call it art.

Honestly, time, is money and as you know with motion (I really hate the word video) time is like a black hole.

Even with the RED rockets you have to transcode in real time.   With the gh3's even an mp4 file, if shot right, we transcode to prorezz, match the sound for multi cam and start the editorial process.

I know that one of the reasons TV land is so hopped up over the Arri's isn't the camera, or the file, it's the straight to prorezz and into the NLE.

Heck on the Movie lots, even for episodic TV I see one trailer parked between two sound stages with a team that is laying in the first cut as the shooting is happening.

BTW: we don't scrimp, we don't overspend, because both of those processes are the paved road to hell, but the one thing I will not budge on is sound.  With dialog we have a sound tech, sometimes two because I can get by with a "challanged" visual but can't get by with sketchy sound.

We do carry our own set of lavs for emergencies though I have two sound techs both great, both different and I demand they use their kit because they know it front to back.

I've tried sound the do it yourself way and it sucks.

I've tried the don't worry we'll fix it in post and that also sucks.

Somewhere the happy medium is between Morgan and Roger Deakins.  I think we can all learn more from you and  Morgan than Roger.

IMO

BC




Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 15, 2013, 08:12:09 pm
Indeed.
 Or do you guys actually operate?


I storyboard, contribute to the script, operate, direct, set the color, look, style edit sometimes to finish.  

My partner and producer not only does the first AD's job, she producers over and underline, even does makeup if time permits.

My partner and I negotiate the talent, select the score, (or commission the score) and btw: I'm not bragging, just talking about what it's like in todays world, or at least my world.

So what I see in the viewfinder is what I want to see in the NLE and btw:  I'm getting deep into fcpX, (which I loathe) but which I believe is the future.

New tech like "FCP X may not be better but in today's world, it's damn close to being the right solution.

I know FCP X pretty well, but when I return to the states, I'm searching for a fcpx tutor to crash course me through the system so when I return to Paris in August to do the final cut, I want to be dead nuts on top of it.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 15, 2013, 08:25:40 pm
Honestly Chris, I like motion, love it when there is a decent storyline AND the time to really craft a shot.

For this the RED's were pretty good, but now I see it all differently.

First, it's all becoming a one man band show.  Sure there is large production out there, we do a lot of it, but with much less people that I ever dreamed imaginable.

I don't have a single person that can't wear multiple hats.   DT that can grade and hang a light.  Grip or swing that can mount a camera, hang a light, move 4,000 lbs of stuff and maybe not with a smile, but at least do it and don't quit.

We shot today in France, two interview sessions, one lifestyle (different locations) one voice over then packed up, took the eurostar got into London at 9, set up and pre lit for the next day, it's now 12:46 pm and will start at 9am with a scheduled 12 hour day tomorrow.

That's today's reality, so Morgan's style probably is becoming everybody's style.  I may have more crew, but considering the scope of what we're doing we are all one man bands.

That's why I bought the GH3's and will probably buy two more and one more bit of honesty.   The RED's impress so we put them on set most of the time, but with the gh3's 90% of the footage will come from them.

Clients like big cameras, but they really like a fluid shoot and it's expensive to move 24lbs of camera, with no IS vs. 2lbs.  

In fact I've spent more time riding around in a wheelchair lately as a defacto dolly than I have shooting on sticks, dollies, sliders and gibs.

At first I thought the RED's and raw were great, get close, fix it later.  Now, with the timeframe we work under I want every camera to be set as close to the look as possible, every camera set exactly at the same settings and locked and if the colour needs tweaking do it with filters.  I see the GH3's as transparency film and   I consider on set to be our primary color and only want to tweak after final locked edit for secondary color, unless there are effects or an elaborate edit.

We don't work sloppy, but if a shot requires detail through a window and crafted light, that is discussed, budgeted and signed off on.  If it's not, then we let the windows blow and call it art.

Honestly, time, is money and as you know with motion (I really hate the word video) time is like a black hole.

Even with the RED rockets you have to transcode in real time.   With the gh3's even an mp4 file, if shot right, we transcode to prorezz, match the sound for multi cam and start the editorial process.

I know that one of the reasons TV land is so hopped up over the Arri's isn't the camera, or the file, it's the straight to prorezz and into the NLE.

Heck on the Movie lots, even for episodic TV I see one trailer parked between two sound stages with a team that is laying in the first cut as the shooting is happening.

BTW: we don't scrimp, we don't overspend, because both of those processes are the paved road to hell, but the one thing I will not budge on is sound.  With dialog we have a sound tech, sometimes two because I can get by with a "challanged" visual but can't get by with sketchy sound.

We do carry our own set of lavs for emergencies though I have two sound techs both great, both different and I demand they use their kit because they know it front to back.

I've tried sound the do it yourself way and it sucks.

I've tried the don't worry we'll fix it in post and that also sucks.

Somewhere the happy medium is between Morgan and Roger Deakins.  I think we can all learn more from you and  Morgan than Roger.

IMO

BC






Yeah, but Coot, there is a big contradiction there.

I agree totaly with you and Morgan on the path this
Business is going

But can someone explains me then, why we never
Had so many DIT workin just to fix toundtrippin issues
When we are all talking about faster, less crew, more
Dynamic.

because it's really amazing that we still don't have a super gh3
And that we still have to color in an ext app.

It's a one man show but we don't have the tools yet.

Each time i talk about integration, i hear resolve. And
Resolve is great, but it comes from the past workflow.
Is there a Raw standart fully supported? Nope
Between conversions and roundtripping, the one-man-show
As became a nightmare of time black-hole. I mean
People who are working in there are aging like bloody
Politicians. Everybody is chasing a camera that does not exist
Yet, and softwares that are fragmentated and require
This new profession called dit to make all that buzz work
Minimaly.
And the time to send an aaf, open the new app, bla bla
The color grading would almost have been finished with
What we should normaly work with in the new panorama.
Gosh, it just pisses me of why Avid has not bloody updated
DS at Nab instead of more of the same bullshit.

So, are we in the past or in the future? I think we are nowhere
Yet.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 15, 2013, 08:59:17 pm
Yeah, but Coot, there is a big contradiction there.

I agree totaly with you and Morgan on the path this
Business is going

But can someone explains me then, why we never
Had so many DIT workin just to fix toundtrippin issues
When we are all talking about faster, less crew, more
Dynamic.

because it's really amazing that we still don't have a super gh3
And that we still have to color in an ext app.

It's a one man show but we don't have the tools yet.

Each time i talk about integration, i hear resolve. And
Resolve is great, but it comes from the past workflow.
Is there a Raw standart fully supported? Nope
Between conversions and roundtripping, the one-man-show
As became a nightmare of time black-hole. I mean
People who are working in there are aging like bloody
Politicians. Everybody is chasing a camera that does not exist
Yet, and softwares that are fragmentated and require
This new profession called dit to make all that buzz work
Minimaly.
And the time to send an aaf, open the new app, bla bla
The color grading would almost have been finished with
What we should normaly work with in the new panorama.
Gosh, it just pisses me of why Avid has not bloody updated
DS at Nab instead of more of the same bullshit.

So, are we in the past or in the future? I think we are nowhere
Yet.


The GH3 is close, very close.

The next one if Panasonic doesn't try to keep selling a new P2 could rock it.

In regards to grading, its a mess, I agree.

Why resolve doesn't have sound, even scratch sound, nodes, come on, we own resolve, a board and it's a pain.  It works ok with RED less ok with other formats, needs a dedicated render card and well, it's just old think.

A lightroom with tracking and layers and keying would do it, as long as they connect to some kind of realtime rendering.

A lightroom that would actually round trip to anything, not just adobe (and no I don't think speed grade is the answer).

Look at some of the third party fcpX apps.  If you could combine them all you'd have something, but so far nobody wants to go there and I assume what most people consider captivating color is non green skintones and maybe some exposure adjustment.

In regards to cameras, everybody talks about the blackmagic like they finally found the answer to a cut rate RED or Arri.

I don't think the blackmagic is the answer, super GH3 will do it (also add a 2:1 crop)  and btw: why don't the camera makers (except RED and Arri) have a full blown kit.  Smaller swing away matte boxes, color and grad filters, (built in NDs), carbon rails and camera specific cages, dual channels with adjustable sound controls, some japanese designed zooms that the front element stays in place and the Olympus IS.
How about a radio controlled connection to adjust led lights, a larger left right left snorkel viewfinder (hey how about removeable prismis (I know there is no prism but you know what I mean).

Real HDMI out, real radio SD signal to monitor to cut down on the cords?

Actually, I took a page out of Chris' book and bought that small gitzo fluid head, took all my cameras (except the RED) bought L brackets, quick release clamps, and can slap on a gh3 or OLy in seconds shoot the footage, go vertical or horiz for stills, slap it back to video and not miss a beat.

It's not perfect but that little gitzo head is a real solution.

Thanks Chris.



IMO

BC

Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 16, 2013, 01:32:01 am
Regarding Resolve with Avid, Scott Freeman just shared this interesting article with me: http://library.creativecow.net/freeman_scott/Editors-Suite_kaufman_Scott-Freeman/1

In his own words:

Quote
"When Blackmagic Design released Resolve, I realized how I could use it to solve my dilemma. Some people might think it's strange for an online editor to use Resolve, but it does much more than color correction so I decided to use it to pull my shots. I had been looking for this solution for a long time. What took me five days now takes me 11 minutes. I dove into using Resolve v.7 in March 2011 on Suits and Covert Affairs and haven't looked back."

Blackmagic Design has repositioned Resolve to not just a color tool, but also as an on-set LUT, dailies and transcoding tool. It can import and work with almost any format natively. And, you can make a few editing changes without going back to your NLE. The major downside is that it needs a lot of computer power. In this respect, Autodesk Smoke 2013 has made giant strides - it can run even on a Macbook Air.

But I'm still sticking to Adobe CC. They have the ability and money to copy or purchase any new advancement or feature a competitor can produce. Who can compete?
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 16, 2013, 03:31:38 am
Yes, Resolve is not a simple CC tool and does
All you mentionned. And for that reasons, it's
The best Avid's mate.
And precisely that's where I disagree with the
Philosophy. Roundtrippin is old school imo.

What I'd like to see is all that in a super media
Composer, and this super media composer
Already exists: DS. Better in many aspects
Than Smoke.

 But the problem is that Avid
Defined their politics at NAB.
even if the comin MC 7 will support LUTs, they
Want to promote MC+Resolve, and stop to develop
DS. For some, it's the right decision,for me it's
A step back in the past, even if it's powerfull.

To be honest, I'm asking myself if in the end
Apple had not, once again, been visionary
With fcpx.
I was always surprised with the fact that Chris
Sanderson is givin a lot of credit with fcpx and
I thought that Chris was in fact playin with the
Brand new gadget for awhile and when he get
Tired he would switch to PP. Now, I think that
He is simply a very clever man.


The word I really find frustrating is "close",
Because close, is close but in the end never there.
Coot said that the GH3 is close to be the solution,
Yes, but it also means that it isn't yet. Same with MC,
It's close. The capabilities of this editor is very high
Indeed, even for compo, and really, the missing
Features are little but important "littles".

Recently i had a discussion on the Cow with an Avid
Tech, on the MC politics. The man recognized that
Avid has the tech and engineers to put MC at the
Level of Resolve and even better in all Resolve is
Capable to, and the only reason they don't is politic.

So can we be in a world that is changing and see
The players enhancing past pipelines? In that
Sense, what was the big bad joke of Apple, fcpx,
May in fact be the answer.

About Adobe, of course that they have something,
But we still don't have a "lightroom" style software.
80% of the work we generaly do could be done
In a "lightroom style" software. We don't need
Everyday to remove objects or do heavy compo.
But it looks to me absolutly amazing to have to
Roundtrip to do secondaries, or dailies. I can't
Accept that any longuer.
Adobe simply hidden the exchange files for
A more direct communication with dynamic link,
But it's still old school.
We really need o lightroom or in-design of motion,
Not another speedgrade to cc, and another AE
For the minimum compo task.
IMHO.








Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 16, 2013, 04:14:47 am
I think FCP-X has one major flaw that does not bode well in the long term - it is Mac only, and tries to resist native editing whenever possible. It's success and adoption is tied to Apple's destiny. However, it is an extremely capable application, which can work with many formats easily.

I was very impressed with Smoke 2013 Extension 1 - supremely capable, but expensive.

I'm currently testing AMC 7, and the old 'broadcast' jargon and methodology still remains. You are right, in that it tries to force a 'conform' based solution when it needn't.

So, the best NLE is....drum roll...Morgan's F5 - if only it could edit, grade and spew money like an ATM machine!
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 16, 2013, 04:31:26 am
I also had follow the Smoke 2013 saga, and
It's really cool. Expensive but they cutted the
Price drasticaly. Unfortunatly, not all is great
in wonderland and
My honey moon with Smoke lasted little.
It's sort of weak in CC. If you do a research on that in
The Cow, you'll see the limitations. It's well
documented. DS in that
Aspect is a more robust tool but as they won't
Developp it anymore...

You are right about Apple. Always the same story:
Prores, almost a standart can't be written on
Pc...it's the absurd of the adsurd. They don't
Even give the option for pc users to pay a fee
To have full access.

And...we are just at the beginning of
The biggest mess about to come: raw video.
Because don't think that all manufacturers
Will embrasse DNG, naaaaaaa....
A supposed standart that nobody pushes
Except BM. You'll see the real mess when
We'll have 200 raw video formats that nothing
Reads, like what we have in still land but
Applied to the more complex and demanding
Motion tasks.
Be prepared for the big caos!

It's goin to be RCx for red, PanaCx for the gh, CanonCx
For the canons etc etc...
We'll end with 5 or 6 apps just to read the datas,
Then we'll cut in NLEs that aren't capable to do
Basic secondaries etc etc...
Instead of saving time, we'll be spending more
Time than ever, not cuttin, not coloring, but learning
Softwares, chasing plug-ins and jumping between a
Myriad of applications when what history screems for
Is exactly the opposite: simplification, integration,
Standardization, versatity and universality...

but no,
I'm afraid it won't happen and i do suspect that
The mess we are in today is just the tip of the iceberg.
People will be forced to become DIT first, instead
Of DP, and this is already a tendency.
 
I got a question: how many long hours have we
Already spent on fixing basic roundtripping garbage,
Test this or that in order to get close to an "ideal"
Workflow? How many long nites reading the forums?
Not to work actually, but just to make the machine
in working order...
How many hours spent? Zillions.

I want tools and workflows that give room for
A healphy life; I don't want to be
Married with the monitors.

Someone has to stop this post-prod nonsense.


Title: Re: F5
Post by: Peter McLennan on July 16, 2013, 11:40:06 am
I storyboard, contribute to the script, operate, direct, set the color, look, style edit sometimes to finish.

Holy crap.  I'll bet there was at least one G&T on the train back to London.

Interesting comments on sound.  From bitter experience: sound is more important to get right than picture.  Even more so now that we can "fix it in post" with picture.  Not so much with sound.

"Clients like big cameras"   Heh.  How true.  How disappointing.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 16, 2013, 10:07:57 pm

I want tools and workflows that give room for
A healphy life; I don't want to be
Married with the monitors.

Someone has to stop this post-prod nonsense.

...The FCP-X Love Quote


This might interest you: http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1174-editing-a-real-world-audi-job-in-final-cut-pro-x
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 17, 2013, 03:24:11 am
This might interest you: http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1174-editing-a-real-world-audi-job-in-final-cut-pro-x

I removed the "love" part just in case of some puritan
Complain ;D

Seriously, thanks for the link. W . ell I don't know if Fcpx
Is the future honestly.
I would have liked a super GH3 and Avid pushing DS
Further.
The super GH3 aint there yet but we'll probably have it,
But on the post-prod side, is indeed where I think that
The real black hole is.

There are 3 possible scenarios.
- big prod, budget and crowd: Avid is workin brilliantly
- "one man show" business model: there is nothing optimum
- and then, something in the middle: maybe smoke,
Adobe suite

And then, this weired fcpx. I'm not far to flip my thoughts
On this software 180 grades.
I don't like Apple politics of the recent years. But...
They may be once again visionary.
On today's panorama, fcpx seems to be the only app
That looks to the future and not the past.

Maybe Chris interest to give it a chance regardless
Of the bad reputation was a clever position.

What's sure, is that Morgan business model is going
To be the norm in a close future, for 80% of the work
Produced. What i see disapear is the middle term.
Imo, we are going to see 2 business models.
One like Morgan: very reduce team, cost efective,
And directly big budget prods.
If on the last one, tools already exist and work
There is something to be done for the first one
Both in capture and post.


we need small cameras that can deliver Alexa files
That allow direct workflow and can br operated
By one guy (nd, af etc...) and software
Fast, intuitive, and capable of covering 80% of the
Tasks without any sort of roundtripping.
 
Any brand that brings that on the table will rule
80% of this industry.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 17, 2013, 03:45:24 am
4k, 2k 4:2:0 to 4:4:4, 8 bit, 10 bit 14 bit, 100mbs, or 30, Intra, progressive, interlaced, MPG 2, 4, h264, Pro REZ DPX. whew?

The ONLY thing that matters is what you shoot looks good, hopefully damn good.


It is clear that the F5 (which this thread is about!) looks good shooting 4k raw.

But is it the ONLY thing that matters?

Going down a 4k raw model arriving on set (prepared to roll 3hours in the day without a dump) you might need 1.5TB of cards (cost $6000)
You are then going to have a 3TB backup (cost $200+DIT dumping time) before you make/record any proxies or enter the edit, so lets call that 4TB

(sony shoots a nice 3:1 compression)

And that is why I think sony are on to something with XABCDEFG codec because if you can cut the data load then its got to be good.

With the FS100 if the light is 5200 and you shoot at 5000 the shot is gone. With raw if you shoot at 2000 and the light is 8000k the shot is great.

IMO a raw lite is needed where you must set the camera to +/- 2000k and +/- 1 stop - IMO it is hard to get closer than that without 'the machine'

That raw lite needs to be 1/4 the data of raw and can be 8X the data of the FS100 - I guess that might be the XABCDEF codec - and it is worth checking out!

S








Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 17, 2013, 04:41:37 am
Avid editors, we were warned about
Issues and crashes with the Sony codec,
and for what i'm seeing, everybody
Is converting to Prores or Dnx
Wich is a pain in the ass. (and not only
Avid editors) and nothing new under
The sun.
Mmmm....
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 17, 2013, 04:48:50 am
Avid editors, we were warned about
Issues and crashes with the Sony codec,
...


I agree. Loading XAVC crashed my AMC 7 system. There is no plug-in for it, so I'm not sure whether somebody in Avid forgot to do that....because it's in the manual. Still testing.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 17, 2013, 05:01:59 am
Not only Avid's editors apparently.
It seems that everybody prefers
Trascoding to Prores because of stability.

At least, this codec is open, unlike Prores.
And true that it has a lot of goodies
But implementation seems to require
More time.

Correct me if i'm wrong but, for 16 bits raw
The "machine" as Morgan says is needed no?
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 17, 2013, 06:10:02 am
I take a slightly different view on raw processing - coming from stills

90% of cases Id do it like this..

raw viewer
corrections
export to prorezz
sleep
edit

Which does not seem to be too intensive on a machine.

--
In stills after my corrections I some times pick tricky (wide DR) shots and export those few shots again dark, I then merge the images in photoshop

Sounds whacky but works for me

So Im not actually banking on raw footy I can playback/edit

I completely agree that a proper workflow is better!

S


Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 17, 2013, 01:19:46 pm

The "machine" as Morgan says is needed no?

How do you get away from a machine? 

We carry 4 powerbooks, just for imaging and that's just for quick dailies and transcoding, even before we get back to the studio.

I'm damn picky about setting up monitors and cameras before hand (learned the hard way) and even then a file always needs attention, raw or baked in?

IMO

BC

Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 17, 2013, 01:28:22 pm

"Clients like big cameras"   Heh.  How true.  How disappointing.

First off I should make it clear that I don't think my way is the best way, I just think today it's the best way for me.

I have belief that if you learn something you not only use it, but you

I have good clients, I have some great clients and even the great clients appreciate investment in their project.

I don't understand 100% how a client thinks but probably 60% and putting myself in their shoes, I guess I could buy a Porsche in a alley, or in a dealership but all things being equal, I'd rather buy in a nice dealership.

So yes, they appreciate big cameras, but in a week after you shoot, they forget about it and they appreciate more the results (or at least that's the plan).

Does the camera make me or anyone better . . . yes, but only in the fact that once I invest in something, especially something expensive I think I try harder to use the damn thing and not feel guilty.

Now in regards to wearing more hats.  Some think it's stupid, some admire it, me, I just do it cause I know how to do it and I like it.

I like editing, or at least setting the style and rythm of the cut, I like having input on the script and score.   

If your emersed in the story, know the edit and your working fast, you can build the story and at least have enough footage to work, without doing triage at the end of the shoot.

For a still photographer moving to motion, the first thing I realized is making it pretty doesn't always cut it.  Like they say in Hollywood, it's the story, it's the story, it's the story and rarely do you have a unique story.''

The more  you learn, the more you do, the more you know the story, the better you shoot.

Everybody's different, but I like being involved in the whole chain.

IMO

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on July 17, 2013, 03:11:12 pm
How do you get away from a machine?  

We carry 4 powerbooks, just for imaging and that's just for quick dailies and transcoding, even before we get back to the studio.

I'm damn picky about setting up monitors and cameras before hand (learned the hard way) and even then a file always needs attention, raw or baked in?

IMO

BC



I was not refering to this James,
Sorry if my post was confusing.

I was asking if the raw capture on the Sony was
Only possible with an external device,
It was in fact a question on how Sony implemented it.

Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 18, 2013, 12:40:14 am

I was asking if the raw capture on the Sony was
Only possible with an external device,
It was in fact a question on how Sony implemented it.


Yes, for RAW you need the external recorder. On both F5 and F55. Same applies for the C500.

The 4K RAW footage from the F55 looks brilliant, similar to the Alexa - which is probably why Arri is making noises about a 4K Alexa in the works. Whether one likes it or not, 4K is going to be thrust upon the masses.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 18, 2013, 03:47:58 am
There are two options - the sony recorder which clips on the back really neatly just making a bigger camera

the second is the odyseyy which seems that sony somewhat hobble in what the camera will put out to it.

also the ody is a spaghetti junction of cables

Ill get the sony when funds allow.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 23, 2013, 01:36:28 pm
Watch with a pinch of salt. He doesn't know resolve for shXt

https://vimeo.com/70783510
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Sareesh Sudhakaran on July 24, 2013, 04:01:45 am
But he knows his Sony!
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 24, 2013, 03:22:53 pm
Or not. Basically the trick of knee and recovering in post is complex

He had the over exposed girl that he said could not be got back - I'm far convinced by that statement

And it's kind of important cos its basically a question about the latitude of the camera..

And if you don't know your post you don't know your latitude ..
Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 24, 2013, 09:15:46 pm
And if you don't know your post you don't know your latitude ..

Morgan,

I dig the one man band thing.   Wish I could pull it off because I think my life would be a lot easier.

Also I fully understand going with a camera that can shoot one file, get it close in camera, grade it, cut and deliver.

And as much as I dig the RED1's I gotta admit that the workflow isn't the easiest thing in the world.

Tonight I had to burn out 15 files, for transcription and forgot and relabeled the RDC folder in shot order.

Ooops, everything was find except two files don't have sound.  I found it, retrieved it, linked it and off I went, but for a few moments it's a heart stopper.

The thing is the RED can scare you sometimes.   We've never lost a shot (knock on wood) have them checked and we recheck them after every shoot, but when you open a folder and see 6 r3d raws instead of one it makes you sweat a little. (it does this for long clips).

It all works as planned, but you can't use standard tools like I-view to drop in files, organize, rename and go.

So my point is I see your point on the F5, though I gotta admit, until Sony proves there ready to step up with no fooling around with their hobbling a system to move you up, I'll wait.

But I really, really do hope the R5 is everything you want.

Let me know.

Thanks

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 25, 2013, 01:47:29 am
I'm not sure how 16 bit 4k raw at 120 or more fps is hobbled?

Title: Re: F5
Post by: bcooter on July 25, 2013, 05:55:39 am
I'm not sure how 16 bit 4k raw at 120 or more fps is hobbled?




In the digital world there is always a what if.

The sony looks good on paper, but the proof is in the file.  They and everyone talks about film like look from the $1,000 to $40,000 cameras.

But . . . I really do hope the F5 works for you though it's 16 grand for the body,  plus and 5 grand for the 4k storage box, (which is to come), 5 grand for the oled viewfinder, and a "Z" mount lens at 10 grand.

That's $36,000 or so, and that's a lot of coin.  Heck I bough two GH3's and Olympus and a box of lenses and didn't top 6 grand and have touch screen autofocus.

Even dropping the lens form the F5 equation this is beyond Red 1 territory and weighs as much, as I can get an R1 with Nikon mount and lens to about 8 1/2 pounds.

Not saying it won't work, but there is those dirty little words, "to come".

I've been there, done that, bought cheap and expensive and there is always another shoe to fall.

I'm glad the F5 is here, it helps all of us, wish it was the fs100 price (where I really believe the high end price should reside) and btw: whatever happened to the fs700 4k upgrade?

Anyway, I kind of get the feeling that Sony and (more companies to come) looked at RED's price list and went ah-ha, that's the magic number, or better/worse looked everyone in the digital world's annoiunce to deliver process and said "announce something first like 4k, we'll figure it out later" cause they'll wait for the tires, they already bought the car.



IMO

BC
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on July 26, 2013, 05:58:51 pm
My set up would be to buy the naked body

Use my Nikon glass rig monitor and batteries

Offer clients to rent the recorder if they needed it

Same price as a c300 or  5k cheaper than a shoot able Scarlet..
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on August 26, 2013, 04:14:35 am
My continuing investigation into the F5 involved getting some files from another tester..

What do I think of them? certainly in a different class to the FS100!

http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backlot/grade-test-playing-with-the-sony-f55
Title: Re: F5
Post by: fredjeang2 on August 27, 2013, 01:57:45 pm
My continuing investigation into the F5 involved getting some files from another tester..

What do I think of them? certainly in a different class to the FS100!

http://www.sammorganmoore.com/backlot/grade-test-playing-with-the-sony-f55

Ps: I liked the short video you did
On 3d LUT node placement on Resolve. It's a cool
Approach and in general quite nailed in practise:
1 pre grade - lut - and a fine tuning post lut grade.
But the interesting trick you mentionned is pre-placing
The nodes first and going backwards from the Lut node.
Well done Morgan.
Title: Re: F5
Post by: Morgan_Moore on August 27, 2013, 02:36:10 pm
Ps: I liked the short video you did
On 3d LUT node placement on Resolve. It's a cool
Approach and in general quite nailed in practise:
1 pre grade - lut - and a fine tuning post lut grade.
But the interesting trick you mentionned is pre-placing
The nodes first and going backwards from the Lut node.
Well done Morgan.


I put placed the LUT as the last node because it seems a LUT is destructive - ie if a LUT clips then the info is gone.. so it has to be in the last node

I didnt make that too clear in the vid cos it is complex to explain, illogical and I am not a tutor just a baby in Resolve trying to make it feel like C1 :)