Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: A7ii Avchds and FCP  (Read 13615 times)

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2016, 12:08:47 pm »

"It's not the money, it's just the principle."

+1
If I didn´t somewhat enjoy this I would do something else.

What I hate about video is the complexity since coming from a straight-laced photography background I feel like editing video is same as editing photos only dealing with 25+ images flying past per second instead of just one to hang on the wall is a headache.
for this reason like Cooter I stick with the editing program I learned when I was young enough to learn something new that is Premiere. Now I am not so young I avoid changing horses unless there is a VERY compelling reason to do so that is not so often, since after all editing is just editing and what matters most is the decision-making about what to do rather than which button to press.

If I had to hand over what I filmed to an editor to use as a mattress to do hand-springs on I would probably not want to film though as it is I enjoy editing what I shoot just as a home handy man enjoys hanging his own wall paper not much difference actually.

I guess if you are doing this for a CLIENT with EXPECTATIONS who is paying a LOT OF MONEY then you have to be more serious about editing that would not be much fun.

Here is my latest attempt.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2016, 11:11:59 am by lowep »
Logged

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #21 on: February 27, 2016, 10:59:56 am »

"It's not the money, it's just the principle."

+1
If I didn´t somewhat enjoy this I would do something else.

What I hate about video is the complexity since coming from a straight-laced photography background I feel like editing video is same as editing photos only dealing with 25+ images flying past per second instead of just one to hang on the wall is a headache.
for this reason like Cooter I stick with the editing program I learned when I was young enough to learn something new that is Premiere. Now I am not so young I avoid changing horses unless there is a VERY compelling reason to do so that is not so often, since after all editing is just editing and what matters most is the decision-making about what to do rather than which button to press.

If I had to hand over what I filmed to an editor to use as a mattress to do hand-springs on I would probably not want to film though as it is I enjoy editing what I shoot just as a home handy man enjoys hanging his own wall paper not much difference actually.

I guess if you are doing this for a CLIENT with EXPECTATIONS who is paying a LOT OF MONEY then you have to be more serious about editing that would not be much fun.

Here is my latest attempt.

Done with FCP7 or FCPX? It looks good.

James is right IMO in the sense that we have a gap uncovered
In what video is concerned: the use of a traditional photo
Editor program like with track+mask would suit
For certain type of works. (but not all). A sort of lightroom or PS
For video.

BUT...that would also mean a standardization in terms
Of formats that we are far from enjoying in motion.

Talking of still, apart from each manufacturer Raw sauce,
Because of course it was given very few would embrasse
DNG just like it also happened in motion,
The rest is very much standardized unlike in motion wich
Remains a superb mess.
What do we have? .PSD and .PSB for retouching and .TIF for
Archiving, print and .JPEG for internet etc...
In motion that is not the case.

Just take Coot's example: different camera brands within a same
Shooting that obliges to handle different files and
Behaviours to match and have consistency.
If all his cams were shooting let's say Prores of a same
Flavour, that would simllify the workflow big time. But...

And none does I.S. why not all cameras with an open EXR
Format? Because it remains huge! But storage is cheap.

Digital motion is still in its infancy compared to still photography.

But a PS or LR for motion would not be enough anyway.
It would suits short form advertising where the look is
King over the story. But for feature film it would be
Absolutly horrible having to cut on something that is
Not Avid like or Lightworks like.
Therefore I think that the oath is not to copy still
Phoyography softwares but more to add capabilities
To the NLEs as well as simplifying the tasks.



« Last Edit: February 27, 2016, 11:20:18 am by fredjeang2 »
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2016, 11:09:09 am »

MP4 edited with Adobe Premiere CS4 & After Effects CS4
« Last Edit: February 27, 2016, 11:16:35 am by lowep »
Logged

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #23 on: February 27, 2016, 11:23:59 am »

MP4 edited with Adobe Premiere CS4 & After Effects CS4

Hey...I still use my PS CS4! Never had the need to upgrade
So far.
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #24 on: February 27, 2016, 04:53:29 pm »

Hey...I still use my PS CS4! Never had the need to upgrade
So far.
they say old is gold - though maybe change once in a while is also not a bad thing?

bit of a detour from the subject of this thread but anyways comments elsewhere like "4k is here and even if you still work in 1080, down res'd 4k looks miles ahead of native 1080 footage" make me think (too much) though probably better to focus more on other stuff like real life than this. Unless of course (sigh) its true...

at least no plans for now to revert to a VHS cuts-only editing system.
Logged

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #25 on: February 27, 2016, 09:13:35 pm »

they say old is gold - though maybe change once in a while is also not a bad thing?

bit of a detour from the subject of this thread but anyways comments elsewhere like "4k is here and even if you still work in 1080, down res'd 4k looks miles ahead of native 1080 footage" make me think (too much) though probably better to focus more on other stuff like real life than this. Unless of course (sigh) its true...

at least no plans for now to revert to a VHS cuts-only editing system.

Well, 4k is IMO only usefull (so far until the broadcast 4k standart takes place) for reframing.

It is true that 4k downsampled to HD gives a more detailed imagery....BUT...is a more surgical imagery necessarly better?
Or...are people spending their day counting the leaves in this tree they can isolate?

If you do fashion and beauty better have the very best stylists and MUAs otherwise you see everything shockingly awfull.

And for feature, apart from the Marvel's special FX kind of soupe for tech whores, 4K gives actually less humanity and proximity.


Tell you a story: I had a working meeting with a middle size company wich I'm working with. The company AD told us this: "we want to drop down all footage resolution because we hired a studdy that showed clearly that people responds way more to the product with snap-mobile like filming...and feel not so close when elaborate ultra definition looks. So we decided to film with I.phones actually". Not kidding. They don't want to hear anymore about Alexas and Reds but bet "instagram" kind of look in motion with square reframing and relatively low-res sells best.

If you sell Lamborghinis you'd need 4k, 10k, 50000k because the target is the alpha male wealphy perfectionist and it's tech. But...a Tampax advert for the beta girl is probably better in instagram...
« Last Edit: February 27, 2016, 09:22:36 pm by fredjeang2 »
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #26 on: February 28, 2016, 01:46:08 pm »

So Megyn Kelly would use an iphone to film Donald but he would prefer 4K for selfies?
Logged

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #27 on: February 28, 2016, 05:37:08 pm »

So Megyn Kelly would use an iphone to film Donald but he would prefer 4K for selfies?

Lol!

What I don't get (I honestly don't), is that we seem to live in
A full contradictory world.
For one side, the pixel race, people completly obsessed with 4k mantras and more at the cost of a serious complication within the workflow,

And then, it's a selfies, facebook instagram culture.
Squared formats, easy look filters (preferably vintage), quick, no hassle. Social media culture goes against the
Pixel race.

My bet is that the only dudes who are actualy concerned and worry about footage resolution and details are only us: the shooters. The audience, our "target", couldn't care less.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2016, 07:24:31 pm by fredjeang2 »
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #28 on: March 02, 2016, 12:26:40 pm »

. . . creative, thoughtful production and well crafted content wins.

heck my computer doesn´t like the links to your movies but if the rest of your website is anything to go by anything is possible :-/
Logged

fredjeang2

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1376
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #29 on: March 02, 2016, 03:30:44 pm »


I hear this "reality" stuff all the time.  From client's, public, crew.   

Everyone talks about social, real, connection with the audience, believable vehicles.

There is nothing new about "real".   There is something new about turning out mediocre work and then saying it's good because it's real, or saying we don't want professional production because nobody believes it.

That's just not true.

This was edited by an editor I know, produced 9 years ago.    I didn't shoot this, but actually love it. 

http://russellrutherfordgroup.com/6_m_football.mov

I'ts Shot on 16mm film (which might make a difference), maybe could be shot on a phone, though it wouldn't have the look and sound.

But it's real, has real quotes, real people, real locations, real heart.

It also has talented but limited production, a good script, well selected voice over excellent storyline.

And btw:  I'm not writing this because I'm afraid that all I've learned will become redundant or not needed because in real paid advertising or entertainment . . . creative, thoughtful production and well crafted content wins.

Hell I don't care if I shoot with an I phone or xt, but then again, if the I phone looks like crap, takes 4 hours a clip to fix,  then I have zero desire to work that way. 

If using a small camera or phone looks unique, or better yet fits the story, I'm in and I can think of a few scenarios where phone production would work, many, many more where it won't.

So producing something in a real situation is not unique.  Producing something that someone wants to watch is a lot more difficult and the camera to some extent does matter.

But it has to be kept in context.    This was a home movie I did a year ago during a family reunion.   It's shot with a 70d, out of camera, quick edit and only produced for the participants . . . my family.

I probably didn't shoot more than 15 minutes of footage, if that, because I didn't want to be the family documentarian, I wanted to enjoy the day.

My family loved it, it meant something to them, but I'm under no impression that it would mean anything to anyone else, because it's personal and it really shouldn't.

http://www.russellrutherford.com/final_new_branfels_mac_web_play.mov

IMO

BC

Hi James,

I agree with in all you said actually. Maybe I expressed myself badly.

The idea I wanted to share is that independently of the reality we see, some brands have ADs who build their strategies based in part on studdies. What I'm seeing from the companies side is in fact the same as we see in most imagery forums: a tendency to pull the string to both extremes.

For one side they tell you: "we don't want Alexas any more but i.phones and no actors but you and me" (the social media mantra)
and for the other side other tell you: "we want 4,6,8ks and above..." (the Marvel mantra)

Then, in the end, they will say: "we want 4k sophisticate and then an unsophisticate simulation of the same in lowres as if it was filmed by the next door girl"
wich means that the only way is that the filming always starts with the highest possible mediums (because we can downgrade but not the other way) and then they bark when they see the bills of hiring the Arri crew for an hour of filming and
so...
next meeting, they are back again with "we don't want that because it's too expensive and i.phones will do the job"... "we hired a studdy...blablá....social media....blablablá...instagram videos...."
then...the next day they strike back: "is there something higher than 4K?" (ya know...my nefew has a 4K Sony camera so profesionals should therfore be already at 10Ks...)
then....
Honestly they don't f....g know where they are (the ADs), don't they?

And James, not to be negative but many are scared of the time when they will ask higher than 4k and then you realise that everything was aimed to social medias advert...



Ps: liked both movies, specially the hand filming of the family reunion and color. (just a selfy of you is missing)

IMO, many people (not shooters but outside this industry) will probably find the family movie very close to them. Because, if it's not their family, we are all the same in fact. We have very similar worries, attachements, values, and conditionings etc...so even if the characters themselves are not directly linked to others, the content yes.

In that sense, I'm back to the car race film. And the family film goes in this spirit too: IMO it is using high-end tools (or very good) BUT, keeping the "non profesional touch" so people feel close.
It's keeping freshness, etc...and that is not easy to balance. The car race has it. This family movie has it also, and the look is there. I'm convinced that when we start to add more and more gear, crew etc...it's not working that well, more
Exactly it becomes more difficult to keep spontaneousness with heavy artillery and complex set. It's posible but require
More experience not being trapped by the gear.

So in a way I understand the ADs torture: if a shooting costed 50.000 and the revenues are 80.000 and 1000"likes" but a phone shooting costed 5.000 and revenues are still 80.000 and 10.000"likes"...they make numbers.
Maybe we don't care about how many "likes" but those dudes seem to
Take those social medias very seriously.

Of course what I'm saying does not apply to brands like McLaren, Chanel (although chanel...), or General Dynamics etc... Those need extremely detailled and sophisticate imagery shooted by highly
Competent crews. But not all products require that level, as you said, it depends.

But something is happening. Some WW brand perfumes are still using parts of shootings
That have been done many years ago. They just cut differently. Then,
All now do the same stupidity: you got those english voices tinted with false french accent
To make it more fashion (Paris still sells).
Imagine the voice: ”cooter...the new fragrance by Janes Russell”...
Same text, same voice for all brands. Pathetic.
And in fashion all they do is blowing the footage so it looks
Dynamic and they can hide the MUAs (they smoke too much herb actualy) disasters
Super visible in 4k. Because again, when resolution jumps,
All problems in the chain jump also.

So my point was: where do we go like this? More and more pixels
And complexity to end in social medias culture?

Got a app in a mobile that shoots squared MP4 with vintage filters
In wysiwyg. The footage obtained is incredibly crap but the audio
Surprizingly ”good” (editable). People love it. They are crazy with it.
It makes me think that I will create a fake advert of a perfume with
All the filters revued and upload this in vimeo.
I'm sure I can do a beleivable campaign with it...lol



Very sweet you shared part of your intimacy.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2016, 07:39:54 am by fredjeang2 »
Logged

lowep

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 568
    • http://sites.google.com/site/peterlowefoto/
Re: A7ii Avchds and FCP
« Reply #30 on: March 02, 2016, 04:44:36 pm »

it is not so often you see an authentic kodak brownie moment made with a fancy rig and crew but maybe in this day and age it is a "look" worth emulating since we all want what we don´t have and photography or video is an easy way to sort of get it.
« Last Edit: March 02, 2016, 08:17:18 pm by lowep »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up