Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: No!  (Read 6629 times)
Eric Myrvaagnes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7789



WWW
« Reply #20 on: May 16, 2011, 08:55:12 AM »
ReplyReply

There's your problem, Rob: Powders for your coffee. Never resort to powders. It's as bad as watering your wine, or even worse IMHO.
Invest in a little coffee mill and find some top quality decaffeinated coffee beans (yes, good decaf beans now have more flavor than ordinary beans-with-caffeine).

The only problem is that you'll find it much harder to limit yourself to only one cup a day. But since it's decaf, you can have more of it.

If you ever cross the pond, look me up and I'll make you a pot of decaf that you'll love, and I'll send you home with a bag of beans to try yourself.

All I need to wake and face each day is a good cup of a hot, dark, beverage with a hearty, honest coffee flavor. I hardly ever touch the kind with caffeine in it any more, even first thing in the morning.

Once you've tasted good decaf, you won't want to go back to (ugh!) powders.

Eric
Logged

-Eric Myrvaagnes

http://myrvaagnes.com  Visit my website. New images each season.
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #21 on: May 16, 2011, 02:16:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Eric, I couldn't agree more; the decaf-bean coffee is what I partake of when in cafés. Café con leche, des-cafeinado (-?) de máquina is the request, and lovely fluids present themselves on my table.

I already have an ancient mill; however, buying a coffee machine of my own is as unlikely as buying a microwave: my wife eschewed the latter and who am I to argue or disagree at this stage? I do have a pair of Italian percolators: an old aluminium one (dangerous!) as well as a newer, stainless steel one, though, and it's my treat on sunny weekends, after lunch at home, when I cheat and instead of a forbidden second glass of wine I lace the coffee. Surely, that can't count?

I and others with similar tastes here have often wondered if the decaffing process is more dangerous than the caf itself. Ann used to think so, and she was an analytical chemist with a food company at one stage... then we got married, she got pregnant and left the company and no, I don't suppose that being analytical really had a lot to do with it. But you never can tell: it's a strange world.

Rob C
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #22 on: June 03, 2011, 09:08:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Why not a Tinto de Verano Rob?
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #23 on: June 03, 2011, 01:31:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Why not a Tinto de Verano Rob?




Hi Fred

It all depends what's on offer as part of menu del dia, but if you're offering me a suntan, forget it: too dangerous these days.

Don't know about Madrid (dead tv still hasn't been replaced), but it's cold and wet and windy on the island; worse, the local dining place closes for holidays from the 13th and won't reopen until the 1st of July. Why do staff need time off? I only use them for minutes each day. Modern ideas!

I love the lighting and atmosphere in this video; she also represents what some might conclude is the very best stage in a woman's life: beautiful, mature and confident. And she's probably quite rich, too, which might mean that she doesn't need a lot more in life other than more of the same. I think it's not a recent shoot - haven't delved deeply - but  get the feeling it's the sort of thing one might consider doing with a dslr. It probably is really far more complex than that - I know nothing about filming - but nonetheless, it reminds me of the look of some shots I've done somewhere in the past. What do you think, Señor Fellini?

http://youtu.be/z4gsbBDyfvo

;-)

Rob C
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #24 on: June 03, 2011, 02:54:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Rob,

Here it's colder than normal too. Wait...it's not gona take too long before the 40 grades on the shade come.
By the way it's better, I did a studi shooting this afternoon and the continuous light is really heating a lot.

Watched the video, yes it seems to me the kind of dslr stuff, good atmosphere but IMO too much defocuss playing, since dslr enter video the narrow d.o.f is been abused.
We have the same tastes about women. Perfect age, mature, no hassle, still good looking, experienced etc...

How is video? Is it much more complex than stills? All I can tell you is that there is a lot more things to know and take into consideration. The post-prod with the big boys softwares is really another story just to start to master the basics but on the other hands, the equipment is so good that a little step on the learning is traduced by a dream workflow unknown in still and a pleasure in use that I don't find on still post-prod environment.
In other words, much more difficult but much more rewarding.
Instead of working with layers, you work with nodes and that makes a huge difference.
If you want to have a taste of what I mean just check those little videos examples I link here. You will see the software's style.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1gAjqno4tE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZAcEuk8Fzs

Also, I'm working with fast optics that weight tons, with many blades continuous aperture , all metal heavy, all manual focusing, others on the opposite very small but man, I did some still testings and yes...optic quality is serious.
I received a rare optic from Russia today, 8 blades, continuous aperture (no click) and a quick session on the dslr today with the adapter it's incredible. Cine gear does not joke. PL mount, from Arri etc...
Angenieux kind of lenses from France, sure you know them.
Price don't joke either in both softwares and gear but I'm far from being rich and step by step I'm building a very decent arsenal. It is like everything, if you want to, you end doing it.

Cheers

 
« Last Edit: June 03, 2011, 02:56:35 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #25 on: June 03, 2011, 03:50:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi Fred

The first video keeps stopping and trying to beat the buffer, but the second, shorter one is very good; it certainly shows how complex things can find simple-looking solutions, but I can tell you now that I could never have got into that world - I feel it too complicated for my mind; I like the greater simplicity of stills. Okay, perhaps starting at the bottom and learning that way would be different, but I'm not sure it would have made the difference. But then, I don't suppose that all aspects or departments of movie-making need to have the same skills - or maybe they do? My interest would have been with the cameras.

Regarding you remark about similar taste in what constitutes glamour/sophistication: I had that battle years ago with Tony Stone (became Getty) when I realised that my best sales were all in France. I asked if my submissions could be edited there instead of in London, but was told no. I understand that an HQ in London doesn't want to lose power/control, but when my output appealed to French tastes of the time more than to any others, it seemed self-defeating for both the agency and myself to have unsympathetic eyes do the edits. That's the way of business, I suppose, not always too bright in some respects.

Rob C
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #26 on: June 03, 2011, 06:10:16 PM »
ReplyReply

You're correct Rob, the different departement involved in post do not share the same softwares and required different skills. Mastering well a single area, like color artist (or colorist), is hard enough. But this is changing. There are softwares (not chaep) that are built "all-in-one" and this is the tendency. Prices are dropping down, tech is going high and interface-integration is each time more accurate wich allows various tasks for one operator that were done before by an army of tech-artists.

Even at the basic editing stage, digital tech is really doing things easily. Let's say you have 10 takes of a scene in wich a scotish actor is saying "I like the Jurançon wine". Well, in Avid you point this sentence on your script and the software will show the exact moment on the scenes where the actor is saying it, so you can choose wich take fits better your need without having to review the all story. It is instananeous.

About the learning, well, yes that is oscur, difficult in the sense that it consumes zillions of hours and also requires a good used of both computer habilities and visual talent. I supose that most people will give-up when they will want to go more serious. If you can enter in stills with relatively basic knowledge and having fun, video-cine very fast forces you to serious learning, some of wich is not fun at all and not fast rewarded. We will see probably less "snappers" as you often point because it obliges to a discipline and sacrifice that is not very compatible with the sign of the times mentality: all easy, instant reward.

To give an idea, in Spain the number of photographers working or trying to work is such that the market is completly distortionated. But in the all country there is about 50 Flame units and not more than 10 Flame artists really good. They are booked. 

When that novelty and ww crazyness about the dslr's HD narrow d.o.f will pass you'll see how much less people will stay. Too much hassle to be attractive if you're really not passionate and commited.

For the kids who will start very young, it will be like a second nature.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2011, 02:29:58 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad