Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon strikes back...  (Read 25348 times)
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #120 on: February 11, 2012, 07:48:45 PM »
ReplyReply

"By the Light of the Moon"

http://vimeo.com/36512776

Either they relied on AF, or the focus puller should be shot. Impressive IQ, though.
Logged

stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #121 on: February 12, 2012, 12:42:41 AM »
ReplyReply

In another forum the guy was explaining that he could hardly see to focus it was so dark. And the C300 doesnt have autofocus. He tried to do the same shot on his 5D2 but couldn't see a thing through it. Makes it even more impressive IMO.
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #122 on: February 12, 2012, 04:05:47 AM »
ReplyReply

In another forum the guy was explaining that he could hardly see to focus it was so dark. And the C300 doesnt have autofocus. He tried to do the same shot on his 5D2 but couldn't see a thing through it. Makes it even more impressive IMO.

It makes for an impressive tech demo, but for a painful viewing experience. ie. 99% of everything produced by photographers doing video.
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #123 on: February 12, 2012, 01:58:36 PM »
ReplyReply

It makes for an impressive tech demo, but for a painful viewing experience. ie. 99% of everything produced by photographers doing video.

It was obviously done with no budget.

Given that you have to look past the content and see that about 2/3's of what use to take 75 people can now be done with 10.

Especially the low light road shots.

That's what the Hollywood suits are looking for.

Look at any episodic TV show, or medium budget movie.  Most are graded and colored like crap, with a few exceptions and nobody knows or cares if it was shot with a $70,000 arri or a $2,500 5d2.

Sure, they're exceptions to every rule.  Download a high quality version of AMC's Hell on Wheels and you'll see beautiful color work, though it takes a lot of time and money.

I'm not the biggest fan of the Canon 300 for a lot of reasons, but I have to admit this low light stuff really opened my eyes.

IMO

BC

Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #124 on: February 12, 2012, 06:02:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Look at any episodic TV show, or medium budget movie.  Most are graded and colored like crap, with a few exceptions and nobody knows or cares if it was shot with a $70,000 arri or a $2,500 5d2.

Most have also as much investment in the story, ie. almost none. Low budget is no excuse for a lack of story - in fact, if you can't shine with video quality, story becomes even more important. On the flipside, one doesn't need great image quality if the story is strong.
Logged

fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #125 on: February 13, 2012, 03:30:48 AM »
ReplyReply


The Hollywood sharks of the B productions couldn't be happier with this Canon. It's going to increase drastically their margen and at the same time will put more technicians on the unemployement offices queues.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2012, 07:12:53 AM by fredjeang » Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



WWW
« Reply #126 on: February 14, 2012, 09:16:03 PM »
ReplyReply

It makes for an impressive tech demo, but for a painful viewing experience. ie. 99% of everything produced by photographers doing video.
That's because photographers are the equivalent of cinematographers, not directors. Telling a story is a very different skill from taking a nice photo or shooting a pretty scene. When the 5DII first appeared I said we would get a lot of pretty slideshows [with added movement] and no story being produced by photographers and sadly I was not wrong.

Another thing to bear in mind is that you can shoot low quality footage and if the story is strong and a low fi shooting style serves said story, then it doesn't matter about iffy image quality.
However you always need good quality sound. Good sound with DV footage looks better than Technicolor with cruddy sound.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



WWW
« Reply #127 on: February 14, 2012, 09:26:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Either they relied on AF, or the focus puller should be shot. Impressive IQ, though.
A quote from the maker on the video page.
"Thanks for not commenting on the focusing. I'm absolutely wide open on a 1.2 lens most of the time, and as the Zacuto baseplates haven't shipped, I can't use a follow focus with this camera yet. (and none of the shots are blocked, marked or otherwise planned)"
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
PierreVandevenne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 508


WWW
« Reply #128 on: February 15, 2012, 06:42:51 AM »
ReplyReply

It's also a matter of conventions and how automatically we have accepted them and don't notice anymore. We are used to night or low lights shots that really aren't, with unrealistic lighting, huge lightboxes in the background, etc...  If we approached this with no preconceived ideas, the night hitchhiking shots are much closer to real life than what we usually see. I don't think the C300 would be the ideal camera for Ben Hur II, but I can see plenty of other styles that would benefit, things like Das Boot, or even Alien ;-) It has always annoyed me to see what are supposed to be dark oppressive scenes lit to the point a somewhat educated spectator could guess where the light sources were. But that's just a matter of taste.

Impressive stuff, for a single guy with a single lens. While it doesn't have the impact of something like "Reverie", we have to consider that the only thing that was cheaper in Laforet's piece was the camera. Here, we can see productions where the cost of everything goes down. Whether it is ultimately good or bad  is another question of course.
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #129 on: February 15, 2012, 06:35:55 PM »
ReplyReply

That's because photographers are the equivalent of cinematographers, not directors. Telling a story is a very different skill from taking a nice photo or shooting a pretty scene. When the 5DII first appeared I said we would get a lot of pretty slideshows [with added movement] and no story being produced by photographers and sadly I was not wrong.

This is exactly what I've been saying as well since Reverie was released, so I'm aware of this. It's just tiring to view these videos year after year when they have nothing of substance to offer - video equivalent of pixel peeping. If you thought Hollywood blockbusters are bad, try watching a few of these videos, and even Michael Bay films start looking like Casablanca.

Thanks for the quote explaining the focusing. Hope he/she plans shots when not doing tech demos...
Logged

jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3078



WWW
« Reply #130 on: February 15, 2012, 07:35:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Feppe - I think all these wannabe directors need to learn how to write a good script before being allowed to make another boring video montage, as that's all most of them are. And learn to edit down too, please.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #131 on: February 16, 2012, 02:17:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I might be wrong, I mean, it has been known, but my understanding is that the guy just offered some sample footage to show how well the camera performed in damn near zero light. He explained that it was too dark to focus and I don't think he did anything more than a rough edit, and I don't recall reading anywhere that he claimed it was a finished sequence from a longer movie, let alone great art.

And yet people are choosing to criticise his artistic ability. Do we know, from what little he offered, whether he had a good script? Do we know how that sequence, once edited with whatever post, would fit into a script? Have we seen enough of his movie to say its crap? Think on it guys, why the feeding frenzy on his artistic soul when all he did was say, hey, these shots are pretty good for just a bit of moonlight and a couple of car headlights? Sometimes I just don't get what the Internet does to our standards of behaviour.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #132 on: February 16, 2012, 02:31:27 AM »
ReplyReply

IMO, barking on the artistic side-content of this sample is pointless, this is obviously not the purpose.

It's the equivalent of those never ending testings in stills of the Canon 1D...X at 25.000, 50.000, 100.000 isos.
What do we see? that it's capable, bearable and can save for the documentary-news a situation in certain conditions.
the difference between not getting the shot at all or getting an hugly picture but a picture. (replacing picture by footage)

It also shows the potencial of reducing drastically the budget on lightning, the hability to work with available light, or D.I.Y solutions etc...
In the hand of a creative team with zero budget, it will enhance the application range flexibility.

But it's not because you can shot a talent with the I.Phone light at 50m that it's going to avoid the crew to place corectly the scene into the available lightning sources.

Instead of placing the lights into the scene, it's the opposite, they'll have to place the talents according to the lights, wich is just as chalenging, even more IMMO.
 
« Last Edit: February 16, 2012, 03:13:40 AM by fredjeang » Logged
PierreVandevenne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 508


WWW
« Reply #133 on: February 16, 2012, 06:53:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Sometimes I just don't get what the Internet does to our standards of behaviour.

Yeah, I met a good friend the other day and decided to behave internet forum style...

- How are you Pierre?

- Jeez, are you blind? Or just stupid? Do I look fine? Maybe you should have your glasses checked?

- Hmmm, well, can I buy you a beer?

- In this crappy location? Look at the waitress! She obviously hasn't seen a nutritionist in her life!

- come on, don't be negative, share a beer with me, mate.

- Let me educate you Paul. There's only one beer that's worth drinking, the one described by Thausing. It would really be plebeian to ignore that the most minute detail that could interfere with the copulation process of mucor mucedo can spoil a beer! And don't forget the glass, I was recently served a westvleeteren in a standard glass and that was such a letdown. It deserves no less than a well broken in gold beer mug! Only unsophisticated drinkers such as you could fail to notice the boost in taste.

Paul? Paul, why are you leaving?
Logged
asf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 506


WWW
« Reply #134 on: February 16, 2012, 09:40:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, I met a good friend the other day and decided to behave internet forum style...

- How are you Pierre?

- Jeez, are you blind? Or just stupid? Do I look fine? Maybe you should have your glasses checked?

- Hmmm, well, can I buy you a beer?

- In this crappy location? Look at the waitress! She obviously hasn't seen a nutritionist in her life!

- come on, don't be negative, share a beer with me, mate.

- Let me educate you Paul. There's only one beer that's worth drinking, the one described by Thausing. It would really be plebeian to ignore that the most minute detail that could interfere with the copulation process of mucor mucedo can spoil a beer! And don't forget the glass, I was recently served a westvleeteren in a standard glass and that was such a letdown. It deserves no less than a well broken in gold beer mug! Only unsophisticated drinkers such as you could fail to notice the boost in taste.

Paul? Paul, why are you leaving?

Thank you for this.

Whenever I'm about to reply to some post I will do my best to remember this.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #135 on: February 16, 2012, 10:06:19 AM »
ReplyReply

So do I.

It was a great post with accurate description. Very effective. I edited my latest post after reading this because I realised it had one of the component described...

Thanks Pierre.
Logged
JBerardi
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 136


« Reply #136 on: February 16, 2012, 11:22:08 AM »
ReplyReply

And don't forget the glass, I was recently served a westvleeteren in a standard glass and that was such a letdown.

I don't have much of an opinion on this video stuff, but Westvleteren in a regular beer glass? Now I'm outraged.
Logged
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2907

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #137 on: February 16, 2012, 12:29:22 PM »
ReplyReply

I acknowledged that it's an impressive tech demo. It's just tiring to view these tech demos years on end - at what point do people say "ok, this is good enough, let's start making movies (or good photos)."

I guess I should further limit my pixel peeper forum attendance.

I'm done here.
Logged

Robert Roaldi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 446


WWW
« Reply #138 on: February 16, 2012, 01:35:11 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, I met a good friend the other day and decided to behave internet forum style...

- How are you Pierre?

- Jeez, are you blind? Or just stupid? Do I look fine? Maybe you should have your glasses checked?

- Hmmm, well, can I buy you a beer?

- In this crappy location? Look at the waitress! She obviously hasn't seen a nutritionist in her life!

- come on, don't be negative, share a beer with me, mate.

- Let me educate you Paul. There's only one beer that's worth drinking, the one described by Thausing. It would really be plebeian to ignore that the most minute detail that could interfere with the copulation process of mucor mucedo can spoil a beer! And don't forget the glass, I was recently served a westvleeteren in a standard glass and that was such a letdown. It deserves no less than a well broken in gold beer mug! Only unsophisticated drinkers such as you could fail to notice the boost in taste.

Paul? Paul, why are you leaving?


That is screamingly funny. Thank you.
Logged

--
Robert
robertroaldi.zenfolio.com
stewarthemley
Guest
« Reply #139 on: February 16, 2012, 04:26:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Feppe, I agree with you completely about endless pixel peeping, and especially when it turns into a MF vs DSLR battle. But I think this is slightly different at the moment - critical phrase at the moment - as this is a new camera that seems to be pushing the boundaries of what might be possible and people are naturally interested in that aspect of it. But if we get many more such offerings then I'll also be out of here.
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad