Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Total newbie needs advice on camera  (Read 3554 times)
Craig Lamson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738



WWW
« on: March 21, 2012, 08:53:37 AM »
ReplyReply

Been shooting stills for more years than I care to admit, but now I have a client asking for video.  He's looking for web playback of his products in action (RV's)...drive bys', product features etc.  Nothing earth shattering.  He has been doing this for years with two crews, and now he wants just one supplier. These are very simple stories that need visualized...see how the electric awning works...look at the large outside storage...etc.

I've been following the crossover discussions for some time and I think I know the problems I might face.  But my current question revolves around a camera choice.

I have a bunch of Canon's including a 5dII and a t2i.  I know I can rig these and shoot. 

But would I be better served, for this type of gig, to use a dedicated video camera and if so, which one?

Holding highlights is a concern as most of these rv's are white boxes on wheels.  Ease of use and the large DOF of a small chip camera might be a plus. Super low light not needed, but I will be shooting the interior features using the modeling lights from my strobes in combination with available.  I can see myself adding some LCD panels to the mix.

If I'm going to move in this direction I'll want to make it a service I offer to all my customers so I want to start on the right foot.  I suspect I'll be purchasing this stuff more than once, but I would like to make smart initial choices.

If I were to go with a different camera other than the Canons ( and I would consider a 5dIII or 7d if staying Canon makes sense) and have a initial budget of say 3 grand for the capture device, can anyone offer any suggestions?

Thanks a bunch.
Logged

Craig Lamson Photo
www.craiglamson.com
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #1 on: March 21, 2012, 09:51:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Craig,

IMO, the 5D2 is the route. And the good news is that you already own one.

You don't really need the 7D having already a 5D2 unless as a B camera. The 5D3 isn't bringing any revolutionary improvement and if higher isos isn't your concern (today),
the cost of going 5D3 would be better used on a dedicated motion camera.

The 5D2 is hackable, like the GH2, and many productions have been using it. You need to control moiré but the banding issue is quite well controled on the Canon.

Whatever camera you'll use, shoot manual focus and if you can dedicated motion lenses. On the other hand, if you choose to use cinema lenses (do not mean C-monut here),
the 7D is a better choice than the 5D2. Setting a 7D to PL is easier than a 5D2.

The best compromised in sensor format for video IMHO is the m4/3 mirrorless standart.
But I can only recommend the GH2 with some reservations. It's a camera capable of smoking a 5D2, but it's delicate to set-up and in use requires a lot of fine-touch because the DR is more limited, and
because it has a banding issue way more pronunced than the Canons. But the mount is much more interesting and gives access to a wider range of profesional lenses.
The latest hacks are really good, I could get the banding under control and they are developping new promissing hacks currently.

On the video, you have, without breaking the bank account, 2 cameras.

-One is the Panasonic AF100: Haleluia, it features an in-built ND filter ! (that should be an obligation). IQ isn't as good as a hack GH2 but on the good side. Not good in higher isos.
-the other one is the Sony FS100: delicate highlights, pink skin tones and no ND (that should be an obligation II), but overall a serious camera and very good in higher isos.

With breaking the bank account but not yet in bankerupcy (you can keep your Chevrolet Corvette): the RED Scarlet. More or less the cost of an antique MF system. But: no 8bits issues and peace of mind. Raw video, 4K, not stellar in extreme isos but you don't need them as you wrote. Great look output, easy workflow but need power, computer power and storage. (in fact not that much more than with a hack GH2...)

Now...all that concerns the image. But the black cat is not that much the image. It's the audio. If you can, hire a tech.

Tripod is KEY !! No mess with tripod. Better you keep the Canon, and put the money on a serious tripod. Think about 2000-3000 euros new as minimum. We're talking about the cost of a still camera. My fav brand is Vitten.

Then the DSLRs...the problem if you shoot with heavy cine-still long lenses is that on the dslrs designs, the contact between the camera and the plate is minimum AND the mount tolerance and robustness aren't good enough. Very bad for filming indeed. It means that from 130ish mm you'll have vibes. It's to the point that you'd need a special rig config to secure the lens itself, such rig system is to the Arri standart and aren't cheap at all. In short, the camera+lens has to be a one solid peice of block. You can see that in this movie (with the marines) they filmed with the 5D2, when used long focal there is an assistant that just secure the lens with his hand to avoid vibrations, despite the lens being attached to the rig, otherwise it's impossible. I had this issue and it's not fun and the solutions are not cheap.

I'd keep the 5D2, completly forgot the 5Departmentmarketing3 and put this money in: A pro grade rig system and a professional video tripod.
Then, take your old FD manual lenses and start to enjoy.

About rigs. The very important thing is to have the most compact config you can. You really need to feel that the all system is a compact block, and most rig I'm seeing aren't well designed and the handlers badly placec etc...except the expensive stuff. Avoid like the plague a configuration that looks messy and too large. The rig has to stick to the camera+lenses and the all system has to be balanced, almost as steady. You want to have one handler at that point. Avoid the handlers too lower placed if you focus. Ideally they should be placed on the side of the camera and not under and with an angle. (unless you have an assistant that pulls focus and there it's more flexible).
Here again, the affordable is generally not working. I've been trying them and no, it doesn't work the way it should. Don't hesitate to spend money on that too. More than the camera itself. Take care a lot of all the screws, cablery, all has to be military grade in motion or you'd have issues at one point or another. No plastic cheap stuff by any means, no fragile components like mini hdmi.
If you look at the cage of the Scarlet, IMO that's really a superb config. Red understands the motion needs, DSLRs manufacturers don't give a damn. They are just playing with a tech that costs nothing to them and a myriad of third-party accessories have been flourished all over the world, most of wich aren't very good and you'd through money away.

Try to be the most simple you can in everything, included post prod.

Considering all I wrote, I'd choose tho shoot the 5D2 with a serious rig, and the cost in this case will be the rig set-up or directly go for one of the dedicated cameras and the cost in this case will be the all system.

With the dedicated camera you'll gain in: handling (rig being an additional gear), moire, rolling shutter, pro connections (XLR), EVF, more surface contact on plate, and in one camera ND built-in.

Best luck.


  

« Last Edit: March 21, 2012, 10:32:25 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Craig Lamson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738



WWW
« Reply #2 on: March 21, 2012, 11:20:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Fred.  The Panasonic and Sony are a bit beyond my initial price point.  Audio is a non issue at this point, as the footage gets used with voiceovers or non at all.  Its pretty low end. Not saying I'll need more if I move forward but its not a big concern for now.

I realize there are costs that far exceed the capture device.  And software and learning curve...

Camera support, rigging for a dslr, etc have a different budget.

I'm still evaluating the ROI  to see if any of this make financial sense.

The software learning curve is another matter.  I've been demo'ing Premier and Final Cut X. I can go either Mac or PC but I'm liking FCX.  Since I've no old habits to break I think this might be an attractive option for the work I'm needing to produce.

If I go DSLR I think I might opt for the 7d.  While I have 1dsIII, I shoot most of the stills with the 5dII. I would hate to rig and de-rig the thing all the time. Besides the extra bit of DOF might be a plus.
Logged

Craig Lamson Photo
www.craiglamson.com
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #3 on: March 21, 2012, 11:43:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Don't worry about the rig and de-rig with the 5D2.
It's 2 seconds.

As the camera is attached to a fast release plate that is the same for the rig and the still tripod, all you have to do is unplug the monitor hdmi, click and pull and you're in still config, while the all robocop rig stays ready in the motion tripod.
You can actually choose the plate within many different brands and systems and mount it in the rig. So with 2 similar quick release systems you cover both fields. I use fast release strap too and always keep the strap in my neck so when I shoot still I just have to plug the cam.

Also, and i don't know if I'm the only one in this case, if you got a compact rig and manage to customize it to your body and feel at ease, I find now way better to keep shooting stills within the motion config. Not everyone will like it, but personaly I can't come back to the still config anymore.

If you work with assistants in motion that are only use to stills, make sure they give you more room to move and be very carefull (I'm going crazy with this) with assistants that leave cables and plugs on the passages. Because the all point of filming obliged to have a clearer set and more organised space.

The 7d isn't a bad option anyway. But a hacked 5D2 is much more powerfull in terms of image recorded because you have access to much higher bitrate.


Cheers.

« Last Edit: March 21, 2012, 08:39:04 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Sareesh Sudhakaran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 533


WWW
« Reply #4 on: March 22, 2012, 07:35:48 AM »
ReplyReply

These are very simple stories that need visualized...see how the electric awning works...look at the large outside storage...etc...But would I be better served, for this type of gig, to use a dedicated video camera and if so, which one?..Holding highlights is a concern as most of these rv's are white boxes on wheels.  Ease of use and the large DOF of a small chip camera might be a plus. Super low light not needed, but I will be shooting the interior features using the modeling lights from my strobes in combination with available.  I can see myself adding some LCD panels to the mix.

... and have a initial budget of say 3 grand for the capture device, can anyone offer any suggestions?

Thanks a bunch.

I wouldn't envy anyone who has to shoot large white shiny objects with digital cameras. If you want to stay off DSLRs, my recommendation is the Canon XF100. It ticks all the boxes you have specified, and even though I haven't used it myself, I have heard great things about it.

Hope this helps.
Logged

Get the Free Comprehensive Guide to Rigging ANY Camera - one guide to rig them all - DSLRs to the Arri Alexa.
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #5 on: March 22, 2012, 10:22:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Indeed. Sareesh is right.

This is a very interesting camera considering the OP needs. It's not my cup of tea but also heard good things about it.

The good is that it shoots 4:2:2 and the files are MXF wich is very good for post-production.  The max bitrate isn't that bad (50).
The zoom is an integrated video one and way easier than dslrs or cameras Alexa like.

It's still on the highly compressed codec but probably a very good 4x4 camera and the IQ is quite good actually.

To consider as a no-hassle camera and affordable. Frankly much better than a 5D3 for video-only.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2012, 10:43:59 AM by fredjeang » Logged
Hywel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139


WWW
« Reply #6 on: March 22, 2012, 02:10:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

 Start with the 5DII and see what you make of shooting with it. It has a bunch of well-known problems, like Moire, shimmering rainbows on repeating patterns, and jello effect from rolling shutter. Plus it is 8-bit and the gamma and colour settings are burned in at record time so if you don't get it spot on in camera you're screwed. Plus its monitoring SUCKS compared with a real video camera, which further increases your chances of a shoot-busting screwup.

   Any one of these things might kill you stone dead for commercial work.

  So I'd definitely do some tests on your own before bringing it anywhere near a paying customer. On the plus side, it has a characteristic look (which is the sum of shallow depth of field from the large sensor, plus Canon colour science) which a lot of people love. But if you don't like that look, you'll find it very difficult to shoot anything else.

  Cutting your movie making teeth with a camera you already own is definitely the way to go, and on the right subjects the results will be out of all proportion to the costs of the camera. There's a hell of lot more to making compelling moving images than just getting the right camera, and you can learn a lot about how to do that with a 5DII.

  However, once it comes to professional work for paying clients- buy or hire a camera where video isn't a secondary feature. The monitoring alone will pay for itself very quickly- something you'll definitely appreciate the first time you screw up a bunch of footage by missing critical focus, over exposing 1/3 of a stop and blowing the highlights, or having the audio jack dislodge and recording static, or having the camera overheat during a time critical shoot (all of which happened to us during the year we shot with a 5DII/7D pair).

  We moved from Canons to the AF100, and got rock solid footage from it for the last year. It still suffers from 8 bit limitations, especially banding, and gamma and colour are burnt in, and the footage from the onboard recording codec does fall apart too quickly for comfort if you need to fix a serious colour cast issue. It therefore remains critical to get everything right in camera, but at least it has all necessary monitoring tools (waveforms, zebras, vectorscope, audio bars) to help you ensure that you do get it right.

  We've also been using HVX200's for years and still have one as a B-cam and "roving reporter, deep focus" cam. The picture resolution is less than full HD, but as it records to P2 cards at a high data rate, there's actually a lot more gradability to the footage than with the AF100. A second-hand HVX200 might not be such a bad buy at the moment. Its replacement, the HPX250, looks to be an absolutely kick-ass camera, recording 10-bit to high bit rate P2 cards at full HD. If deep focus run and gun might be your thing, I'd look into that although it is a bit above budget. (At least you wouldn't need an investment in glass).

  But my advice would be go hire a Scarlet. We've just bought one, getting up to speed with it. Its footage is in a different league from any of these cameras. And shooting in something a bit more like RAW, it is a lot more forgiving of small problems when shooting than any of the 8-bit burnt-in gamma cameras will ever be. Obviously, you should get it right in camera, but if you are anything like us, it is worth getting the most robust footage you can, so that a minor issue doesn't snowball into an expensive reshoot.

   If it is not going to be your daily bread and butter I think you'd do better with hiring in pro kit than fumbling through on cameras which are only going to make your life hard. It is actually a lot easier to get everything set up right, exposed right, focussed right and rolling on the Scarlet than on a 5DII….

  Cheers, Hywel.



Logged
Craig Lamson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 738



WWW
« Reply #7 on: March 22, 2012, 04:25:37 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks to everyone for all the comments and suggestions, its very helpful.

Back in the late 80's I shot and edited video while heading up an in-house photo department.  Had a 3 chip Sony, and shot to 3/4 tape.  Linear editing! What fun!  I was( and still am) a still photographer at heart so when I moved along I skipped the video.

The Canon FX100 look on paper to be a possibility. 

Renting is simply not an option as we are in the sticks and schedules change daily.  For example I've changed he shoot date for a project I was to shoot last week three times now.  Product was late getting back from the paint shop, wrong parts were delivered and the sofa was 3 days late.  And this is a retail sold unit meaning it ships the second I finish with it.  I need to own my gear.

Fortunately this client has some pretty low expectations and the initial uses for these video clips will be 500 or so pixel wide pop up hotspot windows on a web page.  He is not asking for a lot and is giving me a lot of headroom.  I'm just interested in doing the best job I can given my skillset and equipment.  it does however have growth potential for other clients.

We were discussing this in detail today and I think I'm going to shoot the first unit with the DSLR and we will see where it goes from there. Not my first option but the client wants to try it and see.  I'll oblige.

In the meantime I'm doing a lot of practice shooting with the 5d and 550d. 



Logged

Craig Lamson Photo
www.craiglamson.com
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #8 on: March 23, 2012, 03:31:00 PM »
ReplyReply

It is actually a lot easier to get everything set up right, exposed right, focussed right and rolling on the Scarlet than on a 5DII….

  Cheers, Hywel.

Hey, it's a movie camera made by a movie company. That changes all. DSLRs were not designed to shoot movie, and with this 50000 years old designs, never updated since the Spotmatic, their gleaning marketing claims like "multimedia" are quite fun to hear.

Have you started to shoot the Scarlet? Coot seems to like it a lot.
« Last Edit: March 23, 2012, 03:33:11 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Hywel
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 139


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 23, 2012, 04:48:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Have you started to shoot the Scarlet? Coot seems to like it a lot.

Just one shoot so far, but it was a pleasure to work with and the footage looks sumptuous. It feels very liberating to have footage that can stand being given either a very saturated, golden-hour sunset look or desaturated and pushed with milky blacks in a "log-film" look. Sure, one should make that decision at shooting time so one can light accordingly, but it feels so liberating to be able to rethink in post, as I regularly do with stills.

It is even easier to use than the RED One I hired for the day, the results are great, and I'm absolutely delighted with it. I'm really looking forward to the multiple film-making location shoots we have coming up over the next few months, because if I'm that happy with the results after a single day, I can't wait to see what it can do as we learn to use it properly.

Highly recommended.

  Cheers, Hywel.



Logged
ftbt
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #10 on: March 23, 2012, 06:21:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Just received my RED Scarlet. I pick-up the side handle next week. Here are the lenses that I am using with it:

Zeiss Lenses:

CY 21/2.8
ZF 28/2.0
CY 35-70/3.4
CY 50/1.4
ZF100/2.0

Nikon Lenses:
G 14-24/2.8
G 24-70/2.8
D 80-200/2.8

Tokina Lenses:

11-16/2.8
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #11 on: March 24, 2012, 06:45:14 AM »
ReplyReply

After a few weeks of using the Scarlet in about every kind of situation I have some thoughts.

For a raw file shooting, Canon lens mount system the price is good, the file is nice and the build quality is pretty good.

Some things are a little "challenged".

The glossy screen needs to be shaded as outside you constant see your own face rather than what's on the screen. which is a little problematic given the fact that the screen is need for about 1/2 of all the camera's settings using the touch screen in combination with the controls on the handle.

The two biggest issues are #1, autofocus, though not needed every time, is a hunt and peck type of system.  Maybe it will get better with firmware upgrades but it as of today it's not very good.

#2.  Audio mini jacks for input and output.  I don't like those Ipod type mini jacks and don't seem to be stable.  It's nothing to pick up a pop in the middle of filming and I have the feeling that those will go out way before any of the camera does.

Oh and also the fan.  It makes a snowblower sound quiet.  Now when your filming the fan goes 97% quiet but if your running two cameras and the Scarlet is not recording, you will hear it on the other cameras.

It's heavy though you get use to it.  Actually it's a great workout for the R-1.  I always thought the R-1 was heavy, but on one night shoot, I grabbed an R-1 and noticed that to me it didn't seem much if any heavier than the Scarlet, though I'd had the scarlet in my hands for a few weeks.

There are no perfect cameras, but the closest to a great form factor and affordable camera is the Sony FS100.  That camera would be perfect if it didn't blow highlights (yes I know you can use fill light, etc., but it has a ver limited range) and it doesn't shoot a raw file.

I thought the fs100 menu was complicated until using the scarlet and now find it pretty easy, and it autofocus great.  It also has real sized xlr inputs for sound, good sound sampling, lens stabilization and if it shot raw, and had more range, they'd probably sell a billion of them, though I guess they probably sell a billion of them anyway.

It doesn't mean the scarlet isn't a good deal and I'll work footage soon to compare it to the R-1, but I'm glad I bought it, it's fairly fast, though I also have a special place in my heart for the R-1.  On camera screen the R-1 looks a lot prettier.

Still give me the rile of the R-1 on an FS100 and i''d be there. 

IMO

BC


Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #12 on: March 24, 2012, 07:16:09 AM »
ReplyReply

I have the sensation that it's always good not to rush on the latest novelty and wait patiently. James's post makes me think if the real bang-for-the-buck isn't in reality the R1.
Prices have gone down on the used market considerably and I suspect the camera to be built tough enough to be quite confident on a used R1.

The other day I saw a complete R1 with all the accessories for less than 14.000. (I know that 14.000 isn't what we could call cheap but for the kind of equipment we're talking about it's almost gifted).

Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #13 on: March 24, 2012, 07:51:34 AM »
ReplyReply

The R-1 with some small Nikon Ziess glass and a few inexpensive shoulder mounts will work as easy as the scarlet.  It's 3 pounds heavier, but it is a much easier menu and though touch screen seems cool, everytime you touch the screen of a Scarlet something changes. 

The small Nikon mount zeiss glass looks a little silly on a R-1 but it's so sharp and the focus is so precise you can zone in and manually focus easily.  One walk through and your in the zone and the R-1 screen is much sharper to me, than the Scarlet's and being matte much easier to see.

The only downside of the R-1 is the start up, it's about 90 seconds vs. the Scarlets 35 seconds.  Still both require an external battery because they draw a lot of power.

People should use what they want though an R-1 is a hell of a great camera.

IMO

BC
Logged
ftbt
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #14 on: March 24, 2012, 10:26:15 AM »
ReplyReply

... People should use what they want though an R-1 is a hell of a great camera.

It is. And, as previously mentioned, if you can get a complete R1 MX package in the $12,000.00 - $14,000.00 range, (and you can), it is fantastic camera. Jim Jannard has hinted that folks who have decided to "dump" their R1's would be sorry later. However, it is unclear what he meant by that. The thing that appears to be certain is that the R1 will not be a candidate for the new "Dragon" sensor that will probably be released this year for Epic and Scarlet (however ... with RED everything is subject to change). I almost went with a pristine R1 MX package for considerably less than $14,000.00, but decided against it. A used R1 will carry, at best, only a 90 day warranty from RED. The 1 year warranty on a big-ticket (at least for me) camera (Scarlet) was important.  For my uses, (stealth and run-n-gun), the R1 was just too big. (While I have a tripod, I also use my Scarlet handheld and on a monopod when need be.) In the past, I have been on a couple of R1 guerrilla shoots out in public. One shoot was halted because the producer did not have a FILM PERMIT. I guess that is one of the unintended consequences of the R1 ... when mounted on a tripod-w-a matte box, etc. it does tend to attract a fair bit of attention. So far, the Scarlet hasn't raised any of that sort of attention, but it makes very nice pictures, indeed.
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #15 on: March 24, 2012, 10:27:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Something else comes to mind.

So far I've only worked with R1 files, never seen a R3d from an Epic or a Scarlet.

I guess that R3D is R3D, no? whatever the camera involved, reso apart, the workflow will be the same,
but is the render very different or are we talking about the same output?

In other words, if on set you shoot with one R1 and one Epic or Scarlet, is it consistent or the output footage is completly in different leagues?
Logged
bcooter
Guest
« Reply #16 on: March 24, 2012, 12:08:38 PM »
ReplyReply

I did a rush to judgement on the sony fs100.

Morgan kind of peaked my interest, because he seems to thoroughly test everything he owns and he was getting better results than I was from the Sony, so lately we've been using it more and more, after some testing under different lighting, and then grading the footage.

I actually like the camera, though you have to slightly underexpose as it blows the highlights, but once I got use to it, it does a lot of wonderful things.

It's manual functions are greeat, it's autofocus e-mount lenses track focus amazingly well and it has real xlr inputs (2).

For the money, it's probably the best deal out there.

Yes, it does have some of that Sony video look, but working it in post and learning more about grading the file, adding a slight touch of grain, really transforms the look.

It's not a RED, but it also allows you to shoot some things much faster and expert than the RED.

We have a small stedicam for it and it's as smooth and balances as well as any hollywood look production.

My suggestion would be to really test the Sony . . . really, really learn it like Morgan did and I think most people would be more than content with the camera.

IMO

BC
Logged
ftbt
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #17 on: March 24, 2012, 01:14:56 PM »
ReplyReply

... if on set you shoot with one R1 and one Epic or Scarlet, is it consistent or the output footage is completly in different leagues?

I think it depends to large extent whether the R1 has been upgraded with the MX sensor. With said, I have opened up some old R1 (non MX) files in RCX Pro Beta 11 and 12 using the new REDGamma3 and REDColor3, and they looked awesome. The new color science certainly improved the "look" of the footage. Moreover, I just I just printed a 24" x 48" canvas giclee from a 5K Epic frame grab ("developed" with REDGamma3 and REDColor3) and the results are stunning.

Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #18 on: March 24, 2012, 01:28:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Yeah, the latest RCX are powerfull indeed.

Not surprised about the printing.

It makes me smile. In the photo section I read people speaking about 15ish MP cameras with a superior sneer, like if it was the ultimate crapery.
I read many times: "I take this or that camera as a workarround...bla bla...I need at least 30MP...bla bla...". A few years ago we were shooting all editorials on 16MP 1D Canons.
And a good 6-8MP camera would still do wonder. But...

Oh well. That's why marketing bureaux are made for after all.

a 1600 isos motion frame of Natalia from the hacked GH2. No grading. Full aperture. (I use a lot full ap with the gH2 and since the hack don't hesitate to climb in isos up to 3200)

Even with a 100MB/s hacked GH2, the level of detail is such that I focus a little in front of the talent (like here) otherwise it's dermatological instead of beauty (even with HD make-up). Then in post I'd add sharpness in the eyes etc...if needed.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2012, 03:18:26 PM by fredjeang » Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad