PDA

View Full Version : The art of firmware update warfare



squig
05-13-2009, 06:40 PM
Ok I don't know about the rest of you but I'm done sitting on my arse whingeing and listening to others whinge about a camera that we don't even have yet.

I need this camera to be all it can be so I'm gonna go on a quaker speak truth to power trip.

I think a dvxuser group insurgency is in order here. A multi-pronged global attack on every panasonic office around the world should get our message across. I can draft a letter on behalf of us all if the mods are cool with that. I can compile a list of names and addresses if a volunteer dvxer from each territory can print them out and post them, snail mail is a more personal and effective way to communicate than an email. maybe sonic can mail letters to the japanese execs.

Kholi, Hunter, and Philip have gone to the trouble to be crash test dummies so the least the rest of us can do is post a few letters making panasonic aware of the flaws in their new toy and what they need to do to fix it and make it the real camcorder/dslr killer it can be.

so far I suggest we include in our list of demands-
24p/25p mjpeg with at least 20% more data per frame (same overall bit-rate as 30p) but a higher quality option say 40Mbps if the GH1 can do it.
24Mbps AVCHD and native 24p
plus maybe an option to record without sound and allocate more bits to movie mode.

There are lot's of other things that you want like live HDMI out and sound level control and metering but I think it's important to concentrate on the crucial stuff like RESOLUTION!

Anybody with any negative comments like "ur wasting ur time, they're not gonna listen" can stfu now I don't need to hear any more negativity I hear enough of that from people when I tell them I'm shooting a feature with a DSLR and my own money.

Nighthawk
05-13-2009, 07:17 PM
I hear ya on a lot of levels but the petition started might be addressing many of your concerns.

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?t=170343

I too am doing a feature length as a pilot for a series. The pilot is being shot with ultra 16mm. The following 2 episodes are going to be shot with the GH1. Everybody in my circle thinks I'm brain damaged considering what's at risk. Can't get mad at them because when they're right, they're right. Ain't going to stop me and it sounds like it won't stop you. Keep pluggin' and I'll see you at the Oscars.

squig
05-13-2009, 07:23 PM
hehe, only thing stopping me is death and taxes.

Is TV in Canadia 720 or 1080?

artforme
05-13-2009, 07:30 PM
Honestly, I think for the price, what the GH1 offers is nice.

60i goes to 24p nicely.

Compared to the D90 this is a huge step with regards to manual control.

I don't think I need any of the things that you mention, and if I did, I'd rent/buy a RED One or a Scarlet when that comes out.

I understand your fight though, and support it, just think it's more futile than asking for manual controls for the D90.

Best either way though!! Hope pre production is going nicely.

Kholi
05-13-2009, 07:36 PM
Honestly, I think for the price, what the GH1 offers is nice.

60i goes to 24p nicely.

Compared to the D90 this is a huge step with regards to manual control.

I don't think I need any of the things that you mention, and if I did, I'd rent/buy a RED One or a Scarlet when that comes out.

I understand your fight though, and support it, just think it's more futile than asking for manual controls for the D90.

Best either way though!! Hope pre production is going nicely.

:thumbup:

Boz
05-13-2009, 07:37 PM
Count me in. If they simply gave us 720-24P it would be worth the effort. It would be nice to get some of the people Pansonic might listen to (Barry Green, Philip Bloom, etc) involved as well.

squig
05-13-2009, 07:43 PM
they're not the borg

pre-prod is coming along, scriptwriting that's another thing entirely

kholi are you satisfied with the codec for 35mm transfer? it looks about 90% there but I haven't seen enough raw footage to judge.

Nighthawk
05-13-2009, 07:45 PM
hehe, only thing stopping me is death and taxes.

Is TV in Canadia 720 or 1080?

1080i and 720p are what I can get through my cable provider at the moment. Unsure as to what some broadcasters require. They all have different answers.

Only death and hangovers can stop me. Taxes aren't a problem with my income.

squig
05-13-2009, 07:52 PM
hehe.

good boz cause it was you that got me started on this jihad/crusade. You mentioned something about red communicating with their customers and got me thinking about how this is the biggest panasonic user forum as far as I know and we haven't had any communication with them at all. They're doing a great job of "winning hearts and minds".

Kholi
05-13-2009, 08:04 PM
they're not the borg

pre-prod is coming along, scriptwriting that's another thing entirely

kholi are you satisfied with the codec for 35mm transfer? it looks about 90% there but I haven't seen enough raw footage to judge.

This is offtopic, and I might be crushing your dreams but: unless you have named talent in your feature, a decent high concept script (decent defined by something more than you and your best friends will watch), decent production value (above film school caliber), and enough money to go and shop your feature around at festivals, you'd might as well stop dreaming about 35mm Transfers.

A realistic distribution target is Blu Ray, and yeah, this thing wil make excellent Blu Rays.

If you EVER get a 35mm Transfer, you won't have to worry about how it'll transfer because the people PAYING for it will clean it up so that they stand a better chance at getting their money back.

35mm Transfer is the last thing you really should be worrying about.

I implore you to find a Blu Ray player and purchase THE SIGNAL. XL-H1 + P+S 35mm Adapter. PLEASE look at what they did under the limitations this system imposes on its operators. Then realze that even though the XL-H1's compression is a bit more robust, the GH-1 will hold up in just about every situation presented in that feature film.

They had three or more of the things I listed, namely incredible production value on a shoe-string budget.

Again, that's just my opinion on it. Would I like updates, upgrades? Yeah! Am I worried about it? No.

squig
05-13-2009, 08:05 PM
I've heard the argument that it's good enough for joe sixpack and we don't count. Well last time I went to joe sixpack's house he had a home cinema with a big-arse plasma and blue-ray, things that this indie filmmaker doesn't have. He might not like how his dog looks like it's going through a star trek transporter when it runs around the yard @ 1080i AVCHD.

accepting donations of beer or plasma.

Kholi
05-13-2009, 08:07 PM
Not talking about joe-six pack. Talking about the likelyhood of your feature even getting near a 35mm Transfer. Did you just glance over my post?

Even if you were shooting RED this would probably STILL be the likelihood unless you're backed by money to begin with. Then again, you'd probably be backed by an awesome script, decent talent in front of the screen, so-on-and-so-forth.

squig
05-13-2009, 09:00 PM
Kholi it's an alternate universe down here. The film business down here is kept afloat with government funding and american productions shot here, most local films lose money at the box office. I know of more than one film that had shocking production values by our standards that got funding for a 35mm print and distribution. I won't be following their lead however.

I approach the film business like I did the music business. I setup my studio and get quality results on a minimal budget. I produce and market quality product that finds it's target audience and I attract attention from buyers with deep pockets. Now that all sounds very suit-like and not very creative but I'm just letting you know I have things covered from all angles. There's always obstacles and pitfalls but that's life. You just try to be as prepared as you can.

As for distribution it's not a major concern, the script when it's ready will sell itself with a bit of smoke and no GH1 mirrors.

As for named talent......hehe, Mel Gibson was a nobody when Miller made Mad Max and it grossed 100 million and that was back in the day when 100 million was worth something. I'm not trying to make 100 million I just want to tell a good story and make it look good and show it. Money flows if ya do it right.

I do things the hard way with my own money so I won't be forced into some blade runner happy ending. If a studio offered me a few million to make my film I'd tell them to piss off. But I'll happily flog it to them for a few more million when I'm happy with it.

Always like to hear what you have to say Kholi and everyone else, I'm always learning something from you guys but don't confuse my youthful exuberance for naiveite (not that I'm not naive about a great many things) it's just part of australian culture to come across as a wanker and I have some german arrogance in the blood to boot.

I know I'm the new indie kid on the block here but I was once the record producer kid and I walked away with local grammy equivalent (ARIA) for my first album. I'm a dreamer but I'm not dreamin.

You're not worried cause you've had your hand on it. I won't be worried when you stop yappin and show me some wicked shit. Output is something I always worry about until it's put out.

so do I get to hang out with the cool kids?

Nighthawk
05-13-2009, 09:01 PM
This is offtopic, and I might be crushing your dreams but: unless you have named talent in your feature, a decent high concept script (decent defined by something more than you and your best friends will watch), decent production value (above film school caliber), and enough money to go and shop your feature around at festivals, you'd might as well stop dreaming about 35mm Transfers.

A realistic distribution target is Blu Ray, and yeah, this thing wil make excellent Blu Rays.

If you EVER get a 35mm Transfer, you won't have to worry about how it'll transfer because the people PAYING for it will clean it up so that they stand a better chance at getting their money back.

35mm Transfer is the last thing you really should be worrying about.

Totally agree. A solid product is what buyers/ broadcasters/ distributors are looking for. If they see that in your film/ video they'll have no problem fronting the money for transfers, uprezzing, P&A and whatever it takes to get asses in the seats. Just make it the best damn thing your talents and budget allows.

squig
05-13-2009, 09:01 PM
Not talking about joe-six pack. Talking about the likelyhood of your feature even getting near a 35mm Transfer. Did you just glance over my post?


na just writing a novel in reply to it

dadoboy
05-13-2009, 09:02 PM
Squig, the best people to tell you whether or not 17mb AVCHD is "good enough" for a 35mm transfer, are the people who do them like swissfx among many others but the codec and camera is so new they won't know what they heck your talking about. If you're serious about transfer to 35mm you should consider your workflow from start to finish. But really anything thing short of VHS is good enough for transfer to 35mm, if all the other production elements are very, very very strong. So many examples out there of dv transfers to 35mm that made for compelling movies.

All that's an afterthought really, since the chances statistically of any truly indie feature getting distribution is very slim (not talking about studio funded "indies"), so if you manage to make it to the point where you and your buddies are saying - this is so good that it needs a transfer to 35mm - well then congratulations - you will have beaten great odds and made a movie that stands head and shoulders above the rest, and the rest is GRAVY. I hope to see your movie on blue ray (from a 35mm telecine).

squig
05-13-2009, 09:03 PM
it'll be solid as brick shithouse

squig
05-13-2009, 09:06 PM
I've read that something like 98% of indies don't get distribution in the US. It's a little different here. There is very little local content produced here and there is an outlet for it if it's good enough.

Kholi
05-13-2009, 09:12 PM
As for named talent......hehe, Mel Gibson was a nobody when Miller made Mad Max and it grossed 100 million and that was back in the day when 100 million was worth something. I'm not trying to make 100 million I just want to tell a good story and make it look good and show it. Money flows if ya do it right.r

If your script and production value is anywhere near as innovative and high concept as Mad Max I wouldn't suggest shooting it with a VDSLR.



Always like to hear what you have to say Kholi and everyone else, I'm always learning something from you guys but don't confuse my youthful exuberance for naiveite (not that I'm not naive about a great many things) it's just part of australian culture to come across as a wanker and I have some german arrogance in the blood to boot.

I know I'm the new indie kid on the block here but I was once the record producer kid and I walked away with local grammy equivalent (ARIA) for my first album. I'm a dreamer but I'm not dreamin.I'm twenty-six and I've been shooting for less than three years.




You're not worried cause you've had your hand on it. I won't be worried when you stop yappin and show me some wicked shi*. Output is something I always worry about until it's put out.

so do I get to hang out with the cool kids?I'm not worried because I know that the camera is enough as it sits. You know what I know.

But sounds like you got it all down, man! And you're right, you're in a different market, as well. I'm not gonna discourage you, was just bein' realistic.

squig
05-13-2009, 09:29 PM
hehe, I'm not trashing any classic cars. I'd get murdered for that. You know they actually ran out of money and didn't get to trash as many cars as they had wanted to lol. It's an urban drama, Mad Max part 4 is my 2nd script. I'm working on a kind of surreal blade runner look, cinematography not effects wise. anamorphics, smoke, lighting, grading, darkness, rain.....and no bloody narration!

I'm 38 and I'm off to film school next month.....oh joy

like I said always wanna hear what you got to say man.

I gotta run, gotta post an application for a 25k grant.

Nighthawk
05-13-2009, 10:20 PM
I'm 38 and I'm off to film school next month.....oh joy


Kinda the same boat. 4 years ago went to film school. I was 45 then. Mid-life crisis; blonde and red sports car or film school. Wife decided for me.

I start shooting in July. What's your schedule? Maybe we can keep up on each other's progress. PM me if interested.

Art Messenger (yup, that's my name)

dadoboy
05-13-2009, 10:44 PM
I sympathize. I'm 37.. Went to film school a long time ago (and a good thing too. Tuition is murder here in the states especially for private schools..) I've DP'ed 6 features, none of which have gotten distribution. Some of them I knew going into it that they didn't have a chance, but you always want to be supportive and give them the benefit of the doubt. You see that look in their eye that this is the culmination of their life's efforts and dreams - how can you say no? You have to give it your best shot. But let me give you some hope - there's a saying here in LALALand - you're only one movie away from making it. And it's true. Make one great movie that gets distributed, and the failures wont matter at all.


Kinda the same boat. 4 years ago went to film school. I was 45 then. Mid-life crisis; blonde and red sports car or film school. Wife decided for me.

I start shooting in July. What's your schedule? Maybe we can keep up on each other's progress. PM me if interested.

Art Messenger (yup, that's my name)

Boz
05-13-2009, 11:17 PM
I implore you to find a Blu Ray player and purchase THE SIGNAL. XL-H1 + P+S 35mm Adapter. PLEASE look at what they did under the limitations this system imposes on its operators. Then realze that even though the XL-H1's compression is a bit more robust, the GH-1 will hold up in just about every situation presented in that feature film.

I haven't watched "The Signal", but I did just watch the trailer. It definitely does look impressive, no doubt. However, even in the trailer I can see plenty of high-energy scenes that would just collapse under codec/bitrate on the GH1. Hell, simple pans make it fall apart in some cases (http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/DMCGH1/DMCGH1A.HTM#vids). Don't forget, not only does the GH1 suffer from a low bitrate, but it also has no B-frames, which further exacerbates the problem. Kind of a bad codec double-wammy, if you will. :-P


Again, that's just my opinion on it. Would I like updates, upgrades? Yeah! Am I worried about it? No.

That's cool. But what harm is there in trying? If nothing happens you're no worse off. If Panasonic does respond, then we all benefit, and an already good cam becomes great. That's my 2 cents.

Kholi
05-13-2009, 11:21 PM
Never said anything about their being harm in trying. Go all out.

on The Signal and High Enegery scenes: 720/60P. By the way, there's a shot in The Signal where the ground glass is off.

Know how much that movie sold for? Just saying... there's a certain point where the camera isn't the most important thing.

Anyway, crusade away.

Illya Friedman
05-14-2009, 12:47 AM
Two words-

El Mariachi


If RR was was just out of film school and making EL Mariachi today I think the GH1 would be on the short list of formats, instead of 16mm stock and processing.

It's possible to get impressive results with this little camera. Nice lenses don't hurt either.


I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

squig
05-14-2009, 01:30 AM
6 films and no distribution that must suck, all that hard work for nothing. The worst part is that there are so many bad films that do get distribution. I guess we have it pretty easy here in comparison.

My schedule Art, fook knows. I was planning to start shooting about now but I've been stuffing around with the budget and the script still needs some work. I want to find a house I can rent and shoot some scenes in at my leisure. I don't think I'll start shooting anything before september at this rate. Yeah sure I'll keep you posted, I'll probably start a GH1 cinemascope feature making thread next month.

I was building a house until I got the DSLR storytelling bug and I've noticed something that applies to both building and indie filmmaking. You have to choose two of the following options: fast, good, and cheap. So I'm going with good and cheap. if it takes a year of weekends to shoot it then so be it.

It would be good to get some dialog going with panasonic and hear them address our concerns/recommendations, the users here combined know more about how to apply their technology than they do. I can't see the GH1 being a huge consumer hit unless they can really market it to joe sixpack as THE camcorder/DSLR replacement that they have to have. To do that successfully they need to market it like it's the new super 8, a real hobbyist home movie semi-pro retro style movie cam, and to do that they need indie filmmakers and videographers to lead the way. That puts us pretty high up the panasonic food chain.

SonicStates
05-14-2009, 08:36 AM
maybe sonic can mail letters to the japanese execs.



Steal a car and crash through the gates for you Squig :) All the best for film school.

By the sounds of it Australia is calling me home for the film industry support dollar...

Japan's major movies are pretty under funded as far as I know (which is not very far at all). I guess Hollywood and various other film centers keep the Japanese audience intact...there are some very beautiful flicks made right here though...speaking of which actually looking for a 6 month old baby (wait let me finish) for a feature going to be shot here with some Japanese big names as well as a HW actress you will probably know...anyone wanna lend me their baby (need profile pics by tomorrow)....we are working with the talent agent if your wondering but I see it as my way to get onto the set.

Anyway where were we? Oh yeah, updates! Looking up Panny HQ right now...

Kholi
05-14-2009, 10:11 AM
Two words-

El Mariachi


If RR was was just out of film school and making EL Mariachi today I think the GH1 would be on the short list of formats, instead of 16mm stock and processing.

It's possible to get impressive results with this little camera. Nice lenses don't hurt either.


I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

I watch PRIMER like once a week, literally. Just watched it the other night and I'm thinkin' "Wow, these guys knew like nothing about the process, shot with 16mm ends and some sweat... good grief".

I wouldn't have that movie any other way, because the limitations really make that feature. But, I could only imagine what these guys would have done with a Gh-1 had it been available at the ime.

Boz
05-14-2009, 10:43 AM
Yeah, "Primer" is brilliant. And for a film like that (virtually no fast action), the GH1 would positively sing. But if you're making a film with a lot of action or moving camera, the GH1 will be a LOT of work. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems to get the best 24P look out of 60P you really have to twixtor it (or some other time-ramping software). And while that's fine for a clip here and there, it becomes a huge deal if you have to do shot after shot with it. A simple addition of a MJPEG 720-24P mode would solve that and make everyone's life a lot easier. :) It SEEMS simple enough, but I'm no engineer so I have no idea what it takes to enable something like that on Panasonic's end. But it certainly wouldn't hurt to make an effort to make sure Panasonic knows we think the camera is brilliant but we'd like at least this one addition. Heck I'd even pay a firmware update fee.

dadoboy
05-14-2009, 11:04 AM
Regarding PRIMER:

I won't get into a whole 16mm vs GH1 thing on this thread, but being deeply invested in 16mm gear, I looked at a lot of 16mm footage on vimeo.com and compared it to GH1 and Canon 5D footage. I am sad to say that most of the 16mm footage looks like crap, whereas the GH1 footage looks technically a lot better.

I think there's a few reasons for this:
One, you can't just take a 16mm camera out of a box and not know anything about how to shoot. You need a light meter and need to know how to use it. Most of the uploads were by students, probably their first year.
Two, so much depends on the telecine process and where they had it done and what format they ended up on.

There are a few things shot on 16mm on vimeo that I felt were worthy comparisons, like Hunter's footage. But that was one of the exceptions. In such cases, I felt 16mm looked superior - but that's my subjective opinion.

I'm not saying the GH1 is better than 16mm, that would be like shooting my own foot, but it seems like its much easier to get great results quickly and cheaply to the web, so the GH1 like other good video cams be very empowering.

I wasn't too happy with the way PRIMER looked - rather dull to the eye - but as a movie it really worked.

squig
05-14-2009, 12:06 PM
Steal a car and crash through the gates for you Squig :) All the best for film school.

By the sounds of it Australia is calling me home for the film industry support dollar...

Japan's major movies are pretty under funded as far as I know (which is not very far at all). I guess Hollywood and various other film centers keep the Japanese audience intact...there are some very beautiful flicks made right here though...speaking of which actually looking for a 6 month old baby (wait let me finish) for a feature going to be shot here with some Japanese big names as well as a HW actress you will probably know...anyone wanna lend me their baby (need profile pics by tomorrow)....we are working with the talent agent if your wondering but I see it as my way to get onto the set.

Anyway where were we? Oh yeah, updates! Looking up Panny HQ right now...

I have a 14 month baby, she looks like a manga character. japanese tourists freak when they see her and go mad with their nikons. she has asian eyes and burgandy hair.

I have an idea for a film I wanna shoot in japan in a couple of years

squig
05-14-2009, 12:10 PM
I just scored my anamorphic lens adapter, now all I need is a bloody camera!

Kholi did ya forget to feed the grading gimp? where's the footy?

Kholi
05-14-2009, 12:50 PM
magic bullet = plug-in

actual grading = real skill

Takes a little time to grade, man. Especially when people have to work as well. =P Soon as I get the footage you'll get it.

In the meantime, time to do some ISO testings.

SonicStates
05-14-2009, 06:25 PM
I have an idea for a film I wanna shoot in japan in a couple of years

Bring it!

PappasArts
05-14-2009, 06:40 PM
I just scored my anamorphic lens adapter, now all I need is a bloody camera!

Kholi did ya forget to feed the grading gimp? where's the footy?

Which one did you get?

Illya Friedman
05-14-2009, 09:30 PM
I have a question-

If someone were to make a 62mm 1.34x front anamorphic element, optimized for the GH1....

1) Would you be interested in buying it?

2) What would you be willing to pay?

I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

Ian-T
05-14-2009, 09:41 PM
Heck yeah.

pix2pixels
05-14-2009, 09:45 PM
Ilya,

That would be a great addition at the right cost.
I have used an older model (Century) with PD150 cameras. The main issue was that it was limited to wide angle, almost anything past a certain focal length was out of focus.
Also, you could not zoom through.
There is one around, manufactured by Panasonic (http://www.videoguys.com.au/shop/video-video-camera-accessories-lenses-lens-accessories/panasonic-ag-la7200g-16-9-anamorphic-lens-ag-la7200g.asp), selling for about 1150 aussie pesos, but I don't know if it is from the second generation, allowing zooming and shooting at the long end.

Kholi
05-14-2009, 10:36 PM
I have a question-

If someone were to make a 62mm 1.34x front anamorphic element, optimized for the GH1....

1) Would you be interested in buying it?

2) What would you be willing to pay?

I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

1) Yes

2) Not sure.

Question: Would a rear-element produce better results instead of a front? I'm not familiar with it, but I'd take one.

=T I guess it's almost time to get rid of the HPX170 and Ultimaet.

yia
05-14-2009, 10:44 PM
sorry guys... what is this thing firmware?... can some body please slowly explain what it is and what it does to me so I can be in the same page with you guys

squig
05-14-2009, 11:08 PM
Which one did you get?

isco-54, supposed to be the best adapter you can get.

squig
05-14-2009, 11:12 PM
I have a question-

If someone were to make a 62mm 1.34x front anamorphic element, optimized for the GH1....

1) Would you be interested in buying it?

2) What would you be willing to pay?

I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

for sure, the isco-54 is a bit heavy at a kilo (over 2 lb) but it would have to be as good as the german glass. 1.33x is perfect to get 2.39:1. Mine is 1.5x so I'll have to crop. I think anamorphic could be big with the GH1. Shallow dof was the last big thing.

John Caballero
05-14-2009, 11:22 PM
sorry guys... what is this thing firmware?... can some body please slowly explain what it is and what it does to me so I can be in the same page with you guys



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmware (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmware)
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmware)

You can learn so much from Google and Wikipedia.

squig
05-14-2009, 11:23 PM
sorry guys... what is this thing firmware?... can some body please slowly explain what it is and what it does to me so I can be in the same page with you guys

A 1.33x anamorphic adapter on a GH1 = cinemascope widescreen 2.39:1 not 16x9 (think latest star trek, apocalypse now, blade runner etc.) They screw onto the front of your prime lenses and squash the image 1.33, 1.5, or 2x then you stretch it out in post. It gives you a wider picture without cropping.

do a youtube search on anamorphic for some examples. You get really cool distortions and lens flares.

I've been doing a lot of research on anamorphics, I'll start a new thread with all the info/links in a few weeks.

I'd pay $500 for a lightweight 1.33x adapter with picture on par with the isco and better than the century 16x9 if that's possible.

John Caballero
05-14-2009, 11:29 PM
??????

squig
05-14-2009, 11:31 PM
Ilya,

That would be a great addition at the right cost.
I have used an older model (Century) with PD150 cameras. The main issue was that it was limited to wide angle, almost anything past a certain focal length was out of focus.
Also, you could not zoom through.
There is one around, manufactured by Panasonic (http://www.videoguys.com.au/shop/video-video-camera-accessories-lenses-lens-accessories/panasonic-ag-la7200g-16-9-anamorphic-lens-ag-la7200g.asp), selling for about 1150 aussie pesos, but I don't know if it is from the second generation, allowing zooming and shooting at the long end.

D90 jack has the panasonic, he's said it's a bit soft. I picked up a lot of tips from super 8 and 16mm filmmakers who are using old anamorphic projector lenses as adapters. The isco I just got for 500 bucks used to sell new for five grand.

squig
05-14-2009, 11:35 PM
??????

I have anamorphic on the brain, It's all I've been thinking about for the last 2 days. I think I broke google

SonicStates
05-15-2009, 01:31 AM
Just saw a video on anamorphic projection...bloody hell...awesome

MatzeB
05-15-2009, 02:10 AM
I have anamorphic on the brain, It's all I've been thinking about for the last 2 days. I think I broke google

LOL ... I know that feeling.

Illya Friedman
05-15-2009, 02:17 AM
I really didn't like the old DVX100 anamorphic adapter when it was released (soft).

If I knew I could sell enough of them to make it worth the development costs, I'd look into building a custom 1.34 squeeze. I could do a rear element but it's likely more expensive than a front, and unless I chipped a electronic pass through you'd lose auto lens features.

I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 02:31 AM
for sure, the isco-54 is a bit heavy at a kilo (over 2 lb) but it would have to be as good as the german glass. 1.33x is perfect to get 2.39:1. Mine is 1.5x so I'll have to crop. I think anamorphic could be big with the GH1. Shallow dof was the last big thing.


I see this error all the time.

The math: 1.33x Anamorphic X 1.78:1( 16x9 sensor ) = 2.3674 > round up > 2.3700 = 2.37.1


I see figures of 2:35 - 2:40 -2:39... I actual called and spoke with the people who make the Hawk 1:33x to discuss this error in the spec sheet, they were even perplexed too why they have this error! LoL

squig
05-15-2009, 03:00 AM
I really didn't like the old DVX100 anamorphic adapter when it was released (soft).

If I knew I could sell enough of them to make it worth the development costs, I'd look into building a custom 1.34 squeeze. I could do a rear element but it's likely more expensive than a front, and unless I chipped a electronic pass through you'd lose auto lens features.


Anyone who's really serious about shooting anamorphic wouldn't want auto anything.

squig
05-15-2009, 03:05 AM
yeah pappas I know the math is off but my point is 1.33x is closest to 2.39:1. you can always do some horizontal cropping to get it spot on.

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 03:15 AM
yeah pappas I know the math is off but my point is 1.33x is closest to 2.39:1. you can always do some horizontal cropping to get it spot on.

My point was; why not call it 2:37:1 which it is mathematically correct, and not crop anything on the horizontal. The point of anamorphic is the increased horizontal FOV ( in this case .67x wider increase with 1.33x ) of visual info however the vertical untouched. Cropping anything on the side is leaning toward the defeating factor of anamorphic shooting. That's said Horizontal cropping would make it less wide: I think you mean vertical cropping. If you cropped a 2:35 it would be less than 2:35 getting you farther away from 2:39.

Anamorphic can be very enjoyable to frame a visual shot, and also be a pain in the a$$ too. I love to shoot with WideLux cameras, so this wider framing is where I feel at home most.




.

squig
05-15-2009, 03:31 AM
cropping on the side could be good if you want to get rid of an vignetting and softness at the edges. If you're not into that look then 1.5x would be perfect. I kinda like the softness and vignetting so I'm keeping my eye out for a 1.33x adapter to keep my 1.5x company. I fully expect it to be a pain in the arse shooting anamorphic but I just love the look.

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 03:31 AM
Anyone who's really serious about shooting anamorphic wouldn't want auto anything.


Exactly, auto wouldn't be good. Anamorphic already is focusing in two planes as well.


The Panasonic isn't perfect, however it's a stellar performer for the price. I own a couple of them. It 's image holds up well mounted to very high res DSLR's. I also own the century's adapter too, and it sucks... It has more pronounced anamorphic flaring, however the panasonic is better and a bigger piece of glass.

squig
05-15-2009, 03:33 AM
do you have the century anamorphic or the 16x9?

squig
05-15-2009, 03:34 AM
do you have one of those anamorphic lcd hoods?

I'd like to mount one onto the GH1 LCD but I think it's a bit big for the GH1.

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 03:54 AM
do you have the century anamorphic or the 16x9?


Century calls theirs a 16X9 adapter. Then have a 1.33 adapter which I owned both and retained one of them. I own a couple of the Panny's too... I like the Panny better.

pix2pixels
05-15-2009, 03:56 AM
Ilya,
From what I remember, the 'behind the lens' adapter provides some significant light loss. Correct me if I am wrong but it's almost 2 stops; Never used one, heard only horror stories. I like that the Panasonic has 72mm diameter for the lens coupling.

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 03:57 AM
do you have one of those anamorphic lcd hoods?

I'd like to mount one onto the GH1 LCD but I think it's a bit big for the GH1.

Yes, however the 1.33 squeeze is not a distraction for me. So i prefer not using the LCD de-squeezer hood


Michael Pappas
Main Web Site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

squig
05-15-2009, 04:10 AM
Ilya,
From what I remember, the 'behind the lens' adapter provides some significant light loss. Correct me if I am wrong but it's almost 2 stops; Never used one, heard only horror stories. I like that the Panasonic has 72mm diameter for the lens coupling.

The isco-54 has a 77mm rear thread and 95mm up front, it's a big chunk of glass. I was thinking of getting one of the century 16x9's just for times when I need to be invisible but it doesn't sound like they're worth it.

pix2pixels
05-15-2009, 04:14 AM
I used the Century, don't want to go back :-(

pix2pixels
05-15-2009, 04:15 AM
Squig,
I am quite annoyed by the oz prices. Anything that can be done?

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 04:20 AM
My results with the Panasonic Anamorphic adapter

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84


For the cost, good enough for me. I paid under 200 bucks my panny's.. I Can't complain.

Michael Pappas
Main Web Site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

squig
05-15-2009, 04:25 AM
Squig,
I am quite annoyed by the oz prices. Anything that can be done?

tell me about it. Well I reckon we'll be able to get them out of hong kong for about $2500 inc GST, maybe even less. We can get them from the UK for that price too. Panasonic AUS are dreamin. The Japanese model would be more like $1900 landed inc GST.

squig
05-15-2009, 04:31 AM
My results with the Panasonic Anamorphic adapter

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84


For the cost, good enough for me. I paid under 200 bucks my panny's.. I Can't complain.


.

I'll have one for that money. Glad I didn't put down 550 bucks on that century yesterday. I'll post some raw iso-54 files when I get the GH1 and you can compare them to the panny

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 01:18 PM
I'll have one for that money. Glad I didn't put down 550 bucks on that century yesterday. I'll post some raw iso-54 files when I get the GH1 and you can compare them to the panny

Dude, why not just run tests with one of your DSLR's? You don't need to wait for the GH1.


Michael Pappas
Main Web Site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

squig
05-15-2009, 04:15 PM
Dude, why not just run tests with one of your DSLR's? You don't need to wait for the GH1.

Don't have one, just sold the D90.......I'm cameraless

PappasArts
05-15-2009, 08:58 PM
Don't have one, just sold the D90.......I'm cameraless


Your camera-less, that's sad and sucks.


Michael Pappas
Main Web Site
http://www.pbase.com/Arrfilms

Anamorphic DSLR Lens Test Images... links:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1638289&postcount=97
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showpost.php?p=1637705&postcount=84

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Pappas/573417404
http://www.Myspace.com/PappasArts
Arrfilms@hotmail.com
http://www.PappasArts.com
CONTACT VIA AOL INSTANT MESSENGER
AT { PAPPASARTS2 }

SonicStates
05-15-2009, 09:04 PM
I see this thread has been infected by anamorphic madness!! Loving it.

squig
05-15-2009, 09:25 PM
yeah I got a bit sidetracked.

Well technically I still have a camera. The new owner hasn't paid for it yet so it's still mine for a few days

Illya Friedman
05-15-2009, 10:09 PM
Anyone who's really serious about shooting anamorphic wouldn't want auto anything.

LOL! You should wear that quote on your T-shirt.

With all due respect; that comment is nonsense in the context of my post.

When I was referred to "auto" it was in relation to a chipped rear adapter. Understand that if you didn't have that- you don't just lose "auto", you lose >>ALL<< lens/camera interaction.

So let's say you unwrap your fancy Leica/Panasonic 10:1 slap it on the GH1 along with your "brand X" rear anamorphic adapter (unchipped) and now not only can you not use AUTO modes (A, S, P, focus/iris/facial recognition in Movie) you can also not set exposure manually!

In addition, you can not use the AUTO focus assist (which is brilliant BTW), or helpful features like AUTO lens metadata. And the very smart AUTO lens/camera chromatic aberration correction built-in to the camera body. The Leica/Panny 10:1 and 3:1 are fine lenses, it makes no sense to make them worthless with a low cost (or poorly implemented) rear anamorph.

Having access to AUTO features is not BAD, and I doubt that loss of access to those features would suddenly make someone "serious about shooting anamorphic." Good grief.


I.

Illya Friedman
Hot Rod Cameras

squig
05-15-2009, 10:59 PM
yeah I got what you meant.

What I mean is anamorphic is an old school shooting method from the days when there were no auto controls and that's the way I like to shoot, I don't have any auto glass. I understand that there are some benefits with the kit lens in auto mode but nothing I wouldn't sacrifice to get the anamorphic look. But anyway most of us would be using front anamorphic adapters so we still have auto control if we want/need it wit some focusing and zooming issues.