PDA

View Full Version : "When you find me" - C300 short by Ron Howard. Watch before the 19th!



jagstang
12-18-2011, 04:48 AM
Awesome C300 short by Ron Howard and daughter Bryce Dallas Howard produced as part of Canon's Imagin8ion project. Watch it now though as it's only online until the 19th December.

http://www.pauljoy.com/2011/12/when-you-find-me/

cowpunk52
12-18-2011, 08:34 AM
Thanks for sharing!

maranfilms
12-18-2011, 09:37 AM
Pretty cool, After the first few minutes I was transfixed on the story, Occasionally I would remind myself to look at the image, highlights, shadows, noise, all the normal stuff you look at when seeing images from a new camera. Again, it goes to show that "cinematic" is a combination of good production value, and talent (actors, crew). When I watched just random shots from this cam, it looked nice, but nothing I haven't seen before from other high end cameras. But when you add a story, production value, and talent. Well' then it quickly becomes a beautiful image.

What I don't understand, Is how most of Canon's cameras have a similar look in color and the way they handle different enviornmental lighting changes. Even when they develop a new sensor, and processor. What is it that makes them all have a similar color palette, and look? Is it in the software, the sensor, the glass? Or some combination ? Even panisonic cams have a similar look many times referred to as "pani mojo". I would love for someone to explain how these camera companies maintain a specific look accross their product lines.

J Davis
12-18-2011, 10:09 AM
What I don't understand, Is how most of Canon's cameras have a similar look in color and the way they handle different enviornmental lighting changes. Even when they develop a new sensor, and processor. What is it that makes them all have a similar color palette, and look? Is it in the software, the sensor, the glass? Or some combination ? Even panisonic cams have a similar look many times referred to as "pani mojo". I would love for someone to explain how these camera companies maintain a specific look accross their product lines.

Tests like Philips really give insight
http://philipbloom.net/2011/12/15/christmas-shootout/

reem12
12-18-2011, 10:12 AM
Wow!!! I so wish I could afford this cam! The skin tones and filmic grain sucks you in. I even seen that a 5d mark II was used for a shot in the film.

I agree that canon do have similar color to their cams. This looks like it could have been shot entirely on a 5d minus the amazing skin tones being reproduced from the c300.

dustylense
12-18-2011, 10:18 AM
man that camera is sharp.

Chris Adler
12-18-2011, 10:38 AM
Love to see it NOT on YouTube. In 1080P on Youtube at full screen it looks horrible. Well, I should say the dark nighttime shots look horrible. The diner shot with dark windows looked fine.. didn't see the same ugly noise on the blacks of the windows that I saw in the blacks in all of the nighttime indoor shots. Bright daylight looks great. Is there a non-Youtube version of this anywhere? Nice story.

Piolet
12-18-2011, 01:22 PM
Really great film! They did a fantastic job incorporating the 8 photos into the film. The story, acting and cinematography were all very well done. Some story elements were similar to other films like the ending of the 6th Sense, but like they say, all stories are variations of existing ones. The camera did very well where there was a lot of light, but I agree the dark scenes at the beginning had a lot of distracting noise. Not sure if its the YouTube compression or the prototype nature of the cameras. But overall, the feel of the images is very nice. It doesn't feel too digital, at least to me.

Max Smith
12-18-2011, 10:30 PM
I had the exact same thought as Snazzy Flapper when I watched "When You Find Me" this afternoon. Even at 1080p the noise in the dark shots was really distinct... but it's hard to judge any kind of technical quality on youtube.

Oddly enough I was at AMC tonight to watch Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (great flick by the way) and during the ads they run before previews they ran the behind the scenes for it. There were a few brief shot from the short in the behind the scenes. I thought the night shots looked particularly noisy. But I also figured I might be biased from watching it earlier so I asked my wife, who had not watched it and hasn't been following the camera at all. She thought they looked kind of noisy too.

Hidef1080
12-19-2011, 10:40 AM
I missed it by one day.
They have it locked now.


This camera is out of my range but I'm following it and wondering how much will “trickle down” to the DSLR-C, 1D-X and the 7D and 5D replacements.

Canon seems to be on a mini roll here because of the popularity of the 5-D in cinema.

Everts
12-19-2011, 01:15 PM
the lowlight scene were extremely noisey ..didnt look good at all not one bit IMO ..but the daylight scenes were just beautiful.

David G. Smith
12-19-2011, 06:13 PM
The low light scenes did look very noisy. The shots in the house at night looked plan underexposed. I would hate to think that on a production of that scale that they would confuse low light sensitivity with under exposure lattitude! I bet the camera is capable of much better than that.

jw2700
12-19-2011, 07:25 PM
The low light scenes did look very noisy. The shots in the house at night looked plan underexposed. I would hate to think that on a production of that scale that they would confuse low light sensitivity with under exposure lattitude! I bet the camera is capible of much better than that.

Which probably means that there are some serious YouTube compression issues here. These guys aren't idiots - no way they would accept that noise.

c3hammer
12-19-2011, 08:39 PM
I would agree that the night indoor shots were very noisey. i have always found youtube to be pretty good with extreme noise. they actually seem to have a pretty good noise reduction effect in their transcoding from my experience. I've never seen it add noise. Macroblocking and color issues for sure, but never increased noise. It would be interesting to see what they actually put up vs. what we saw.

Cheers,
Pete

chris f
12-19-2011, 11:33 PM
anyone have a download link to the film? I meant to use KeepTube and download it but missed the deadline

David G. Smith
12-20-2011, 12:12 AM
Which probably means that there are some serious YouTube compression issues here. These guys aren't idiots - no way they would accept that noise.

Maybe the Gaffer turned up the brightness on the reference monitor and went on a beer run!!! :2vrolijk_08::beer:



EDIT: That is a joke, but I am not laughing... I had a guy do that to us once (Not the beer run part...). He wanted to show us how we could brighten the image in post, and forgot to tell us he had messed with the monitor!

GaryinCalifornia
12-20-2011, 05:45 AM
I figure its the You Tube compression also...

I like the camera... I thought they did a good job using the photos in the story... other than that... I thought it was kinda of boring...

jw2700
12-20-2011, 08:19 AM
Again, I'm figuring it to be some nasty encoding for YouTube. If you haven't already seen it, check the this low-light comparison 7D-F3-C300 on Vimeo. Don't see any of the nasty mosquito noise here:

http://vimeo.com/33813534

jagstang
12-21-2011, 04:45 AM
anyone have a download link to the film? I meant to use KeepTube and download it but missed the deadline

You're in luck, it looks like they've decided to make it public again.

http://www.pauljoy.com/2011/12/when-you-find-me/

David G. Smith
12-21-2011, 05:21 AM
I just re-watched the scenes in the house early in the film and it has horrible compression issues. That sucks.

David G. Smith
12-21-2011, 05:29 AM
Again, I'm figuring it to be some nasty encoding for YouTube. If you haven't already seen it, check the this low-light comparison 7D-F3-C300 on Vimeo. Don't see any of the nasty mosquito noise here:

http://vimeo.com/33813534

Holy cow, the F3 with S-LOG kicked butt!

Hidef1080
12-21-2011, 11:02 AM
You're in luck, it looks like they've decided to make it public again.

http://www.pauljoy.com/2011/12/when-you-find-me/

Either I have bad timing or something becuase it is still Private.

Really would like to see it.

jw2700
12-21-2011, 11:56 AM
Holy cow, the F3 with S-LOG kicked butt!

I don't think this Vimeo comparison tells the whole story. It was probably not intentional, but the testing seems to be slanted towards the F3. My understanding is the S-Log doubles the ISO numbers, or something like that. Using the db standard instead of ISO, the highest db tested was 24db on the C300, while it can go all the way to 30db. Why didn't he show any of the looks beyond 24db? Clearly the C300 picture was improving dramatically as gain was increased in this setting. Near the end of the piece, check the 9db S-Log shot, against the 18db C300. I think that is a fairer test - at this point one can chose if they like the sharper but possibly noisier background and more video-like F3 look, or the softer, more organic/analog look of the C300. They both certainly look great.

alpi69
12-22-2011, 02:55 AM
...at this point one can chose if they like the sharper but possibly noisier background and more video-like F3 look, or the softer, more organic/analog look of the C300. They both certainly look great.

The C300 has a very pleasing, filmic look. At least with the lenses we saw so far. The F3 is capable of that look when using the right lenses. The F3 will be cleaner, while the F3 seems to have an edge on highlight-rolloff to my eyes.

But judging the noise they get away with in this clip, they didnīt look at that at all. Was it the wrong ISO setting? probably. But the big guys donīt care about technical perfection as much as some of us. They use what works for the story and not the shot that pleases the pro-audience. Watch Super8- Tons of out of focus. But still a good movie, because you get lost in the storytelling.