Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
  1. Collapse Details
    #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,071
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rob norton View Post
    Then why stop at venice's sensor block? Why not make a camera the size of an SD card? Other than physical limitations, it's because there's a sweet spot in size. People will have different ideas of what that sweet spot looks like. Hollywood and other professionals have a different idea of what that sweet spot is compared to you and DLD. It doesn't need to stay the same either - it ideally should be project dependent. For jcs' shooting needs, the smaller the better. You a) don't need to and b) can't apply your philosophy across the entire video production landscape. There's no one size fits all. DLD doesn't shoot any video at all so while it's fun to live in broken record theory land, not everyone will agree, after forming their own opinion from working in the field. I'm sure you're a really nice guy DLD but you say the exact same thing with every single post, I don't get it?

    For every venice sensor block separation success story there are 100x larger camera success stories. We're just not hearing about it at trade shows because it'd be ridiculous if cinema5d asked a DP how they were enjoying a way of working that's been going on for decades. I love small cameras if I'm by myself and am only talking about a crew environment (I obviously would have no argument if only speaking about a solo shooter that has few needs). For crew/camera interaction, we're headed for wireless controls across the board but there still needs to be enough real estate for mounting hardware.
    You're right, why stop at the sensor block? I was recently thinking, what is the practical limit in this universe for the smallest possible camera? Yeah, thinking down to the Planck Length, then working back up to deal with photons, as both particles and waves, and how it might be possible to capture light as waves in addition to particles and effectively unlimited resolution capture. The primitive Light Field cameras (not using traditional lenses) already provide a glimpse of what's coming, and giant heavy lenses won't be needed as computational cameras evolve. If we look at nature, for example the eyes of eagles & owls, we can see what's possible in fairly compact and lightweight optics and sensors (currently blows away anything on the camera market). Future cameras will blow away birds of prey. Understand working folks don't want to constantly hear about whats coming someday, what's more important is what's here now and will be here in the very near future.

    Regarding applying philosophies across the board: if we have the option, the flexibility to use a smaller, lighter system, that's an advantage. We can always add more size + weight + mounting points as needed. However if the camera system can't be slimmed down, that's a limitation and less flexibility. Camera systems that are more flexible will always win in the market when other factors are effectively equivalent (this is true in nature too).

    What's the most popular rental at the top pro level: the big ARRIs or the ARRI Minis?

    Is the new Red Komodo bigger or smaller than their other cameras?

    Is there a pattern here?


    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #22
    Senior Member Samuel H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    7,915
    Default
    I've been faking tripod moves with the gimbal since I got the original Zhiyun Crane. Nowadays I only use the tripod when I need the camera on sticks for VFX takes... and that doesn't require an expensive tripod either: yesterday I did it with a bag on top of a chair on top of a table. I have a 6kg tripod and also a light tripod, and if my memory isn't failing I think none of them has left my home studio in the last year.

    Of course, if your have a crew and trucks and whatnot, you can do a lot better than what I do. But yesterday we were a crew of two and already carrying maybe 20kg of gear (lights and their very heavy batteries, stands, softboxes, smoke machine... everything tech won't fake successfully).


    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #23
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,020
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs View Post
    Regarding applying philosophies across the board: if we have the option, the flexibility to use a smaller, lighter system, that's an advantage. We can always add more size + weight + mounting points as needed. However if the camera system can't be slimmed down, that's a limitation and less flexibility. Camera systems that are more flexible will always win in the market when other factors are effectively equivalent (this is true in nature too).
    Assuming the flexibility doesn't come at a cost, which it typically does. Adding weight to a camera is not as easy or ergonomic as you make it sound. Where are you going to add 20 lbs to say a DSLR to give it the proper amount of weight and inertia that is desired? If you mount 20 lbs on the bottom of the camera, you now have a sensor that is higher than desired from say either your shoulder or the center of gravity on your Steadicam. You can't really mount 20 lbs on the sides of the camera because that's where your buttons are, and on top of the camera is likely impractical as well. With an actual large camera, the mass and weight is inside of the camera, so you don't have to worry about building 20 lbs of weight around the camera in an impractical fashion.

    My Steadicam has a minimum weight capacity of 9 lbs, and works better with more inertia at say 20 lbs, so when I tried to turn my 2.2 lb C100 camera body into a 20 lb setup, what resulted was an unsteady mess of camera parts that led to instability. The Amira on the other hand takes no rigging to plop on the Steadicam and works well on it.

    It's also of note that flexible cameras tend to mean more work rigging and derigging the camera. Sure, the Amira may not fit on most gimbals, so maybe I won't get hired for gimbal jobs, but I will get hired for other jobs appropriate for the camera, and at the end of the day, spend a lot less time rigging and derigging my camera than those people with flexible cameras. I guess if you like spending time building and unbuilding cameras, more power to you. I prefer the actual filming process and don't miss all the building and unbuilding I used to do with my C300.

    Nowadays, if it's a small shoot then I shoot with the C300 and keep it lean and mean (not fully rigged for cinema), and if it's a bigger shoot, then the Amira comes out and is already ready to go. Instead of one camera which needs time rigging and derigging, two cameras which are always ready to shoot.

    A lot of what I see big Hollywood movies these days using follows a similar pattern; Alexa XT for tripod, crane, dolly shots, Alexa Mini for Steadicam, car shots, drone, gimbal, and perhaps handheld.
    Last edited by Eric Coughlin; 08-20-2019 at 07:24 PM.


    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #24
    Senior Member puredrifting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles, Ca.
    Posts
    9,860
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Coughlin View Post
    Assuming the flexibility doesn't come at a cost, which it typically does. Adding weight to a camera is not as easy or ergonomic as you make it sound. Where are you going to add 20 lbs to say a DSLR to give it the proper amount of weight and inertia that is desired? If you mount 20 lbs on the bottom of the camera, you now have a sensor that is higher than desired from say either your shoulder or the center of gravity on your Steadicam. You can't really mount 20 lbs on the sides of the camera because that's where your buttons are, and on top of the camera is likely impractical as well. With an actual large camera, the mass and weight is inside of the camera, so you don't have to worry about building 20 lbs of weight around the camera in an impractical fashion.

    My Steadicam has a minimum weight capacity of 9 lbs, and works better with more inertia at say 20 lbs, so when I tried to turn my 2.2 lb C100 camera body into a 20 lb setup, what resulted was an unsteady mess of camera parts that led to instability. The Amira on the other hand takes no rigging to plop on the Steadicam and works well on it.

    It's also of note that flexible cameras tend to mean more work rigging and derigging the camera. Sure, the Amira may not fit on most gimbals, so maybe I won't get hired for gimbal jobs, but I will get hired for other jobs appropriate for the camera, and at the end of the day, spend a lot less time rigging and derigging my camera than those people with flexible cameras. I guess if you like spending time building and unbuilding cameras, more power to you. I prefer the actual filming process and don't miss all the building and unbuilding I used to do with my C300.

    Nowadays, if it's a small shoot then I shoot with the C300 and keep it lean and mean (not fully rigged for cinema), and if it's a bigger shoot, then the Amira comes out and is already ready to go. Instead of one camera which needs time rigging and derigging, two cameras which are always ready to shoot.

    A lot of what I see big Hollywood movies these days using follows a similar pattern; Alexa XT for tripod, crane, dolly shots, Alexa Mini for Steadicam, car shots, drone, gimbal, and perhaps handheld.
    I agree, small cameras rigged to be large are almost always an ergonomic mess. In a way, it's entertaining to look at FB User Groups for tiny cameras like the Z Cam and the XT-3, you see very very few shoulder rigs with these tiny cameras that make any sense at all.
    The weight distribution is all off, the balance is all off, the access to the camera when balanced on the shoulder is always totally useless. The rigs almost always have a rats nest of wires looping all over the place with plenty of snag points. I saw a Z Cam rig with the
    Ninja V yesterday that used what must be the thickest coiled HDMI cable known to man, it looked like a coiled garden hose hanging off the tiny Z Cam body. Rube Goldberg would be proud of our industry ;-)

    I think many of us are doing what you observe, I am shooting sit downs, green screen and tripod work with the C200 and then come to set with the XT-3 rigged either on gimbal or handheld cage. It's such a better way to work than trying to
    use the C200 for everything. I laugh at people who fly the C200 on a one-handed gimbal. Sure, it can be done but what a tiring, unbalanced, unsteady, top heavy mess.
    It's a business first and a creative outlet second.
    G.A.S. destroys lives. Stop buying gear that doesn't make you money.


    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    5,881
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by rob norton View Post
    ... DLD doesn't shoot any video at all so while it's fun to live in broken record theory land, not everyone will agree, after forming their own opinion from working in the field. I'm sure you're a really nice guy DLD but you say the exact same thing with every single post ... .
    FYI, you don't know me. Including an odd notion that I am a nice guy. Don't assume.


    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #26
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,020
    Default
    I just find it amusing how DLD and jcs regularly offer their unprofessional opinions on how the camera industry will change. I say unprofessional not in the sense that they don't do any professional video work (I know at least jcs does), but in the sense that they comment on the needs of professionals in fields that as far as I'm aware they don't work in or have any experience in (such as high end filmmaking (upwards of 10 mil budgets), high end commercial work (upwards of $500k budgets), etc.). Obviously the camera industry will change, but I just wouldn't consider non-professionals to be good judges of how the industry will change. That said, I still have fun replying; at least they're not trolls (like laverdir) because they seem to believe what they say. And I'm not saying none of it could come true, just that a person who has little or no experience in the field that they're theorizing about the future of is likely not a good candidate for accurate observations due to their lack of knowledge of the needs of that industry.

    I believe if they ever did end up working in the same field as other professionals, they would slowly come to realize and agree with everything we're saying, but as long as they don't, they will continue to not understand. I guess some needs of cameras are just concepts that experience helps to understand those needs more so than words from people on the Internet.
    Last edited by Eric Coughlin; 08-21-2019 at 02:24 PM.


    2 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Beverly Hills, CA
    Posts
    2,071
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Coughlin View Post
    I just find it amusing how DLD and jcs regularly offer their unprofessional opinions on how the camera industry will change. I say unprofessional not in the sense that they don't do any professional video work (I know at least jcs does), but in the sense that they comment on the needs of professionals in fields that as far as I'm aware they don't work in or have any experience in (such as high end filmmaking (upwards of 10 mil budgets), high end commercial work (upwards of $500k budgets), etc.). Obviously the camera industry will change, but I just wouldn't consider non-professionals to be good judges of how the industry will change. That said, I still have fun replying; at least they're not trolls (like laverdir) because they seem to believe what they say. And I'm not saying none of it could come true, just that a person who has little or no experience in the field that they're theorizing about the future of is likely not a good candidate for accurate observations due to their lack of knowledge of the needs of that industry.

    I believe if they ever did end up working in the same field as other professionals, they would slowly come to realize and agree with everything we're saying, but as long as they don't, they will continue to not understand. I guess some needs of cameras are just concepts that experience helps to understand those needs more so than words from people on the Internet.
    Why make it personal? Why not focus on facts and debate those, with facts, instead of ad hominem? Comments are made based on experience and supported by evidence, logic, and viewing trends and sharing them.

    So now we need to work on high end films upwards of 10mil budgets to be able to think for ourselves? I've owned and used pro level cameras (most recently the C300 II) and sold it after many years of experience with it. I could own an ARRI Mini LF or Venice (the two cameras that look the best to me in terms of imagery) if it made business sense, however I see what's coming based on personally creating camera software systems and it doesn't make sense. We create our own content, not shooting for others, so it's really about passion to be creative and share helpful information and/or provide comic relief vs. trying to make a buck shooting content for others.

    I dig small, light cameras which can shoot stable footage and produce competent quality. Not telling anyone else what to use, just sharing what I enjoy and why. Including sharing what's possible on the technology side, and what's coming. If one is making a living with larger heavier gear, all good; the age of AI + robotic assisted camera systems is here and I find it makes it easier for me to quickly create competent content. The goal is to keep shooting and climb out of Mediocrity Valley to create content that provides value. Currently working in a purely tech field and really enjoy working on creative projects after work/weekends.


    2 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    305
    Default
    +1


    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #29
    Senior Member Samuel H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Madrid, Spain
    Posts
    7,915
    Default
    If we could turn this thread back into useful and respectful territory...

    Does anybody know if the Ronin-S or the Ronin-SC can be made to work with the motors on the left?

    I'm using a p4k nowadays and having the motors on the right makes it a nightmare to balance on small gimbals, with its odd shape with huge grip. Moving the motors to the left, I can balance it on my Zhiyun Crane (first model). Since I don't attach any cables while working on a one-hand gimbal, this setup is perfect for me (I can also change batteries and cards without taking it off the gimbal, which is very useful given how fast the p4k eats cards and batteries). That setup is working great for me, but I'd like to switch to a more modern gimbal with better motion and features. The Ronin-SC seems perfect but if I can't make it work with motors on the left then it will have to be the Icecam Tiny 3 Ultravision, which is twice the price (but also 20% lighter) (Brandon Lee made a nice review here).


    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #30
    Senior Member Eric Coughlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    2,020
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by jcs View Post
    Why make it personal? Why not focus on facts and debate those, with facts, instead of ad hominem? Comments are made based on experience and supported by evidence, logic, and viewing trends and sharing them.

    So now we need to work on high end films upwards of 10mil budgets to be able to think for ourselves? I've owned and used pro level cameras (most recently the C300 II) and sold it after many years of experience with it. I could own an ARRI Mini LF or Venice (the two cameras that look the best to me in terms of imagery) if it made business sense, however I see what's coming based on personally creating camera software systems and it doesn't make sense. We create our own content, not shooting for others, so it's really about passion to be creative and share helpful information and/or provide comic relief vs. trying to make a buck shooting content for others.

    I dig small, light cameras which can shoot stable footage and produce competent quality. Not telling anyone else what to use, just sharing what I enjoy and why. Including sharing what's possible on the technology side, and what's coming. If one is making a living with larger heavier gear, all good; the age of AI + robotic assisted camera systems is here and I find it makes it easier for me to quickly create competent content. The goal is to keep shooting and climb out of Mediocrity Valley to create content that provides value. Currently working in a purely tech field and really enjoy working on creative projects after work/weekends.
    We've already noted facts to you guys time and again you ignore the facts and continue making your assertions based on a lack of experience in the higher end camera industry. I don't consider it an ad hominum to point out that someone does not have experience at what they're talking about. The facts are high end cameras often need things like weight for inertia, size to attach accessories, gimbals offer low quality stabilization in many cases, SDI, timecode, XLR, NDs are important, Blackmagic cameras are for amateurs and hobbyists, 6K is often not important at the high end, a variety of codecs is important, integrated quality viewfinders are important, ergonomics for balanced shoulder use is important, etc. Then you and DLD will go ahead and disagree with many of these facts, and I'm just pointing out that the basis of your disagreements comes from a lack of actual experience working in those environments and knowing what is needed from a high end camera. I don't see any higher end professionals agreeing with you here.

    Perhaps having knowledge of the tech field could help you see what's coming, but you constantly display a lack of knowledge of how that tech is going to help improve the higher end camera industry since you seem unaware of what technical features professional cameramen actually want or need.

    Yeah, again, if you both constantly prefaced by saying, "What I'm personally looking for in a camera for my own use," but I more often see sweeping statements like, "Blackmagic 6K RAW is going to change the entire industry" and "Buying an Arri is a waste of money because it doesn't even do true 4K."

    A camera's typical shelf life is around 3-6 years, and I personally don't see a lot of your tech predictions coming true within that window, in which case those predictions shouldn't have an effect on what people are trying to decide to buy for their next camera.

    Back on the subject of gimbals, you often talk like they're a mostly perfected tool that allows magnificent movement from small cameras, yet, Hollywood (and myself) continue to use Steadicam much more often because for most shots it looks better in a way that a gimbal is typically incapable of recreating, even with future tech, programmable moves, etc., as a gimbal by it's nature cannot be as quick and precise to respond to human movement as a Steadicam. And most of the time I see DSLR gimbal camera movement, the quality of the camera movement looks low quality to me. With all the 48 Hour films I've been doing, of which a lot of hobbyists and amateurs compete as well, I get to see just how bad gimbals often look in narrative films.
    Last edited by Eric Coughlin; 08-22-2019 at 01:51 AM.


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •