GH5 How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

I'm sure you could explain to Deakins why all the effort he expended pulling off that oner was a huge waste

Dunning-Kruger effect, in psychology, a cognitive bias whereby people with limited knowledge or competence in a given intellectual or social domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence in that domain relative to objective criteria or to the performance of their peers or of people in general.
Click to expand...
 
I wouldn't want to do that, I thought it was a great shot.

I just think the extra over-appreciation of it is cute.
 
What overappreciation? I noted it for its technical difficulty, particularly with regard to camera movement. Originally I was just trying to look up a sweeping crane shot from an old film and compare it to one from a new film. I repeatedly said that one could make the case that a oner was the wrong way to do the scene or the movie. But only a oner can have the effect of a oner. It isn't pretentious to analyze how a oner differs in effect from montage. It's elementary
 
What's the definition of overrated...highlight that one too if you have time.

Maybe you're right; I hope machines take over everything ASAP. We're better off.
 
I like everything. It's actually ironic because I appreciate everyone who's ever cared and gets up and makes something, anything more than I appreciate the execution like of certain shots that may end up being overanalyzed as being far greater than they really are, IMO.
 
So you would say that all the Star Wars movies are equally good and there's no particular scene or shot that stands out to you?
 
Don't kill me...but I haven't seen any of them besides one part of one where they are on those cool air vehicles in a forest, I think battling.

I know...I know.

I have an unbelievable amount of experience with other things in my life and tons of other pop culture stuff, but I somehow never seen the Star Wars movies and I really don't know anything about them or that universe.

___

But I know what you mean. There's a Lethal Weapon marathon this week and I can't help but to think how much more I love 1 and 2 over 3 and 4.
 
My excuse for not seeing them as a kid/teen was because I was so busy with sports and video games and many other hobbies, but it really is impossible I haven’t seen at least one of them after that. I guess it just never appealed to me to make an effort to try, and after growing up I rarely went to movie theaters (where I would have had a better chance of seeing one of the new ones) so it kind of worked out that way.
 
Movies such as 1917 and Birdman are interesting in the way they create the impression of a single take - and because of the amazing planning that went into creating something where all the shots could be combined so seamlessly to create that impression.
But if you want to see an amazing 'one-er', you should really watch Victoria (2015) from director Sebastian Schipper and cinematographer Sturla Brandth Grøvlen.
 
stoneinapond said:
Fanciful. But why?

I just pulled this out of you not what, and perhaps I will be criticized again for what I'm about to say, but not every commercial entity on the plant functions according to the way of doing business the American way. Although a small fraction of the overall number of camera users, Panasonic users are still a significant number, and it may not be a perceived burden for the company to continue to serve this client base, if it is not a horrendous drainer of resources. I think it's called good faith. (It's OK to call me an idealistic relic.)
Click to expand...

It make sense for the same reasons Olympus dropped out. The Lumix operation is either a money loser - most likely - or, at best, a moderate moneymaker in a rapidly declining industry. By acquiring the assets, OMD obtains itself a virtual monopoly on the MFT products and, off it, would be able to negotiate better sensors from Sony without being forced to be a photo-centric entity only, with Panny taking over the video sector. As an MFT monopoly, it could have several sensors in several bodies, from the most affordable to the most cool.

And Panasonic - this was brought up a few months ago - saves itself some face without the need to admit failure. And the long time Lumix users would not be left in a lurch either, with a continuous MFT production. Plus, the L-Mount users wouldn't feel too distraught if the S-line keeps on. But, if Panasonic simply drops the entire Lumix line a la Samsung with its NX-mount, a lot of people would be quite upset and this would present a negative image for the huge company. My version has more upside and almost no downside. Win, win, et cetera, et cetera.
 
ahalpert said:
I believe that the 12 can't zoom. It just has different focal length lenses (on separate sensors) available. It can switch between them or crop in from a wide (possibly with an assist in center resolution from the telephoto?)
Click to expand...

go to where you change lens and swipe up the with the little wheel you zoom in and out. You don't have to pinch your finger. It is not like a DSLR but it works pretty good. I thought maybe he didn't know that
 
ahalpert said:
Agreed. The success of iphone photography is that it has built-in processing to make things look the way we typically want them to (sky, overall exposure, skin). But it does so via automatic processing, not because of some superior optics or sensor. Fixing flaws does not an interesting photo make. And any serious application will want to handle the processing personally, unless they're pressed for time
Click to expand...

With any camera you can overexpose. Even with the iPhone you can use filters and go manual with Filmic Pro.
 
Zim said:
go to where you change lens and swipe up the with the little wheel you zoom in and out. You don't have to pinch your finger. It is not like a DSLR but it works pretty good. I thought maybe he didn't know that
Click to expand...

You crop in and out. Or change lenses
 
NorBro said:
My excuse for not seeing them as a kid/teen was because I was so busy with sports and video games and many other hobbies, but it really is impossible I haven’t seen at least one of them after that. I guess it just never appealed to me to make an effort to try, and after growing up I rarely went to movie theaters (where I would have had a better chance of seeing one of the new ones) so it kind of worked out that way.
Click to expand...

I would say you should see them right now but I think you might be too old. Too old to begin the training.

That's another line from Empire Strikes Back. How many star wars references have you missed in your lifetime, one wonders? I will quote another star wars line every hour on the hour until my demands are met.

What did you even do with the family guy star wars take off? You poor soul

 
OnSet said:
Movies such as 1917 and Birdman are interesting in the way they create the impression of a single take - and because of the amazing planning that went into creating something where all the shots could be combined so seamlessly to create that impression.
But if you want to see an amazing 'one-er', you should really watch Victoria (2015) from director Sebastian Schipper and cinematographer Sturla Brandth Grøvlen.
Click to expand...

It's on YouTube and I started watching it in the middle of some random scene by a piano and it was like one big camera test for 15 minutes and I couldn't pull away. Some of the shaky and what appears like random improv camera work is really captivating.

I don't know if a robot could do that! [Although it could probably come close with random calculations.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVzTYle4ppg

Where do even start planning something like this...

I stopped and bookmarked it so I can start from the beginning one day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top