darwinandpaine
Well-known member
I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I'm getting a little annoyed by people talking about the noise, resolution, etc... in the HVX who have never used the camera. I'm annoyed most, because I know that the more professional the camera, the more is required of the operator.
Good camera operators are good because they know their instrument. They've taken the time to test the camera in different situations, with different light, adjusting the settings as needed and really gotten to know the camera and what it can do. So, when someone starts talking about the noise, pixel count, etc... and they haven't even used an HVX, well... I know they're not skilled in their craft.
For instance, I feel that in low light situations, neither of the Cinegammas are best to my eye. But, I've also noticed that none of the "filmic" look I desire is not lost by using another setting either, because in low light, you don't need to flatten things out as much --- they're already flat!
My belabored point is this: This camera will not run itself and there is no "best/magical" setting that works in every situation. If you're in low light with a lot of dark in the back ground, Normal SD gamma might be best, or you might want to change the matrix, or the master ped, or, or, or... In broad daylight, standard F5 might do perfectly. Like a high-end DSLR, the HVX is not point-and-shoot. It's a professional camera that requires the skill and finesse of a "professional" operator. So, a lot of us (myself included) are going to have to bring our game up.
If it were just a matter of getting the "best" camera, then anyone could be a fantastic camera operator and make beautiful images. But we all know that's not true.
Sorry for the rant.
Good camera operators are good because they know their instrument. They've taken the time to test the camera in different situations, with different light, adjusting the settings as needed and really gotten to know the camera and what it can do. So, when someone starts talking about the noise, pixel count, etc... and they haven't even used an HVX, well... I know they're not skilled in their craft.
For instance, I feel that in low light situations, neither of the Cinegammas are best to my eye. But, I've also noticed that none of the "filmic" look I desire is not lost by using another setting either, because in low light, you don't need to flatten things out as much --- they're already flat!
My belabored point is this: This camera will not run itself and there is no "best/magical" setting that works in every situation. If you're in low light with a lot of dark in the back ground, Normal SD gamma might be best, or you might want to change the matrix, or the master ped, or, or, or... In broad daylight, standard F5 might do perfectly. Like a high-end DSLR, the HVX is not point-and-shoot. It's a professional camera that requires the skill and finesse of a "professional" operator. So, a lot of us (myself included) are going to have to bring our game up.
If it were just a matter of getting the "best" camera, then anyone could be a fantastic camera operator and make beautiful images. But we all know that's not true.
Sorry for the rant.
