Music video shot with FS100 and Sony EX1

The band shots were old EX1 footage. The band wanted a video and this is the only footage I had. The original shootring conditions were atrocious, with the band inside and very brightly lit windows looking outside on a sunny day, backlighting the band. In the original footage, those windows were very blown out. This was the best I could do to mitigate the funky windows. I could have made the windows anything, trying total black, but, that looked VERY weird.
 
If they wanted a video, they got a video, and just a video. Sometimes it's better to say no!

It would have served them much better to just get the band performing in a room with out anything else in it. Blown out windows or not the video looks like someone went through a slew of random footage blindfolded. My opinion, and no intention on being rude.
 
All criticism welcome. That's what public forums are all about, yes? Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If the images make no sense to you, then they make no sense to you. And your perspective is valid. This ain't, exactly, a "feel-good" video. The intention IS to make you feel uncomfortable....not all significant film is beautiful sunrises or flowered forests.

Ya gotta love your "can-do" attitude, artnvideo. Do you tell everyone who comes to you for help to take a flyin' leap? Since I've never seen you post any work, I can only assume you don't have customers. I guess you just sit back and criticize.

I will say that the FS100 is a true pleasure to use. While my EX1 shoots quite a nice picture, the FS100 is so much easier to work with. I love this cam.
 
Last edited:
cuervo said:
I will say that the FS100 is a true pleasure to use. While my EX1 shoots quite a nice picture, the FS100 is so much easier to work with. I love this cam.
Click to expand...

Amen to that, Bill :)

PS. I also have the two, so I know what I'm saying!
 
cuervo said:
The band shots were old EX1 footage. The band wanted a video and this is the only footage I had. The original shootring conditions were atrocious, with the band inside and very brightly lit windows looking outside on a sunny day, backlighting the band. In the original footage, those windows were very blown out. This was the best I could do to mitigate the funky windows. I could have made the windows anything, trying total black, but, that looked VERY weird.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that it would have looked better left natural or maybe if you color graded to augment the overexposed look. The grey just looks strange.
 
good feedback... thanx. This is a wee bit experimental......:happy:
nyvz said:
It seems to me that it would have looked better left natural or maybe if you color graded to augment the overexposed look. The grey just looks strange.
Click to expand...
 
Dunno why I didn't think of this earlier! I can pull a luma key on the blown out windows, then fill the key with another image...like clouds....or whatever. I'm gonna give that a try. Thanx for the thought, that set me to thinking.
 
If you had wanted to make a amateur "home movie" you would not have done it any differently. This video has no aethetic vision. You have no interesting shots, no interesting colours, no interesting camera moves, no close ups, no interesting editing, no interesting effects..... nothing. Just amateur coverage. No lighting. This is anything BUT a music video. A 10 year old could have shot this with his prosumer camera and a low end shareware editing program could have gotten a better result. Get your act together. It is a waste to own 2 expensive cameras. As for the Nanoflash... you've got to be kidding. You're light years away from shooting something that deserves Nanoflash technologies. Stop spending money on equipment and start learning the craft.
 
whoa...have a fight with your wife this morning vousetestouscons? Or are you off your meds? I'd love to see your work. Or is it hard to shoot while you're on your skateboard? Or maybe you're mean just because your name is so hard to say.

so, gee, I'm really sad that my work isn't up to your artistic expectations. I guess that means I can't add you to my "friends"...LOL

oh wait....come to think of it, you didn't say that the video had no social relevance, whew, that would have REALLY hurt my feelings. Perfect lighting, inspired vision, and excellence in editing isn't going to change the fact that millions of people in the USA are out of work, or have lost untold billions in lifetime savings. But then, maybe if I had shot a video of my weekend car racing, we wouldn't have to face these issues. Sorry for waking you up, dude.

anyhow, your gracious comments are welcome. :love4: have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
cuervo said:
Dunno why I didn't think of this earlier! I can pull a luma key on the blown out windows, then fill the key with another image...like clouds....or whatever. I'm gonna give that a try. Thanx for the thought, that set me to thinking.
Click to expand...

I don't think you'll ever get that luma key to look right without some serious rotoscoping and a bit of tracking since you have camera movement. Plus you have transparent reflective surfaces in your background that would be difficult with a chroma key and nearly impossible with a luma key. At least based on my understanding. Again, I think unless you are an amazing compositor and have the time to really do a key right, I think you'd still be better off just letting the blown whites stay white.
 
Yeah, you're right, nyvz. I ended up making a luma key in Color Finesse. Once I had established the key in a contrasting monolithic color, I could do a standard key. The beauty of this approach is that I can go back and rotoscope the inappropriate luma keys. I have this approach rendered out and it looks pretty good. Having a double pass key, I have two opportunities to do a tolerance and strength adjustment. There's still a little bit of twitter, I need to go back and tweak some of the key tolerances, but, I'm making progress. I suspect I'll never totally get rid of that dratted twitter.

Thanx again for your constructive input.

More along the lines of comparing the EX1 and the FS100, I am noticing that the FS100 is a LOT more tolerant to over/underexposure than the EX1. The old shots taken with the EX1 were exposed for the faces, blowing out the hi-lights. It's called dynamic range, duh. Unfortunately, the EX1 seems to suffer a lot of overall picture degredation from the blooming of the over-exposed hi-lites. Once that blooming affects the image, there is no recovery. The FS100 is,as I said, much more forgiving, especially with the Nano.
 
Last edited:
That may tend to depend on the picture profile settings used on the EX1 or FS100. Cinematone1 on the FS100 is very nice for latitude and for highlights, whereas the EX1 has more options with various strengths and weaknesses and more adjustability. If you were not using a cinegamma on the EX1, blow-outs tend to be very harsh. Overall, though, EX1 cinegamma compared to FS100 cinematone, I do agree the FS100 will usually give better results.
 
I'll give you three examples: The band is filmed with a static master shot. That is called coverage. If I point my camera at anything to get a static master shot, I'm not doing anything creative. I'm just being a camera set-up guy. Second example: The blue screen effect. What where you thinking? It looks awful. It would have been better to just keep the original shot without any chroma keying effect. Third example: the computer screen. What exactly are you trying to show here? There is nothing to look at and it just looks like a fill in shot. The list goes on and on. What about depth of field? This video has infinite depth on field in almost everything. Where are the colours? You could at least have added saturation in post. You could have done zillions of things to make this video better. All I'm saying is that it is a waste to use top of the line codec and cameras for this kind of work. Food for thought and improvement.
 
Well I can't watch the video since I don't have a password, but there's two ways to give constructive criticism and two ways to take it...... "Food for thought and improvement" times 2.
 
Cuervo,

from your initial post it seemed like you were kinda proud to display the video, it wasn't until people started giving not so desirable feedback that you added the password restriction. I guess all feedback is not welcome after all.

ddp said:
Well I can't watch the video since I don't have a password, but there's two ways to give constructive criticism and two ways to take it...... "Food for thought and improvement" times 2.
Click to expand...

It's probably better that his "video" is password protected, at least now, he can control who views his video and get the kind of feedback he's looking for. ( I know there's been many times that all of us, may have not received the desired feedback... It happens!
 
wow...I'm really pleased with the responses I've gotten. I got exactly the feedback I need to go forward with this project. Thanks, so much to everyone for their passionate input...perfect! It works....:cheesy:. Like it or not, this got attention....and that's a good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top