New Firmware Out

Matthew P said:
I'm not sure if you were being sarcastic (there's a lot of that going around it seems :huh: ) but a bit of noise reduction and colour curves helps a little. Though, the sharpness (or lack of it) is really noticeable in that shot. :shocked:

1256024949.jpg
Click to expand...

LOL yeah I was just having fun:happy: Theres been a lot of bashing on the 7D/5D relating to its quality, and ability to be used to produce a bearable finalized product. Now seeing that none have said the aforementioned directly, I should place a caveat on that statement, but with the amount of 7D/5D image deconstructing pointing out its faults with a HALOGEN BULB, but only quickly glancing over its strengths with a mere keyring flashlight, I wanted to allow those considering these current crop of cameras to know that they CAN & DO produce a great look if you give yourself room to work with.

I just took the opportunity to post a quick screen grab (UNTOUCHED IN POST by the way) of some 7D footage, right after the 5D footage was posted. That way after reading all the bashing, you would have at least something real world situations to compare it to. Cuz I'm not sure about anyone else, but none of my projects I have ever filmed, nor will be attempting to film within the near future do I plan on having a 5K res chart in any scenes. But hey never say never right.

Once again this camera only cost $2K w/lens & Tax added and to me that screen grab justifies its purchase alone.
 
1256024949.jpg
[/QUOTE]

J. Odoms, do you happen to recall what the settings were for that shot - ISO, shutter (if not 1/50) etc? It's a great example, since you can see the camera's technical deficiencies clearly if you look for them, but the emotional impression created by the actor with an interesting face is far stronger.

The weakness of the typical 'camcorder look' has so much to do with inadequate depth of field, insofar as the background is competing with the subject for attention. I would work further on this in post - as Barry says, the effects of aliasing and chroma noise are real, and over 90-120 minutes may become tiring to the viewer even if they can't articulate why - but this looks pretty damn good.
 
Eddy Robinson said:
1256024949.jpg
Click to expand...

J. Odoms, do you happen to recall what the settings were for that shot - ISO, shutter (if not 1/50) etc? It's a great example, since you can see the camera's technical deficiencies clearly if you look for them, but the emotional impression created by the actor with an interesting face is far stronger.

The weakness of the typical 'camcorder look' has so much to do with inadequate depth of field, insofar as the background is competing with the subject for attention. I would work further on this in post - as Barry says, the effects of aliasing and chroma noise are real, and over 90-120 minutes may become tiring to the viewer even if they can't articulate why - but this looks pretty damn good.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I was on the Canon 50mm F1.8 I (Metal One) at a Shutter Speed of 1/50, Never left it the entire night. ISO 640 I believe, and I really cant remember what I stopped down to, because I got this shot so quickly. I plan on having a little time in Post, but I'm sure it'll stand out. I as well thought this particular shot was a great example of what the camera is capable of in a pinch.

As for the (Actor) he actually was just a random guy in Chicago, riding the Train, but I liked his look so much I wanted to grab him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top