Panasonic GH3 Debut Viideo

Looks to have the GH/AF skintones similar to prior panny m43 releases. But with the right post work, this can be 'fixed'. Though, for the style of this film, I didn't mind the grading for skin color. The Musgo trailer was fine example of good skintone, and the GH2-hack sample video showed the potential of higher bit rates. So, with extra DR and better iso performance, I cannot see how the GH3 would be bad, unless it is priced drastically different. But yeah, based on the look of this short, it seems out of camera, the skintones are going to be that typical panny m43 look. A workable trade off.

Great little short by the way.
 
The skin tone is just pretty common with what bloom does in post. I've never been a huge fan of the way he grades, but thats just my personal taste. I don't think there will be an issue at all with skin tones.
 
A lot of how the camera looks straight ends up effecting the final look in most cases. Look how muted most films are that use prolost canon settings on 7D? Nikons tend to be more yellow when shot with 3200k lighting than a Canon, and the final product of film ends up showing that. The DP is influenced by the nature of the camera, and the colorists are often influenced by the nature of the footage.

Of course, that cannot be determined from this one short, but I see the same color characteristics in this film as I would expect from a GH2 or AF100. It is not an issue, but the style is there in my eyes.
 
With footage like this, I always wish there was a timeline with a list of exactly when which lens was used, synced with a data dump/meter readings from the camera at the time so we know what info the camera is reading. And then see the result with no grading of any kind - just the footage. I don't think in principle this should be especially difficult. It's not a complaint, mind you, just a wish.
 
Wasn't blown away by the footage, but it looks nice. Acting was terrible though, gah.
 
Warm grading with bluish blacks is nice sometimes but here it pops out a bit too much IMO. Skin tones - it was said before - could be better. Everything was lighted and graded for a flat look, suggesting a wide dynamic range, especially the final scene at the station. But in harsh sunlight, at 00:10 one can see the limits - though the DR has obviously vastly improved. The only moiré I could find was at 1:06 on the TV screen. The rolling shutter you can judge at 00:45 and 1:21. At 2:48 the camera didn't stand the jello stress test completely.
 
Last edited:
Most of the mud is gone now. Looks much better. I didn't comment it because I supposed it was due to web compression. Philip, how is the grain structure in the original footage? I have the impression it is quite fine and filmlike but the web compression is still creating blocks.
 
joe 1008 said:
Specs leak on 43rumors: http://www.43rumors.com/ says NOT weather proof...
Click to expand...

Hopefully this is a mistake. But maybe not. They are saying it is splash proof which doesn't really tell you anything when you think about it. How often does your camera get splashed? And who ever had a camera break just because it got splashed? If you cant confidently take it out in the rain then it is useless.
 
Last edited:
joe 1008 said:
Specs leak on 43rumors: http://www.43rumors.com/ says NOT weather proof...
Click to expand...

Okay: I all the time wonder what "weather proof" really means. Does a camera then survive either a slight drizzle or also torrents of monsoon-rain? Lightning? Is it protected against normal dust or would it hold off the infinitesimal tiny granule of desert sand coming with, say, the Sirocco in Sicily?

"Not weather proof" may be bad - the other things I read made me pre-pre-order the thing already. It seems to have if not all then at least most of the things I was looking for.
 
Jay Birch said:
Yea, i thought this too.... I don't do much narrative stuff, but this opened my eyes to how actors can be bad, even without any dialogue (or maybe because there was no dialogue).
Click to expand...

The problem with the story is that it has no room where the actors could create dramatic depth. The story works because of the misleading plot (The audience is supposed to expect a totally different outcome). The actors had to follow that plot and therefore had to act against their inner motivations. The result is that it looks like bad acting. But we should not judge too heavy about that issue. The video's intention is to be visual and entertaining. I would say mission accomplished.
 
joe 1008 said:
The problem with the story is that it has no room where the actors could create dramatic depth. The story works because of the misleading plot (The audience is supposed to expect a totally different outcome). The actors had to follow that plot and therefore had to act against their inner motivations. The result is that it looks like bad acting. But we should not judge too heavy about that issue. The video's intention is to be visual and entertaining. I would say mission accomplished.
Click to expand...

The story makes so very little sense. If she is initially meant to be a suspect he is tracking, why is she calling him? They could have made it ambiguous by have his phone make a beeping sound and him just looking at it. As it turns out he is just a guy with phone anxiety because he never tries to call her back, but instead covertly tracks her like a creepy man. And somehow this miss call tells him that she is about to leave town. If he knew there was a high chance of her leaving town that would be indicated by her miscalling, why was he staying in a random motel so far away. And it must have been far because he seemingly drives for an entire day non stop as it is morning when he gets the miss call but is night when he gets there. If he is so willing to drive, then her going somewhere on a train shouldn't be much of a problem. He can just drive there. In fact he drove so far I suspect he was closer to her destination in the first place.

Obviously the film is more an indication of the visuals which do look pretty good actually, although I'm looking forward to seeing more.
 
The backstory is the following, I suppose: He was waiting for her in the motel. When she called him he saw the geographic origin of the phone call and knew she wouldn't come (Conclusion: She will leave him forever). So he started to hurry toward her. Sometimes you have to convince a woman personally, not by a phonecall. Makes sense to me. Maybe they had better showed him waiting in the first scene, not sleeping.
 
joe 1008 said:
The problem with the story is that it has no room where the actors could create dramatic depth. The story works because of the misleading plot (The audience is supposed to expect a totally different outcome). The actors had to follow that plot and therefore had to act against their inner motivations. The result is that it looks like bad acting. But we should not judge too heavy about that issue. The video's intention is to be visual and entertaining. I would say mission accomplished.
Click to expand...
Never mislead the audience, first rule on scriptwriting :-) Well, and on acting too... LOL
 
Emanuel said:
Never mislead the audience, first rule on scriptwriting :-) Well, and on acting too... LOL
Click to expand...

Hi Emanuel! Yes, that can blow right into the filmmaker's face. :banned:(but in this case at least I didn't feel totally offended. They did it in a likeable way ;))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top