morgan_moore
Major Contributor
good to know..
It feels like people are reluctant to say they like the "B" image simply because it's too easy of an answer. It's like answering "Steven Spielberg" when asked "Who's your favorite film Director?" in film school. You feel you won't sound knowledgeable enough with an obvious answer, so you fib and throw some out-of-left-field answer like "Sam Peckinpah" or "John Frankenheimer" (yah, I looked the latter up by the way). It may not have been the most natural-looking of the images, but in a proclaimed "camera shootout" test, in which the viewers are, at the very least, looking for clarity out of a camera, this camera and image obviously stood out above the rest.
Now obviously this was not solely a camera test, as the DP/crew, lighting, and post color correction factors had a MAJOR hand in the final product. And ultimately this was more about what you can do with the right human resources behind the scenes. But, without being so nit-picky or "different" or TOO analytical of this art form, why is it so tough to say that, at the very least, Camera B produced the most standout image for the situation it was put in--well-lit, clear, and colorful. Of course we can spend all day chiming in with our own subjective opinions as to how much light we should put on our subjects or how colorful our scenes should be, but that's really a different matter; not really pertinent to a "camera shootout." Then again, this wasn't really a traditional shootout where we let the cameras do all the work, but I guess we should be seeing that in Part III.
We're butchering these tests to death, and yet you show these clips to a random movie-going audience (the people who are ultimately going to judge our films), they'll either tell you that "'B's the prettiest" or "I can't even tell the difference." You certainly won't hear people saying, "UGH, did you SEE that aliasing?" or "That was WAYYY too contrasty." If the story's engaging enough and the cinematography, audio, and acting is level and non-distracting, nobody will know the difference.
Now obviously this was not solely a camera test, as the DP/crew, lighting, and post color correction factors had a MAJOR hand in the final product. And ultimately this was more about what you can do with the right human resources behind the scenes. But, without being so nit-picky or "different" or TOO analytical of this art form, why is it so tough to say that, at the very least, Camera B produced the most standout image for the situation it was put in--well-lit, clear, and colorful. Of course we can spend all day chiming in with our own subjective opinions as to how much light we should put on our subjects or how colorful our scenes should be, but that's really a different matter; not really pertinent to a "camera shootout." Then again, this wasn't really a traditional shootout where we let the cameras do all the work, but I guess we should be seeing that in Part III.
We're butchering these tests to death, and yet you show these clips to a random movie-going audience (the people who are ultimately going to judge our films), they'll either tell you that "'B's the prettiest" or "I can't even tell the difference." You certainly won't hear people saying, "UGH, did you SEE that aliasing?" or "That was WAYYY too contrasty." If the story's engaging enough and the cinematography, audio, and acting is level and non-distracting, nobody will know the difference.
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
Sure the audience wont know - I could not see the cameras apart due to watching the thing low res
But a film is the audience experience and the shooting experience/budget, spending a bunch in lighting and post to make a 7d look like an alexa just does not stack up financially, unless you are a student who does his own post for 'free' and all the extra lighting crew were students working for 'free', with lighting they borrowed for 'free' from college
S
But a film is the audience experience and the shooting experience/budget, spending a bunch in lighting and post to make a 7d look like an alexa just does not stack up financially, unless you are a student who does his own post for 'free' and all the extra lighting crew were students working for 'free', with lighting they borrowed for 'free' from college
S
That is in your opinion and as may be the case the opinion of some others. And I won't tell you you're wrong. Suffice to say that I completely disagree with those points I've quoted.
My top preferences in the blind version were H and F and I posted as much at the time of viewing.
Samuel H
Major Contributor
I also said I didn't like B http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?284906-Revenge-of-the-Great-Camera-Shootout-blind-test in fact I said:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...of-the-Great-Camera-Shootout-blind-test/page5
It was a blind test. I posted right after watching it without any knowledge or even speculation on which camera was which that I preferred H and disliked B.
There's wasn't any agenda to sound knowledgeable or not. For all I knew B could have been the F65 and H could have been the Iphone.
I just said, this looks nice and film like, that looks like a youtube video and kinda cheesy whatever cameras they might be.
28 days later was a great entertaining movie, shot in SD.
Do you want to get rid of your HD camera because the audience won't care if it's HD or SD?
refocusedmedia
Veteran
B looked the most like video, imo.
vision_filmz
Carbonite Member
I and many others also agreed that we did NOT like "B". So for anyone to say it was the best just proves the point of "opinions" and how everyone has one. Lets wait till the nest test comes out and it's put to a non lit torture tests, lets see what happens.
This is a noteworthy shootout. We get some nice information without any effort on our part. Thanks Zacuto. We all get to decide what our favorite camera is and it doesn't matter what that may be.
Since there is some discussion about filmmaker vs viewer opinions, it would be fun to have a part four, that presents a general audience opinion for best image.
A lot of effort is put into the image both during the shoot and in post. How much does it matter to the audience? Do they care? Do they notice? Is it subliminal? Do we care what the audience thinks or do we do what satisfies us?
Since there is some discussion about filmmaker vs viewer opinions, it would be fun to have a part four, that presents a general audience opinion for best image.
A lot of effort is put into the image both during the shoot and in post. How much does it matter to the audience? Do they care? Do they notice? Is it subliminal? Do we care what the audience thinks or do we do what satisfies us?
Ryan E. Walters
Well-known member
Perspective on the shootout-
Perspective on the shootout-
In addition to my first write up where I talk about the choices I made on the shoot, I have done another write up that offers some perspective on some issues that I think have gone over looked: http://thetown-crier.blogspot.com/2012/07/perspective-on-part-02-of-zacutos.html
Some of my comments are around the following-
- Viewing environment and scene size affect the viewer perception. (You can get away with more on an iPhone screen then on a theater screen.)
- Story, Acting, Lighting, & Set design are all bigger factors then what camera was used.
- Lighting and camera choice are not done in a vacuum, which is one of the short comings of this test. (But that is the nature of testing, so I'm not sure how it can be avoided ...)
Overall, I'm glad for this test, and the discussion it has generated. Now lets go out and make some great images with the cameras we do have!
Perspective on the shootout-
In addition to my first write up where I talk about the choices I made on the shoot, I have done another write up that offers some perspective on some issues that I think have gone over looked: http://thetown-crier.blogspot.com/2012/07/perspective-on-part-02-of-zacutos.html
Some of my comments are around the following-
- Viewing environment and scene size affect the viewer perception. (You can get away with more on an iPhone screen then on a theater screen.)
- Story, Acting, Lighting, & Set design are all bigger factors then what camera was used.
- Lighting and camera choice are not done in a vacuum, which is one of the short comings of this test. (But that is the nature of testing, so I'm not sure how it can be avoided ...)
Overall, I'm glad for this test, and the discussion it has generated. Now lets go out and make some great images with the cameras we do have!
FrameFarmMedia
Veteran
Thanks for the insight Ryan. Well written blog post. Sums up the test nicely
Ryan E. Walters
Well-known member
Much appreciated. Thanks!
morgan_moore
Major Contributor
This is genius (the costings)
I am a proud FS100 owner, the cheapest camera to an owner operator without $50g or more to drop!
Of course at day to day end (not cine) the FS100 owner wins on the cameras with dual sound, which is an additional post cost..
S
Didn't say "B" was "the best"; said it produced the most "standout" image. In a "camera shootout," it was the most visible and clear picture. Whatever camera it was, it was capable of pulling out a clear, sharp image based on the mutual limited lighting resources, while the other images were clearly dark in areas. Of course, we find out after the fact that the DP's and their crews chose to light and color-correct a certain way, based on how they felt it should be addressed in their circumstance. Were they wrong? Were others right? Absolutely not. Each scenario was basically a crew interpretation. And our initial thoughts of each shot were our own interpretation. I suppose I approached the initial viewing on a fundamental level, given that it was a "camera shootout" and these array of cameras would be put in a daunting situation. So to immediately see a clear, colorful, sharp picture out of "B" and then see a combination of darker images, it was clear that "B" had some capability. In the back of my mind, I'm also thinking, "Well that crew appears to have done much more to light up that scene." Nevertheless, the camera was able to produce a clear, visible scene. How that cam's exploited for everyone else's projects is up to their own interpretation.
Truth be told, most (if not all) of these cameras have a "video" look. Way too sharp, too clean, too contrasty. But at this point, we've kind of accepted them for what they are and what they produce and we've adjusted.
What fascinates me the most is to hear all the different interpretations from all the different filmmakers in the viewing room after they're showed the clips. One man's Nissan Sentra was another man's Jaguar. I just felt that, fundamentally speaking, "B" obviously was the most standout image and couldn't understand why it was deemed by some to be at or towards the bottom of their list.
But ultimately that's mine and yours' opinion, neither good nor bad. Just different. HAPPY SHOOTING, GUYS!
Ian-T
Veteran
I agree with everyhting you said . I was saying some of the same things earlier (or maybe in another thread) that it all looked too dark. I agree the GH-2 stood out in comparison to the others because of lighting choice. Good for them. At first I also said that I didn't think "B" was the GH-2 but in the back of my mind I knew it was due to what the guys said about their lighting choice. Then there are those who say they didn't like "B" because it looked too digital.....as opposed to what? Because it all looked digital. Yes...cameras like the Alexa and SOny are...too clean. I remember some videos I watched last summer where these pros "dirtied" up their Alexa footage because....it was too clean. The Sonys are also....too clean. The C300....not at all. They all come with their own quirks....just like the lower end cameras. Regardless of what I say though I'm sure the images looked a lot different when viewing them on the big screen. So everyone in the video had a totally different perspective than most of us commentig here.
G
Guest
Guest
I felt the GH2 had the most unique image of the bunch, minus the iPhone. It definitely has a place.
If you wanted to know which stock 1000cc bike is the fastest in 0-400m, it would be much easier to find out. This test however is not something similar. The elements contained within the test were prone to too much subjectiveness.
What i learned from this project:
-Hacked panasonic gh2 is simply amazing (hence the reason why i'm waiting for gh3 now).
-DPs and Colorists may still fail even with years of experience.
-Don't be a 'i know it best' type of person in this job.
-As always, competition is a good thing.
Thanks to all those involved in this project. It was a very inspirational work.
What i learned from this project:
-Hacked panasonic gh2 is simply amazing (hence the reason why i'm waiting for gh3 now).
-DPs and Colorists may still fail even with years of experience.
-Don't be a 'i know it best' type of person in this job.
-As always, competition is a good thing.
Thanks to all those involved in this project. It was a very inspirational work.
Fluoro
Well-known member
First you have to wait for it to be released and then how long for availability and then how long for a hack? And just because it's a newer camera there is no guarantee it will be better than the GH2. Some people still use the hacked GH1 because they prefer the look to the hacked GH2. But as long as you don't need a camera now then I guess you might as well wait.