G
Guest
Guest
interesting to go back to these old threads. Has any of your opinions changed since then?
Hidef1080
Well-known member
G
Guest
Guest
Totally.
It is the price everyone wished it started at . Since, nothing has come out that truly surpasses it, and no camera in 2013 seems to really out do it in the sub $10k price range, it does conjure up some almost break through sort of excitement. Definitely a good thing.
The "A" is the first camera in s35 HD that I have felt is, I apologize if I offend anyone, ...good enough.
The reason I am a little apprehensive about saying that, is the fact that I do not want to discount the incredible achievements that people have made to improve the digital imaging technology to this point. But that doesn't change the fact that, up to this point, digital imagining still doesn't do it for our eyes. We make do. We certainly are ok with compromise, we survived the VHS days. We all know 'awesome' is relative.
Anyway, the "A" and subsequent high end cameras have arrived at the point, where it is making me more concerned about display technology. Winning. I still like 4 and 8k better than HD. So, I am glad we are getting 4-8k with no obvious drawbacks.
squig
Veteran
I agree with the "good enough" from a purely technical standpoint, but creatively speaking they're all good....I draw the line with the iPhone though, and I've never been a big 7D fan but I can make it look good.
This year is gonna to be interesting with the GH3, 5D MKIII, D800, BMCC, 1DC, and F5/F55 in the mix. I expect the Sonys, BMCC, and GH3 will do really well. (notice I didn't mention Canon and I've been shooting Canon almost exclusively for the past 4 years.)
This year is gonna to be interesting with the GH3, 5D MKIII, D800, BMCC, 1DC, and F5/F55 in the mix. I expect the Sonys, BMCC, and GH3 will do really well. (notice I didn't mention Canon and I've been shooting Canon almost exclusively for the past 4 years.)
G
Guest
Guest
Aw, I have a love hate with phones. They are always there, and are a creative challenge.
These are my 1.3mp crack berry. pics...
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
That's what is so challenging with the 1.3mp crack berry, is to get the auto exposure to cooperate.
I don't think everything needs the highest quality (just look at how fun instagram is, as it destroys IQ at times). I stay away from instagram, but recognize the appeal to others.
But yeah, even our best tech is only starting to get there. Seeing how far we have to go, makes the difference between an Arri and a GH3 small. But as they are both lacking, then presumably every little bit of improvement matters. When you're starved, the difference between a small portion of food and a smaller portion matter. I just disagree with comparing how far we have come with digital imaging, and therefore feeling obligated to say how awesome the look is. Yeah, we have come a long way, but we still have a long way to go. Ergonomics, DR, resolution, bit rates, compression, and on top of that, we need storage solutions, and better displays, new lens options, and on and on. Moving forward. PLenty of things to keep me upgrading. But only if I see movement. Right now, I can't see a whole lot of progression. I am still happy with the Canon 60D(comparatively). The C100 looks nice, but 8bit, meh (remember we are comparing a $700 camera with a $7,000 one). Sure, it looks better than the 60D, but not in light of how much farther imagining needs to go. And the difference between a C100 and a 60D is not as big as the difference between people operating them. Not to mention I almost definitively prefer the ergonomics of the 60D. Thank the lord, that Red is getting out a 6k DRagon slayer sensor to put some perspective on all this. I want to put my money in a company that serves my needs. So, far it was Canon 2 years ago. Today? Well, ,no one really changed the standards of s35 or ff35 since the 5dmk2 came out, so in a weird way, Canon 3 years ago was sooo progressive, that I haven't needed to upgrade. Thanks Canon??? D800, F3, and 1dc currently have my attention, since I have a long doco style shoot coming up. Otherwise I wouldn't be looking, since there is nothing that serves my personal shooting needs. Ah, work. I do not mind paying more for a camera when it is work. Just wish 1D-C and f3 had more pro features built in. It's their lack, that is leading me to even consider the consumer D800 for pro work.
Last edited:
squig
Veteran
The D800 is capable of producing some very nice images as are all these cameras in the right hands.
We're going through the same growing pains in digital cinema that we went through back in the late 90's in digital audio. Back then we were trying to emulate the sound of analogue and with the early 16bit A/D converters we weren't quite there, but we learned a few tricks like putting everything through valves to warm it up before it hit the converters, just like we do with picture profiles on 8bit video. It wasn't long before very nice 24bit A/D converters came out and it was very hard to tell the difference between analogue and digital. It was the same situation as now where you had guys producing really good stuff with cheap equipment that was as good and a lot of times better than the stuff recorded by guys with much more expensive "professional" gear.
As an indie filmmaker who has to perform every job in the end credits, my right creative brain is in constant conflict with my left technical brain (I just made that up, it could be the other way around). Sure I want everything to look amazing but a few compression artifacts aren't going to ruin a great story for the audience. Of the 6000+ people that watched my first student film https://vimeo.com/11456214 only one person pointed out a flaw in the cinematography (he happens to be an academy award winning cinematographer). He didn't say anything about the aliasing or moire or noise from the 5D, he just picked out a mistake I made with the lighting in one shot that looked unnatural. I see so many faults in that film that I'd like to fix but I've got bigger fish to fry.
I'm shooting my first feature this year with a budget of around 60k. I'm confident I can make it look amazing with a sub $4000 camera, and I don't really have a choice given the budget constraints. I'm in the testing stage right now to figure out which camera is right for the job, the 5D MKIII and GH3 are the leading contenders.
What the Zacuto shootout really demonstrated is that it's far more important to know your camera than to have the "best" camera. Even pixel peepers forget about pixels when they're watching a really great story.
We have to master the technology and not become its slave.
Sorry for the rant.... James, the hottest day on record, and a good ale made me do it. :grin:
We're going through the same growing pains in digital cinema that we went through back in the late 90's in digital audio. Back then we were trying to emulate the sound of analogue and with the early 16bit A/D converters we weren't quite there, but we learned a few tricks like putting everything through valves to warm it up before it hit the converters, just like we do with picture profiles on 8bit video. It wasn't long before very nice 24bit A/D converters came out and it was very hard to tell the difference between analogue and digital. It was the same situation as now where you had guys producing really good stuff with cheap equipment that was as good and a lot of times better than the stuff recorded by guys with much more expensive "professional" gear.
As an indie filmmaker who has to perform every job in the end credits, my right creative brain is in constant conflict with my left technical brain (I just made that up, it could be the other way around). Sure I want everything to look amazing but a few compression artifacts aren't going to ruin a great story for the audience. Of the 6000+ people that watched my first student film https://vimeo.com/11456214 only one person pointed out a flaw in the cinematography (he happens to be an academy award winning cinematographer). He didn't say anything about the aliasing or moire or noise from the 5D, he just picked out a mistake I made with the lighting in one shot that looked unnatural. I see so many faults in that film that I'd like to fix but I've got bigger fish to fry.
I'm shooting my first feature this year with a budget of around 60k. I'm confident I can make it look amazing with a sub $4000 camera, and I don't really have a choice given the budget constraints. I'm in the testing stage right now to figure out which camera is right for the job, the 5D MKIII and GH3 are the leading contenders.
What the Zacuto shootout really demonstrated is that it's far more important to know your camera than to have the "best" camera. Even pixel peepers forget about pixels when they're watching a really great story.
We have to master the technology and not become its slave.
Sorry for the rant.... James, the hottest day on record, and a good ale made me do it. :grin:
Last edited:
TrueIndigo
Well-known member
James and Squig = quality posts :thumbup:
Sage
Well-known member
G
Guest
Guest
Great summation.
Over the holidays, I watched a bit of netflix. It is almost ironic that we watched the show "Alias". Because at times I was pixel peeping for artifacts and anomolies in the highly compressed video. Tons of posterization, macro blocking, and loss of detail in the shadows. And even though the show was shot on film, the compression really crushed the highlights too. The film grain was not nostalgic or nice, it was almost like mosquito noise (though far better than fixed pattern noise).
Did all of those defects destroy my viewing experience? No. But it didn't help either. Even with the loose plot and rushed edits, poor fight choreography, etc, I still enjoyed it. How much more so when something is really masterful?
As a professional, low image quality doesn't bother me. As a story teller, low image quality doesn't bother me. As an artist, low image quality doesn't bother me.
We often separate the 'amateur' from the 'pro' along lines of quality. We know that is not the definition, but we do. A guy on a set I recently worked on got pissed off and snarked, "I'm f'ing tired of working with these amateurs!" He meant it in regards to the quality of work. But if you go back to the Latin origin of the word (amator) it means: Lover, devotee, enthusiatic pursuer. In that sense, amateurs in my mind, can often be better, or more discerning at a skill, or have a deeper appreciation for something than so called professionals.
If your focus is the story, than the quality of image doesn't matter; only the content of those images. However, if you are a lover of the image itself, in all it's aesthetic beauty, then the image matters. Some one may love the classics like Rembrandt, but hate Picasso. Someone may love the clean image and definition of 80mp, but hate the graininess of 8mm film. Some may love them all. But a point comes, when you have to ask yourself, what aesthetic and practical aspects do you want in a camera. It is a good question to ask.
When I shoot a 'story', that doesn't mean I have to shoot in a certain medium, and it sure doesn't mean it will be viewed in that medium. But occasionally, I feel like I want to capture family members in as much pristine detail as possible. A photograph taken with a 36mp D800 is going to give me that, at a price I can swallow (aka, not a business expense.) Does that mean that low res facebook pics from a couple years ago, don't work their nostalgia on me? Of course they still work. But I am not talking about everyday images.
So, you can see why we don't have better image quality at lower prices, because 99% of the time, we don't need it. And therefore, the mass market will not bare the burden of the cost.
I like what you wrote. And a good ale can do wonders.
There are pixel peepers and trophy keepers, but there are also amator's. Even if we prevent ourselves from being slaves to technology, we cannot prevent ourselves from being slaves of our senses. I one hundred percent believe that Jim Jannard is a lover of the highest image quality possible. Instead of being forced to wait for technology, he actually did something about it. Started making his own cameras. I do not get that sense from other camera manufacturers. Not even Black Magic has that. Black magic saw a niche in the market. Truth is, Jim is not alone. Most people enjoy better images. I do not understand it wholly, but I recognize it.
People often forget, and many never knew, that early photography was extremely high resolution, with amazing texture. If you get a chance, to check out some daguerreotype photography at a museum. (but also..... http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/07/ff_daguerrotype_panorama/ quote "a digicam would have to record 140,000 megapixels per shot to match that.")
We shouldn't be slaves to technology, which can be taken in more than one way. We shouldn't be slaves to the market either. Technology and mass production has already proven that prohibitively expensive technology can exist at affordable prices. There just needs to be a demand for it. As long as the average consumer knows it is possible, they will demand it (Steve Jobs). And then story tellers can stop worrying about technology, because it will be readily available, and then they can focus on the what matters to them: the story, and the creative mastery of tools.
Last edited:
G
Guest
Guest
Squig is super quality.
Mitch Gross
Veteran
Or Talent Trumps Tech.
Or that you can make the cameras all look kinda the same if the same is what you want.
Or that if you have a ton of time in post you can fix/hide a lot of things.
Doesn't really tell much about the cameras, though.
squig
Veteran
It's readily available now. You can go out and shoot a feature with a BMCC or a GH3 (ok not the best examples of readily available) and it's not going to look any different projected to something shot with an Alexa or even film. 16bit CD audio doesn't sound anywhere near as good as vinyl, and MP3s sound a lot worse, who cares?
I respect people for pushing the envelope but I don't respect people who insist that you have to have x stops of dynamic range or x mbits/s. Did other artists give Van Gogh crap because he didn't use the highest resolving brushes?
I'm focussing A LOT more on story than I am on cameras. It's quite sad reading about projects that can't go ahead due to the slow shipment of the BMCC, since when did the tool dictate the art?
My head hurts
rogar-BlackEye(DBG
G
Guest
Guest
Mine too. Let's grab another Ale. Beat the heat'My head hurts