Through The Fire

If you are on the fence about an F35, don't get it

C70,Komdo, and Fx6
But I like the image from F35 which cannot say about C70, FX6 and other video cams with lots of these amazing specs like ISO 1000 000 or bird-catching AF :) They are really great tools for making videos (even the video art in right hands), but not the movies.

Agree with all of you that Komodo is the most logical choice in my hard crazy case
 
I know. But consider, please, that we are from the different worlds: I live in Kiev and cannot buy an F35 from my neighbor who has already played enough with. Same with Alexa or Komodo. And color is not the most important thing for me when I chosing between them. They all produce enough colors for getting everything you want. Arris are overused with 4000+ hours, Sonys are ugly built and couldn't be serviced, Komodos just launched and have tons of bugs. But they all producing quite enough image for my humble needs.

Have you seen the bigmitch's footage? Those blue daylights out from the box... is that CCD's holy magic, which shouldn't be graded or even corrected?

FYI I shoot everything at 3200 on the F35 even outdoor stuff. The sample clips are all at 3200. I personally like "colder" looking footage as my personal taste but I know if I shot the color checker correctly I can easily bring the white balance back to any degree I want. But I always find myself going back to the cooler vibes.

There are a lot of good camera options out there for sure. I certainly took a leap of faith when purchasing the F35 about a year ago. I didnt know much about it, other than what I found on here on the forum that these wonderful folks have archived for us. But for some reason I was super excited about it. I took me many hours and many long nights of tweaking footage, testing lighting scenarios, finding the perfect exposure IRE for the style I'm going for until I felt totally comfortable using the camera. If you do decide to make a move on the F35 I would definitely practice a bunch before you go all in on a feature.

BUT for me, this camera is what I feel like I've been searching for my whole life when it comes to an image. I really cant put it into words but it really just does it for me. When you know you know right?? lololol but it didnt happen by just turning the camera on and hitting record. This camera is work, but its worth it for me in the end at least.

I also have a deep appreciation for old things in general. Like going into an old metal shop or wood shop seeing all the worn tools, pathways, textures, smells etc... The F35 is like having an old tool that your father took care of and handed it down to you haha who knows what was actually shot on it. Most likely some pretty talented people were around it and had their hands on it. That nostalgia alone gets me excited to film something. This camera was designed for professional DP's the best of the best at its time. Not a main stream market trying to turn good cameras out for cheap prices. When designing this camera it didnt matter how much it cost. I think thats why this camera is still in the conversation today and why it cost so damn much when it came out. I dont think you'll ever see anything like it ever again.
 
How did you upscale it to 4K? Just a 4k export? DaVinci? or different software?

//C

I used the super scale feature in the paid version of resolve. To my eyes I think it works fantastic. I think mostly because the 12bit information really helps, but who really knows whats going on under the hood. Maybe it likes dpx files?? It takes a couple min testing out different levels of sharpening and noise reduction. Usually a setting of "low" does the trick but I have used "medium" before. I've tested it on a 48 oled, my iPhone and a standard LG monitor. I like it so far. 99% of my work is watched on phones looks like 4k footage to me when watched on my small devices.
 
Bigmitch! Awesome stuff!

You have an eye and skill that obviously transcends one camera, as I think you could get good results from an 80D, but well done in choosing the F35 for its attributes, and using them as advantages for your vision. You really rolled with that. Looks fantastic!

James0b57! Thanks so much man! I really appreciate that! I learned a lot from you guys while reading up around here. You said it best tho, just accept what the camera is, use it to your advantage. A little noisy, thats okay. Blacks are deep, great. A little underexposed to save the highlights lets do it
 
I used the super scale feature in the paid version of resolve. To my eyes I think it works fantastic. I think mostly because the 12bit information really helps, but who really knows whats going on under the hood. Maybe it likes dpx files??

I did the same thing with my files. I see no difference between DPX and 4444 anyways so I shoot mainly 4444 and it looks great.

C
 
Arris are overused with 4000+ hours

You're sort of proving my point here. Alexas CMOS can probably last more hours than a Sony CCD. I am guessing here, so if I am wrong guys, please correct me, but that is downside with the F35 I guess. So getting a high hours Alexa won't be that bad.

I know. But consider, please, that we are from the different worlds: I live in Kiev and cannot buy an F35 from my neighbor who has already played enough with. Same with Alexa or Komodo. And color is not the most important thing for me when I chosing between them. They all produce enough colors for getting everything you want.

If you want the look of an Alexa, just get one of those instead. There will be more floating around to buy, more accessories, and less work arounds. The F35 looks amazing, and it has a very unique look to it. I thought I knew before I bought it, but now, 6 lens tests later, I still feel I am learning a lot.

But am I trying to imitate an Alexa? No.

Have you seen the bigmitch's footage? Those blue daylights out from the box... is that CCD's holy magic, which shouldn't be graded or even corrected?

This sort of a weird question to ask. If you like it, you like it. If not, you can correct it. Personally I would say that come colors appear more accurate out of the box than Alexa EV footage, if both are shot in 422/4444. BUT that is MY opinion. There are probably graphs and data to prove me otherwise here.

Not to sound like an old fart here, but you sound a lot like when I bought my 16 mm camera years back. You'll probably be happier, and have better result with a newer camera to work with and practice TBH, much like the C70, A7s III, or the FX6.

I spent (or wasted) 4 years in film school, and worked with virtually every camera out there. And I still struggled a lot with the F35 in the beginning.

That's it.

C
 
The F35 lives in a small island in the middle of the ocean that separates Film from Digital.

I think the secret is definitely in the highlights. It's not simply an issue of latitude. It's the subtle gradation from one tone value to the next. The closest thing to film and I don't really think the Alexa is as good at that. Again it's not only about latitude.

Shadows are a bit of a challenge for the F35 though. But with effort they can be handled very well.
 
I downloaded those clips. Gosh, miss how easy it is to grade that.

When you say you shoot at iso3200, were you metering for that in these clips? Or what iso where you aiming for when shooting them?

Thanks!
 
I downloaded those clips. Gosh, miss how easy it is to grade that.

When you say you shoot at iso3200, were you metering for that in these clips? Or what iso where you aiming for when shooting them?

Thanks!

I think he was talking about white balance 3200K not iso.
 
Looking at the footage more and more, and after talking to others on the forum.

I see NO difference between this and ProRes 4444

C

If you're referring to the difference between dpx and Prores 444, it is there but very subtle. Dpx contains slightly more color information and complexity. However, there is no improvement in noise or resolution. The best way to describe it is that in Prores the colors are a bit "smeared". Very subtle though. Whether that tiny difference warrants the added storage needs of dpx is a different matter. I have stopped recording in dpx as well. It just demands so much in storage. The big unknown is whether this difference becomes magnified on an 80' screen. Good luck conducting that test!
 
If you're referring to the difference between dpx and Prores 444, it is there but very subtle. Dpx contains slightly more color information and complexity. However, there is no improvement in noise or resolution. The best way to describe it is that in Prores the colors are a bit "smeared". Very subtle though. Whether that tiny difference warrants the added storage needs of dpx is a different matter. I have stopped recording in dpx as well. It just demands so much in storage. The big unknown is whether this difference becomes magnified on an 80' screen. Good luck conducting that test!

I am yet to see a difference...

C
 
Looking at the footage more and more, and after talking to others on the forum.

I see NO difference between this and ProRes 4444

C

Awesome! Good to know because dpx files are stupid big. The only thing I noticed which is more of a technical thing is when the footage is put into resolve I believe I have to change the ProRes 4444 to "full data" and when I bring in dpx footage that setting is automatically turned on... can anyone else confirm this on their end? Not a huge issue but that is something to easily forget.
 
Awesome! Good to know because dpx files are stupid big. The only thing I noticed which is more of a technical thing is when the footage is put into resolve I believe I have to change the ProRes 4444 to "full data" and when I bring in dpx footage that setting is automatically turned on... can anyone else confirm this on their end? Not a huge issue but that is something to easily forget.

This is a SLOG bug with Resolve. Had to do the same with A7s footage recorded externally in ProRes as well.

Other than that it acts EXACTLY the same (downloaded your DPX footage and player around with it)

C
 
I used the super scale feature in the paid version of resolve. To my eyes I think it works fantastic. I think mostly because the 12bit information really helps, but who really knows whats going on under the hood. Maybe it likes dpx files?? It takes a couple min testing out different levels of sharpening and noise reduction. Usually a setting of "low" does the trick but I have used "medium" before. I've tested it on a 48 oled, my iPhone and a standard LG monitor. I like it so far. 99% of my work is watched on phones looks like 4k footage to me when watched on my small devices.

How it looks in your 48 oled? Better than the TV upscale feature? Noticeable better than just HD?
 
How it looks in your 48 oled? Better than the TV upscale feature? Noticeable better than just HD?

I haven't tested it on the tv's built in upscale feature. I didn't even think of that... I'll give it a try.

I can certainly see a visual difference on the 48 oled when I turn on and off super scale. Mostly from the sharpening feature. But as we all know the F35 is probably one of the nicest looking 1080 images possible. A little goes a long way when it comes to upscaling. A "low" setting on both noise reduction and sharpening is usually enough as long as you used a solid lens from my experience.
 
released a music video - through the fire super pumped on how it turned out! Just me no other crew, 99% practicals, had one soft led on the second verse with the artist and his wife next to him in the lobby buttt thats it! Would love to hear what you guys think. Any feedback / critiques would be super helpful! Heres a few of my favorite frames. https://vimeo.com/474862420
View attachment 141406View attachment 141407View attachment 141408View attachment 141409View attachment 141410View attachment 141411View attachment 141412View attachment 141413View attachment 141414View attachment 141415View attachment 141416

making her sing!!! Yeah!!!!!!!
 
Back
Top