July 22, 2014, 08:21:51 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - bluegreenturtle

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6
61
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Entry-level video production
« on: April 17, 2012, 10:49:59 PM »
I'm quite sick right now so don't have the stamina for a real reply. 

I will say that I did basically what they've been looking to do - started a video production company out of nothing, really (well, I had one client) and that supports me today. 

People have chimed in on the gear.  It both matters and doesn't - at the end of the day it's about the ideas and story telling; the quality of the gear needs to be sufficient to not get in the way of that.  You can go way beyond that but ultimately your clients will judge you on how engaging the storytelling is.  The more experience I get the more I realize this is true - nobody worth working for gives a crap what you're shooting on - they care if their ideas are being expressed correctly and if you have good ideas of your own.  I second the audio remarks - a crappy shot will be forgiven - a poorly recorded interview will not. 

Other advice - somebody on the team that has a very good grasp with after-effects or other similar software is invaluable.  Editorial skills are invaluable, and required to do *any* work.  Shooting is the easy part.  Making meaning out of what you've shot is far harder.   

Expect to get screwed on a few jobs.  Don't take on clients you don't trust.  This is true in any business. 

Ultimately your own experience as a free lance writer should be informative about video production, because we're really talking the same language.  Somebody with a fancy typewriter and a good grasp of sentence structure will get some jobs, but only some, and only for a while.  It comes down to creativity, ability to work hard, and ability to interpret the desires of clients, and maintain relationships. 

I have no idea why they incorporated.  Pointless at this juncture.  A lot of people are more in love with the idea of starting a business than actually doing the work associated with the business.

Margins can be good in video, but it depends on the area you're working in.  I've been in the fortunate situation of having every single check get bigger over the years, even as I hire more and more subs, but at some point I'll plateau out, and I stress about every penny.  I try to do 2 or 3 big jobs per year.

62
It only uses a portion of the sensor for video so it's smaller than even 4/3rds - you're getting into 2/3" camcorder territory there.

As to the fruit of large sensors - there is no "must" in any of what you've said  - it just is how some manufacturers are choosing to deliver their product and at what price.  DSLRs as video devices have compromises - some required by technology and price points, some to protect other products and their price points. 

This camera is interesting, especially as a first step from somebody who's never made a camera before, but there's still a reason that people chose to shoot with DSLRs - large sensors previously not available at these price points. 

63
Software & Accessories / Re: NAB 2012: Singular Software PluralEyes
« on: April 17, 2012, 04:02:12 PM »
Everybody doesn't use it because often the software simply doesn't work.  I've been using dual eyes since it came out and have abandoned it - half the time it doesn't create the new files (just extracts the audio) and in the last time I used it it introduced a weird drift in just some of the files.  It basically takes me 5 times as long to try to massage the software into working (and sometimes with no success) as it does to just synch it myself manually.   I went through one tortuous project where the client saw drift in all my videos and repeatedly suggested I use plural-eyes, but it turned out that was the issue to begin with - I was already using it.  I finally had to redo everything manually and then it was fine.

64
Ah.  Suddenly it's all clear. 

65
I would suggest picking up your camera, going outside, and shooting some footage with a bunch of movement in it, and see which of these various settings, including Mr. Hurlbut's, looks the best to you. 

All I can say is I've worked on a feature with Shane and he does talk a lot!

66
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Need some Video Advice for the 7D
« on: April 03, 2012, 08:48:12 PM »
I think handheld is totally fine for personal stuff or more intimate (more emotional content) work.  I just can't get away with it for my clients.  When I shoot music videos I use some handheld.

I use miller solo legs with a cartoni focus head.  Cost more than my camera.  And I'm beginning to feel like it's overkill for travel. 

67
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Need some Video Advice for the 7D
« on: April 03, 2012, 05:30:48 PM »
It depends on what you're doing.  I shoot documentaries and corporate pieces professionally (and have for years) and never shoot without a tripod with a fluid head.  I'm a steadicam operator too (not one of those little handheld things) and I use that occasionally but it's a special effect for what I do.  But never hand held except for the occasional shot when it's braced against something else.  You just can't with a large sensor CMOS camera - it looks like hell. 

I typically shoot interviews at f 1.4 or 2.8 depending on the light and the subject/background if using a 7D, f 4 or so if using FF.   You need to light though usually, and up the f a little as really I'm usually gambling (and have lost, sometimes) when shooting at those shallow of DOF, slight movement will pull the subject out of focus, and if I'm conducting the interview at the same time, I can't adjust every little time they move.   I use a Vari-ND outside often to allow the lens to remain open (if a subject or close up b roll) or just stop down for vistas, as you would with a still camera. 

68
Lenses / Re: advice re lenses for travel photography
« on: April 02, 2012, 02:20:04 PM »
How did you get into the gig?  My wife occasionally works on Crystal and I've always wanted to get into the video side for a line like them. 

69
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Need some Video Advice for the 7D
« on: April 02, 2012, 02:05:34 PM »
I shoot video elusively with DSLRs. I wouldn't touch Cinestyle unless you really have to. Most of the big boys abandoned it after seeing the problems with banding and skin tones. Some of the best vids out there are shot on Netural or standard, but ALWAYS turn the contrast down all the way. I actually leave sharpness at 3. Because of the aliasing, these files don't look good sharpened in post. Still Motion does the same thing in their wedding videos.

You should take a fast prime with you on the trip. Thats really what makes these cameras stand out. a 50 1.8 would be cheap. I'd also buy a polarizer and maybe a grad ND or two for your landscape stuff. I just got back from the Caribbean and had good results. Here is a link to the unfinished test video if your interested.  - Edit for Andrew

That's pretty great Matt.  5D, though?

70
Act of valor was shot at 30p because it was shot before the 24p firmware upgrade came.  They had no choice.  It was retimed to 24p in post. 

waterdonkey; this is an extended discussion, especially since you are coming from a TV aesthetic, which is simply different than the cinema aesthetic.  Your sony should be defaulting to the correct shutter angle and speed (I believe those cameras can set both) however, I think they have to be overridden from just doing the settings we are speaking of.  However the 60i(p) vs 24p and the jitter you see are different issues from that - the aesthetic is simply different than what you've been trained in and so used to seeing.  I've worked with TV guys too, there is just a different standard and look in broadcast TV. 

As for 30p, it's actually a reasonable choice for certain kinds of work; some corporate video demands 30p as sometimes the client doesn't care for the 24p look.  That's unusual though; my rule of thumb is that I shoot 24p for everything, except when some B roll, I might use 30p and put it on a 24p timeline giving a very slight slow motion which gives everything a dreamy look, especially useful in music videos. 

71
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Need some Video Advice for the 7D
« on: March 31, 2012, 08:57:54 PM »
Can you be more specific?  The quality is either there in the clips out of the camera or it's not - the editing software doesn't matter.  Maybe post a clip and describe what you don't like?

72
Lenses / Re: Noob first Canon: For first video prime, 85mm 1.8?
« on: March 31, 2012, 04:36:49 PM »
Are you planning on shooting video handheld at all?  If so, nix the 85.  There's a rule of thumb in cinema that anything past about 75 ff equiv is very difficult to hand hold, and it's true for the most part.  On the other hand, if you're planning to use a tripod, the 85 is a perfect interview lens.  I shoot interviews for a living, and on a 7D mostly use a 50 1.4 (and, by the way, it's an old manual lens), which would be about 80mm FF.  I  never ever handhold ANYTHING though (you just can't, if you're working professionally, with these cmos cameras).  A 50 will work on a FF, but you will need to get the camera a bit close to the subject, sometimes that's uncomfortable.  Anyway, 90% of the work I do, I shoot with either a 50mm prime or the 17-55mm zoom (b roll) which is about equivilant to the 24-70 on full frame. 

Consider also the 28-135 ff IS, which is very underrated lens for the money.  A little slow but on a FF you're gonna want to be at f4 or so anyway. 

73
In short, yes, never shoot at less than double the frame rate, because you're creating a look that no mechanical film camera could do by keeping the shutter open that long.   I came from the feature film world and when I started shooting with dslrs (I only do video - no stills) it seemed clear to me.  But I worked with a lot of people who were essentially stills photographers and trying out their nifty new features on their 5Dmk IIs and they weren't getting it (and ruining some footage as a result).  Photographers are used to thinking of the shutter speed as a way to let in more light or stop movement - obviously when you're working with motion pictures the shutter has a different concept as you never are stopping motion, and we can't drop our shutter slower to let in more light or it gives an unnatural and unpleasing look/effect.  Which is why videographers are so enamored with their fast primes. 

Instead of trying to ape it out I'll just give you a link:

http://tylerginter.com/post/11480534977/180-degree-shutter-learn-it-live-it-love-it

74
I have to stop reading this thread.  I want my 5 minutes back.

75
EOS Bodies / Re: This web site is making me question why I lurk here
« on: March 29, 2012, 12:27:55 PM »
This sort of issue crops up in any gear-centric profession or hobby. 

Basically, ever since it was possible to gain entry to an activity simply with money, by buying a piece (or pieces) of equipment, you have many people who feel that somehow getting better equipment will improve their performance.  Sometimes this is true, and in the case of cameras, it's partly because of all the astonishing things they can do these days, allowing somebody with no clue what they are doing to put out an acceptable image.   

But the fact is that for the most part, it really doesn't matter what the piece of equipment is, it matters who is holding it.  That's not ego, it's just the truth.  I'm also a musician, and I experience this every day - the music instrument market is not driven be professionals - far from it.  Most pros don't even materially participate in that market - they either have the instruments they are happy with and retain them most of their lives, or they are given them through endorsements.  All the instrument manufacturers stay in business because of the people such as the complaint is here; people that desperately hope that trading a few thousand dollars will net them a better end result and performance.  They're not willing to put in the THOUSANDS of hours that it takes to truly master a craft or art. 

The problem with photography is that cameras, lenses, etc cost money.  This gives the buyer some false sense that by paying, they are getting something and are owed something - a response we're all conditioned to.  Consider writing, as a professional.  The cost of entry is exactly zero - one can begin writing a novel, or newspaper columns, or articles, or whatever, for the cost of a pencil and piece of paper, which are freely given out in our society, and then by adding their time and talent.  You don't see any of these discussions in pro-writing forums - because at the end of the day, there's nothing to blame but yourself if the end result is not what you want.  The same is true of photography/videography, but it's hidden behind this mask of the cost of the gear.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6