August 01, 2014, 06:34:50 AM

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 - Cgdillan

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 19
61
EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Video Tiem for 650D
« on: February 04, 2013, 09:40:57 AM »
I just purchased Cannon 650D for videoing as my son said it’s the way I gotta go rather than video camera. I’m impressed with the contrast & colour, BUT I just discovered it only videos 29mins then turns off…
Does anyone know if there is any way around this as I needed it to record 1-1.5hrs continual?

Sorry there is no way to make it actually record longer than that with stopping and starting again. There are camera hacks that auto restart the camera, but you still have a 1 second delay between shots.

62
I answered a thread with a question about "a basic easy multicam video set up with 5d3s". The easiest method with 2 or 3 5D mkIIIs is to capture half way decent audio on each camera and record audio to a separate continuous audio recorder to use as your main sync track. Then use pluraleyes to auto sync, which only takes a few minutes on the computer.

Trying to do anything with timecode on a Canon DSLR, for now, is only going to cause trouble. With other cameras and other situations, timecode is better. NOT with a Canon photography camera.

Yes I have made commercials for TV and full 30 minute spots... Yes I have had to sync 5 continuous cameras for 2 hours running time... And I don't work for other people, because I don't like to work for other people, and I love what I do.

I am sorry your DSLR that shoots video doesn't run timecode professionally =-( it probably never will.. your probably better off selling it and getting the VERY least a c100 or some other super 35 video camera..

63
so why do you think time codes exists?

explain

Because when time does we're created, auto sync with sound didn't exist yet. Lol =) well because in a nicely controlled environment timecode easier

64
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Single raw real estate photos
« on: February 02, 2013, 01:36:53 PM »
I think you have done well to develop a workflow that will make a cheap customer happy.
My only advice would be on the front exterior image.

Try to avoid shooting the house from the garage side. This puts a large boring plane in the front of your composition . In this case the low angle is not helpful but does have  a certain drama the unsophisticated realtor may see as sizzle.

It looks to me that the opposite side view with a tighter  composition could work well.

I am also in SoCal and wrestle with the harsh lighting on daylight shoots. I use LR and have presets for these things with a ton of highlight and shadow correction. I usually add clarity of snap as the opposite seems a bit smeary for me.

Aha. I see what you mean with the garage door. Thank you =-) I think something I need to get away from is only using my 14mm for pretty much all the shots. After you saying that I could have backed up and used 24 or 35mm. What photo tripod would you recommend for the higher angle? The more RE work I do the more willing i will be to invest in photo gear. I primarily shoot video, but dabble heavily in photography. In other words, by tripods don't go higher than eye level..

My primary workflow with these shots were to bring the highlight to -100 and shadows to +100. Then contrast somewhere between +75 and +100 then clarity down a bit to smooth it out. Which I may have over done a bit. I'm still experimenting.

65
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Single raw real estate photos
« on: February 02, 2013, 10:56:15 AM »
I shoot RE photos and personally strive to do the best possible job regardless of the property.  The way I look at it, whenever a home is listed with my work it is a public example of my skills.  It does not matter if the property is a $6M waterfront mansion or a $20k half destroyed condo.  If I accept the job, then I put all of my effort into it.  If I believe the effort is not worth the pay, then I do not take the job in the first place.

Sorry to be blunt, but IMHO it is not right to do a fast job just because the pay isn't enough.  This is an example of your work broadcast across the world.

I understand what you mean, this has always been my idea as well. It is absolutely the way I am with my wedding videography. But RE photos are more for my free time and the client asked me if I would be will to shoot the cheaper houses for less money so he can end up with better pictures then what he would take and so he wouldn't have to deal with shooting the shots on his t2i or deal with processing the photos or anything. I agreed, and this was the first cheap job. I am happy to provide him with better photos then he would have otherwise, and still get the money for my time accordingly. I respect your opinion, and everyone does things differently.

What I said to him

"let me know if these are too saturated for you. I went kinda crazy with them and could easily tone it tone a bit."

Direct quote from his response email

"Dillan,
Beautiful! I like them. Thanks for getting them over so quick."

If it was any less than that at all then I would either re-shoot or re-edit, or do whatever it takes for him to like the photos.

66
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Single raw real estate photos
« on: February 02, 2013, 10:44:16 AM »

I do try and keep a certain standard, and I know these aren't the worst RE photos out there, I know they are not the best , but certainly not of the lowest standard. I simply did not have the time, or experience, to be able to shoot and edit this in 1 hour and produce amazing photos. Honestly, RE photos are only something I do on the side for two different agents and if they come to me with a $75-200 job and I have nothing else going on, then I am happy to do the work, and happy to do it quick and dirty if that is what they need. If I really got into RE photography then would take it much further and buy the Canon 17mm TS-E and maybe the 24TS-E and make sure I had all the proper lighting necessary for every job. Then it would no longer be a side job for me. I real work is in wedding videography. And that is something I have done ALOT of and have based all my gear purchasing decisions around. I also do wedding photography, but video is more my bread and butter and is where I believe I shine. RE photos are just a side thing for me and keep my mind fresh and learning by posting the images here. I am only 20 and have only been shooting photography for 1.5 years and video for 3. But I really do appreciate your critiques. I think a little bit of it just came off a little strong.

By no means was that to say that your work was bottom of the barrel...what I intended to say was that it's always best to hold high standards rather than to 'settle' with what the client wants, even if it is only $100 per job - "always shoot like it was a million dollar set". I started a computer company when I was 18 and one of my goals is still one that I teach & lecture today - I always educate my client to what should be a minimum standard (my minimum standard, that I've decided is the lowest I'll go - which may be way above what somebody else would accept). "An educated client is a good client and good client's pay good". I don't shoot full time, I write specialty software. However, when I am shooting, I block out a few days from the programming and go shoot like it was the only thing I did.

And, I didn't mean for you to think that I meant you HDR'd the images, just that the images were processed to the point where they had an HDR effect to them - the re-edits are much better and seem much more "real" to the originals that you posted.

I hear ya about not wanting to drag out all the gear for such a fast and cheap shoot - but I would have done it anyways so that I could "educate" my client on what I could do. I've had a few clients who wanted to pay $100 for a set of shots, but I lit it properly, rich and bright, and showed them the shots compared to what they wanted (the "quick" shots). The next time, they paid me extra to "work my magic" with the properties. I even gave them an out by choosing the "cheap and quick" or "purdy" shots and they chose the latter. Kinda like giving yourself a raise!

...that's all that was meant, no intentions of "coming off a bit strong"...

I appreciate your response, and I understand where you are coming from. This however is something I have done. I've been doing work with this client for the last year and a half or so. I've always shot his expensive listings, where I spend more time and polish the images to much higher standards than these. For all of his cheaper houses, he has been shooting "standard" jpeg with T2i and Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. He recently asked me if I would be willing to shoot those cheaper houses for him and keep it much more basic than normal. So I can make a few bucks and get in and get out. He know what he can pay me for nicer jobs and he know what that looks like, and for his $1 million+ houses he does get the nicer ones. The reason I posted these here was just to share what I did fairly quickly.

67
Oh! and i would definitely shoot IPB

Why IPB rather than ALI?

I've shot with both and have found that ALL-I is not any better in terms of quality, but is only better for editing, and only if you edit with the raw footage and don't do any transcode or conversion. If you do transcode the for editing, then save the space on your memory card if your shooting a long day and use IBP. I have found ALL-I doesn't help color correction and actually has more artifacts than IBP. If you are editing in FCP X or Premier, and only use the the h.264 footage for editing out of camera, then ALL-I will be more friendly for editing - for the most part the only benefit, which is great for come people. Someone else's opinion may differ from mine, but that is just my experience.

Hmm....well, I just dump my 'raw' footage from the camera into FCPX and try to do roundtrip with Davinci Resolve Lite.  I don't do any transcoding.

On one thread on the forums here, I'd found that you didn't need to transcode anything before using FCPX (I believe it was Axelrod that told me about that).

So, if doing it the way I do it...ALI-I is the way to go?

C

Exactly, you technically don't need to transcode, but if you do, then rending is faster and final export is faster. So it's really just opinion based. I prefer IPB to save space on cards for long days of shooting (I primarily shoot weddings = long days and lots of footage) that way I only need 1/3rd the number of cards. but then I put the time in for transcoding.. So it goes both ways and just depends on where you want to invest.

I think shooting IPB for long events and long "uncontrolled" shoots is best to save you card space.

I think ALL-I is better for shorter and controlled shoots to save time in post.

I've noticed just a couple more artifacts in ALL-I so I always use IPB and just deal with the transcoding time so I can be editing in FCPs "true" native format.

And again neither way is wrong. It's all just about preference.

68
Oh! and i would definitely shoot IPB

Why IPB rather than ALI?

I've shot with both and have found that ALL-I is not any better in terms of quality, but is only better for editing, and only if you edit with the raw footage and don't do any transcode or conversion. If you do transcode the for editing, then save the space on your memory card if your shooting a long day and use IBP. I have found ALL-I doesn't help color correction and actually has more artifacts than IBP. If you are editing in FCP X or Premier, and only use the the h.264 footage for editing out of camera, then ALL-I will be more friendly for editing - for the most part the only benefit, which is great for come people. Someone else's opinion may differ from mine, but that is just my experience.

69
Oh! and i would definitely shoot IPB

70
the question is about shooting multicam PRO footage and importing into a PRO sequencer where the clips line up to the exact TIME CODE recording during session for both online and offline PROFESSIONAL editing, same process used in film and cinema, PROFESSIONAL standards require TIMECODE, if you you want entry level equipment that does not REQUIRE to be up to those standards like the minimum of 100mbs, Timecode - digi clock, SDI connectors then a pro-summer camera would be priced at the correct range for you.

You can make pro looking videos, even money doing them but PROFESSIONAL level work requires PROFESSIONAL equipment up to  par with networks,  i think someone does not understand what PROFESSIONAL means, and yes anyone can buy PROFESSIONAL sony, canon, Panasonic cameras with TIME CODE and all that syncs with TV networks and up scaled hardware software for Hollywood Suites.

Anyway, i a not trying to sound PROFESSIONAL, i like to work with my clients as their friend, i tend to make them more then happy to pay me, its working out nice.

I guess ill fiddle with the TIMECODE on the canon 5d3 here, as i mentioned before it seems un stable, but this time ill try using the canon "EOS utility" software and see the camea settings and live mode as well as reading the manual.

Ok Mr. Professional, we get it, but you don't have to be a prick about it.  And last time I checked "professional" means doing something as your main source of income.  It doesn't mean that ANY video project ever done by mankind has to meet broadcast standards, content has plenty of other destinations nowadays.  And yes, in broadcast/film industry in general timecode is absolutely critical and very useful. But this is just some guy with a couple 5D3's (which aren't technically "professional video cameras") and not that much experience.  He can turn both of those cameras on and off all night, and as long as he has a clean audio source can sync them up in a matter of minutes without much thought, so why not let him do that?  You're acting like this is the most important job of his life and is going to be broadcasted worldwide and acting like we are trying to tell him to use his cameras underwater or something.  My favorite part about film/video is that it doesn't matter what was going on behind the scenes as long as the final product looks good, so who cares?

+1 I totally agree

71
I am a "pro" wedding videographer and shoot almost every wedding ceremony with 2x 5D mkIIIs, a 7D, a 60D. and a T2i. For the last two years, I have not once need to manually sync, or worry about free running timecode, or synced time code. I use "Plural Eyes" now made by the company "Red Giant" and it has never once failed me. The plugin uses the audio tracks, dirty or clean, to match the video clips up. I have many starts and stops on each camera throughout the ceremony and plural eyes has no problem auto syncing them up and keeping each camera on it's own track. I think it is around $150 but is totally worth it.

WOW....how many people do you have shooting with you, with that many cameras, or is that not all video..some for stills?
Still...how many extras to you have shooting a wedding?
the question is about shooting multicam PRO footage and importing into a PRO sequencer where the clips line up to the exact TIME CODE recording during session for both online and offline PROFESSIONAL editing, same process used in film and cinema, PROFESSIONAL standards require TIMECODE, if you you want entry level equipment that does not REQUIRE to be up to those standards like the minimum of 100mbs, Timecode - digi clock, SDI connectors then a pro-summer camera would be priced at the correct range for you.

You can make pro looking videos, even money doing them but PROFESSIONAL level work requires PROFESSIONAL equipment up to  par with networks,  i think someone does not understand what PROFESSIONAL means, and yes anyone can buy PROFESSIONAL sony, canon, Panasonic cameras with TIME CODE and all that syncs with TV networks and up scaled hardware software for Hollywood Suites.

Anyway, i a not trying to sound PROFESSIONAL, i like to work with my clients as their friend, i tend to make them more then happy to pay me, its working out nice.

I guess ill fiddle with the TIMECODE on the canon 5d3 here, as i mentioned before it seems un stable, but this time ill try using the canon "EOS utility" software and see the camea settings and live mode as well as reading the manual.

The thing with using TIMECODE is that when you don't have a CLOCK to keep your TIMECODE straight on all cameras, then you TIMECODE can begin to DRIFT on the cameras and through out the day you cameras TIMECODE will lose SYNC. Also... the heading of this post was basic easy multicam video set up with 5d3s and setting up TIMECODE is and trying to keep it all in SYNC is not so easy when you don't have a CLOCK and your footage TIMECODE begins to DRIFT. Now audio does not drift in video on these cameras and is perfect for syncing and matches the heading of this topic much better than TIMECODE and CLOCKs and DRIFTing SYNC issues. The Audio is not unstable like the free running timecode. and I didn't really understand all the CAPITALs but I thought that use the CAPITALs might help in my response since you REALLY like to use them. =-)

72
I am a "pro" wedding videographer and shoot almost every wedding ceremony with 2x 5D mkIIIs, a 7D, a 60D. and a T2i. For the last two years, I have not once need to manually sync, or worry about free running timecode, or synced time code. I use "Plural Eyes" now made by the company "Red Giant" and it has never once failed me. The plugin uses the audio tracks, dirty or clean, to match the video clips up. I have many starts and stops on each camera throughout the ceremony and plural eyes has no problem auto syncing them up and keeping each camera on it's own track. I think it is around $150 but is totally worth it.

WOW....how many people do you have shooting with you, with that many cameras, or is that not all video..some for stills?
Still...how many extras to you have shooting a wedding?

I have 3 cameras setup that are continuos. 2 up front and one at the rear. I have one camera that switches between the glidecam and slider. and 1 camera that is used on a mono pod for shots of the bride walking down the aisle and of the grooms reaction, as well as for shots of the parents and people sitting in the chairs. I then use Plural eyes to sync it all and the the mouth movement to voice is absolutely always spot on. Which for wedding, real estate, and most commercial shoots work perfectly when you either don't have the money to invest in cameras and a clock to keep it all in sync. This was particularly helpful for a concert that I shot. I had 4 cameras set up shooting video and the theater couldn't believe that he didn't need to run sync cables and audio cables for us all over the place. It really made everyones job much easier.

73
I am a "pro" wedding videographer and shoot almost every wedding ceremony with 2x 5D mkIIIs, a 7D, a 60D. and a T2i. For the last two years, I have not once need to manually sync, or worry about free running timecode, or synced time code. I use "Plural Eyes" now made by the company "Red Giant" and it has never once failed me. The plugin uses the audio tracks, dirty or clean, to match the video clips up. I have many starts and stops on each camera throughout the ceremony and plural eyes has no problem auto syncing them up and keeping each camera on it's own track. I think it is around $150 but is totally worth it.

74
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Single raw real estate photos
« on: January 30, 2013, 02:54:20 AM »
I too, used to shoot a lot of real estate - high end real estate. My thoughts on the images are that they look way too fake - the colors don't pop (no contrast), the grass and sky are the wrong color (looks like a colored pencil drawing), the HDR effect gives a hazy white "diffused" look to the images, and there's too much vertical distortion from the WA lens (walls should be parallel). They are definitely flat and need more dynamic range.

I appreciate your critiques. And they help push me to do better with my RE photos and quick jobs. The client said he "loved the photos" and that is why they stayed the way they are. I let him know I was going to try a different look that I had seen and let him know that I could easily change the color back to a more natural state very quickly and free of charge. He did not wish to change them at all. Although, your critiques do/will help improve my work.


The compositions are good, but for the darkened areas, you should add/turn on some light (last shot - the shower should be popping with light so that it looks inviting). The kitchen shot has 3 color temperatures - that' makes the shot look unnatural and "dirty".

All the light were on and this was such a quick in and out job, I had no time to worry about extra lighting and the client did not want me to bring anything extra to the job that might slow anything down. Otherwise I would have changed all the bulb from tungsten to something closer to daylight to match the incoming light. Also, the lights under the cabinets were terrible florescent lights the he wanted on and yellow rather than off on dark. I also would have brought my 580 and 430exIIs to fill light if of course the budget would have approved for the extra time.

It's best to avoid using any HDR when doing RE imaging. It's like the truth in advertising stuff, should look natural. Now, if you add some light, that's better. It's the highlight to shadow range that is far apart, making you want to use HDR. But, if you light it right, you'll get much more contrasty, natural images. You can use a ND grad for the sky on outdoor stuff, fill strobes to brighten up shadows (under carports, etc). Indoors, turn on every light AND put bulbs in that are the right color temperature AND matching! I carry a Pelican that has nothing but 50 or so bulbs that are all the same temp.

None of these shots were processed to be HDR or were processed in HDR software. They just all single raw shots edited in LR to maximize the dynamic range, while still not being true HDR processed photos. I posted a couple images of re-edits, and would be curious to see if they seem more appealing to you. I did them really quick, but tried to keep them more natural looking while still trying to maximize the dynamic range available to me in the raw file. And again, I would never do all the extra lighting for a quick $75 job. These are not meant to be the best RE photos ever. I just wanted to see what the reaction would be to something that took me a total of 1 hour to shoot and edit. These are only meant to be critiques as "quickies", not are certainly not meant to be the "best" RE photos.

And, I would have definitely cleaned up the ground - myself or have my client do it first.

Yes, I agree. I would have liked that as well.

Even though it's a low pay job, there's still a standard you should establish. You don't want to explain to anybody and everybody who see's the shots that it was a cheap job - you want them to know what level of work you do (and assume that it was high paying!). I shoot for quite a few brokers and firms - if they were being cheap, I'd walk away gladly. I don't want to be known for being a cheap shooter, but rather a "perfectionist" and let my work negotiate the pay!

I do try and keep a certain standard, and I know these aren't the worst RE photos out there, I know they are not the best , but certainly not of the lowest standard. I simply did not have the time, or experience, to be able to shoot and edit this in 1 hour and produce amazing photos. Honestly, RE photos are only something I do on the side for two different agents and if they come to me with a $75-200 job and I have nothing else going on, then I am happy to do the work, and happy to do it quick and dirty if that is what they need. If I really got into RE photography then would take it much further and buy the Canon 17mm TS-E and maybe the 24TS-E and make sure I had all the proper lighting necessary for every job. Then it would no longer be a side job for me. I real work is in wedding videography. And that is something I have done ALOT of and have based all my gear purchasing decisions around. I also do wedding photography, but video is more my bread and butter and is where I believe I shine. RE photos are just a side thing for me and keep my mind fresh and learning by posting the images here. I am only 20 and have only been shooting photography for 1.5 years and video for 3. But I really do appreciate your critiques. I think a little bit of it just came off a little strong.

75
5D MK III Sample Images / Re: Single raw real estate photos
« on: January 30, 2013, 02:16:24 AM »
The first thing I see in the first image is the cracks and the grass in the concrete joints of the driveway.  That tells me that the home was not well maintained, and I'd not really be interested. 
If thats what the client wants ....

I totally agree. I am still fairly new to RE photography so It's important for me to receive these critiques. This really was a MUCH quicker job than most of my others and really didn't think quick enough or pay attention to the crack like I should have. Your comments are what will make me be able to deliver a better product with the client knowing they needed something better. I really only work with two RE agents on the side, and they are always pleased with my work, but I would love to produce better work and catch issues better as I go. Thank you.

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 19