M Joel W

Thanks. I had an old Vinten I sold for next to nothing and regret selling, it was good. This is the type of thing I plan to shoot with like a crew of three so really anything would be good enough but I think I'll just rent a Sachtler Ace for a few days or the other option is a Benro S8, which is probably what I'll go with. For what I'm working on, that is good enough.

As cheap as possible, a few hundred dollars. I don't mind renting or buying used if there's nothing decent and affordable. It doesn't have to be great but I am a bit spoiled now so I'd probably rather rent something good than own something bad. Edit: I'm not that spoiled, though. Decent is fine.

I'm getting back into shooting smaller projects with my Panasonic S1. I'd like a tripod with a fluid head that's inexpensive and small and balances with a 3lb camera. Any recommendations? I know this site isn't tailored toward consumer equipment, but I figure people here have high standards. Which unfortunately after operating an O'Connor head even once so do I. 🙁 But it just has to be decent. Cheap and compact would be nice. I will also use this with a friend’s C100 and plan to travel with it between coasts. Or I could just rent but recommendations there would be nice, too. Manfrotto? Sa

So cool! I think I ended up owning most of the owner's old stuff. Birns and Sawyer tripod from way back when, a few 2m cameras, and a bunch of lomo lenses. Is it safe to store everything in normal conditions? The cameras etc. are just out in the open, the lenses are in a humidity controlled cabinet.

What do you think of old Nikkors?

There's an interview on YouTube where a lens rental shop owner praises K35s for a number of reasons, but he also praises b speeds, which are like 1/10th the price. He does mention that something about newer lenses renders poorly or harshly on digital cameras, hence the sudden spike in popularity with S2/S3s and K35s. They probably are overpriced relatively to standard speeds and b speeds, for instance, but I guess if you're renting that's less of an issue.

I'm also guessing it's mostly a matter of older coatings. I think with older lenses you can get away with lighting a bit more carelessly or using less fill. On the other hand, if you over-light, they don't look so good imo.

This might be me overthinking things (as usual). But I think, even if you’re grading film, Resolve doesn’t obey the same rules as film and you can end up introducing colors that wouldn’t be there naturally, over-saturated highlights in particular. For instance by shifting lift to blue and gain to orange, the highlights might get too warm in an artificial “digital” way. So even if Arri is clamping down on over-saturated highlights with the Alexa (not that they always are, the brightest areas can clip a little weird imo) Resolve isn’t. So I try to apply lum vs sat last. Anyway that’s my thinking

Thanks, I didn’t key it. It’s just a lum vs sat curve roughly like the image attached. That’s from Lumetri but Resolve has the same curve.

I agree once the highlights are clipped there's not much you can do to recover them but if the saturation isn't clipping I think a Lum vs saturation adjustment can approve their appearance and make them feel less "digital." I'm not a colorist and the difference is subtle but this is what I had in mind re: desaturating highlights.

I don't think it does either but my only experience with reversal is with Velvia 50 and 100. Saturation roll off is harder to adjust (imo at least) once the color channels clip but even in the example here I think you could address the issue in post pretty well.

This has always confused me. Maybe I'm conflating two separate issues. Arri (and now most other video camera manufacturers it seems) rolls off saturation in the highlights and midtowns (starting around 30 IRE or so I think) so the shadows are more saturated than the highlights are. This is not the case with traditional video cameras. The best comparison I have of this is an A7S clipping a red light source in frame as pure red (or yellow in this case?) before white and an Alexa clipping the same source as a very pale shade of pink before white. Apparently this is kind of highlight rolloff

I've noticed this, too. My friends over 30 are likely to be film nuts but below that age less so? I think it has to do with when film was transitioned out at schools and with the initial digital to film transition. That was around 2006-2008 as I mentioned and anyone who was shooting before then I think is likely to be more nostalgic than those who've never shot film. I want to romanticize it and say YouTube creators at least focus on content rather than fetishizing "vintage" aesthetics, but have not really found this to be the case except in rare circumstances, and in those circumsta

And it shoots ProRes! Post loves it, too.

I agree it's a matter of taste. The clipping motorcycle headlights could be mitigated in post with a Lum vs sat adjustment. It was likely a choice to leave it as-is or simply not a priority to correct it. I remember in 2006 I had a dvx100a and was looking for the "film look." But around then Miami Vice, Speed Racer, Tim and Eric, Inland Empire, etc. were embracing a "digital" look. And there was some wild digital color grading then, too. So it's a little disappointing to me that my favored digital cinema camera is the Alexa because I think the look is closer to a film emulation than