Jump to content

John Brawley

Premium Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by John Brawley

  1. This is known as veiling flare. Most lenses will do it to some degree, usually when backlit or shooting into the source. Hotter and larger sources will do it more rather than the point source you used here. So say lace curtains in shot around a window and glowing hot in terms of exposure will do it. Modern lenses tend to have better anti reflective coatings and will subdue this more than older lenses will. Any filter or extra glass in front will also create extra veiling flare in this scenario, even a "clear". JB
  2. That's actually your choice. You can choose to accept those terms or not. Your choice. Because you choose to let it. There has always been this drive, it's not new "these days" it's been happening for decades. You're just choosing to forgo actually proactively taking control of your shooting circumstance and giving yourself a better chance of success. And then you're kind of bragging about getting away with it. And saying the one time you didn't, it was the camera's fault. JB
  3. Actually it's something far more valuable than money that's on the line. Reputation. I prefer to take more concern when it's my reputation on the line. It's a shame you worry about money instead of the work. People don't hire a camera, they hire the DP. Your continued myopic supposition that those that rent somehow are more invested or know better than those that don't is deeply flawed. I do hope your reputation will precede you. That explain's it. I don't know any professional or even aspiring professional camera department crew that would just wing something like that. That's what film students do, not someone that cares about craft. And you have the gall to call someone out for pointing out a design flaw that you don't even know or understand, most likely because you never got past the first 5 mins of working out the camera "out of the box". I'm glad I'm not one of your clients. Then we moved interior, things seemed to be ok for a while, but eventually poop fell apart. We starting having the same issues as the last one with color balance and getting good skin tones. Now we also couldn't control all of the lighting interior, so it would have been a problem no matter what. Yet, I was just frustrated and didn't understand why these cameras just don't look good! I would look at the monitor and I would want to puke. We tried all sorts of crazy lighting rigs to try and warm things up and it worked sometimes, but not others. Eventually we just gave up and again, finished the show because we didn't have the time to **(obscenity removed)** around on set. My gaffing team is top notch, really awesome guys, led by a very good DP in his own right. So when we had issues, they knew how to solve them, but everyone scratched their heads when looking at the monitors. Maybe you need to spend more than 5 mins using one out of the box. Maybe your natural talent wasn't up to the task of mastering a camera that doesn't just work out of the box like you want it to. You've actually proven my point, and demonstrated how naive you are to think that you can get away with winging it like that. I mean really...your complaint is that it doesn't work out of the box like a RED or Alexa did for you ? And yet you disparage those that suggest testing. Your "seat" time was on a job where by your own admission, you dind't have time to **(obscenity removed)** around. That's not testing or seat time. That's laziness. My friend that's ALL ON YOU. You're someone who blames the tools instead of mastering them, no matter how difficult they are. You either chose the wrong tool in the first place or didn't have the skill to make it do what you wanted. Every single camera out there has it's issues. If you can't be bothered learning how to get the most out of any tool you're tasked with using or chose to stake your reputation on then I don't think you get to whinge about it with any credibility on a public forum like you are now. JB
  4. Hello Stuart. Yes, I'm probably wading into something I shouldn't bother with, apologies. I have indeed shot many times with Sony cameras and gotten good results using them. So much that I went back for more. JB
  5. OK. So again, the inference is that renting a camera means you don't know it as well because...you don't own it ? Don't use it for many hours ? Here's my B camera that I operated full time from Party Tricks. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/14068920207/in/album-72157644563566426/ In this photo you'll notice that I'm using the Panavision EVF instead of the two inferior options that Sony offer. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/14569360055/in/album-72157644563566426/ That's because in the EXTENSIVE TESTING I did with this camera during a phrase perhaps that hasn't been heard of around here, called PRE PRODUCTION, I realised it wasn't going to do what I needed so I switched it for a BETTER EVF. I guess I'd learn that from....what ? The BH user review and feedback when I go to BUY the camera ? I did weeks of testing before to put myself in the best possible position to know what I can and can't do with the tools I choose. WEEKS of testing. It's insulting to infer that ownership bestows a greater or deeper knowledge of understanding a camera. Just as insulting to say that the work of a cinematographer rests solely on the knowledge of operating a particular camera. I also operated full time on Hiding, another F55 series. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/15110096353/in/album-72157594566402764/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/15543549359/in/album-72157594566402764/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/15727506451/in/album-72157594566402764/ Still. Maybe I learned some more about the F55 as the DP and sole camera operator on Scare Campaign. Here's my camera build for that show. https://www.flickr.com/photos/johnbrawley/16839307659/in/album-72157650542810588/ FYI, I operate as well as DP. Just because I use a lot of cameras doesn't mean they have each have dedicated operators and I'm sitting on my arse behind a DIT tent somewhere. It's just unbelievably elitist and insulting that someone can't have an opinion about a piece of equipment because they don't own it. That even the inference that you might not be the operator or "just a DP" I think shows a gross misunderstanding of how filmaking. I'm still flabbergasted that we're still in a conversation where I have to justify and defend my opinion of a camera, especially when the OP clearly doesn't know the F55 as well as he thinks he does. JB
  6. Buddy it's your thread. You called me out. Great attitude though for someone that purports to be an educator when you're challenged to back up your information. JB
  7. You didn't say money. You actually said this. That's not money. That's some BS about knowledge being different depending on if you own the camera or not. You then went on to disprove your own theory by not even understanding the issues I have with the camera. Then you muddy the waters with "money" as an answer. Cryptic. Because it doesn't mean anything. How is it different ? JB
  8. Please do list them for me. JB
  9. Actually this was my camera package on Queen Of The South Season 2 A Alexa Min B Alexa Mini C Alexa Mini D Alexa Plus E Ursa Mini 4.6K F Ursa Mini 4.6K G Blackmagic Micro H Blackmagic Micro J Ursa Mini 4.6K K Ursa Mini Pro L Alexa Mini N Alexa Mini P Olympus EM1 Mark 2 R DJI Drone At the end of the day, around 30% of the shots in the finished episode are Ursa Mini 4.6K. I dare anyone to pick them all out. There are many scenes that are shot only Ursa Mini 4.6K. Huh? Sounds a bit elitist to say that not owning the camera means I don't know the camera ? Where does that logic add up ? It's been a few days since I did an F55 show but the last time I shot them was on back to back series. Two multi episodic TV series AND a feature film. That means hundreds of days with up to 4 bodies shooting 2 hours per camera per day. And by the way, that's on PANAVISED F55's, where they make everything that's kind of ENG Sony and make it more film / narrative drama shooting style friendly. I only went Sony because I could get 16 Bit RAW in 2K or 4K (at the time) and I didn't want to go RED 12Bit is the minimum for any drama shooting in my view. Which ProRes 444 does easily. What's not to understand about that ? Re the viewfinder. I haven't looked for a while, but there wasn't way to have look-around in the sony EVF. If you want camera status it's burned over the ACTIVE recorded image area or you can choose nothing at all. Pretty big oversight in my view for V4.0 software (which is what I was using at the time). An Alexa shows you the full recorded image and then OUTSIDE of that in the EVF you get camera status. JB
  10. The 8-64 doesn't cover till about 30mm in my opinion. JB.
  11. Sorry Phil I think I might have to claim this one.... jb (long time 4/3 and m4/3 shooter and err..cough cough...it was the second thing I asked them to look at when I first saw the camera)
  12. I'd say a bad idea. It will be a substantial crop. jb
  13. I've found that I often ended up with the viewfinder arm down quite low and the eyepiece pointing almost upwards (and slightly outwards with the angle of the arm) If i had the viewfinder at 90Deg out from the body, then I'd have exactly the same problem you're describing. Did you try pulling the VF arm lower and then rotating the eyepiece upwards ? jb
  14. Looks Like an XTR Plus to me jb
  15. The short answer is yes, there is extra info. It's not just LOG images (the washed out video you speak of) I think enough people complained to make them realise m4/3 would be a good idea.....It will happen down the road... The internal battery is just like on a hyper deck. It recharges when there's an external power source present.....otherwise you don't have to use it. It's not just lately. Editors have been calling themselves colourists for a long time. I feel the same way you do. They do plan to have some easy setups in Resolve to give you a good result in a sort of AUTO mode. If you want to do more you can. Or of course you can just shoot ProRes. That looks pretty nice right out of the camera. jb
  16. No. This is the right way to think of it. They took a Hyperdeck, and put a sensor and screen on it. They just wanted a way to do uncompressed RAW files. QT and DnX don't offer that. So they went for Cinema DNG as a format. jb
  17. They won't because of cost. What they will do is separate models. You'll buy a PL mount version, or a m4/3 version, or an EF version. jb
  18. Not quiet right Freya. it records uncompressed Cinema DNG files, not Quicktime's. Cinema DNG is an open standard format based on DNG (basically Cinema DNG is DNG with Timecode and audio) created by Adobe. Resolve, Speedgrade and all adobe products support DNG right now. jb
  19. not really for EF. Iris control is problematic with adaptors. jb
  20. I think you've got to remember they have never made a camera before. This is them dipping their toe in the water with a product and a market they haven't dealt with before. They might have turned up to NAB and had everyone laugh at them. (and some are) They wanted to do a single model for the lowest cost and see how that goes. If you had to choose one mount for the dSLR market, (both thinking of sensor size) then EF mount makes complete sense. Imagine if they'd only done m4/3 mount....all the EF crowd would be saying the same thing. EF mount has a very large installed user base... BMD aren't really going for professionals like the ones that inhabit these forums.....they're going for a more mass market. If the camera is a success, and it's safe to say it's made a big impact, then they will look to explore and expand. They had to place orders for millions of $$ in components a few months ago before they even had a working camera. Risk mitigation meant they wanted to keep it simple, and appeal to what they thought would be their largest market. They see this camera as a replacement / alternative to a 5Dmk2.(and 3). hat means EF mount. They haven't been stupid. They know their are other options out there and they'll look at that now that see that they can do a camera and sell them in the numbers they need to. jb
  21. Would have added a lot to the cost of the camera. Like a removable battery. They will be doing other mounts down the track. jb
  22. Guys, it' snot a 16mm sensor. It's not Super 35 either, but it's not 16mm..... jb
  23. Phil, they're still working on this. Sensor calibration is where they are up to right now. It's not a Canon C300, but she's no slouch either. jb
  • Create New...