Jump to content

Carl King

Basic Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Carl King

  • Birthday 08/26/1975

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  • Location
    Los Angeles, CA
  • My Gear
    Canon 5Dmkiii, Canon C100, Sony EX3
  • Specialties

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  1. Hello, This question is for the sensor tech geeks out there. I have both a 5D3 and a C100. When shooting in documentary situations with pre-existing lights of varying / unpredictable quality (the kind you find overhead in a recording studio, live venue etc.), my C100 sensor has a lot of difficulty maintaining a "normal color" look. Meaning, it is very sensitive to the green spikes in fluorescent lights, etc. With it, I need to be very careful of "contamination" from any of those sources. It seems to NEED a balanced spectrum source such as a professional tungsten bulb. However, the 5D3 seems to not be "fragile" with those weird light sources. It maintains skin tones and acceptable colors without "freaking out." No tint adjustments needed to compensate for fluorescent spikes. I can typically set it to Tungsten / 3200 and it will be totally fine! Even if I change rooms, go into a hallway with lighting that is weird, it can handle it and maintain its color. I now actually prefer the 5D3 when I am shooting for documentary because of this -- which is kind of silly considering how many great tools the C100 has on it, such as peaking and waveform monitor, ND, XLR, etc. Can a serious sensor geek explain to me why the C100 sensor seems so fragile and the 5D3 can seem to handle any situation? Has anyone else experienced this? -Carl.
  2. PS -- my primary line of work is music documentaries and educational content, so I have very little experience with a narrative filmmaking workflow. -Carl.
  3. Hi, I've tested a Blackmagic Design 4K camera and was very disappointed by the vertical fixed noise pattern. It was apparent to me even before I knew it was called that, or that there was an online petition about it. I could even see it on the internal LCD while shooting, and immediately thought "This is not something I want to work with." I have seen some well-respected video geeks defending Blackmagic by saying, "There is nothing wrong with the camera -- it is just the spec." In all sincerity, what is meant by that argument? I don't understand why raising the ISO / ASA one stop from Native 400 to 800 and getting that much noise is considered acceptable. I am used to working with 5Dmk3 or C100, and having much more room to work the ISO / ASA before getting that much noise. Having only one choice above 400 (and introducing that much noise) seems odd. Would some of the more experienced cinematographers mind explaining? Is this something more common in what is considered a "cinema" workflow? Meaning, are "cinema" cameras generally set at their Native ISO / ASA -- leaving control of exposure through aperture, shutter, and lighting? -Carl.
  4. I agree with all these things! Sorry if my post was not clear. -Carl.
  5. Gregory, that "perseverance of character and attitude of take no prisoners" is easy for a kid to claim he has, when he's getting a free ride to film school. :) Seems to me that people often need to be faced with a real obstacle before they can learn those things. Interesting topic. -Carl.
  6. Hey guys, I don't want to sound like I know all the answers. I've been freelancing in LA since 2008 and doing very well. Could I have done it at 18? Probably not, you're right. But I've had many great day jobs along the way that contributed to my income, skills, and experience. And to be clear, I spent many years in graphic design, music, and writing -- and those all added up to what I do now for a living (which is mostly music education videos and marketing promos). About 1/3 of my income is fun stuff: mini-docs and music videos, etc. I know many freelancers in LA who are self-taught and move from project to project, and they do fine. And if the original poster is specifically wanting to work in mainstream feature filmmaking, that's not my area of interest -- so apologies if I am an outsider getting in the middle of things. And I think my answer would have been different if it wasn't half his retired mom's money. Scary! I think I can imagine Dave Ramsey freaking out over that one. -Carl.
  7. On the one hand I don't want to discourage a kid from going to film school if that's what he really wants to do and his mom wants to spend her money -- this happens every day. On the other hand, the world is full of people who have gone to film school, then moved back home and worked at Home Depot or whatever. As I near 40 years old, I think of the value of this hypothetical $200k... and with my life experience I would not give it to a film school. It is totally viable to buy a GREAT camera for only around $5,000 (C100 with all its features to learn), buy some books, start shooting, and make a good living freelancing. Then work your way into whatever filmmaking area you want. Weber, if you leave your mom with $200k and she lives another 20 years, that's only $10k a year for her. She'll be broke. That's not a sound business plan -- but I didn't have one when I was college age either. I'd say let your mom keep her money to retire with. And if you're good at making movies, you won't need film school. Anything else is just conjecture or gambling. -Carl.
  8. Sounds like the best way to make money is to start a film school. $200k is a lot of money for a retired woman. I totally agree with Matthew.
  9. When I do my own effects I always prefer the footage in its natural state.
  10. It does sound like the simple solution would be more makeup. And making sure you're not overexposing / clipping the highlights.
  11. Isn't it the same sensor as Black Magic Cinema Camera 4K? If it is, I tested one recently and was horrified by the lack of sensitivity and fixed noise pattern. I truly respect their bold gear designs, but I think they should focus on making a camera without so many problems before releasing more cameras. But, they're inexpensive. So it's not too fair to complain. I saw a test of the new GH4 at Hot Rod Cameras in Hollywood, up against footage from Alexa, RED, 1DC, etc. and it was very impressive! You may want to look into that instead. -Carl.
  12. Mark and Brian -- excellent replies! -Carl.
  13. If it were me I'd try to convince the client to change the shot. You'll probably have color temperature strangeness, too -- since you probably have tungsten behind the umbrella and daylight outside. You could also break the glass out of the window (haha). Although I'd guess someone out there has a better solution. -Carl.
  14. Fun topic, but has anyone considered that the original poster might be trolling? -Carl.
  15. I'm wondering how you'd solve this problem. During interviews for documentary shoots, I am sometimes required to shoot in small office spaces, with the interviewer and the subject in a single wide shot. (Not my choice -- it's what the client wants.) Since the office spaces are so small, it's inevitably shot against a wall or bookshelves, which means it is very difficult for me to get any depth in the lighting or focus. And since the walls are usually white or other very light color, the shot looks extremely flat and harsh. The lights I usually have available are Lowell Omni with umbrellas. I shoot with either C100 or 5D. If it were up to me I'd use a larger room so I can separate the people from the background, but it's not up to me. Do you have any ideas on how I can make the most of it? What would you do in this situation? Thanks! -Carl.
  • Create New...