Jump to content

Matthew Rogan

Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Matthew Rogan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Occupation
  • Location

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  1. Ah ok, thanks guys. I've been going back and forth in my head with the fs7 vs fs5. It'll cost me about €3000 to get the FS7 I reckon with the price difference in the bodies plus the XQHD cards. I think it might be the smart option though, the FS5 doesn't seem very future proof, whereas I can see the FS7 being used for a good many years to come.
  2. Even if its only limited to 30p. I've been trying to decide for a while now what camera I am going to buy. I have pretty much decided on an FS5, but from what I've heard, the 8bit 4K isn't great and I should really consider it a very good HD camera. Now with the announcement of the GH5 with internal 10bit 4k 422 it seems like Panasonic are trying to undercut a lot of the competition. Now I would much rather have the FS5 with its proper body and variable ND etc but I can't say the 10bit 4k in the GH5 isn't tempting. Do you think it could be possible Sony would upgrade the FS5 to 4k 10bit via a firmware update? Even if its a paid option like what they did with the F5. I would gladly pay $500 or more for that ability.
  3. Thank you! Long time lurker. Thought it was about time to get involved!
  4. That's very helpful. Thank you. I think I will shoot unfiltered tungsten then correct in the lab. Then build it from there.
  5. Its all the colleges gear, so we have a full tungsten package from 2k to 150s and 4 foot kinos. I want to try and keep the lighting package as small as possible, to be honest, I am going to try and shoot it all natural light if possible.
  6. Oh no don't worry its a 400' roll! I'd worrying if it was only 100! The reason we only get one roll is that it is for the Kodak Student Commercial competition and thats the rules. I had thought about shooting it all unfiltered. But as I would be the one grading it and I am not too sure about my grading skills just yet so much as to trust the whole look to that. I prefer to get it as much in camera as possible. I will be shooting mostly natural light, atleast in the car and countryside, there will be lighting setups in the apartment. I have been thinking though that shooting uncorrected tungsten in daylight for the apartment scenes, although set in very early morning, will be too blue for what I am looking for. Maybe if I shoot that scene with the 81ef then move on to another filter for the car scenes, what is there in between the 81ef and 85 that would give me a still slightly cold look?
  7. Hi all. I am 4th cinematography student. I am about to shoot a short commercial on s16. I have shot on film a few times before but I would like hear other opinions on how best to a achieve a cold daylight look on film. Basically the story is that a couple wakes up very early in their city apartment and leaves for the countryside. I want the piece to start off very cold looking in their apartment and then gradually get warmer as they leave the city in their car and arrive in the country. I have only one roll to shoot this piece on. It's a thirty second ad so that should be loads of stock. Bug that brings into question how I can get a varying level of "coldness" on the one roll. I will be shooting on Kodak 200t 7213. My initial thought is to shoot the grey card with an 85 in. The remove that for the early scenes. Then later for the car scenes to use a 81ef so a slightly warmer, but still cold look. Then finally for the countryside scenes to put the 85 back in. Does this seem like a good plan to achieve what I am looking for? Very open to suggestions and opinions, or indeed any help at all. Thanks.
  • Create New...