My videos are junk so far

[BrandonFuller]

I am new to cinematography. I am wanting to get better with the frames, cameras, and coloring.. if you guys could help give me some critique I can use to better my videos I would greatly appreciate it.

 

This is my newest video. I am thinking about posting a video of a non color corrected version. I am wondering if this coloring "lute" that I am using is to much.

 

 

 

 

I was filming with the Sony A7iii and 24mm 1.4, I did forget to adjust I was not on 1.4, but was on 16. I am not sure what that one is. one of my latest videos got all jacked up from the 1.4 and auto focus.

 

 

[Max Field]

Wait are you saying your camera was set to f/16 and that's how it looked in just practical garage lighting? Did you run heavy noise reduction on it? What did your ISO shoot up to?

 

These Sony sensors are so interesting when it comes to low light...

Edited December 16, 2018 by Macks Fiiod

[BrandonFuller]

Wait are you saying your camera was set to f/16 and that's how it looked in just practical garage lighting? Did you run heavy noise reduction on it? What did your ISO shoot up to?

 

These Sony sensors are so interesting when it comes to low light...

 

 

yes, ISO 32,000 I always try and set my ISO and white balance. I have currently 3 sets of 8' ballasts. so lighting is normal I would say. all daylight bulbs.

 

I also dont know what noise reduction is sorry.

Edited December 16, 2018 by BrandonFuller

[Max Field]

I'm not really sure if cinematography is what you're trying to learn when it comes to Youtube Vlogging. Pretty much everyone posting here is discussing the production of narratives, commercials, and documentaries.

 

I say this because given the medium you are pursuing, what you have looks fine. Better than most.

[BrandonFuller]

I'm not really sure if cinematography is what you're trying to learn when it comes to Youtube Vlogging. Pretty much everyone posting here is discussing the production of narratives, commercials, and documentaries.

 

I say this because given the medium you are pursuing, what you have looks fine. Better than most.

 

 

Thanks for your input. I want to shoot shorts at some point as well. most of the good vloggers talk about making a story out of the videos. so narratives might just be what I need.

 

do you guys tend to talk about filming techniques? I have not dove real far into this forum yet.

[Max Field]

Thanks for your input. I want to shoot shorts at some point as well. most of the good vloggers talk about making a story out of the videos. so narratives might just be what I need.

 

do you guys tend to talk about filming techniques? I have not dove real far into this forum yet.

We talk about everything here... just not really Youtube Vlogging. Unless there's a grip truck standing by for the set of the vlog. Threads that ask on specific techniques/theories get more replies than threads that ask generalities.

[BrandonFuller]

I noticed this lens has a slight zoom when it focuses, is that normal? Its a prime lens. 24mm just doesnt seem normal.

[Max Field]

Lenses zooming slightly when they focus is called "focus breathing". Spend a lot on your lenses to avoid this completely.

[BrandonFuller]

Dang.. my lens was $1200! I guess that isnt enough?

[Robin R Probyn]

Better to shoot lower ISO and wider stop.. f16/22 can get refraction which will make your shots look soft..as the iris /hole is so small.. try for around 400/800.. 32000 too high dont need to push it that much.. your adding a ton of gain to the signal..you have a f1.4 lens..

 

Avoid high shutter speeds .. can look odd with video/moving pictures compared to still images.. try for the 180 degree rule.. ie shutter is double frame rate .. 25p=1/50th etc.. but 24p in the US use 1/60th to avoid flicker from practical lights..

 

Still lenses even expensive ones can "breath" as they are not designed for the focus change to be recorded .. ie only for one frame at a time.. you would need cine lenses ..and actually a lot of them breath too to various degrees.. I wouldn't worry about it TBH..

 

I have the A7III as B cam and for Ronin S.. fantastic bang for the buck.. and at last the bigger batteries that only the A9 had before..

[Max Field]

Still lenses even expensive ones can "breath" as they are not designed for the focus change to be recorded .. ie only for one frame at a time.. you would need cine lenses ..and actually a lot of them breath too to various degrees.. I wouldn't worry about it TBH..

Well to be fair... the modern breathless glass seems to be the most expensive there is. We're probably dealing in relativity at this point.

 

Is the L-series stuff built with breathing in mind now? I heard photogs talk about how they breathe less.

Edited December 16, 2018 by Macks Fiiod

[Robin R Probyn]

I was just making a general comment that stills lenses manufactures don't have to worry about "breathing" as it doesn't matter when you are taking stills .. they nearly all use auto now anyway and you just want it to be super quick and track well..and of course yes it takes more elements /money to build cine lenses, where we record the change the change in focus..that are designed not to or at least that its not big enough to draw attention to itself.. Im not a lens tech but I guess some stills lenses by luck breath less than others used in video mode.. I have the two Sigma Cine zooms.. that are pretty much re housed from the Art series 18-35 and the 50-100.. the 18-35 there really is no more breathing than a far more expensive lenses .. but the 50-100 breaths like a coal miner who smoked 2 packs a day.. sort learn to live with it.. the hugely more expensive Canon CN7 has pretty much no perceptible breathing but cost north of $30K new when I got it.. get what you pay for..

 

But I can't see any reason for a stills lens maker to go to the expense of making breathless lenses or for stills people to ever need it ? I might be missing something though.. all the pro stills people I know use auto focus all the time.. there has been huge leaps in this tech and Sony seems to be at the top of it at the moment ..what ever else about there stills cameras..

[Bob Speziale]

New, there's nothing wrong with your camera or settings or color, or lighting. They are all fine.

 

What needs work is your video technique and and presentation. It looks like you are holding your camera in your right hand and moving back and forth, in and out while the camera jumps all around. It's not a video it's a skype session. Get a tripod and set up a medium shot, and dont move. Have your items in arms reach and show them without moving them into the camera. You can take still closeups of the items and/or any written info like model numbers, etc., and cut the stills into the video in the editor, leaving them up long enough to see well and slowly. Or you can take closeup video segments of each item and cut 4 or 5 seconds of the closeup into the viedo in the editor.

 

Have a script and practice it so you can present info like a news reader or teacher. At least have a large written outline behind or next to the camera, out of sight of the camera where you can see it so you can hit all your points without hesitation.

 

Most members here are into narrative movie making but I do mostly amateur music videos and they suck too, hopefully just the music and not the camera technique or audio. But I have made some tutorial stuff too. I'm also interested in doing better work. It's a hobby and I do it for an outlet as I am retired. I recently bought a second camera so I can mount two cameras on my tripod, set one for a medium shot and one for a closeup and cut the scenes together in the editor using the audio tracks to sync up the video. I'm my own camera man, sound and lighting engineer, and editor.

 

Good luck. I'm pretty sure you can get any questions you have answered here.

 

This tutorial I did got over 15,000 views in five years and I'm not even in it, I'm just narrating. I believe it got so many views because there's enough people who had this question already and were searching youtube for an answer.

 

Edited December 17, 2018 by Bob Speziale

[Robin R Probyn]

Bob,with respect, I would say setting your camera at f16 /32,000 Iso with a f1.4 lens for low light interior ..is totally wrong.. you would rarely want to shoot f16 in the blazing sun let alone a dark garage .. cranking up the ISO to this limit on a f1.4 lens to shoot f16 in low light is absolutely the wrong way round..

 

Brandon.. I see you did this to have maximum depth of field due to previous focus problems.. f1.4 even on 24mm it will be shallow.. you could go up to f4/5.6 but you dont need f16.. and ISO 32,000 way off the scale.. you would only use this as some extreme emergency setting like a dark colored UFU landing in the night :)... the A7III has very good AF.. check your settings.. are you in movie mode?.. Auto focus continuous is what you want.. WIDE focus area.. with Face detect .. for when you turn the camera to yourself..

[Bob Speziale]

Robin you are 100% correct. When I first looked at the OP's video what stood out as needing work to me was the camera technique and presentation. I saw it in a small youtube window and didn't even notice how grainy and poor the camera settings were making the video look. I looked at it again in full screen and you are exactly right. And really he needs more light available. I just bought a couple of 500 watt equivalent mogul e39 led bulbs and adapters to standard e26 sockets and a couple of pvc clip on lamps to point at the ceiling from above a 6 ft'. cabinet to light up a space without shadows. Whole thing cost less than 75 bucks.

Bob,with respect, I would say setting your camera at f16 /32,000 Iso with a f1.4 lens for low light interior ..is totally wrong.. you would rarely want to shoot f16 in the blazing sun let alone a dark garage .. cranking up the ISO to this limit on a f1.4 lens to shoot f16 in low light is absolutely the wrong way round..

 

Brandon.. I see you did this to have maximum depth of field due to previous focus problems.. f1.4 even on 24mm it will be shallow.. you could go up to f4/5.6 but you dont need f16.. and ISO 32,000 way off the scale.. you would only use this as some extreme emergency setting like a dark colored UFU landing in the night :)... the A7III has very good AF.. check your settings.. are you in movie mode?.. Auto focus continuous is what you want.. WIDE focus area.. with Face detect .. for when you turn the camera to yourself..

Edited December 17, 2018 by Bob Speziale

[Bob Speziale]

And Robin, you are right in that you get what you pay for in cameras and lenses and in narrative video or outdoor shoots in different lighting etc, this is quite evident. But for youtube videos in small indoor spaces like tutorials or solo against a wall music videos, I have found (and a year ago I would have considered this ridiculous heresy) my two $300 to $400 super zoom bridge cameras, a coolpix b700 with a fixed 24 to 1440 mm equivalent zoom lens and lumix fz80 with a fixed 20 to 1200 mm equivalent zoom lens work the best. And I can put two on a tripod next to each other on a bar, focus one to a medium shot and one to a close up, start the video and step in front of the cameras.

 

I say this after making youtube videos with a variety of dslrs and lenses and video cams and bridge cameras, The reason is the coolpix b700 and lumix fz-80 bridge cameras both shoot in 4K, they have excellent silent continuous auto tracking in video that changes focus silently in 1 to 3 seconds and in video mode they set everything automatically, iso, f stop, shutter speed to get the best exposure in any lighting. I spent years in manual video mode with dslrs and I have to concede the bridge cameras work better and faster for me. A little color grading and the vast majority of viewers wouldn't see the difference on a solo music video shot against a wall or a tutorial from a dslr with a prime or zoom lens. Sure a Blackmagic Ursa Mini 4.6K with cine lenses would look better, but it's really the content that people are looking at.

Edited December 17, 2018 by Bob Speziale

[BrandonFuller]

Thanks for more input. I do have more lights I can use. I will check into doing a short video or testing different lighting and settings. did not realize I wanted 800 iso or lower. that was helpful. I hope you guys are helpful in the future.

[BrandonFuller]

 

here is a test video. did f4 at 800 iso showed up a lot darker than it looked on the back of the screen as well.

[BrandonFuller]

 

 

here is the data off the camera.

[Daniel D. Teoli Jr.]

I'm not really sure if cinematography is what you're trying to learn when it comes to Youtube Vlogging. Pretty much everyone posting here is discussing the production of narratives, commercials, and documentaries.

 

I say this because given the medium you are pursuing, what you have looks fine. Better than most.

\

BH had some deal with a camera and mike in it for YT video. Dedicated type of thing for selfie and talking. Get it. IQ looked good.

[BrandonFuller]

I have been shooting 24 fps and a shutter speed of 1/50

 

I could step that up, but I have been following Peter Mckinnon and he talks about making videos more cinematic like this.

 

Maybe I can step up and then when I get better, I can drop back down to 24/48 but then again, why not just try to get better with this frame rate. just need to make sure I get the lighting set up for every video.

[Robin R Probyn]

I don't know your location .. but the main point was not to shoot f16 in low light.. by racking up your ISO to 32000.. if its too dark at f4 go down to 2.8.. or put your ISO up to 1600.. or more ..but 6000 is really the max you would want to go normally .. check your monitor brightness levels maybe set too high..?

 

Bob yes plenty of cheap/kit lenses can give decent pictures.. I was referring more to lenses "breathing" in that stills lenses are a lot cheaper than cine lenses .. as they dont have to worry about breathing in manufacturing ..where as cine lenses do and are more expensive as a result..

[BrandonFuller]

I forget why I did not do 2.8.

 

I think I need to learn this lens and camera better. Know at what focus distances at the lower F stops.

 

Are all cameras tbe same in regards to fstop settings? Basically is my 1.4 sony the same as canon or nikons? This is probably a noob question.. but I dont recall anyone ever talking about it.

[Bob Speziale]

 

here is a test video. did f4 at 800 iso showed up a lot darker than it looked on the back of the screen as well.

Video unavailabe on youtube. Maybe a bad link?

[BrandonFuller]

I apparently turned it to private instead of unlisted

Thanks