Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

What if?

Andrew Salter said:
I've read the articles and seen the footage off the 5D2 and GH1 and its a bit of the Kings new cloths, if you want a shallow depth of field (which does give a nice image but with huge draw backs) a jumpy picture no real audio controls and a lot of controls stuck on to your camera, with a crap editing process then there the cameras for you. But they are not video cameras or film cameras, apples are apples and oranges are oranges, why to people try to make one the other!
Click to expand...

Because, if you're doing narrative work, "video" camera's do not capture a filmic image. I don't know why people can't just look at all cameras, weather it be still-with-video option or straight up video, as just tools for the job. Who cares what their purpose was. The truth is right now, if used correctly, the 5d actually takes video that looks like pretty damn close to film. It's more about dynamic range, sensitivity, lens options, ect, than frame rate. Who gives a crap what the camera was "made for". You could ask the people shooting a feature on a ex1, ex3, xh-a1, or whatever the same question. "Why are you trying to shoot a feature film on a non-35mm format, non-interchangeable lens camera?"... it's like apple to oranges. Oh yea, duh, because the s***ty 1/3" low-latitude with no lens options were MADE for video, my mistake. :tongue_smilie:


BTW, in the beginning, movie cameras were also just still cameras... with video option.
 
Bryce O said:
Wait, I have the solution, right now I'm announcing the pre-development of a new camera I designed, the Light-Raper 1250d It's going to have a 15k sensor with 25 stops of dynamic range and capture at 1000mbps RAW up to 1500fps. Actually, make that two sensors with a beam splitter for 3D. Scarlet, Epic, 5D, Phantom, Genesis, and every other camera ever made is going to be a toy in comparison. End of discussion. Right now I have only drawn the plans with a sharpie, but I swear in the next 5-30 years it will change cinema forever. But in the mean time, don't buy anything. You don't want to waste money on something inferior do you?

Light-Raper 1250d proposed specs:

15k up to 1500fps

RAW 2.0

25 stops of dynamic range

Computer-Controlled Focus Pulling

Focus Keying
Green-screen is old technology

Dynamic Full-Motion Stabilization
Dolly's and Steady-cams are only for idiots now.

3D On Demand

Wireless server capture

!NEW! Cine-assist Digital Camera Engine (CDCE)
CDCE take the guess work out of film-making. If you're composition, actors, lighting, sound, and directing all suck, the camera simply wont record the image. Making sure you only capture the highest possibly quality... every time.

more to come!

Why waste money on an inferior camera?
Click to expand...

You should register lightraperuser.net ASAP so that we can start to discuss how light-raper is going to change cinema forever (in 5-30 years, of course). :lol:
 
The still camera makers have just migrated their consumer video features from the sub $1k point and shoot cams to their DSLR models. I read that the 5d II was apparently designed at the behest of one of the news agencies so their photojournalists could shoot short video clips for the web. For that purpose it is excellent. That people push the envelope with them for other uses is mildly entertaining, but the quality of the video still sucks. If I needed another still camera I would probably pick one up for grins, but for a primary motion picture camera they just aren't very interesting to me. Too many inherent compromises.
 
Well I wouldn't say the video quality "sucks". I think "sucks" is a loaded word.

The video quality is pretty damn excellent for web content, but in comparison to professional cams I think that the compression is way to much, and the manual settings (while getting better with each firmware upgrade) are still limited.

It's a cam with limited application in professional cinematic production, but I wouldn't necessarily say it "sucks".
 
Well I wouldn't say the video quality "sucks". I think "sucks" is a loaded word.
Click to expand...

Yeah that was a little extreme I suppose. Lets just say I haven't been as nearly impressed by them as a lot of people seem to be. :reddevil:
 
David Rasberry said:
That people push the envelope with them for other uses is mildly entertaining, but the quality of the video still sucks.
Click to expand...

Then what do you use to describe EX1, HVX, and HDV footage? All have lower data rate that the 5D and the footage captured by those cams looks like porno quality at best, which "sucks" if you ask me.

David Rasberry said:
Yeah that was a little extreme I suppose. Lets just say I haven't been as nearly impressed by them as a lot of people seem to be. :reddevil:
Click to expand...

...I say the same thing about most of the red one's footage I see online. Knowing looked excellent, but a good chuck of it looks sub-par. All depends who's using the cam.
 
All these cameras can produce good results when applied to the right situation. Don't shoot an action movie with the 5D. It's that simple. But I bet you could produce a very nice character driven short with it, something that's light on fast camera moves.

We've all seen really great results come from a wide variety of less than top quality cameras. It's really just a matter of application and knowing it's inherit limitations (don't try to make it do something it can't).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top