on one hand I get annoyed at people for 1)making vertical videos and 2) watching them and not noticing how annoying it is.
but, on the other hand, these producers are not letting that get in the way of meeting people where they are and using a (what i see, snobbishly, as faulty) trend to their advantage.
kind of like how ad agencies use "home-made" looking video footage for online videos. people are more likely to watch it because of the cultural association with "home-made" videos as relatable, immediate, and "the footage is terrible so the content MUST be amazing" principle.
yeah...yikes. whoever wrote this seems to have no idea what they are talking about. I like no film school, i've enjoyed the articles, but this is a little disconcerting. to not know that the GH4 had internal 4k (which was a major competitive selling point to sony) is a problem.
I've always had to set my GH4 to a luminance range of 16-135 in order for the video assist to display the live image correctly.
This update says "increased HDMI luminance range", however, the GH4 still has to be set to the diminished luminance range, as before. Does anyone else experience this?
(in layman's terms, the video assist crushes the blacks and blows out the whites, when the GH4 screen still shows lots of details, but once you set GH4 luminance range to 16-235, instead of 0-255, the displays match nicely.)
i LOVE pixar and their willingness to be so open and helpful like this. such a great studio.
"Lens focal lengths are largely meaningless unless you also know the the actual camera format the lens is going to be used with."
I'm no expert, but in my experience, the crop factor of a camera will effect depth of field and framing. however, the focal length itself still maintains its emotional impact in terms of image compression regardless of format. An 85mm on MFT or full frame is still going to "feel" like an 85mm in terms of compression. you will just lose or gain depth of field control. So when a director says he likes to use, say, a 50mm over a 24mm, i think they are referring more to the emotional effect that the standard focal length has over the wide focal length, and not so much the depth of field control. What that means for me is that I don't have to fret so much over my sensor size. the control over the level of perspective compression and lens distortion is still available to me regardless of the crop factor.
but that's just me! :)
We seem to be fussing about how his comment "high ISO equals more noise" is antiquated with modern cameras. Even if this were true, he barely mentioned the concept of noise. His main point was about executing good artistic and aesthetic set design and lighting techniques, and how incredibly important they are.
His main theme is always "don't invest in gear, but instead, invest in knowledge and skills and artistry". And that again is his theme here.