I think there are plenty of people who understand that Black Panther is a milestone for people of color, but that shouldn't automatically earn it extra points in directing, story telling, cinematography, etc.
I think there is a strong argument that it's not all that different from other Marvel films in terms of overall quality. In fact, I'd argue that there are at least a couple of other Marvel films that are better films overall, but that's subjective.
Killmonger's final monologue is a little odd to me and if you really think about it is sort of insulting to his ancestors. He is victimizing himself and comparing his potential bondage to the bondage of his slave ancestors. Really!?
Yeah, the two aren't even remotely close to being the same. He was certainly a victim when he was left in America with no family, but the rest of what happens is something else entirely.
He stabs T'Challa in the stomach and throws him down a waterfall, burns all the heart-shaped herbs so that he would forever be the most powerful, kills an old gardener, causes hundreds of deaths and advocates for millions more.
His bondage would have been for the heinous acts he committed and was well deserved. The slave's bondage was the result of unjust capture, transport, and transaction. Trying to equate the two is just wrong.
My thoughts exactly. Innovative is being used very loosely. I'd say maybe 3-4 qualify. I like weird and strange creative ideas but just being weird and strange doesn't make one innovative. Neither does renting out the Louvre.
I know people bring up Mac OS as a big selling point but I just don't see it. For the past 8 years I have been regularly using Macs and a home built PC to do the same editing, motion gfx, VFX work.
I would work on macs at various production companies and use my custom built PC for my own projects. In practice, I can't say that either OS is really all that better. I have had just as many issues on one as the other.
Honestly, I think that the bad rep PC gets comes from people buying terrible store bought PCs. If you build a system with good components and take care of it then you'll have a good experience. It takes a little research but it's not hard to do.
To be able to understand how your computer works and troubleshoot it yourself instead of having to take it into a store is extremely helpful.
To each their own, but I've never fully understood why pro users wouldn't want these things. It doesn't matter where the computer is from, it's going to need maintenance at some point even if it's just opening it up and getting the dust out which incidentally is something that Apple makes difficult to do thanks to all the steps they take to keep people out of their hardware. Hell they even created their own proprietary screw!
And don't even get me started on what a rip off the Genius Bar is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2_SZ4tfLns
I have regularly worked on both PC and Mac for years doing editing, motion gfx, and vfx work. I usually would work on an imac or mac pro at various production companies I contracted for and my own projects were done on a home built PC.
Honestly, neither system is light years ahead of the other. I have had just as many issues on the macs I've worked on than my PC.
The big difference I see is ownership. I have control over my PC and it's components. I first built it back in 2011 and have periodically swapped parts over the years. I've managed to keep my specs high without ever having to buy a new computer. The most I have spent at one time is $800 for a Graphics card.
Macs couldn't be more opposite. Apple goes to great lengths to make sure that you can't tinker with your computer. They want you to buy a new computer every few years. Forget that. I'd rather be able to just upgrade and make repairs myself if needed and save my money.
The point of the video wasn't an in depth comparison, but it was calling out bad info being claimed by the FPCX guy. The guy in the video who was trying to show how FPCX was better than Premier either didn't know how to use Premier properly and didn't do his research or was purposely misleading. Neither is good.
Piotr was just showing that the same edit can be made in PPro just as fast, albeit one extra click, as it is done in FCPX. He was actually very complimentary of the FCPX guys and was extremely respectful.
Let's not start bashing someone like Piotr who clearly meant nothing malicious in his video but instead wanted to properly inform the community of how PPro actually works... unlike the FCPX guy.
Everyone has their own preference. I rarely have to make major changes to exposure during flight unless I am flying in and out of structures or there are extremely dense clouds moving quickly and changing the ambient light considerably. Even so, there are still options to change exposure on the zoom.
On a typical flight, the exposure isn't going to change so dramatically that I would have to make anything more than a minor adjustment to the ISO or shutter. Although I agree that being able to change my aperture would be nice, I don't see it making a drastic difference in the end.
I have no interest in the vertigo effect, but I do like aerial shots at a longer focal length. It is a look that I personally find to be very cinematic. Also, sometimes flying closer isn't a great option or maybe not even an option at all.
It's the same reason why I would rather walk around with a quality zoom lens attached to my DSLR rather than just a wide if I had to choose between the two. My preference will be versatility in composition.