Video shot by my stablizer[2] - Page 8 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > Support Your Local Camera > Stabilizers (Steadicam etc.)


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old April 5th, 2005, 04:52 AM   #106
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
<<<-- Originally posted by Mikko Wilson : Leigh,
I'm back and hoping for some new excersize stills, but none i see!


- Mikko.. -->>>

Hi Mikko,

Here are some photo I shot for our review. 8 )

The one mark small is small size photo. They are around 140k bytes.

Flower 1 small size photo
Flower 1 full size photo

Flower 2 small size photo
Flower 2 full size photo

Flower 3 small size photo
Flower 3 full size photo

Flower 4 small size photo
Flower 4 full size photo

The decision for me to select which one is best is quite hard. All are nice photos IMHO. I really like the one is number 4. Both corner got flower and it seems offer some balance and talking to each other. 8 )

Thank you for your time and effort to teach me and I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 14th, 2005, 09:38 PM   #107
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
Hi Mikko,

I look forward to your comments.

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2005, 01:21 AM   #108
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 578
Leigh,

Pictures 1 and 3 look like the same picture. They are better than 2 and 4. Picture 4 doesn't have a definite focal point. It looks like you are framing for something in the middle but there isn't anything in the middle.

How did this thread go from video to stills?

Nice flowers though.

Terry
__________________
He's only mostly sDEADy.

sort of from "The Princess Bride"

www.indicam.com
Terry Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2005, 01:33 AM   #109
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
<<<-- Originally posted by Terry Thompson : Leigh,

Pictures 1 and 3 look like the same picture. They are better than 2 and 4. Picture 4 doesn't have a definite focal point. It looks like you are framing for something in the middle but there isn't anything in the middle.

How did this thread go from video to stills?

Nice flowers though.

Terry -->>>

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the comment.

Mikko suggested me to learn to take photo first, so I just go back to where the industry started. 8 )

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2005, 01:40 AM   #110
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 578
Oh, I get it, composition. Good idea!

Tery
__________________
He's only mostly sDEADy.

sort of from "The Princess Bride"

www.indicam.com
Terry Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2005, 03:27 AM   #111
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Posts: 624
You got it Terry. I see that needing some work before moving!

Leigh;

I like the pictures. and i definatly think that terry put it very well abotu shots 2 and 4. you can probabaly see that yourself.
4 is somewhat balanced as you said. but with the left flower out of focus it looses importance and puts the shot off balance.

However, 1 and 3 - are very similar, but one is definatly better than the other in my oppinion. It has "balance" of objects in the frame without the distraction of unimportant elements.
Can you tell which one i'm talking about? Which is better of 1 and 3? why?

First tell me which is better, 1 or 3? Then surf over to: http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp022.htm and read that module as well as modules 23, 24 and 25.

- Mikko.
Mikko Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2005, 03:22 PM   #112
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
<<<-- Originally posted by Mikko Wilson : You got it Terry. I see that needing some work before moving!

Leigh;

I like the pictures. and i definatly think that terry put it very well abotu shots 2 and 4. you can probabaly see that yourself.
4 is somewhat balanced as you said. but with the left flower out of focus it looses importance and puts the shot off balance.

However, 1 and 3 - are very similar, but one is definatly better than the other in my oppinion. It has "balance" of objects in the frame without the distraction of unimportant elements.
Can you tell which one i'm talking about? Which is better of 1 and 3? why?

First tell me which is better, 1 or 3? Then surf over to: http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp022.htm and read that module as well as modules 23, 24 and 25.

- Mikko. -->>>

Hi Mikko,

The flower in the right bottom in picture 3 should be completely out of focus, but it is reasonable focus now. I did not successfully throw that element out of the picture which distract of the important element, the center flower in the picture 3. Thus picture 3 got two focus flower which left top corner became empty cause picture not balanced.

Am I right?

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 15th, 2005, 06:40 PM   #113
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juneau, Alaska, USA
Posts: 624
Legh.

I like picture 3 more.
The flower in the top left of picture 1 does provide a little balance, but it's out of focus and there fore part of the backgroudn and not in the equation of balance.
Therefore i'd say that picutre 3 is better becaus the focus is in the right place in the frame. in picutre 1 it's all too far in the bottom right corner.

That beeing said none of those pcitures are what i'd call a "great" picture.

Ok. next assignment:
Take another set of photos. but of a person. Again same questions abotu composition. ignore focus, ignore everything else, just where is the person in your frame.

Oh and even smaller image sizes would be better - about 50% of the smaller ones of this set.


- Mikko.
Mikko Wilson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2005, 03:18 AM   #114
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
Hello everyone,

Here is a video I shot backward today. Glad the day is not sunny, so it is quite easy to control the camera. The camera is my old jvc gy-dv5000 camera with a fujinon s20x6.4brm-sd lense.

I found that shot backward is harder than shot forward. I think I need some more exercise. ;-)

wmv format

Here is the link

[short]file size around 10mb
http://www.salenz.com/movie/2005_5_21_small.wmv

[long]file size around 98mb
http://www.salenz.com/movie/2005_5_21.wmv

I hope you'll check out this video and offer some constructive criticism. I look forward to your comments.

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2005, 07:35 PM   #115
Major Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Auburn, CA
Posts: 578
Leigh,

You're a skunk! The video looks very good but I was waiting for you to "reveal" yourself as you panned at the end of your shot. I thought I might see you reflected in the glass but you panned perfectly at the end of the building. NOT FAIR!

Thanks for the smaller file size. It looked fine on my computer.

Terry
__________________
He's only mostly sDEADy.

sort of from "The Princess Bride"

www.indicam.com

Last edited by Terry Thompson; May 23rd, 2005 at 11:10 AM.
Terry Thompson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2005, 08:42 PM   #116
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terry Thompson
Leigh,

You're a skunk! The video looks very good but I was waiting for you to "reveal" yourself as you panned at the end of your shot. I though I might see you reflected in the glass but you panned perfectly at the end of the building. NOT FAIR!

Thanks for the smaller file size. It looked fine on my computer.

Terry
Hi Terry,

Thanks for the comment.

I am shy in front of the camera. ;-)

Regards
Leigh
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2005, 05:50 PM   #117
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Manchester and Kent, UK
Posts: 256
Excellent Leigh. Very nicely done.

[edit: See, I can be nice.]

-Rick
__________________
Richard Lewis.
Steadicam Owner / Operator
Richard Lewis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2005, 06:28 PM   #118
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
Hi Rick,

Thanks for the praise. ;-)

Regards
Leigh

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Lewis
Excellent Leigh. Very nicely done.

[edit: See, I can be nice.]

-Rick
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2005, 12:43 AM   #119
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,781
Leigh:

Yes indeed, the operating is looking solid. Your horizons are looking better every time.

It would be helpful for you to start using a subject again, perhaps you have some friends that you can corral for this purpose; block out a "scene" and start to work on the reactive aspect of operating; moving with a person, framing, using the boom arm, pans and tilts etc.

Now, let me ask you this: is your rig substantially improved from when you posted your earlier clips, or is it basically the same?
__________________
Charles Papert
www.charlespapert.com
Charles Papert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2005, 03:10 AM   #120
Trustee
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 1,276
Hi Charles Papert,

Thanks for the comment.

There is no change for the device for the last six months. I was very sad that we can not invent device help cameraman instantly get steady shot. It seems that still need lots of training. For me, as I mentioned before, I spent an hour training everyday and I bought myself a nice mp3 player and walking with the music to get rid of boring stuff. 8 )

Regards
Leigh

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Papert
Leigh:

Yes indeed, the operating is looking solid. Your horizons are looking better every time.

It would be helpful for you to start using a subject again, perhaps you have some friends that you can corral for this purpose; block out a "scene" and start to work on the reactive aspect of operating; moving with a person, framing, using the boom arm, pans and tilts etc.

Now, let me ask you this: is your rig substantially improved from when you posted your earlier clips, or is it basically the same?
Leigh Wanstead is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > The Tools of DV and HD Production > Support Your Local Camera > Stabilizers (Steadicam etc.)

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:19 PM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network