Quote:
|
I definitely wouldn't want to disparage the DP on that project, but I can think of at least 3-4 things that could have been done differently to lose the giveaway videoness of those stills.
Then again, I've had the camera for 3 weeks, and been able to view my tests on many different displays, of wildly varying sizes and qualities. I'm sure he didn't have the time to suss that stuff out. |
For those picking the image appart, they should note that this was a pre-production cam with which in exchange they gave JVC feedback and reports on what was to be finalized for the shipping cams. This was not final firmware but a beta cam. The menu's weren't even set. As well it has been stated by Ken Freed that they are continuing to upgrade the firmware even now.
That said, I think even these nitpicks would be far less visable in a moving shot not a jpeg still. Regardless the stills are undeniably georgeous. |
Quote:
The basic information is all present aside from the CA and cut-off highlights, a little CC makes the picture look pretty nice. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I shot a short on the Sony F900 with a pretty good lens and some of the stills showed chromatic aberration so I agree no one should be worried.
The images are splended and we should all be very grateful for such a terrific camera. Rob |
Quote:
|
Dear Nate,
Could you tell us the three or four things you mentioned in your email? Would be much appreciated. Rob |
Quote:
1-The stills are definitely exposed like video. I would have exposed 1 to 1.5 stops down to save the highlights in the hair. Bump up fill on faces to compensate. 2-Bring down in-camera detail maybe 2 notches. This does soften the image a tiny bit to the eye, but the info still really is there. 3-Bring color level (saturation) down a notch or two. Not many of what a colorist would call a "flat transfer" would have colors this saturated. If you did shoot film and told your colorist you wanted things more saturated, chances are he would try to find out what more you were after than just bump up the saturation globally. Or maybe not. When shooting DV, I try to save the highlights, always...even if sometimes it means I'll have to pull my subject out a little with CC work later. There is a limit though, of course. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Art dept. Color correction Good location Which brings me to a parallel situation I see the same thing going on in girlfriend's knitting. She'll pick a pattern for say, a top out of a book...based on a photo of a model in a setting where everything in the frame is art directed to match the color of the top. The model of course is beautiful, and the top is knitted by an expert to fit her perfectly...and suited to her type of body. The photography usually is excellent So now I have a girlfriend that's knitted this top, and the reality of it is that the top is NOT suited to her frame, and standing in the mirror there is no expert photographer to show it at a good angle, and the rest of the house is NOT art directed. The overall impression is much of a let down. If I had a music video coming up, I could post grabs or footage on here of that, which would be art directed, probably have a real good looking girl or guy in it, it would be lit (almost) expertly, and they would be in a setting that is interesting and looks cool. I bet $500 that everybody would be talking about how "filmic" it looked. Even if I HAD screwed up detail settings and exposure or whatever. Know what I mean? |
Exactly!!!
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:06 PM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network