OzRay

OzRay

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Dec 8, 2003

Comments

Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

That has to be the worst slider setup that I've ever seen. Good luck with managing vibrations etc.

Link | Posted on Sep 25, 2020 at 06:12 UTC as 7th comment
In reply to:

OzRay: I wouldn't call Filmic Pro 'pro' software, closer to amateur. I installed it a few days ago and there are some major flaws/omissions that really shouldn't be there after being in existence for so long.

My biggest gripe is that is doesn't offer the choice of shutter angle and for it to be set at 180 degrees as a default setting for whatever fps you've set. It crazy that Filmic Pro automatically sets a shutter speed that has no bearing on the fps used.

If you go into manual mode, you have to set shutter speed every time and isolate it from ISO. Then when you go back to the normal screen, both exposure and focus are locked. When you unlock these, the shutter speed and ISO revert to what they were. So you don't really have proper manual control over the settings.

There are other minor issues with the controls, from a operator/visibility point of view when in manual mode, but the shutter angle issue is a major shortfall.

Yeah, just like car manufacturers saw a market and figured the masses will buy. So what's your point? The issue is whether the app is useful and whether it offers something that isn't otherwise available, and it does.

In fact, given the short amount of testing that I've done, I believe that I can integrate the footage quite well with my BMPCC4K footage. The app's capabilities are really only limited by the phone's camera capabilities.

For anyone who is actually interested in video/film making, the Filmic Pro app is a worthwhile buy.

Link | Posted on Sep 16, 2020 at 21:38 UTC
In reply to:

OzRay: I wouldn't call Filmic Pro 'pro' software, closer to amateur. I installed it a few days ago and there are some major flaws/omissions that really shouldn't be there after being in existence for so long.

My biggest gripe is that is doesn't offer the choice of shutter angle and for it to be set at 180 degrees as a default setting for whatever fps you've set. It crazy that Filmic Pro automatically sets a shutter speed that has no bearing on the fps used.

If you go into manual mode, you have to set shutter speed every time and isolate it from ISO. Then when you go back to the normal screen, both exposure and focus are locked. When you unlock these, the shutter speed and ISO revert to what they were. So you don't really have proper manual control over the settings.

There are other minor issues with the controls, from a operator/visibility point of view when in manual mode, but the shutter angle issue is a major shortfall.

Were you more eloquent, you might consider posting more than what come across as slogans. You consider it an app for the 'masses', but you could apply that logic to just as easily to any camera.

And just like what any camera provides the app provides, for those who are prepared to use it properly and fully, outstanding results. But you also need to use an appropriate NLE to extract the best that it can provide (or that your phone can provide).

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2020 at 07:09 UTC
In reply to:

OzRay: I wouldn't call Filmic Pro 'pro' software, closer to amateur. I installed it a few days ago and there are some major flaws/omissions that really shouldn't be there after being in existence for so long.

My biggest gripe is that is doesn't offer the choice of shutter angle and for it to be set at 180 degrees as a default setting for whatever fps you've set. It crazy that Filmic Pro automatically sets a shutter speed that has no bearing on the fps used.

If you go into manual mode, you have to set shutter speed every time and isolate it from ISO. Then when you go back to the normal screen, both exposure and focus are locked. When you unlock these, the shutter speed and ISO revert to what they were. So you don't really have proper manual control over the settings.

There are other minor issues with the controls, from a operator/visibility point of view when in manual mode, but the shutter angle issue is a major shortfall.

Say and believe what you will, but I've been doing tests over the last few days, using log v2 and editing in Resolve, the results are far, far, better than most would expect. So I'll give credit where credit is due.

Link | Posted on Sep 15, 2020 at 00:04 UTC
In reply to:

OzRay: I wouldn't call Filmic Pro 'pro' software, closer to amateur. I installed it a few days ago and there are some major flaws/omissions that really shouldn't be there after being in existence for so long.

My biggest gripe is that is doesn't offer the choice of shutter angle and for it to be set at 180 degrees as a default setting for whatever fps you've set. It crazy that Filmic Pro automatically sets a shutter speed that has no bearing on the fps used.

If you go into manual mode, you have to set shutter speed every time and isolate it from ISO. Then when you go back to the normal screen, both exposure and focus are locked. When you unlock these, the shutter speed and ISO revert to what they were. So you don't really have proper manual control over the settings.

There are other minor issues with the controls, from a operator/visibility point of view when in manual mode, but the shutter angle issue is a major shortfall.

I own two BMPCC4Ks, amongst other gear, so I do have some idea of what Filmic Pro is and whether it's a useful supplement for other cameras, or not. Do you own it? Do you use it?

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2020 at 09:15 UTC
In reply to:

OzRay: I wouldn't call Filmic Pro 'pro' software, closer to amateur. I installed it a few days ago and there are some major flaws/omissions that really shouldn't be there after being in existence for so long.

My biggest gripe is that is doesn't offer the choice of shutter angle and for it to be set at 180 degrees as a default setting for whatever fps you've set. It crazy that Filmic Pro automatically sets a shutter speed that has no bearing on the fps used.

If you go into manual mode, you have to set shutter speed every time and isolate it from ISO. Then when you go back to the normal screen, both exposure and focus are locked. When you unlock these, the shutter speed and ISO revert to what they were. So you don't really have proper manual control over the settings.

There are other minor issues with the controls, from a operator/visibility point of view when in manual mode, but the shutter angle issue is a major shortfall.

I disagree. I've applied the Log V2 to the settings and even using the less than high-end camera on my Redmi Note 9s, the results are very good indeed when edited in DaVinci Resolve. I've been in contact with Filmic Pro developers, after they contacted me, and suggested some changes to make the camera operation much better, so that it emulates a cinema camera more than a DSLR/Mirrorless camera. Hopefully they can make the changes and this will be an excellent app for mobile phones.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2020 at 04:42 UTC

I wouldn't call Filmic Pro 'pro' software, closer to amateur. I installed it a few days ago and there are some major flaws/omissions that really shouldn't be there after being in existence for so long.

My biggest gripe is that is doesn't offer the choice of shutter angle and for it to be set at 180 degrees as a default setting for whatever fps you've set. It crazy that Filmic Pro automatically sets a shutter speed that has no bearing on the fps used.

If you go into manual mode, you have to set shutter speed every time and isolate it from ISO. Then when you go back to the normal screen, both exposure and focus are locked. When you unlock these, the shutter speed and ISO revert to what they were. So you don't really have proper manual control over the settings.

There are other minor issues with the controls, from a operator/visibility point of view when in manual mode, but the shutter angle issue is a major shortfall.

Link | Posted on Sep 12, 2020 at 23:21 UTC as 4th comment | 10 replies
In reply to:

Whois: Unfortunately it's all very overdramatized (voice over and music) and we also end up having no idea of why they are threatened. Very nice images though.

I was being sarcastic. The link I added should have been a giveaway.

Link | Posted on Mar 26, 2018 at 08:57 UTC
In reply to:

Whois: Unfortunately it's all very overdramatized (voice over and music) and we also end up having no idea of why they are threatened. Very nice images though.

You must have missed it: '...whose already dwindling numbers are increasingly threatened by climate change.'

And another small list of things threatened by climate change (though it's getting a bit old now): http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm

Link | Posted on Mar 25, 2018 at 23:52 UTC

And an interesting story here: https://petapixel.com/2018/02/27/beware-500pxs-flexible-pricing/ . Will things change?

Link | Posted on Feb 28, 2018 at 04:59 UTC as 9th comment

In 2016 I wrote about something very similar in my blog: https://australianimage.com.au/the-last-photography-frontier/ . Where can a photographer go today where the ground hasn't been trampled by untold numbers of visitors already?

Link | Posted on Feb 5, 2018 at 01:57 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

OzRay: That last photo is the crappiest photograph I've seen for a while. Having a humanoid baboon sitting in it completely destroys what would have been a great photograph.

Yes, a potentially award winning photograph ruined by a humanoid baboon sitting in the scene, scratching its ass, shouting the typical 'Look at moi, look at moi!'

There were any number of ways that you could have represented a person in the scene, such as standing on the shore on the far left or perhaps just right of the leaning tree, centre of the left side and the tree in the lake. Subtle but noticeable.

I'm surprised that the baboon didn't have their arms raised showing how 'nature woke' they are.

Link | Posted on Feb 1, 2018 at 06:44 UTC

That last photo is the crappiest photograph I've seen for a while. Having a humanoid baboon sitting in it completely destroys what would have been a great photograph.

Link | Posted on Jan 31, 2018 at 06:47 UTC as 18th comment | 3 replies
On article Throwback Thursday: Olympus E-P1 (66 comments in total)

I must have been the first (or one of the first few) to buy an E-1 in Australia and similarly the E-P1. I still have both and they both work fine.

Link | Posted on Sep 1, 2017 at 02:32 UTC as 18th comment
In reply to:

melgross: I remember the first Ad for the four thirds system concept those long years ago. Perhaps the very concept itself had too many limitations to succeed.

The Ad stated, and I'm paraphrasing now, unless I find a copy with rhat Ad somewhere here at home.

"The best compromise between price, size and image quality...".

That compromise on image quality has continued to haunt this system, and continues to do so for the mirrorless versions.

You still don't understand, it's getting the actual picture that counts.

Link | Posted on Mar 13, 2017 at 19:34 UTC
In reply to:

melgross: I remember the first Ad for the four thirds system concept those long years ago. Perhaps the very concept itself had too many limitations to succeed.

The Ad stated, and I'm paraphrasing now, unless I find a copy with rhat Ad somewhere here at home.

"The best compromise between price, size and image quality...".

That compromise on image quality has continued to haunt this system, and continues to do so for the mirrorless versions.

@bokeh (it's a better way to spell it)

And have you done that work? I suspect not, as it's getting the shots that count, the end use is another thing.

Based on your view, news and sports photographers don't need Canon 1Dx or Nikon D5 cameras, as all they are doing is taking photographs for the 'least technically demanding medium'.

You've also managed to put down every news and sports photographer that's ever existed.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 23:07 UTC
In reply to:

melgross: I remember the first Ad for the four thirds system concept those long years ago. Perhaps the very concept itself had too many limitations to succeed.

The Ad stated, and I'm paraphrasing now, unless I find a copy with rhat Ad somewhere here at home.

"The best compromise between price, size and image quality...".

That compromise on image quality has continued to haunt this system, and continues to do so for the mirrorless versions.

Absolutely nothing wrong with the image quality whatsoever. I shot news and sports for a newspaper for many years using nothing but 4/3 cameras.

Not once in my entire time did I receive a negative comment about my results, quite the opposite. And I still do to this day.

It's not what you think about the quality, it's what your clients and others think about the quality.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 02:33 UTC
In reply to:

MrBrightSide: Olympus made amazing lenses back then; that 90-250 looks like it would be a true gem. Anyone ever try it?

I've owned mine for what must be at least 10 years now and still use it regularly on my E-M1. Despite many lamenting the demise of the 4/3 cameras, the E-M1 completely rejuvenated my 4/3 lenses (7-14mm, 14-35m, 35-100mm and the 90-250mm). They all work so much better on the E-M1 than they ever did on my E-3 or E-5.

Link | Posted on Mar 12, 2017 at 02:30 UTC
In reply to:

RedFox88: Alas another dead camera format.

No, the format is very much alive and doing well.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 00:07 UTC

All of my SHG lenses (well over 10 years old) still work fine on my E-M1 and they get used daily.

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 20:59 UTC as 127th comment | 1 reply
Total: 24, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »