Michael Slowe
Forum Replies Created
-
That’s it Gerry, a great Tutorial, thank you Floh, I’ve printed it out for experiments. Thank goodness Floh seems to have returned to the fold, I know he’s been busy working outside of his home town, Munich.
Michael Slowe
-
Although I’m a user and fan of Transfer I believe that it has long been superseded by Browser and even something else, so you won’t get it to work with Yosemite. Why they can’t leave things alone when they work perfectly well always amazes me.
Michael Slowe
-
Clint, what side of the pond are you on? Here in the UK I think that they’ve settled the band issues, hence my purchase of the Shure. As you say you also had this, what did you think? Did you have that tiny, square shaped mic?
As to the siting of the receiver, I always fix it on the camera (EX 1), I got an extended shoe which can hold the camera mic and the radio receiver. Pity there’s only two XLR inputs as I’d really like a back up mic near the talent in addition to the radio one if practical.
Michael Slowe
-
I used to use the Sennheiser EW 100 G2 on my EX 1 camera for a number of years with great results. When the new regulations on band usage came in here in the UK I was told that this mic was illegal.
I then bought the Shure model WL93 with the SM93 lapel mic. I found this to be superior to my old Sennheiser in a number of aspects. Firstly it’s far lighter in weight, which is easier for the cameraman and the talent. Secondly, the tuning and syncing is automatic and far less bother than the Sennheiser, and thirdly, and more important, the microphone is quite amazing. It is tiny in size, has a square shape which fits well under the Rycote ‘stickies’ that I use to attach it to the talent, and gives a very good sound indeed.
I have used this set up on a number of difficult documentaries and no one listening to my audio on the films would know that such a set up is being used.Michael Slowe
-
Thanks Marcus, actually that’s quite an old production, the hounds one and the one on the musician are rather better and mrs interesting!
Michael Slowe
-
Well, it seems that it’s just us three who are interested in Media 100 and sharing experiences, surely there are more editors worldwide on Media 100?
You fellows seem to be only talking workflow rather than product. It would be nice to see some of each others work. My main docs. can be seen on Vimeo through this link: https://vimeo.com/user17404759/videos It should work, navigating these sites is not always straightforward.
As to the Media 100 Windows, many of them are not of much interest to me, Slip, Slide, Catch Frame I don’t use, but there are others which could be of use if I understood what they do. I do my colour grading (such as it is), in the Colour FX section in the Edit Suite window and, having had some basic instruction, find it fantastic. Doubtless you all use more advanced stuff like Color or Da Vinci?
Michael Slowe
-
OK fellows, I’ll try and join by following the original instructions, but, what happens to this forum on The Cow? We do really want to encourage and promote Media 100, we mustn’t let it slip away out of sight.
Michael Slowe
-
You boys are just great, and so kind and generous to an old man!
Yes, you can do whatever you want with my picture, one of my daughter’s friends, who is a photographer, did it. My edit set up is in quite the normal mode: MacPro (not the very new one), external drives (10TB’s raided so about 5 usable), two HP screens (would like the super Apple ones), a Sony HD monitor and two Edirol speakers. Plus, of course, Media 100, BitVice, Titanium Toast Pro 11, Studio Pro, Compressor, a Sony DSR20 DVCAM tape deck, (legacy stuff still on tape as well as files). As we all know, editing is the art, most anyone nowadays can shoot the stuff.
Michael Slowe
-
Andrew and Marcus. I share your enthusiasm for Media 100 (I wouldn’t dream of editing on anything else – couldn’t, too old!), but why Facebook? Surely this forum can do all the things that Marcus mentions. I imagine that you’ll say that Facebook reaches more people, but are they likely to be interested in film editing?
I think that I’m a member of Facebook because I keep getting messages that so and so wants to ‘talk’ to me. It’s all a mystery and I ask myself whether I want to get all these mails and then have to spend even more time at the computer dealing with it all. I only started this computer lark when I had to edit digitally rather than with film in the late 90’s. Can you please advise and explain what Facebook is? I don’t ‘twat’ or other odd activities and I’d rather not really.
Michael Slowe
-
Tom, you confused me with your mail because I couldn’t find the thread until I realised that it went back to June!
I’m glad you liked the Doug Jensen PP’s, I used them from when I first got my EX 1 and viewed his DVD. As to your depth of field question, this comes down to basic photographic principles that I thought we all learnt at our mother’s knee. The wider the aperture the shallower the DOF, similarly, the longer the focal length of the lens, the shallower the DOF. The problem often is that the light is too bright for a wide aperture (f1.9 or f2). This is where the built in neutral density filters come in handy to darken the picture to allow correct exposure with the wide aperture. I often find that two filters don’t give enough choice, and I find myself between the two. I notice that the new Sony camera has three ND filters. You can of course fit an external one if required.
The choice of focal length (zoom) is more problematic because the situation often doesn’t allow a long tele setting due to space and distance from your subject. What I haven’t mentioned is the size of the chip in the camera. The larger the chip, the shallower DOF. The consumer cameras often have small chips which makes life very difficult. Our EX’s, with half inch chips are easier, the new 35mm sensors are the real business and will give similar DOF performance as the DSLR’s that you like using. I’m seriously considering looking at the new Sony with this large sensor.
Michael Slowe