Bill Davis
Forum Replies Created
-
While these are real problems in the real world – I just want to note for the vast majority of folks who read about this stuff rather than doing it – I’ve been shooting the 5dMkii for more than two years now, and I’ve had exactly ONE shot that was unusable due to Moire in those two years.
Yes, its’ “an” issue. But it’s NOT a big deal, and in general practice, unless you’re working for a picket fence manufacturer – it’s largely a ‘once in a while” deal – (maybe a bit like RF problems in Audio) NOT a major technology flaw.
My “street” experience, anyway.
FWIW.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
Sounds like fun.
Since you’re said the “bottle fill” is supposed to be a mystery – consider the question of whether they should look like they’re being added to the pile from the TOP, or (even weirder) from the BOTTOM.
The difference might be notable if some of the bottles in the visible wall in the doorway were colored or otherwise distinctive, then the audience would track the bottle walls movement by these “marker bottles.”
As to rigging the gag, the point is that you’ll get so much optical distortion by shooting through the bottles, that you don’t actually have to fill up the elevator with bottles. If the shot angle is level, you just have to raise the “bottle wall” by increments whenever the shot pulls out.
I’d rig a series of flat pieces (perhaps white masonite or even foamcore) to which you’ve adhered the bottles. During your close shots, the crew just raises the existing panel and puts the one below it in place. Voila, rising tide of bottles. If you want to REALLY sell the illusion, have the general body shapes of the band in the elevator painted on the foam core so that as the “bottle tide” rises, the shadow shapes of the band is maintained through the plastic.
If you ARE shooting down and want the illusion of a rising tide, you’ll need to rig a false bottom that the band can raise manually, upon which rests the top layer of bottles. Either way is a LOT easier than trying to actually fill the entire space with actual bottles over a short time.
Just some general ideas to spark your thinking.
Good luck and let us know how it works out.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
I have 3 of Richard’s LED units and 3 of his fluorescent fixtures. The LED units I ordered in 3200k since many of the retail stores I commonly shoot in have re-lit their interiors using the newest generation of high-efficiency fluor tubes and these typically read at about 3800k. On the fluorescent lights, I ordered sets of both the 3200 tubes and the 5600 tubes.
If either of these are the ONLY lights involved in a shoot, I don’t typically use any minus green on any of them. On standard cameras shooing in a “single technology” (all fluor, tungsten, or LED environment, regular white balancing seems to take care of things and I just don’t find much use for the magenta filters in that circumstance.
When I’m shooting on DSLR, the cameras have pretty lousy white balance capabilities, however, my 5dMkii does have a fluorescent preset that seems to balance really well with either the fluors OR the LEDs. With that setting, shooting the DSLR, it’s Fluors in the studio and LEDs in the field and the setting gives me excellent color rendition.
However, if you’re shooting in a tungsten space and want to use ANY of these as kickers or fill, then you’ll definitely need the magenta filters. In a mixed light environment, the green tinge is quite apparent. The amount of minus-green you’ll need depends on the environmental light you’re fighting.
None of these yet do what tungsten, especially the traditional fresnels in my Arri Kits do – which is allow you to really shape the light with barn doors, gobos and foil wraps. But for broad, soft fill light for interviews and other small setups, the savings in power and the ability to generate a whole lot of lumens at an incredibly low cost and power consumption is a HUGE leap forward in location and broad space studio lighting.
FWIW.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
Just echoing much of what’s said here.
Our coverage is also via Hartford , BUT – I don’t think the company is the key. Your AGENT is the key. Typically a local insurance professional who acts as the middleman and who is around to pick up the phone when you need something.
One company in my rolodex. If it’s personal or household stuff, it’s Vicki. If it’s business stuff, it was Nancy for the first decade but now it’s Julie.
A few years ago, I needed insurance quotes for a not-for-profit who’s board of directors I sit on concerning a huge fund raiser that involved both public admission and on-site alcohol consumption – in other words a situation who’s risk profile was much different than my video operations. So I called Julie, who connected me with Tom, who sent me to Brenda who hooked me up with the right coverage in 48 hours.
The point is that it’s all about building business RELATIONSHIPS. At the end of the day, THAT’s what gets you the needed coverage certificate on a holiday or after hours and why I know that no matter what happens out in the field, I won’t be calling someone who’s never heard of me and has no financial or emotional stake in keeping me happy for another decade or two.
For what it’s worth.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
Personal opinion is that the best price/performance ratio is the CoolLights units. The company owner is active in these boards and proves that he really cares about customer service, and his equipment, while perhaps not at the absolute pinnacle of manufacturing fit and finish, are well designed for their task and are totally as functional as the expensive brands at less than 50% the price.
I own 3 (two 600s and a 250) and seldom work out of state without them.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
House painters charge by measuring, adding up a host of line items, calculating paint coverage factors, listing labor and materials needed – then add a profit margin or fee to cover their overhead.
Portrait painters NEVER charge for how much paint they use, or how expensive the canvas is. They charge for ACCESS TO THEIR TALENT AND EXPERIENCE. Period.
There’s a lesson in that for anyone who sees themselves as a creative talent rather than a simple business person.
You want to paint houses – go right ahead. It’s honest work and people need it.
You want to work beyond housepainter wages – you’ve GOT to learn to get out of the freekin’ line items and work on the big picture. Reputation and extraordinary ability earned through years of craft study and a constant inward evaluation as you push toward creativity and excellence.
Your call as to which level you are currently cruising at, and which game you want to spend your life playing.
Good luck.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
Damn, Mark. You’re right.
Ammended as follows…
Dear Accountants.
Your query regarding the financial efficaciousness of my approach to company video production and the lighting tools which I feel to be a necessary part of same has come to my attention.
Here are some additional facts for you to consider. T
his company is currently paying MONEY for me to make company videos. (Salary, benefits, etc, etc.) Said Videos have, as their underlying purpose DOING something for the company that is suppose to either generate additional revenue (SALES) or limit unnecessary expense (COST CONTROLS).
However, if the people watching said videos can’t adequately SEE what’s happening in them, then I’m concerned that the EXPENDATURE required to make them stands a greater chance of FAILURE to generate offsetting INCREASE IN REVENUE to cover not just their direct costs, but the on-going and accumulating DEPRECIATION of everything associated with this department.
However, if you let me buy the lighting equipment I need, I believe I could do a more effective job in LEVERAGING your INVESTMENT in my employment.
If you wish further emperical data on this matter, please feel free to SURVEY any and all OTHERS doing professional video work and ask them this simple question: “Do you use LIGHTS in your video practice?”
If such a survey indicates that others with the same precise task you’ve assigned to me report that they, in fact, DO NOT use “lights.” then I’m more than willing to re-consider this request.
If, however, you discover that a large percentage of them DO use “lights” then I respectfully suggest that you may want to equip OUR operations so that we might drive results that are similar or even SUPERIOR to the operations of our COMPETITORS.
Yours for the BOTTOM LINE.
(Signature)
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
I’d opt for a simple written response:
The ONLY thing that any camera ever created does is to record reflected light.
Control the light – and one controls the picture. If one can’t – one can’t.Thank you.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
Scott,
I understand both points of view and I know that makeup has been undervalued and underappreciated for a long time in our industry. (I’m also a 30 year working pro) And I also agree that the quality of modern cameras with elements like skin detail can go a long way to making people with modest issues look good.
However, there are two trends that support my contention that pro shooters might want to consider elevating makeup to a stronger position in current best practices.
The first is the move to High Def. Minor bleminshes that disappeared in lousy rez of the SD days can stand out like (terrible simile, sorry) a sore thumb in these days of HD cameras. This is also true of rashes, freckles, cold sores, and a host of other common natural shocks that flesh is heir to.
The other trend is, in my opinion, even more compelling. That’s the continuing inclusion of women into all levels of the workforce. Once upon a time, it was rare for a woman to be in the corporate suite and acting as spokesperson. Today, it’s VERY common. And that woman is MUCH more likely to not only appreciate, but EXPECT to have people available to help her look her best on camera. And she’s likely VERY conditioned to makeup being a part of that. Having a pro around to apply it rather than leaving it as a “do it yourself” gig adds a layer of perceived service that is often extremely appreciated.
So I’d advise everyone to have a couple of quality make up artists in your business phone list.
The time you decide the budget just won’t stretch that far (typically just a couple of hundred bucks for a single session) you might discover that you’re being “penny wise and pound foolish.”
I know I had makeup brought in for a female executive a few months ago. And her company has since come back for THREE additional projects – and I KNOW that a part of that return work is because all her staff and she herself commented on how good she looked in the original video.
Best $200 bucks I’ve spent in a LONG time!
YMMV.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
They are both fine cameras but they ARE different.
So I agree you need to define your work AHEAD of the purchase.
For example, most people can’t go out and buy a comprehensive set of glass because that’s too costly. So often, you’ll be looking for RENTAL LENSES. Those lenses will work just fine with both bodies, but there will be a crop factor to deal with on the APS-C sensor of the 7d NOT on the full-frame sensor of the 5d.
Also, if you’re going to shoot stills for advertising and need the MAX resolution possible for doing large format printing as in Duratrans kiosk work, vehicle wraps, or billboards, the resolution difference WILL be a factor in those areas – tho NOT in direct to video work.
Finally, the “ecosystem” for the transformative 5d is gigantic and growing. It’s the top of mind brand that says “serious DSLR video shooter” in general conversation. Anything less is a step down, but NOT necessarily a step worse. It’s perception. And sometimes perception matters.
One guy told me six months ago that he was selling his P2 Panasonic camera because in the space of a month, every call he got SWITCHED from asking if he shot P2 to asking if he shot a 5d.
It’s got that “kleenex” branding thing about it that no other camera has to date.
Whether any or all of this means it’s worth the extra $1k to YOU or the people who might hire you is hugely debatable. But you should realize that there are factors other than just cost in play.
They are both fine cameras. The choice is yours alone and no matter which way you jump, you can make some great looking video once you learn how.
Good luck.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner