Mike Cohen
1
COW Coin
Forum Replies Created
-
The Chicago Code is now one of my favorite currently airing shows. It is somewhat like Hawaii 5-0 in Chicago in that there is a special task force solving a crime each episode, although it is better in that the ensemble cast operates in separate efforts in each show, yet they are all related somehow and there is no eye candy.
I hope it lasts.
They seem to have reduced the organic transitions, which I think is good. The last one I saw looked like it was done in post making me think they are all done that way. For a 1-2 second shot it would not be a lot of work for a skilled compositor. Perhaps they export each cut point and ship out to an effects house.
Google does not produce any results, and in fact sends me right back to this thread!
Maybe editor Jordan Goldman will google himself and find this thread, and give us the answer!
Mike Cohen
-
🙂
-
Dear Richard Harrington,
Please write a book about how you find the time to create so many books, tutorials, blogs and still keep up with your job duties. Do you sleep?
Thanks for all the great information.Mike Cohen
-
I was once walking outside a hospital with video camera – not actually shooting, and was picked up by security. The doctor I was working for had to come bail me out.
Hospitals have a lot to lose, so they have a right to be extra cautious.
Have not been nabbed for a bridge or tunnel shot yet.
Mike Cowen
-
That website is a very confusing mishmash of information. It appears that, yes, there is a permit fee for commercial still photography – no surprise there. But photos or video taken for personal use are ok – just as long as a city official does not happen to walk by!
The line between commercial and personal photo and video is being blurred. It used to be that tourists used point and shoot cameras and pros used high end still cameras or shoulder mounted video cameras. Now consumers and pros may in fact use similar gear – hence confusing those who make rules and issue permits.
If you are shooting for personal use, just don’t make it look like you are not. Setting up a tripod on Rodeo Drive can be construed as doing a commercial shoot. Appearance is everything. It probably would be a good idea to have a friend with you posing in front of whatever you are shooting to sell the “I’m a tourist with a nice camera” idea.
I think NYC has similar rules and regs. Just don’t take pictures of bridges or hospitals!
Mike Cohen
-
If I had $7,000 AUS I’d look at a Sony EX3 – that’s assuming you already have all the support gear – but of course you need SxS cards which will break your budget.
So look at the EX1 and a couple of cards.Everything I have read about the new Sony and Panasonic 35mm sized cmos sensors is that yes the image sensors are bigger, but they are basically an EX1 or HVX-200 with bigger chips and perhaps more outputs. And the stock prime lenses these come with may have some limitations, vs a higher quality prime or zoom which you could rent, but then that’s more money. I would not buy one of these new cameras right out of the gate. Perhaps rent one to see how it works for you.
What type of shooting do you do?
Mike Cohen -
Hire a paving company to resurface the road. You will be doing a great civic duty in the process!
Seriously, anything mounted to the car will show any movement of the car. A shoulder rig might help – your body is amazingly good at stabilizing movement. Just don’t zoom in – that will magnify any motion. There are some bungee-cord stabilizers out there – like a microphone shock mount – or try making your own.
Mike Cohen
-
For $600 you get what you pay for. The Canon HF series have mic-inputs.
How about the GoPro as Grinner suggested and a Zoom audio recorder with a lav – sync it up later.
Mike Cohen
-
It depends what you are demonstrating. If you super the demo “Compositing” then viewers will understand you did the comp but not the image creation. Basically tell the viewer what they are seeing and your role
Honesty is the best advice.
Mike Cohen -
“The couple paid OVER FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS” said the reporter and won “ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS” in the lawsuit.
I think the videographer wins in both cases – he got away with it the first time and he did not get an adequate punishment the second.
If this happened in 1983, the couple may have been able to say “we didn’t know” but in 2011, with this newfangled “inter-net” thingamajig, there is no excuse for not knowing what you are buying. There are plenty of websites telling you how to choose a wedding videographer.
If the guy misrepresented his work, fine, but $500 for a wedding video is not a lot of money. In weddings especially, you get what you pay for…or not in this case.
The videographer should have admitted his error and refunded the money, or even offered to shoot a recreation of the missing scenes.
I suppose if the couple ever gets divorced, he could offer to shoot their next weddings for free.
Mike Cohen