[Todd Terry]

John’s right…

Actually while I’ve done it a million times, I haven’t done it a million times practically… as I said the vast majority of the time I’ve greenscreened.

And yes, as John said you have to pay attention to your intended delivery system. I believe the last time I did it practically I had goosed the levels up to a normally-too-high 90ish because I knew the video was to be embedded on an all-white web page (and was sure the web designer would be using pure white), so I didn’t want the white to appear too gray in the side-by-side immediately-adjacent comparison.

But mostly we do broadcast television, where usually what appears to be pure white in actuality isn’t anywhere near 100% white (and the same for black). A lot depends on the end usage.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

That’s a tiny bit confusing….

Are you doing a LENS test?… or a CAMERA test?

Your title says LENS test, but that usually means comparing multiple lenses on the SAME camera or other test instruments.

If you only have ONE lens and are using it on the C300 and FS7 bodies, then really that’s a comparison of the quality of the cameras, not the lens.

It’s mostly confusing because although while it sounds like you are doing a CAMERA test, most if not all of the factors you want to check (barrel and pin cushion distortion and vignetting, etc.) are purely functions of the lens, and will not change no matter what camera body you use. If, for example, a lens breathes when mounted to one body, then it will breathe when mounted to any body… the actual camera doesn’t matter. That’s true for most if not all of the test factors you mentioned.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Color temp should make no difference as long as it is all the same. Since you have more daylight instruments to me it’d just make sense to crank your LItePanels over to the daylight side.

Well I said “as long as it is all the same”… which of course it not totally true. In a setup light that I’ll sometimes use a backlight that is a bit on the warm side, maybe not cranked all the way to tungsten, but somewhat. In many case a somewhat warmer back/side/hair light gives a good look, I think. Conversely, I recently worked with one client who preferred that his backlights were a bit cooler, so it’s just a matter of personal pref and the look that you want. But as long as your key fill and backdrop lights are all the same temp, you should be good to go.

And I probably wouldn’t shoot much above 90, if that. Definitely not 100.

And for what it’s worth (and this was discussed recently in another thread), I’ve had to shoot white backgrounds about a zillion times (especially back in the days when the white limbo “Apple look” was in vogue), and after a few dozen times I finally realized that it was infinitely easier to do them greenscreen and insert the white plate in post. It just made for a much much easier shoot, easier lighting, and easier post. But you may have reasons that you need to do it practically, and of course it can be done.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Yeah this one LOOKED nice, but gawd the smell.

It took about 20 nice-but-persistent emails but I finally got my money back… I just got the email from Amazon a little while ago that the seller had refunded.

Hopefully the next one I buy won’t be so odorous………

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Obviously, you still have the rights to the footage that you provided (providing you had those rights in the first place, which I’m assuming you did), irrespective of the fact that it was used by the production company to create your final video.

So yes, obviously you can do with that footage as you wish (again, assuming you have the rights to it). But the fact that this production company used it for your project in no way gives them any rights or control over that supplied raw footage.

The end result of what they did with it, though, is likely a different story. Let’s say you supplied them with a shot of a dog in a field, for example, that you either shot yourself, had shot for you, or purchased. You have the rights to that shot, and even though the production company used it in your project you still have the rights to the original raw shot. But let’s say the production company did something to that footage… used it within an edit, composited it somehow, or color-graded it. Let’s say, for example, they did a sky replacement in the shot, or added some bushes. You probably don’t have the rights to that version of the shot (other than its use as-is in the production you hired them for). It all just depends on what specific agreement you had about footage re-use with the production company… and in the absence of any specific mentions of re-usage rights, I personally would contend that the rights to individual and manipulated elements remain with the production company. But then again, we always have agreements that specifically prohibit that kind of reuse. Others may feel differently, but that’s my opinion.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

It depends on several things, most importantly whatever the original agreement was, and the mood of the production company.

Here we mostly produce television commercials, and by the terms of our agreements with clients they own the right to the FINISHED PRODUCTION, as-is, to broadcast as they wish, when and where they wish.

What they do NOT own are any elements that went to make up the complete production, not the graphic elements, music tracks, voice or on-camera performances of actors, or the footage itself. We do not allow clients to have our raw footage (unless that’s our agreement and what they specifically paid for), nor do we allow them to, for example, chop up a commercial elsewhere and use any of its pieces.

It’s one thing if you hire a production company to shoot raw video for your use (search “work for hire” in this forum and you’ll find lots of good info). It’s another thing if, like in almost all our cases, you are hiring to create a finished production. If that’s the case, you likely only have rights to the finished production.

You asked a couple of questions: “If I hire a production company to create video segments for my business do I have the right to edit the final product? “… well, I would say yes, as the client you’re signing the checks and obviously you have the say-so in the final cut. They would usually be expected to edit it as you see fit. We often have projects that we would edit a bit differently than the client wants… but as the say “the customer is always right.”

The other question “Can I pull footage from the provided segments and create a new video?” is completely different. Depending on your agreement with the production company, you may or may not have that right. Very likely not. Compounding that is the fact that the production company may not own transferrable rights to all the bits and pieces that make it up, not only the footage. For example there may be performance or location rights that apply to the original production you hired them for, but would not be available for you to re-use. That applies to the footage itself, too… those rights are likely solely with the production company.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Thanks everyone for the suggestion…. this horrible thing is going back, though… already packed up and heading out to ship in it a few minutes. I took the liberty of thoroughly wrapping it in plastic stretch wrap just in case the smell dissipated any before it arrived.

I traded about 15 emails with the seller last night… all very friendly, which started from not-very-accommodating to eventually very accommodating. Their first very friendly-toned offer was to refund 50% and I could keep the case. No thank you. They then offered a full refund after I returned it, but warned it would take up to 28 days to get back to China. No thanks. Then they said they would give me a US address. Before I could even respond they wrote back and said, “We’ll issue a refund, just keep it.” But their refund was only the purchase price, didn’t include shipping I had paid which I thought I deserved since it was a defective product, and I was just going to throw it away… so I was friendly but hardnosed about it. Their final offer was to send it back to the US address and they would pay for shipping both ways.

The funny thing is the emails, both ways, were all surprisingly friendly and civil.

And now, I’m about to get this horrible thing out of my house……..

Thanks all!

(by the way, I have also just ordered a small Pelican-clone for it… it’s what I really need for it anyway)

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

Thanks Nick…

Yes, that is a Biz & Mktg answer, definitely.

After mulling it over today, I’m just going to try to get a refund. This one was SO bad I don’t trust another one, especially from the same vendor. And it took WEEKS to get this one delivered, so I can’t imagine returning this one and getting a new one and hoping that one is odor-free would be a fast process.

At this point I’m going to just try to get a refund. If not, it’s a short trip to the dumpster out back and I’ll move on.

I’ve just never had (or smelled) anything remotely like this, in probably 30 years of buying countless cases…..

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

” how can I guarantee that the file is not shown more times/longer times than we arranged?”

There is virtually no way to guarantee that. Any time you turn a file over to someone, put it on a download site, even just put it on YouTube, it can be copied… and easily. And if the person receiving it is unscrupulous there’s technically nothing to prevent them from showing it longer or more times than agreed upon, and you’d never know it.

I literally think the only way to ensure that, is to never give them the files… period. You’d have to show up at the event(s) in person, with the files in hand, on a flash drive or external drive, play them from your drive without ever actually transferring them to your client’s system, and then leave with them when done.

Obviously, that is way too much trouble for a couple hundred bucks, unless they could make it worth your while.

I think you either just have to deal with people who you 100% trust, or charge them enough so that if they do additionally use your files without your permission, that you are so well compensated that it won’t bug you too much.

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com

[Todd Terry]

I’ve had to do the “Apple look” countless times…. I haven’t had to do it in a while now but back when it was in vogue a few years ago it seems like practically every week a client was needing that…

I did it practically with white seamless paper a few times, with good success although it was a fair bit of work to get it looking perfect. After a few times, I started doing them greenscreen instead, with much better success and much easier.

It was just so much easier to get that pure white perfectly uniform limbo background, and I could concentrate on just lighting the talent without having to be so meticulously concerned about the BG.

If you haven’t considered that, you might want to give it a try.

I will note though, that usually white limbo backgrounds are not pure pure white… which can be a bit overpowering. Just for fun I sampled and tested the Apple video that Vince embedded… which appears to be pure screamin’ white, but is actually 96% white. It’s almost white, but not quite. I think when I’ve done it in the past I’ve ended up with background plates that were somewhere in the 90-95% white range, which looked good (and looked white).

T2

__________________________________
Todd Terry
Creative Director
Fantastic Plastic Entertainment, Inc.
fantasticplastic.com