-
So the director that shot the final episode of House on a 5D MkII would be laughed at?
by some fanboys maybe, but certainly not me, and i dont think they are supposed to. in the end, the final products that matters. its not the tools that make wonders, its the muscle and brain thats behind it.
u give me that 5D2? i will shoot crappy vidz, just the same as always.
all i'm saying is that... do you think that if you say "the 5D2 is the video everything!" to the guys with a XL1HA on his shoulder, he would be agree with you?
-
its the same if i say my Uni-T UT71A DMM is everything that everyone should owns, it gives very precise reading, bla bla bla. whats with you and your Fluke 87-V?
well.... just speculating their felling... whats with me? i dont own them.
but as i said, the tools doesnt matter.
-
and one more thing... the camera is not the only thing that you see, its just a small part, there a lot more behind the scene that makes the audience scream at the video, a lot lot more that cant be seen even if you find it to the wormhole, its in the brain of the maker. but in the end, the tools got the name and fame.
-
i only copy pasted others people work, its up to you to do the translation...
http://hddslreader.com/2010/04/20/canon-5d-mark-ii-at-skywalker-ranch/
For a filmmaker with true cinematic aspirations, the end product must be technically capable of being screened according to Hollywood’s exacting standards. Apparently, if Blooms test is an indication, the Canon 5D Mark II is up to the challenge
-
you are right! but i only give you 66.666% mark for that 2 points. the exact answer should be:
I disagree. Perspective is the relation between distance and relative size (that objects farther away are smaller, and by how much), which purely depends on the subject distance. The angle of view (which depends on focal length and sensor size) determines the crop, but you can get exactly the same perspective by cropping later, this doesn't change the perspective. You can correct the smaller angle of view of a smaller sensor by choosing a shorter focal length, which will yield the same perspective and crop, only the DOF will be different.
Perspective isonlya function of the subject distance and focal length, so the sensor doesn't matter. = 100% mark answer80% mark... 100% = Bokeh is mainly a function of the lens aperture.
The shape is determined by the iris, but the other attributes like how well defined the aperture shape is and if the edges are obvious depends on the under- or overcorrection of spherical aberrations, which is determined by the lens design (and setting of the defocus control ring on the few lenses that have one).let me tell you a secret, that nobody on earth do care to put it on the internet. COC is a subjective matter, it varies with each different observer, trust me, it cannot be counted in the engineering equation. just like colors or your favourite food.
This statement is not relevant to the discussion. Whatever criterion you choose, it will scale proportionally with sensor size. If you view on a 24" screen, the image from the 1/3rd inch sensor has been enlarged much more to make it that large (in mm, not in pixels). So the CoC is also enlarged, which means the CoC on the sensor must be smaller to compensate.yup yup! PRINTING! it has to do with resolution! thats why sensor size (pixel count actually) comes into equation/discussion. if you talk about resolution, then yes... 1/3" sensor lose!
Sure, the resolution provides a lower bound, no point in choosing a CoC that's lower than the resolution of either the sensor or the output device (times scaling). But I'm not at all talking about pixel count, for my example, you could just assume both sensors are 1080p, everything except the sensor size (and derived values like focal length, for the same angle of view) can be identical. Actually, for the simple DOF equation, you assume pixel size << CoC, and when viewing (on a screen or on paper), your eyes should be unable to see individual pixels, otherwise the resolution was way too low, or you're too close (which is why CoC assumes a certain viewing distance). So as long as the CoC is much larger than the pixel pitch, the pixel pitch doesn't matter, and you could just as well assume a constant pixel pitch.man! i dont understand what you are talking about! are you saying that when i put a 50mm f1.2L @f8 on the 5D2, the image will be similar effect to the same lens @f1.2 on the EOS 350D? (the smallest DSLR sensor)?
I'm saying that you can compensate for the deeper DOF on smaller sensors by using a proportionally larger aperture and proportionally shorter focal length (to compensate for angle of view). The 350D sensor is 1.6x smaller, so the lens should be 1.6x shorter for the same angle of view (~30mm), and the aperture should be a factor 1.6 larger (f/2 on the 5D would be equivalent to f/1.2 on the 350D). This can be derived from the DOF equation, for the simplified case for a symmetrical lens (probably not a bad approximation for a 50mm lens), the hyperfocal distance h=f2/NC, with N the f-number and C the CoC. The near and far limits are a function of h, the subject distance v and v - f. Assuming v >> f (usually true except for macro), we can approximate v - f with v, and the sensor size/aperture/focal length only changes h. If you change the sensor a factor x, both f and C will change (see above), but h must stay the same (same DOF). So f02/N0C0 = f12/N1C1 = (x*f0)2 / N1(x*C0) => N1 = x * N0. If you do it the hard way without my assumptions of a symmetrical lens and v >> f, the change in N will be slightly different than x. You can argue about that exact value, I'm not going to claim that it's exactly 1.600 or something like that, but it's clearly not 1, so the sensor size does have an effect, since you've effectively gotten extra lower stops (f/1.2 on 350D is now f/2.0, so I can go two stops lower than before, and lose two stops on the other end). This is why large format photographers use these extreme aperture's like f/64 to get enough DOF. -
It's not about resolution but about chip size! As a photographer you should know about DOF and other photographic effects which are nearly impossible to achieve with that small 1/3" (or similar) camcorder sensors.
i think u have a misunderstanding there... DOF/bokeh/perpective effect are the function of lens aperture and focal length only. the function of chip size will equates to noise level, dynamic range, resolution.... and crop factor i think.
my XL1S is an old a third inch sensor, but trust me! $1K or even larger sensor "handycam" cannot achieve the effect that it can get.
yes and the smaller the sensor chip the shorter the lens must be to achive the same angle of view, my first cmaera really had a 6.2-66mm lens because the sensor was so small and it was equivalent to a 28-300 film camera. Now I have a DSLR with an APS sensor I can use proper length lenses and my photos look normal now -
anyway, the misconception occured when this "behind the scene" is out before its documentary not as the usually the hollywood movies do (behind the scene is at the end of the story)... so when the documentary will be out? should be something and worth waiting for, i wish to see Dave is posing somewhere while Karl is doing the Blooms panning effect with the surrounding effect of the circle of confusion. hopefully it will be free! at least for us
-
Karl has been kind enough to share the how and why of "grading":
And gives a sneak peak at what the final doco result will look like.
For those (including myself initially) who though the background was "too dark", it's time to learn from the pros!
Dave. -
For those (including myself initially) who though the background was "too dark", it's time to learn from the pros!
Dave... dont be too much be influenced by a photographers mind, they got a very different perspective, as i said... they dont like oscilloscope! u may well say that Karl is astonished by your Tektronix... but thats just what they put it out, you dont know whats inside seeing is believing! believing is doing!... what did i say?
unless you want to be listed in the best cinematic and director of photography award, then you can do whatever u like. this photography thing is really a subjective matter. will took forever to discuss what u like or dont like. as you said, you will not satisfy everyone. not the electronics bunch in here.
we kinda used and like your existing setup (well lit lab n very crowded background)+spinning erthernet board as an intro. but that one can be improved though, but if you delve too much into photography, that will rip out some part of electronics within yourself.
my opinion.
-
More behind the scenes stuff on Karl's TV ad for Canon:
Dave. -
but the fact is.. actually... i will be more astonished if you can do all those blooming summer winter COC effect + horse riding frequently here in EEVBlog. you will be noted by videography giants out there more than ever!
-
Karl has been kind enough to share the how and why of "grading":
Maybe a vignette would draw the average fellow's eyes to the subject, but I was still staring at your bench gear.
I can't help it.
-
I think Shafri needs to spend a little less time in electronics and more in photography, he's getting that exited that I can't understand what he is on about anymore
-
I think Shafri needs to spend a little less time in electronics and more in photography, he's getting that exited that I can't understand what he is on about anymore
i'm done with photography, thats why i came here. and then... when i'm done here, i'll go somewhere else... just a matter of time.
and trust me, sometime i also dont understand myself what i'm talking about.
-
nice to know I'm not alone
-
I think Shafri needs to spend a little less time in electronics and more in photography, he's getting that exited that I can't understand what he is on about anymore
Whew, I thought it was just me!
Dave. -
so when the documentary will be out?
When Karl's finished it!Quotehopefully it will be free! at least for us
Yes, the final doco will be available for all to see.
Dave. -
so what exactly is this documentary about ? you Dave or electronics today on the whole ?
-
so what exactly is this documentary about ? you Dave or electronics today on the whole ?
It's about the history of electronics design and manufacture and hobby electronics in Australia, the changes, and the future.
I'm just one of half a dozen people interviewed. See Karl's blog page for some of the other people.
Dave.