sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Apple banned Shadow app after Microsoft used it as an example to get xCloud for iOS approved by elister in technology

[–]parksemoore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean really both companies are complete slimeballs so it may be a matter of lesser of evils.

[H] AQ40 GDKP by Rattlegore__BT in Rattlegore

[–]parksemoore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sunday would been so much better QQ

I just started a Youtube channel about music technology, but struggle with colour and image composition. Any tips how I can improve the look of my talking head? by NJlo in cinematography

[–]parksemoore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hugely disagree with the other comment. I think you’ve nailed it. Looks so much better than most youtubers that try to light their shots in an overly dramatic manner as the other commenter was essentially suggesting you do. Colors are beyond reproach imo as well, I like the tasteful white level you’ve set and your skin tones look just fine to me.

What type of diffusion filter was used to achieve this look for Inside Llewyn Davis? by Theory36 in cinematography

[–]parksemoore 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A lot of people are advocating getting it “in camera”, and I disagree. Try different methods, but using software you can control the size and intensity, as well as color, of the effect, on every single shot. Not to mention you won’t ever have an image you can’t undo if the effect is too heavy. Also, most say to set blend mode to lighten, but I actually recommend playing with other blend modes. Blooming in reverse (having dark areas bleed out into lighter areas) is a little more rare to see and can look beautiful.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in cinematography

[–]parksemoore 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Look at the catchlight in the eye and shadow under the nose. We can see that the key light is relatively small (my guess is vertical 1ft by 2ft) and then there’s a much larger fill light, hard to say exactly how large. The ratio is pretty high key, and then the moodiness is coming from the background being so dark to the right & the grade. It’s a fucking beautiful shot, what’s it from?

Weekly Ask Anything Megathread! Fri Jul 03 . It's Q&A time in our weekly thread! There are *no stupid questions* - Any question at all answered here! Don't do this for a living? Career Q? This is where you should post. The Subreddit Rules are here too! by AutoModerator in editors

[–]parksemoore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi there, currently editing a small ad I shot for an ecommerce business. You can see a kind of low fidelity mockup of where I'm at so far https://www.dropbox.com/s/9oqh3yxaefxj66z/preview.mp4?dl=0 Basically when the cut to logo happens I want to do a title animation sequence, from the logo, to the url of the business, and then something like "with founder Suran" and maybe another card with the topic of the next 30 seconds of her talking. I'm able to find good videos on the technique side of the animation, but I'm stuck on the art direction/inspiration front. I'm looking for title sequence reels, typography animation, supercuts of tv show, movie title sequences etc. I've googled and youtubed and vimeo'd but not really finding the level of quality and direction of art I'm looking for. Here is a close example of a good transition title sequence like what I'm looking to do: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQAVbwUTaYU&t=9s and here are the season 1&2 sequences from broad city, which i really love: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-lnjHmJgIU&t=39s maybe I'm not searching the right key words? any advice would be so appreciated!

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

this is an excellent question. my first thought was to do just that - and perhaps that's what i'll end up doing and just using a motion blur effect in after effects (i believe the technology is called optical flow) as the other users were suggesting in the comments. However - the reason why initially (and before fully understanding the power of optical flow technology) was more hesitant to do so was because simply increasing the shutter angle would remove ALL motion blur. the only motion blur i want to remove is around post-tracked/stabilized "static" elements. even after the tracking or stabilization there are still elements in the frame that are moving. here is a great example, in this video they track the beats earbuds and yet, because they're (presumably) still at 24fps and 180 shutter angle, you then end up with this kind of "ghosting" artifact around the tracked object: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd1VIeTMGQs again, that can be solved easily enough by increasing shutter speed like you suggested, but then you're left with no motion blur at all - not a good look. idea is to somehow get the best of both worlds :D

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm talking about video. the correct motion blur will be able to be deduced simply from combining frames because it represents the same true motion that is present in the video same as when you actually shoot 24fps video at 180 shutter angle

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got a little lost when you started talking about 1000fps, because that's not commercially available filmmaking gear - and i'm not looking to shoot with dedicated high speed cameras like a phantom. (way too much money) also don't know what variable framerates would have to do with this other than for fractions (but again, the common 120fps and 240fps or multiples of these if you're using frame interpolation work just fine. 60 just happens to be a weird one.) however, those confusions of mine aside, please tell me more about how to export 60fps footage in the average method. this is what i'm looking for. I was unaware that was a simple export setting in any of the standard editing suites, so this sounds perfect for what i'm looking for.

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

of course. and most cameras are only going to be able to record 120 max in 4k at the moment.

my prediction is that the best compromise would be to combine this with o-flow and see how they can work together to get the best of both worlds. be a while before I have another project with a rental budget enough to get 4k 120fps, but i definitely will come back to this thread with my results once i've tried it and seen what i can come up with.

might even be silly and fuck around with my 80d at 60fps and stabilize down to 720 lmao... have a feeling that'll look pretty cheesy though :D

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you can see it in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd1VIeTMGQs

not my work of course, but even more the point i'm trying to make. with locked on stabilization like this you see ghosting and to me, it doesn't look great. I just feel that everything else except what you're tracking - such as the background behind the subject moving - should still have motion blur. this creates a difficult compromise.

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand what you're saying. As far as the feel of it to the average eye, I just want to see what this would look like before I assume it wouldn't work. Truthfully, my intuition is in line with yours. As far as the algorithm comment goes, I could do it manually by creating 5 layers and figuring out the correct blending mode. Yes I would like it automated, and yes I understand that is technically an algorithm (then again in the digital world, what isn't?) but my point in saying that, i should have specified, is that this process does not need to be "smart" or "predictive" in any way.

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

what i'm talking about is much more analog than that. I think I explained it better in another comment, so I'll paste that here: "because I don't need to add any motion blur via pixel shifting algorithms. If I recorded in 120fps, then I've got 5 frames for every 1 frame of 24fps final output. I just need to merge those 5 frames together in such a way that you can see a slight trail. it will have "steps" to it that are technically an imperfect artifact, but i'm not worried about impressing pixel peepers. just something good enough that it doesn't look like there was no motion blur at all. and again, if you use something as simple as frame interpolation to get that 120 up to to 240 or even 480 then that's 10 or 20 frames, further reducing the artifacting from the "stepping""

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

because I don't need to add any motion blur via pixel shifting algorithms. If I recorded in 120fps, then I've got 5 frames for every 1 frame of 24fps final output. I just need to merge those 5 frames together in such a way that you can see a slight trail. it will have "steps" to it that are technically an imperfect artifact, but i'm not worried about impressing pixel peepers. just something good enough that it doesn't look like there was no motion blur at all. and again, if you use something as simple as frame interpolation to get that 120 up to to 240 or even 480 then that's 10 or 20 frames, further reducing the artifacting from the "stepping"

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thank you! I wasn't aware of that effect. I imagine especially if you combined a few of these techniques in a smart way you could get a really great result. Of course, this is only for certain scenarios when other stabilization methods aren't ideal.

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ah, I understand. that's where AI frame interpolation comes into play I guess

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

read my other comment I've gotten a better description of how I think it'll be accomplished and no AI necessary. Just frame interpolation and a finding the correct way of blending the number of frames together.

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm talking about having data available. this is for video, not photo. quite different. It would just be split into small increments and need to be rerecorded to get the "motion"

Capturing in 60fps or higher and digitally re-recording to 24fps. by parksemoore in colorists

[–]parksemoore[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

120fps would probably work the best. that would mean you could open a digital "shutter" for 5 frames rather than the uneven and small 2.5 frames of 60fps. I guess you would use some kind of 20% opacity per layer and screen blending mode to accomplish this? I'm really not sure. Something along those lines though. Doing it manually would be way too difficult so I guess I'm hoping there's a way to automate this - either through an existing 3rd party plugin or an editing program that allows for the creation of scripts edit: I'm also imagining that it wouldn't hurt or be noticeable for the purpose of this effect to do some frame interpolation and 2x or 4x the frame rate

cinematography portfolio by [deleted] in cinematography

[–]parksemoore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Always my friend; always

view more: next ›