Ryan Koo's short film AMATEUR, a prequel to the feature MANCHILD he's directing (only project I've ever backed on Kickstarter).

277

(469 replies, posted in Episodes)

Ladies and gentlemen welcome to the Space Jam! It's your chance, do your dance. Today's movie is...

278

(449 replies, posted in Off Topic)

bullet3 wrote:

The movie by many accounts is the cheesy, lame biopic you would expect, but I think the trailer is extremely well-cut.

I definitely get the potentially cheesy vibe from the trailer. That's why I'm not super interested in it.

279

(449 replies, posted in Off Topic)

BigDamnArtist wrote:

I care next to nothing about Baseball. But this looks damn good.

That's funny, I'm a huge baseball guy and this movie isn't really appealing to me.

280

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

Here's a chart with a list of lenses that can be adapted to a number of mounts (M4/3 included).

One thing to note is that when you put a full frame lens on a crop sensor camera, the sensor captures a smaller section of the image from the lens. This means that a 1920x1080 frame from the crop sensor will contain less detail than a 1920x1080 frame from a full frame camera using the same lens. But as far as I can tell there's not much of a difference.

Also, Metabones makes a "Speedbooster" adapter which uses glass to re-concentrates the light from the lens to a smaller area, making the image wider, sharper, and effectively lowering the f-stop. I believe they're coming out with a M4/3 version soon.

281

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

BigDamnArtist wrote:

Right now I'll be working with a GH2, which is a micro 4/3rds lens mount. But obviously I'll be moving up to something bigger and better eventually, something that will most likely not have a m4/3rds mount. If I'm building my glass kit, should I buy for the m4/3rds and then use an adapter later, or do I get something else that's a great piece of glass and adapt it down to the m4/3rds?

I don't know every bit of technical jargon but I understand it well enough, so I hope I can explain it well enough too.

If you get a camera with a different mount (e.g. Canon EF Mount) in the future, you won't be able to adapt M4/3 lenses to it. For one thing, the sensor will probably be larger than a M4/3 sensor and those lenses wouldn't cover the whole thing, and you'd get some serious vignetting.

The main reason though is the flange distance (distance between mount and sensor) of the M4/3 system. I don't know what cameras this diagram depicts but let's call the top one a 7D and the bottom one a GH2. That's basically how the distances compare, because M4/3 cameras don't have a mirror taking up so much space between the lens and the sensor.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Flange_Focal_Length_(2_types_camera).PNG/220px-Flange_Focal_Length_(2_types_camera).PNG

A lens made for a certain mount is designed for the particular flange distance of that mount. If the lens is set at the wrong distance from the sensor, the focal distance will be out of whack. If you hold a M4/3 lens up to a Canon 7D, since the lens is positioned too far out you probably won't be able to focus further than a few inches. It's like using a macro extension tube.

So, if you're planning on holding on to your lenses after switching to a camera with a different mount, don't buy M4/3 lenses. The thing is though, if you're gonna invest in a different lens system, you're gonna have to know which mount your future camera will have. That's the tricky part of this mess.

In my opinion, Canon hasn't shown a lot of promise lately in terms of consumer/prosumer video quality, but their EF Mount is also the most widely used in the video world. So since everybody already has EF lenses, companies that want to make a camera but don't have their own lens systems are likely to use EF if their sensor is bigger than M4/3 (case in point, Blackmagic). Plus you can also adapt EF lenses to Sony E Mount cameras. So that's why Canon is a solid choice. But hey, Nikon also seem to be stepping up their game too, though they still don't even make a dedicated video camera (yet). Sony are trying with their Alpha mount, but I think they know E-Mount is their future, which is out of the question for a M4/3 camera owner since that flange distance is even shorter, and there aren't a lot of E-mount lenses out there yet anyway.

But hey, you could always just sell your lenses when you want to upgrade... Or just commit to using M4/3 cameras forever because you light like a champ and shallow DoF is for hipsters!

Wow. I am sorry if you read all that nonsense. Quite the ramble.

TL;DR - No. Sure.

282

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

bullet3 wrote:

Also get to see the Movi in person tomorrow, and damn its gonna be hard resisting the urge to just buy that thing on the spot. MUST NOT MAKE CRAZY IMPULSE PURCHASE

Wow that's awesome. I am jealous of you.

And also Dorkman. Congrats on your BMPCC preorder. Sounds like you'll have yourself a nice 31st birthday present!

283

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

http://instagram.com/p/X09vwJzXMl/

clap

284

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

My brother just got the 504HD head (no legs yet). I'm not a tripod expert, but I think it's very solid. I also have the Davis & Sanford FM18 head, and the 504HD seems to be a nice step up in build quality.

285

(211 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Is it solid at room temp?

286

(31 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Phew.

287

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

The new Freefly "MōVI." Vincent Laforet calls it a game changer.

288

(211 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Tomahawk wrote:

Is it a recreational toy?

fcw wrote:

12) Is it something you might give to a child? It's not a toy, but, sure, why not?

289

(49 replies, posted in Episodes)

I'm sorry guys. I just don't get why everyone's so crazy about Jennifer Lawrence...

290

(31 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Trey wrote:

Ebert's last review really was The Host.

Yeah I saw that it was the last one on his Twitter feed and just thought, what a shame.

291

(49 replies, posted in Episodes)

Teague, you just had to mention the Sandlot 4th of July scene! Now I can't stop humming the Ray Charles version of America the Beautiful.

292

(211 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Is it generally used to help you consume liquids more than solids?

fireproof78 wrote:

I LOLed at Under Armour's new product line

I'm slightly embarrassed at this, I worked at an Under Armour store for a few years.

294

(48 replies, posted in Episodes)

Also I think Horner's themes for animated kids' movies like The Land Before Time, An American Tale, and Balto are freakin sweet.

295

(48 replies, posted in Episodes)

I've got 20 minutes left. Home stretch.

The first score I really ever noticed wast The Rock (Zimmer). I was in 6th grade and we had it on VHS. I watched that movie so many times. I remember playing viola in my school orchestra and was wishing we could play that theme.

Okay I've been wondering about the explanation for a certain scene in this movie, and either I missed something or there's a very annoying plot hole...

  Show
So Oz, the monkey and China Girl are looking for the Glinda, thinking she's the wicked witch, when they suddenly stumble upon her, conveniently and purposefully leaving her wand on a rock outside the grave yard at night. What was her reason for this? Is that where she leaves it for the night? If that thing is destroyed she apparently like dies or something. So why in Oz would she just leave it sitting on a rock on the side of the road in the middle of the night, and just walk away? I'd be so happy if someone could tell me there was a good reason for it that I missed, because if there isn't then that's down right lazy of whoever drew up that scene.

But even apart from that issue, I'll just say I enjoyed The Incredible Burt Wonderstone more than this movie. Yeah...

297

(19 replies, posted in Episodes)

Awesome, can't wait to see this.

298

(2 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Zarban wrote:

Obviously, these are just made for peop—

I FOUND "BEANSTALK"!!

Good job smile

There was a solutions page at the end, but I chose not to post it. Figured people might like to try them out.

299

(2 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yet my local theater had a stack of these laid out for people to grab. I'm confused. When you go to a restaurant they won't even give you one of these unless you're younger than 13...

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8511/8543137799_99024d1a08_b.jpg

300

(53 replies, posted in Episodes)

switch wrote:

dear god!  exporting an image sequence of an 8 min. 50 sec. video ends up being just a little over 90 GB!  DUDE!  that's like a 100 times larger than the PRORES quicktime!

Yeah I tried it with a 1 minute video yesterday. PNG, 12GB, 14x larger... I think I'll stick with ProRes for now and maybe wait a few years till storage costs WAY less, and ProRes is still alive and kicking.