Download the original file via Vimeo for better quality.

HILL 235 from Stuart Howe on Vimeo.

It's still undergoing some grading tweaks, but thought I would start creating some buzz.

Screenplay, Editing : Richard van der Laan Camera, Grading : Michiel Boogerman Sound design, Mastering : Maarten Boogerman Production : VEASONIC

Camera : Panasonic GH2 AVC-Intra Driftwood VY Canis Majoris Day Lens : Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8 G ED, Tokina AT-X 116 Pro DX AF 11-16mm f2.8 Gear : Kessler Hercules 2.0 Head, Kessler Pocket Jib, Kessler K-Pod Tripod System, Gini Follow Focus Rig, Lilliput field monitors Tools : Adobe Premiere CS6, Magic Bullet Suite

This short won the first prize on the QuickFlick.tv festival in Amsterdam (15.07.2012 - heaven and hell theme).

The month of the Frisian book is held in Friesland, the nothern province of the Netherlands. It is a literature festival organized around the Frisian language. The theme of this year festival is 'tension'.

Production : Veasonic Director, Screenwriter : Richard van der Laan Director of Photography, Montage / Post : Michiel Boogerman Sound design / Recording : Maarten Boogerman

Camera : 2x Panasonic GH2 AVC-Intra Driftwood VY Canis Majoris Day Lens : Nikon AF-S 24-70mm f2.8 G ED, Tokina AT-X 116 Pro DX AF 11-16mm f2.8 Gear : Sachtler FSB-4 75 CF, Kessler Hercules 2.0 Head, Kessler Pocket Jib, Kessler K-Pod Tripod System, Gini Follow Focus Rig, Lilliput field monitors

Actors Writer, Detective, Voice : Siem de Vlas Woman : Marieke van Brussel Perpetrator : Maarten Boogerman

The Frisian languages are a closely related group of Germanic languages, spoken by about 500,000 members of Frisian ethnic groups, who live on the southern fringes of the North Sea in the Netherlands and Germany. The Frisian languages are the second closest living languages to English, after Scots.

Anyway, it's a fun little short - please check it out and let me know what you think.

I'm posting here to promote my short horror film, called Insane Madness. It's a short film, inspired by the works of H.P. Lovecraft and films like Evil Dead that I've helped co-write. The film plays with human mind, never knowing what's real and what's a dream. It's a period piece, set in the 80s, which we will shoot using time correct techniques in effects (all make up here) and visually. As such, the best way to do it is to shoot it on 16mm, especially as it's soon too late!

So my post here is to essentially spread the word, hoping both to get some donators (if you like the idea) and also hoping for people to share it, to spread the word. We've managed to raise $205 in the first 24 hours, plus we've got over 80 likes on our Facebook page in the same time (including Harold Skinner, gaffer for the majority of Fincher's movies). A link to our Indiegogo page: http://www.indiegogo.com/insanemadness?a=1377951

And Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/insanemadness2012

And Twitter: @insanemad2012 or #insanemadness2012.

Spread the word!

Lots of people here undestands, dont undestand, and soso undestand what dynamic range is. Some people compare it to latitude, which in a simple way is much the same thing but on an analog sustrate.

COLOR HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DYNAMIC RANGE.

Both sensors (bayer or foveon) and films stocks (diferent emulsions) captures light, in a time and a speed. Both use this to gather all the information available to them in that specific time.

""Dynamic Range of a Sensor: is defined by the largest possible signal divided by the smallest possible signal it can generate. The largest possible signal is directly proportional to the full well capacity of the pixel. The lowest signal is the noise level when the sensor is not exposed to any light, also called the "noise floor" This is interpreted by bits in a digital level.""

In the photosites of the sensor. When the photosites are well lit, they full themselfs with light particles. Then we can know how much light has enter each photosite and have a comparison between the low lit ( not so fully loaded ) and high lit scene ( fully loaded photosite). have the average and get results. So as bee told before Dynamic range is defined by the largest possible signal divided by the smallest possible signal it can generate.

""Even if one's digital camera could capture a vast dynamic range, the precision at which light measurements are translated into digital values may limit usable dynamic range. The workhorse which translates these continuous measurements into discrete numerical values is called the analog to digital (A/D) converter. The accuracy of an A/D converter can be described in terms of bits of precision, similar to bit depth in digital images, although care should be taken that these concepts are not used interchangeably. The A/D converter is what creates values for the digital camera's RAW file format""

"sensor has millions of pixels collecting photons during the exposure of the sensor. You could compare this process to millions of tiny buckets collecting rain water. The brighter the captured area, the more photons are collected. After the exposure, the level of each bucket is assigned a discrete value as is explained in the analog to digital conversion topic. Empty and full buckets are assigned values of "0" and "255" respectively, and represent pure black and pure white, as perceived by the sensor. The conceptual sensor below has only 16 pixels. Those pixels which capture the bright parts of the scene get filled up very quickly"

we can easily understand this, but inside the sensor there are more dificult parameters that must be calculated.

This differs alot from what actual film is made of, and the prosess that has to be done to make the film capture light. foveon sensor is more like Film, it has diferent levels of colors, chemicaly aligned in layers using diferent sutrates and quemicals for each color. So film does not "hold light inside" it uses it for a quemical reaction, so color can be generated using this method. Foveon sensors are quiet the same, the are made from layers of silicon with diferen materials, so the wavelenght of the light can traspass easily each layer. Also foveon sensors use pixel by pixel information, thats why foveon sensors with less pixels have better image quality than good old bayern pattern sensors (GHx, Canon, RED, Nikon Pentax)

But here is the question ive been hunting me some hours ago. I didnt knew that Dynamic range is limited by the bits the sensor can output. As @berniez put at the GH3 rumors topic. Vitaliy answer was quiet good but i didnt manage to undestand it at its full.

IF THIS IS TRUE CAN SOME ONE EXPLAIN MORE DETAIL ABOUT IT, COS I DONT HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE.

Here the eplanation but .... can someone explain it in more detail please.

""As an example, 10-bits of tonal precision translates into a possible brightness range of 0-1023 (since 210 = 1024 levels). Assuming that each A/D converter number is proportional to actual image brightness (meaning twice the pixel value represents twice the brightness), 10-bits of precision can only encode a contrast ratio of 1024:1.

Most digital cameras use a 10 to 14-bit A/D converter, and so their theoretical maximum dynamic range is 10-14 stops. However, this high bit depth only helps minimize image posterization since total dynamic range is usually limited by noise levels. Similar to how a high bit depth image does not necessarily mean that image contains more colors, if a digital camera has a high precision A/D converter it does not necessarily mean it can record a greater dynamic range. In practice, the dynamic range of a digital camera does not even approach the A/D converter's theoretical maximum; 5-9 stops is generally all one can expect from the camera.""

Info:

http://learn.hamamatsu.com/articles/dynamicrange.html

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/dynamic-range.htm

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/dynamic-range.htm

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Digital_Imaging/dynamic_range_01.htm

Please feel free to post any info concerning this topic. Thank you very much for reading, and please correct me if im wrong since im still in learning stage.

Cheers.

ROCHESTER, N.Y. – After decades of churning out untold millions of little yellow boxes of camera film, Eastman Kodak is saying goodbye to the still photography business.

The company synonymous with photography said Thursday it is putting a batch of businesses up for sale, including more than 100,000 photo kiosks installed at retailers around the globe and its professional and consumer still camera film operation. ....

In the conference call, [CEO] Perez repeatedly circled back to the idea that these sales were part of Kodak's goal to focus in the future on a set of core businesses — commercial printing, packaging printing and various printing services.

From USA Today: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/retail/story/2012-08-24/eastman-kodak-sells-still-photography-business/57289302/1

I know that Nostalgic film mode has best dynamic range (from what I've read), but I also read on EOSHD Guide to GH2 that Black and White Smooth Film mode on GH2 is supposed to have the best DR and smoothest gradation out of all film modes. Should I just shoot Black and White Smooth mode straight in the camera or do use another mode and then do B&W in post? How about the best patch?

Any input is appreciated enormously,

Thank you so much.

I need some help...I want to shoot 3-4 Short Films with my newly purchased Panasonic GH2 and I am constantly amazed at the results that the hacks produced through this forum have reached.

I need a little guidance as to which patch is best for me and how I can apply the hacks to my camera?

I want as close to a standard Motion Picture look as I can get (without sounding patronising). I know a lot is in the colour grading but if I could be able to shoot raw footage that complements skin tones, looks perfectly clear and sharp and shoots at 24fps with a beautiful rendering close to any "Hollywood," standard footage for Short Film Drama use produces then i'd be an extremely happy filmmaker.

Continue the good work guys and gals it's all looking brilliant!

Viva the GH2 Revolution! :)

http://www.foxbusiness.com/news/2012/08/15/kodak-reaches-film-deals-with-four-movie-studios54410

Thanks @Vitaliy_Kiselev, @driftwood, and the rest.

A creative vacation video shot on (and off) of Chebeague Island. Located a few miles off the coast of southern Maine. Shot on a Hacked GH2. Download Original for maximum quality (FINALLY a PLUS member)!

Lenses used:

Tokina 11-16mm f2,8 Lumix/Leica 25mm f1.4 Zeiss 85mm f1.4.

Filter: Singh Ray Vari-ND DUO (Vari-ND and Polarizer in one)

Simple color corrections within Final Cut Pro, and some Magic Bullet Looks

SONG: "Daily(drops) - 5/1/2012 [Day One] (1)" (Infinite Third) / CC BY-NC 3.0 soundcloud.com/infinitethird/daily-drops-5-1-2012-day-one-1

MORE INFO on how the filming process on Vimeo

GH2 (handheld) Vibrant mode 44mbit hack

Panny 20mm f/1.7 Panny 14-140 kit Nikon AI-S 50mm f/1.4

All feedback welcome. Details of the kit on my blog:

http://rungunshoot.com/my-one-bag-gh2-docu-filmmaking-kit-in-explicit-detail/

Was DoP on this. Shot on a driftwood-176-intra GH2 with vintage lenses.

Feedback is welcome!

Description from Vimeo: This shortfilm is produced by Welterwerk Filmkompani, a new small filmproduction company based in Oslo. We make musicvideos, shortfilms and commercials. CONTACT US: post@welterwerk.no Directed by ERLEND WESTNES DOP CHRISTIAN EKREM Edit and grading ERLEND WESTNES Post effects and 3d modeling EIVIND JACOBSEN Makeup artist GRETE SKJÆVELAND CAST Machinist LASSE VALDAL Girl YVONNE / TEAM Boy ALEKSANDER M. TANGEN / TEAM Music: SIRIUSMO - NIGHTS OFF THANKS Za, Margrethe, TEAMMODELS, UiO and Khang Vinh Tran.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01l93ck/Swimmer/

Check out my short film for DepicT film festival. You could only make it 90 seconds long which was quite a challange, plus I don't have much experience. Post your comments/suggestions below, ty!

I wanted to share this film with you to get some real critics from you. I'm active on a Swedish forum already and usually put my films over there to get some feedback but I wanted to hear your opinions as well.

The film is a school project I had, and I wanted to make a short film where I could really show my color grading. So even though I directed, edited and made the vfx in this video, I did it almost only to show my grading skills to then have something to show post companies as a portfolio after my graduation, which was a few weeks ago.

What do you think is good, what can I've been doing better?

I was using GH2, Orion v4b, Nostalgic (-2-2-2-2). Lens was Samyang 35mm 1.4.

Software used was After Effects CS5.5, Premiere Pro CS5.5, Twixtor, DaVinci Resolve. Converted all my files to Cineform .MOV before editing.

Forrest Gump. The movie is legitimately great, but isn't remotely like the book. Part of what makes a good adaptation is how close they stay to the original source material. The novel Forrest Gump is basically a pure wacky comedy with little to no drama or pathos or the heart of the movie. Stick to the source material or GTFO! :P

The biggest offender is Jurassic Park. Hands down, the worst adaptations of ALL TIME. Massive changes from the book to screen. Biggest change was in the book, the lawyer character was one of the good guys, while in the movie he was the typical sleazy lawyer. I guess, in a movie with DINOSAURS, having a lawyer that's actually a hero was too fantastical for Spielberg. This was officially when I started to turn away from Spielberg.

Other bad adaptations: Any Tom Clancy novel, minus Hunt for Red October. Most Steven King books, with the exception of Shawshank Redemption and Misery.

Now some good adaptations. First Tarantino's Jackie Brown. Despite changing the main characters race from white to black, and adding his own spin on the dialogue, it's a very mature adaptation for such a young director. Especially when you compare it to Steven Soderbergs adaptation of another novel from the same author released in the same year with one of the same actors playing the same role in a unique cross studio crossover. You almost never see the same actor from one studio's film play the same character in another studio's film, even a cameo, but since it was in the book, Tarantino said go for it, and did it free.

And the best adaptation to date...Sin City. Rodriquez's main weakness has been his writing. When you do as many jobs as he does, something has to suffer, and in his case, it's his writing. So when you start with something that's already well written and you decide to film it AS WRITTEN...that's as good as it gets. The dialogue in the movie is nearly word for word from the comic. The comic panels are storyboards for the film with many looking almost exactly the same. He even shot all the comics in full and then released the full edit later. The more faithful you are to the source material, the better a movie you will make, and this is as faithful as it could possibly get.

Sadly, the graded version of our film didn't export in time and we were forced to submit the ungraded/non-color corrected version of the film. I'm still quite proud of the results. We shot it on the GH2 and the 5DMark III. I'll post the graded version after the contest ends.

http://docchallenge.org/News/2012-finalists-announced.html

It was all shot at 720p50, using a Voigtlander 25mm 0.95, Canon FD 50mm 1.4 and 85mm 1.8.

As a cautionary tale, I attempted to shoot with the Flowmotion v1.11 patch, but found when getting the footage in it was averaging a very low bitrate of between 14 - 17 mbps, which I can only attribute to me not having applied the patch correctly. So always test your bitrates before going out into a shoot! I can't work out why this patch won't work for me as I don't have problems with any others.

Anyhow, just wanted to express my thanks for all the work you guys do on this forum, and to show how great this little camera can look even without a massive high bitrate patch!

http://usa.shop.lomography.com/the-lomokino-mubi-edition

Just thought I share.

The LomoKino Movie Camera in general (http://microsites.lomography.com/lomokino/features)

FOR most people, investing has not been fun these last few years. At best, it has been stressful. Bucks Investing With Your Heart, as Well as Your Head

Have you ever followed your passion with an investment? How did that work out? Can you offer advice to others tempted to do this?

Paul Sullivan writes about strategies that the wealthy use to manage their money and their overall well-being.

But there are investments that have nothing to do with stocks or bonds or real estate that may be at least enjoyable if not always moneymaking. I’ve come up with about a half-dozen, and over the next few weeks, I plan to explore some of them, including investments as different as horses and restaurants. My goal is to see how people do this successfully — or whether they have a broader definition of success than just making money.

This week, I’m going to look at films, given that the influential Tribeca Film Festival is under way; it runs through Sunday.

Investing in a movie seems a risky proposition. Movie studios lose tens of millions of dollars on films almost every week. But for some amateurs, being part of the film festival circuit, let alone making it to a big Hollywood premiere, can be glamorous. For a serious investor, with more at stake, there are many ways to make money in films that have little to do with box-office success.

Dennis Wallestad, chief financial officer of the Treasury services division of JPMorgan Chase, said he wanted to back a promising filmmaker after spending over a decade as a benefactor to David M. Lenz, an artist who gained wide acclaim in 2006 when he won a competition at the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery.

He met the filmmaker Nate Taylor because their wives knew each other. On the surface, they seem nothing alike. “I’m a C.P.A. from Milwaukee and as white bread as they come,” Mr. Wallestad said. “He’s a goth with a mohawk.”

Yet after many meetings, Mr. Wallestad put up $300,000 to make the film “Forgetting the Girl.” He also ran all aspects of the film’s finances and whittled away waste as he does in his day job. “I wanted to help someone else,” Mr. Wallestad said. “My covenant with Nate is, You do the art and I’ll take care of the business.”

Earlier this month, “Forgetting The Girl” won the audience award at the SoHo International Film Festival, and Mr. Wallestad said that had attracted interest from two dozen distributors

(SNIP)