A feature length documentary on life in Dyrafjordur, a beautiful and remote region in the West Fjords of Iceland.

filmed with hacked gh2 and 550d with fisheye lens.

I'm an imagination person first. There's a theme park carnival universe in my head / heart - then I'm an an actor, then a writer, then a director, then a DP and then an editor (I think... the orders of those things switch around a lot - and I'm not including music or broadcasting or hosting which I did a lot of too).

Somehow after or before or quantum sideways of that I have something to do with the Thrice Great Okapi but let's not get into that now. Why must you readers always distract me? Oh wait, you haven't read this yet. It's me who's distracting me. So sorry, let me get on with it:

As the title says. Digital Film Making Finally Beats Chemical Film Making.

I just viewed Prometheus. This article is not so much about the movie plot or merits. It was OK. OK it was a little better than OK... I'd say 3 stars out of 4 for you geeks out there. It was dark and highly predictable in that same way that so many sci fi movies are with their ominous shots of Halo like activity that we've seen so many times before but it was a [i]fairly[/i] good movie none the less and the visuals are amazing!

The focus here is that it was shot, edited, and projected entirely digitally. No chemical film. Remember when CDs had AAD, DAD, DAA OR DDD? Well this was the DDD of motion pictures (and then in 3D too so really it's almost DDD+3D). I viewed it in 3D on dual 8K digital projectors from a digital source (it was shot on Red Epic digital cameras with Zeiss Ultra Prime and Angenieux Optimo Lenses) and I was so impressed that it led me to write this column that will only be appreciated by hard core film or motion picture buffs, fellow film makers, or total and absolute techy nerds.

I apologize to my regular 'wacky guy with a hat" audience about the extreme levels of techy geek I am about to enter but I am compelled to write on this for my film making friends. We really need to change that terminology to 'motion picture' or 'movie' making, because old school film making is finally really dead and unnecessary. OOPS I just blew my whole article away! That was a huge spoiler... oh well ...crap...so anyway I thought I'd give the above disclaimer, and now having done that... here we go!

Chemical film is finally dead. Let me make it clear I don't say this with any sort of hatred of chemical film like it is some witch or beast that needed to be slayed. I LOVED the look of it, but it was/is just way too expensive. People who had the money liked this fact as it keep them in some sort of elitist control club. I did not. I used to have fantasies of stealing panavision film equipment when I found out they only rented and didn't sell film cameras and related equipment. I say this as a LOVER of the motion picture 24p chemical film look who has been on a loooong (add as many o's as you need to make that long really looooong) quest to make movies that looked like what...well... movies looked like... well.. at the movies!!!

I was not once ever satisfied with my 60i vhs or 8mm or hi8 or super v or even later with supposed masters work on the digitally shot and digitally projected movies from the Star Wars fiascos to the IMAX lies (especially in 3D) until now.

Watching Prometheus on dual 8K projectors was the first time I could sit closer than mid row and be absolutely immersed in the entire film without seeing the artifacts of digital film making or 3D problems. The picture was as detailed as I have ever seen - other than some outstanding real (chemical film) IMAX 3D films - but nearly the same, and there were no pixels, the brightness was excellent, the 3D did not flicker. I mean seriously - holy s*%t it finally works! Give someone a gold star sticker!!!

DEEPER INTO THE TECHY GEEKY WORLD OF MOTION PICTURE MAKING - FORMERLY CALLED FILM MAKING in part II:

Better Quality: http://photos.jamesthorpe.com/Other/Film/22905243_LRBs44#!i=2084189442&k=VPTsv35&lb=1&s=A

I tried Flow Motion 2 and some Driftwood series 6 settings, but I had the same problem with both of them. I did not go into quality tests yet, because I wanted to check workflow options first, with different fps settings in Flow Motion 2, without success, but also found out that spanning did not work with it and I wanted to get that right first. After some tests I found something strange happened. Instead of a range of MTS files spanning, I now get several files with the same content. The longer the clip gets, the more files there are, which makes me believe it creates a new copy of the original file every time it is supposed to span into a new clip due to the 4GB limitation. The files do have subtle differences in size, but are all around 4gigs, but I think it is only the variable bit rate. Here is some stream info example on 3 (of five) duplicate files.

\PRIVATE\AVCHD\BDMV\STREAM\00000.MTS Size = 4.305.033.216 Bytes (22.422.048 Packets) Stream: TS Max Speed = 96.897.200 bps Mode = 1080/24p Average PCR Timing Interval = 0,094 seconds Clip Duration = 0:08:06,02 PCR Duration = 0:08:06,10 Average Total Bitrate = 70.861.957 Average Video Bitrate = 69.022.876 Average Audio Bitrate = 235.013 Average Other Bitrate = 1.604.066 Max GOP Size = 4.662.528 Bytes (37.300.224 bits) Video Frame Count (All-I/P/B) = 11.653 - 971 / 2.914 / 7.767 Video Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 12.288 / 367.482 / 1.031.232 I Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 282.624 / 979.755 / 1.031.232 P Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 87.552 / 463.923 / 504.384 B Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 12.288 / 254.803 / 329.664

\PRIVATE\AVCHD\BDMV\STREAM\00001.MTS Size = 4.302.151.680 Bytes (22.407.040 Packets) Stream: TS Max Speed = 96.897.200 bps Mode = 1080/24p Average PCR Timing Interval = 0,094 seconds Clip Duration = 0:08:11,98 PCR Duration = 0:08:11,93 Average Total Bitrate = 69.956.059 Average Video Bitrate = 68.133.383 Average Audio Bitrate = 235.007 Average Other Bitrate = 1.587.668 Max GOP Size = 4.587.648 Bytes (36.701.184 bits) Video Frame Count (All-I/P/B) = 11.796 - 983 / 2.949 / 7.863 Video Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 234.240 / 362.747 / 1.009.728 I Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 945.216 / 967.698 / 1.009.728 P Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 440.640 / 470.262 / 520.704 B Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 234.240 / 246.841 / 264.192

\PRIVATE\AVCHD\BDMV\STREAM\00002.MTS Size = 4.301.021.184 Bytes (22.401.152 Packets) Stream: TS Max Speed = 96.897.200 bps Mode = 1080/24p Average PCR Timing Interval = 0,094 seconds Clip Duration = 0:08:14,99 PCR Duration = 0:08:14,87 Average Total Bitrate = 69.513.383 Average Video Bitrate = 67.701.911 Average Audio Bitrate = 234.995 Average Other Bitrate = 1.576.476 Max GOP Size = 4.569.792 Bytes (36.558.336 bits) Video Frame Count (All-I/P/B) = 11.868 - 989 / 2.967 / 7.911 Video Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 234.432 / 360.450 / 991.488 I Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 934.656 / 948.918 / 991.488 P Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 457.344 / 471.075 / 510.720 B Frame Size (Min/Ave/Max) = 234.432 / 245.438 / 264.192

Even the clip duration seems vary, but inside premiere they are all the same length. Usually only one of the files retains any sound. I am deeply confused to what is happening, and would appreciate any insight any one might have. I will try some more settings and probably go back to stock too, just to check whether it happens there too.

One thing to note is the card I am using. I read some controversial and mostly unclear posts one which cards work or do not. I have been using a 64GB SanDisk Extreme the SDXC1 U1 Class 10 with 45MB/s. Even if, what some of the posts say, it would be only half as fast, it should still be able to keep up with the bps the tried settings use. The only other card I have to test at the moment is a 32GB Transcend Class 10, but that has only 10MB/s and is used usually for photography only. I am about to order the 64GB Extreme Pro 90MB/s but I still think the one I haver should be fine. I am not using the highest bit rates anyway...

Thanks for any knowledge you can share

Better quality. http://photos.jamesthorpe.com/Other/Film/22905243_LRBs44#!i=2084766486&k=b7pS5nb&lb=1&s=A

and another:

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

I just wanted to share the FOV of the Panny 100-300. There was alot of wind so there was excessive RS at the telephoto end. I'll probably do one more of these tests with no wind to see if it lessens the severity of the 'vapor' artifacts. I think that will always be there but it depends on the weather. I don't believe OIS or hacks can take care of it. If you guys know of how to minimize it, please share. I may be asking too much of the cam cause the reach is an insane 1,560mm (w/ETC) :)

Q: If I get a GH2, and hack it with the GH2 version of the blackout-powell native 24p patch, can I hook up my hdmi computer monitor to it and be able to monitor the output live with that 24p patch installed (at 1080p)? I want the live HDMI out so that I can easily see when the focus goes out and be able to keep adjusting the manual lens as I look at the hdmi computer monitor while recording. My question is I don't know if after I hack the GH2 into 24p native if it will have a live HDMI monitoring feed that is useable direct into an hdmi computer monitor or not. I read that the output from the GH2 only works in 1080i mode, so from that I was thinking if I hack it and put on the 24p native patch the hdmi out may then not work, and that I may be forced to keep it in 1080i mode only if I want to get a live HDMI feed that works into a computer monitor while recording.

I hope everyone can advise me on this if you have tried what I am talking about and know what the results are. Since I don't yet have a GH2 I can't test this and don't want to buy one unless I know I can do this because I don't want to ever again work with anything except native 24p footage, and I don't ever want to work with any new camera that can't do that and give me a live 1080 output that I can use as a focus aid while recording, since the lcd is not sufficient to visually see well enough to focus at a professional level of exactness.

The live hdmi 1080 will probably work as i or p, as long as it is true 1080 out, since I am not recording the live output to a recorder, I just need it for a visual focus aid to magnify the image into a big computer monitor so I can get better focus whenever someone moves a bit out of focus.

Thanks very much.