The political economist Benjamin Friedman once compared modern Western society to a stable bicycle whose wheels are kept spinning by economic growth. Should that forward-propelling motion slow or cease, the pillars that define our society – democracy, individual liberties, social tolerance and more would begin to teeter. Our world would become an increasingly ugly place, one defined by a scramble over limited resources and a rejection of anyone outside of our immediate group. Should we find no way to get the wheels back in motion, we’d eventually face total societal collapse.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170418-how-western-civilisation-could-collapse

The GH5 serial is WG -PP001244.

The SLR Magic lens had a white sticker with number which has probably been ripped off by now.

Strangely enough, but it could be just coincidence, a similar lens has come on the market at ebay from a seller in Carlsbad, California, United States. Now it could very well have travelled that far in just over a week so Im not excluding it.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SLR-Magic-35mm-T2-4-2x-Anamorphot-CINE-Lens-MFT-Mount-/282433781260?hash=item41c25d7e0c:g:r14AAOSwpkFY8XCh

I am considering first contacting Spanish Police to investigate with eBay but I was wondering about other people's experiences regarding possible sightings of their stolen goods and whether to just leave it be...

I'd be interested to know other peoples ideas.

Just a bit strange that this particular lens shows up! I don't expect I will ever see the camera again.

Some people can buy just because they have enough money, other people probably need to sell some used gear to get a 4k camera. There are cheap cameras like the G7, midprice like G8 and GH4 and more expensive cameras like the new GH5. In some choices you get the sensor stabilization also.

But the question is: do you need 4K? Do your clients, do your audience need 4k? Better have two 1080p cameras or one 4k camera?

If you are shooting weddings I think it will be better use a 4k camera, because new couples probably will have a 4k smarttv in the new home... They want to see the gorgeous 4k image with their happy faces, and all the beauty cerimony and celebration.

If you are doing corporate videos, probably the employees will see the video projected in a low resolution projector, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x720 or, if lucky, a full hd projector. They will also see in the low resolution computer corporation monitors. The clients probably will see in computer monitors or maybe a DVD or BluRay disc, or a pendrive... Much better have a low datarate 1080p video compatible with all devices instead of a high datarate 4k file.

If you are talented enough to make a living from narrative short movies or feature films, and documentaries, so that is a big question: will 4k get more attention to my production? Will it worth dealing with 4k files in the timeline slowing the editing experience? How much people will see my movie in 4K? 2% or maybe 5%? And then another big question: will 4k help me to sell my movie in video on demand sites? May I upload a 30Mbps H265 or may I upload a 50 Mbps H264 file? Ohhh! a 12 Mbps 1080p would be easy to upload... And then you perceive that a good story in fullhd would be better than a bad story in 4k...

To be honest, whatching MadMen on NetFlix I do not care if the streaming is 480p, 720p or 1080p. The camera, the light, the photography, the talents are so good that the final resolution does not matter so much. Do you prefer MadMen in 1080p or House of Cards in 4K?

Is 4k the new 35mm and 1080p the new low budget 16mm? Or 1080p keep the 35mm position and 4k is a plus, a 70mm IMAX?

Is 4k more related to the luxury of the indie filmmaker who own a 4k tv and are salivating for a 4k camera just to shoot and see the world in 4k?

Come and see my new movie! A super hiper mega ultra premium special powerful production "THE 4K GIRL" Soon in all VOD sites and also in UHDBLURAY!

4k cameras can deliver a better 1080p image, editing in 4k and then doing a downscaled render, less aliasing, more resolution. Or to make it simple: you have all resolutions the world can ask you to have. But does it worth the effort? Is this choice more related to money? That is the question! Or that are the questionsssssss...

If I was a movie distributor I would say: do not worry about resolution, 720p is the minimum good enough.

• PV does not have ads, "sponsors" or anything like such crap injecting stuff.
• We even do not have auto playing video ads what became trend in last few months. :-)
• Each month we pay for dedicated server hosting and it this sum is not small, and additional daily backup located outside of hoster network (for safety).
• We don't have big team to support site. No admins, paid moderators, etc. All this time is invested in keeping this community alive.
• Remember to support regularly, even with very small amounts, if you are in economic trouble.

Where we are going:

• Exhibition coverage planned - Photography show and NAB
• Lot of new lab equipment, all of it will be used in lab report, we are learning and do some software stuff
• We are making gear reviews and slowly improving in it - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Pj7yx6F1TdNJ36eRlZgcA?sub_confirmation=1
• We are improving our deals and added new partners and good items like Nebula gimbals, big Fotga update is also coming
• Plan to make systematic guides for basic lighting, audio still in place. Something what you can compare to good book.
• Made secure site version working fully last month, this month we will improve some responsiveness and later move to mobile
• Still slightly short to get lab grade spectrometer for measuring lights and filters (but we already got monochromator)

We need your help, remember to donate using orange Donate button above this page!

Thanks in advance.

"One, two, three, I need you! Who is my hero? Who comes to help me?"

"I do not care about what people talks about me, talk bad or good, but talk about me!"

Electronic shutters. Why are they not on every m43 Lumix camera? Or any m43 brand? Why does my GH2 have a shutter curtain and the worst possible clonk shutter sound in history?

If the camera can take videos by electronically turning the shutter on and off, why can't it do the same with photos? How is it "cheaper" to put a physical hardware into the camera, a piece so crucial to the operation and functionality of the entire thing?

Is it that impossible to make shutter "open and close" electronically for photos like in the movie mode?

― A.E. Samaan

Can truly random data be compressed? The conventional answer is “no”. Like many conventional notions, that is incorrect. Not only can random data be compressed, it is trivially easy to do so.

Most would agree that if one were to attempt to compress numerous files containing random data, out of pure luck some of the processed files would end up somewhat smaller than the originals. Conversely, some of the processed files would end up somewhat larger than the originals. In fact, nearly all processed files would differ slightly in size from the originals, even if all the original files were the same size. However, taken in the aggregate, the random random data files would require the same amount of storage as the processed files – right? Well… not necessarily. By adding a simple rule to the compression algorithm one can have a collection of files containing truly random data that always requires less space to store than the original collection.

The rule that accomplishes this only requires that a simple decision be included in the processing sequence: if the processed file is smaller than the original, use it; if it is not, use the original. This will result in a statistically small, but significant and repeatable compression of truly random (i.e. entropic) information.

Can the resulting collection of files be further compressed? Absolutely! If the data in the files is somehow transformed (using a lossless transform) – the entire compression scheme can applied again resulting in approximately the same degree of compression achieved the first time. This is true because random data is already “uncompressible” so the entire process started out as a worst case scenario. Alternatively, one could leave the collection of files alone and use a different compression algorithm instead.

Can this process be executed ad infinitum? If so that would imply that given enough iterations, the minute amount of compression realized at each iteration could add up to – well… an arbitrary amount of compression.

In fairness one would have to include the information about this algorithm into the calculation of the total data volume. But that won’t matter because there are self-modifying transforms that can achieve an infinite number of different results, so only a very small amount of storage would be necessary. Besides, the algorithm data can also be compressed.

This implies that information and effort are related and interchangeable – much the same way matter and energy are. In fact, it wouldn’t surprise me if that if the amount of processing required to achieve significant amounts of compression wouldn’t end up being calculated as the energy expended for the processing being equal to the storage savings multiplied by …wait for it… the speed of light squared.

I’m a little busy these days. Do any of you have time to put this lossless, infinite compression algorithm, together? If you get it to work, I’ll split the royalties with you.

My apologies to Claude Shannon… I wish he were around to reply.

Chris

I have a few questions, how does this translate from general filmaking 35mm stock to a a micro four third lens and sensor?

Plus do you think keeping a steady f stop is a good idea and would you do it for a documentary? Personally I'm done with shallow focus wedding video looking stuff and want to shot my doc as similar to film as possible.

*Maybe another whole subject but how to people keep a consistent look in terms of ISO/grain, lighting etc across a whole movie or documentary. I know with Docs people expect jumps in media but if you wanted to maintain a standard exposure and grain how would you go about it in terms of settings? Would you ride the ISO up and down or aperture?

“Meridian” is 4K HDR video shot with 60 frames per second with a peak brightness level of 4000 nits and Dolby Atmos audio. In other words: It pushes the boundaries on all specs fronts, and includes a number of visuals that can trip up encoders.

You can download the MXF and some auxillary files at https://media.xiph.org/video/derf/meridian/MERIDIAN_SHR_C_EN-XX_US-NR_51_LTRT_UHD_20160909_OV/

This is very simple idea: hang/upload/embed a picture of a movie poster you like

2 EASY RULES:

A - The movie can be a piece of shit or a masterpiece, doesn't matter, what matters is that YOU like the poster

B - 1 movie poster at the time

You see, simple idea, now let's see about outcome, je je
BTW remember there's no point bringing a whale into Vitaliy bathroom :P - 800px wide is more than enough

As always, I'll brake the ice

Yen Tan design for Nor'easter / 2012 • IMHO not worth the watch, even if a 20$K Kickstarter financed film

gashô

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/world/europe/europe-migrant-crisis.html?_r=0

Yet we managed to made many good things:

• We have more than 70 videos on our Youtube channel and growing - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-Pj7yx6F1TdNJ36eRlZgcA?sub_confirmation=1 including best Photokina coverage that we ever had. Thanks to our great members.
• We are establishing two labs for detailed items testing.
• PV has around 90% of all existing reviews on video and photo items sorted in proper topics.
• PV in photo/view news coverage is faster and better due to lack of marketing bullshit compared to most photos sites.
• We had our best deals year and much more coming in 2017.
• And we have still running video contest, you can still post your entry - http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/16128/personal-view-2016-laing-video-contest

So, if you did not still register - do it now!

If you registered already, but did not donated to lab http://www.personal-view.com/talks/discussion/16041/personal-view-needs-your-help-to-make-community-lab - do it now!

Wish you Happy New 2017 Year!

http://www.eoshd.com/comments/topic/21297-now-available-%E2%80%93-eoshd-pro-color-for-panasonic-cameras-gh4-gx85-g85-and-more/?page=1

Merry Christmas!

We can argue whether it’s easier or harder for the young cinematographers today to display their work to the wide audience. No matter which point of view each of us takes, we can agree over one thing – it’s definitely very different today than it was 20 or 30 years ago. In a video by Cooke OpticsTV, some of the world’s most renowned cinematographers discuss the advantages and disadvantages of being a young cinematographer today.

Cooke Optics interviewed Paul Cameron (Westworld, Collateral), Roberto Schaefer (The Kite Runner, Monster’s Ball), Michael Seresin (Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Angela’s Ashes) and Anthony Dod Mantle (Slumdog Millionaire, Snowden), asking them about the opportunities and drawbacks young cinematographers have today. Considering that they have been in the industry for several decades, it’s very interesting to hear their opinions.

ADVANTAGES

• You’re young: according to Paul Cameron, the advantage of being young is simply that – you’re young. I believe this means you simply have more energy to make an effort to rise to the top and succeed.

• Editing tools are more available: another advantage young cinematographers have today is that everything is available. You can make a 4K video directly on your cell phone, transfer it to the computer immediately and do all the necessary editing right after the shooting. A few years ago, Nokia even ran a competition for short movies made by cell phones.

• Video equipment is more available: the choice of the equipment is also much larger today, and video recording devices are simply available to more people. This means that it’s easier for those with an idea to create something and share it with the world.

• It’s easier to reach people: if you are cinematographer today, it’s much more probable that you’ll get the message out than it used to be. Even if you don’t reach the wider audience straight away, there are so many channels you can use to display your work, reach people and gain audience. This is one more thing veteran cinematographers didn’t have.

DISADVANTAGES

The main disadvantage is in a way connected to the advantages, and it’s the matter of availability: availability increases competition. While the availability of video equipment and editing tools can be a good thing, at the same time, it can also be a disadvantage. Wider availability means more people can and want to be cinematographers. As Roberto Schaefer points out, everyone thinks they are a cinematographer (photographers, does this sound familiar?). This means that the competition is much bigger, and it may be more difficult to get attention, showcase your work to a wider audience and achieve success.

At the end, the interviewed videographers advise the young ones to work, to study from the professionals and from their own experience, and to do their best. As Paul Cameron suggests – good cinematographers do rise to the top.