Micro35 Footage!

[Larry McKee]

Jon, I have looked at the clips again, and I don't see anything you could call "foggy". Can you help me understand what you are seeing?

[Daniel Skubal]

<<<-- Originally posted by Larry McKee : Jon, I have looked at the clips again, and I don't see anything you could call "foggy". Can you help me understand what you are seeing? -->>>

Hey Larry!

I think it's the wmv compression. It puts a slight blur on the footage. In comparisson to the horse footage, this is a bit fuzzier, but I blame that on the wmv.

[Jon Laing]

<<<-- Originally posted by Larry McKee : Jon, I have looked at the clips again, and I don't see anything you could call "foggy". Can you help me understand what you are seeing? -->>>

I mostly notice it in the background, where it looks like it should be black, its more of a dark grey.

The clips i notice this most in are clips: 13, 18, and 24. It looks almost like a contrast problem. Am I the only one that's seeing this?

[Daniel Skubal]

yeah, that's a wmv thing. It really sucks out contrast

[Larry McKee]

"I mostly notice it in the background, where it looks like it should be black, its more of a dark grey."

OK, that's easy. We used a medium/dark gray portrait background to hide the tattoo art on the walls.

[John Sandel]

That's what I see when I'm looking at the online clip: a dark grey cloth in the background, slightly out of focus.

(Jeez, Larry, couldn't you have at least flipped on the Duveteen toggle on the DVX!?)

[John Ness]

To me the images appear a little soft. I think to really be able to tell how the micro35 performs, we would need to see uncompressed footage in average lighting where the camera performs a slow even (non-jerky) pan. I realize a lot of people are highly impressed by the horse footage, but I believe any system has its inherent strengths and weaknesses. The horse footage is exploiting the strengths of this system.

This is not a put down of the system in any way. I am just stating that I think if people think they are going to build one of these and every shot is going to produce an image that looks like the horses, they are going to be dissapointed. Every tool has its limitations.

I could be wrong, but it is impossible to tell because of the extreme delay in releasing the guides. I'm beginning to believe perhaps there is some sort of technical problem with the system. Otherwise, it is just paper and a sticker (most of us don't care about the sticker). It appears the latest gg batch is bad, which makes me believe it is difficult to build one of these on our own. If James is having quality control problems with his own components, it makes me less secure in the belief that I can build a micro35 that produces useful results in most situations. He's been working on this for years. I'm all thumbs. If he can't get it right after all this time, I'm probably screwed when I try.

I hope I am wrong. I guess we'll find out when the guides ship.

John

[Daniel Skubal]

Morale is low and the troops are restless. I've got a huge shoot coming up in two weeks (maybe 3, depending on the extra's schedules), but it's going to be huge and I would LOVE to get the micro35 up and running for it. James would have to REALLY hustle to get out the guides though... I'd really need to get it by friday at the latest I think, if I were going to do this. :( :( :( Project delayssss

[John Ness]

<<<-- Originally posted by Daniel Skubal : Morale is low and the troops are restless. I've got a huge shoot coming up in two weeks (maybe 3, depending on the extra's schedules), but it's going to be huge and I would LOVE to get the micro35 up and running for it. James would have to REALLY hustle to get out the guides though... I'd really need to get it by friday at the latest I think, if I were going to do this. :( :( :( Project delayssss -->>>

Yes, sorry for the pessimism. Hopefully the guides will ship soon. Good luck on your shoot. If you end up getting the guide, you might be the first person to build one of these yourself and perform useful filming. Your feedback would be much appreciated.

[Daniel Skubal]

Yeah, I'll take lots of pictures and post lots of demos. I think that will ultimately sell the product. Seeing someone else build one and footage from it.

[Cody Dulock]

just as john said, everything has its ups and downs. and when it comes to these devices for this super low price range, expect a flaw here or there but nothing thats going to make your 45$ not well spent. if the micro35 can accept lenses with smaller aperatures and still be able to capture the image, thats a huge selling point for me. i can only use 1 lens on the mini35 i built (50mm f1.4) because the vingetting on the other lenses are so bad... maybe its just the ghetto rig im rolling with, but it seems to work. also the achromat that he's made is also well worth the money since people are paying around 700$ for an achromatic diopter and he figured out a way to make them for like10$ or something like that.

on another note, it may have been better to let the pre-paying of the guide hold off until everything was/is concrete. i think/hope everyones patience will pay off in the end.

thats just my .02cents... not trying to start a squabble.

[Brian Valente]

Larry - I understand you shot all this in 4:3 for a variety of reasons, but hypothetically if you had to shoot 16:9 how would you have approached it? Would you have used the micro35?

[Daniel Skubal]

I actually edited a scene from the Ancient (not one with the adapter), but I think there wouldn't have been a difference other than a mask from vignetting. I hope they convert to 24p once the video is finished.

[Brian Valente]

so no anamorphic?

[Larry McKee]

Brian, I guess it depends on where the project would be viewed. If it was for direct to DVD, I would probably just do the mask thing. But honestly, I have never been asked to shoot anything anamorphic. So it really hasn't ever been an issue.