![]() |
Re: DSLRs: am I just being paranoid?
Quote:
|
Re: DSLRs: am I just being paranoid?
Nope, because to the client. It doesn't matter one iota. Just don't shoot certain types of brick wall :)
|
Re: DSLRs: am I just being paranoid?
I had an interesting conversation with a BBC chappie yesterday and it might be topical here:
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/wedding-...ml#post1671494 |
Re: DSLRs: am I just being paranoid?
Lay viewers care little or nothing about moire as they have been seeing it on TV newsreader's stripy shirts for years. It's us straining for technical perfection who worry about these things.
|
Re: DSLRs: am I just being paranoid?
Quote:
Zoom lenses have been used extensively in Hollywood movies since decent versions were invented. I happened to be watching a DVD of a classic, the French Connection, last night and Friedkin (no mean director) uses two long, fast zooms in the first 5 minutes - and FWIW a gross violation of the 180 "rule" some people (not Danny) are so fond of quoting. To give another more recent example, the opening few minutes of The Bourne Ultimatum contains many short, sharp zooms which, along with his unusual closeup framing have rightly earned Paul Greengrass his eminent reputation as a director. Finally, film audio has to be recorded separately not because of any virtue in the system but because (with a few exceptions in the amateur world) you can't record sound to film in the camera. In fact film/audio sync control in film-making adds cost and cabling we wedding people would find unacceptable. Finally, much Hollywood style audio is re-dubbed in the sound studio afterwards so I doubt the complete accuracy of that statement also. None of this detracts from the benefits DSLRs can give but let's not get them out of proportion. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:13 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2025 The Digital Video Information Network