Anyone have any experience with this?
http://softscreen.us/
Damn, what is up with this "wanna make Digital look like Film" debate?
Want film? Shoot film.
Want digital? Shoot Digital.
Want film but can't afford film? Save up some money.
Or shoot HD and get the professional digital look.
But no, I've never used it. :)
Actually, it's pretty much a joke since it's not a filter or anything...it's really a sheet of translucent material.
What I'd like is a digital camera that better depth of field control. Tell me how to get that.
Quote from: metroshaneWhat I'd like is a digital camera that better depth of field control. Tell me how to get that.
Mini35 (http://www.mini35.de/).
Thanks for that link.
That's gotta be the ugliest dog I've ever seen.
I wouldn't go so far as to call the brother ugly.
Quote from: metroshaneActually, it's pretty much a joke since it's not a filter or anything...it's really a sheet of translucent material.
What I'd like is a digital camera that better depth of field control. Tell me how to get that.
Control your own depth of field you lazy bum. Always blamming the camera's
Shallow depth of field=lower f-stop (bigger aperture) & less natural or synthetic light. Also, bring the camera as close to the subject as possible (the one you want in focus).
Wide depth of field=Higher f-stop (smaller aperture) & provide more natural or synthetic light. Also, get the camera as far away from the subject as possible. Avoid zooming in, however, as this will constrict your shot.
I've managed to get very shallow depths of field following these simple instructions. The shots didn't exactly look like film, but its a step in the right direction.
Movement and light and even colors just don't turn up the same on video as film, so yeah, why the hell try to make digital look like film.
Fuck, why not make a movie and use the massive depth of field? Orson Welles would've killed to have these kinds of videocameras on Citizen Kane (well... maybe not, but y'know what I mean). :wink:
Yes, thank you for that very precise video instruction, Reece. No really. As a photographer for many years, I can now safely say you've shown me the way to depth of field. 8)
You're just not going to get the same depth of field control without nice prime lenses and a large plane.
I see your point SoNOWTHEN...and in many ways a agree wholeheartedly. We do have to start thinking of video as a different medium as oil is to charcoal, etc. However, I like the way a short depth of field allows you to control audience focus.
But like I said, I agree with you for the most part.
Quote from: metroshaneYes, thank you for that very precise video instruction, Reece. No really. As a photographer for many years, I can now safely say you've shown me the way to depth of field. 8)
You're just not going to get the same depth of field control without nice prime lenses and a large plane.
Ok, I didn't mean to sound so smart assy, but I jsut mean that video isn't as bad as everyone on this forum seems to imply. Sure, it ain't film, but it costs a shit load less and I've managed to get some pretty interesting footage out of video.
Quote from: metroshaneWe do have to start thinking of video as a different medium as oil is to charcoal, etc..
You could think of film as oil paint, digital as acrylic...
that's deep :wink: