Export and footage looks so crips and clean, Great job on the coloring as well. Appreciate the review and relative pros/cons was actually very helpful.
Years ago, a film-making friend of mine would confound his mates... According to what he saw, rapidly switching TV channels, he would bark out 'video' or 'film.' Was the show produced by a film camera or a video camera? To him, the difference was obvious. Though almost everything is shot as video these days, the same dichotomy persists - a 'cinematic' look and a 'video' look. I could write a book on the cinematic look, the history of it, and why I like and dislike it. In a nutshell, it stems from two origins - early 20th Century film cameras, and the natural latency of the human retina under lower lighting conditions. Early cameras simply could not produce images with fast exposures, and motion-blur was unavoidable. At the same time, sitting in a dark movie theater, human eyes expected a lower-lighting environment - a.k.a., motion blur. Through a lifetime of experience, the cinematic look came to tell us that we are watching a story. But what about the video look - an experience focused on clarity? As an example, my drone produces 4k 60 fps video - nothing remotely cinematic, especially without ND filters. Instead, I see sharp details, little motion blur, and an intense you-are-there-this-very-second kind of feeling. Very un-cinematic - but *not* inaccurate, or wrong, or even lacking in artistic value. And so my point is this - if I want a dreamy cinematic look, by all means, I am willing to go for it. But I also keep in mind that high frame-rate crystal-clear video is a potentially satisfying option.
An example of mixing technological genres might be tried in a 'behind the scenes' piece documenting a film production -- distinguishing background footage, this could have more of a video feel, whereas footage from the actual film would keep its finished cinematic form. Another example... during televised sporting event coverage, directors will sometimes apply a cinematic feel to previous events as a way of saying 'this did not happen today.' Anyhow, enough of that!
Can the polarization be adjusted on the ND/PL filters. I've always thought that using polarizers on a drone would be very difficult because they are so dependent on the angle in relation to the sun. Thanks
![ND Filters Mavic 2 Pro - WHY you NEED them & Comprehensive Review! [4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gIEFxkY_Y00/mqdefault.jpg)
![ND Filters Mavic 2 Pro - WHY you NEED them & Comprehensive Review! [4K]](/img/tr.png)
Export and footage looks so crips and clean, Great job on the coloring as well. Appreciate the review and relative pros/cons was actually very helpful.
Great video and explanation! I appreciate this.
Hi 👋🏼, I just found your channel and it's great!! Could you do a video on your color correcting/grading process?? Thanks!
Years ago, a film-making friend of mine would confound his mates... According to what he saw, rapidly switching TV channels, he would bark out 'video' or 'film.' Was the show produced by a film camera or a video camera? To him, the difference was obvious. Though almost everything is shot as video these days, the same dichotomy persists - a 'cinematic' look and a 'video' look.
I could write a book on the cinematic look, the history of it, and why I like and dislike it. In a nutshell, it stems from two origins - early 20th Century film cameras, and the natural latency of the human retina under lower lighting conditions. Early cameras simply could not produce images with fast exposures, and motion-blur was unavoidable. At the same time, sitting in a dark movie theater, human eyes expected a lower-lighting environment - a.k.a., motion blur. Through a lifetime of experience, the cinematic look came to tell us that we are watching a story.
But what about the video look - an experience focused on clarity? As an example, my drone produces 4k 60 fps video - nothing remotely cinematic, especially without ND filters. Instead, I see sharp details, little motion blur, and an intense you-are-there-this-very-second kind of feeling. Very un-cinematic - but *not* inaccurate, or wrong, or even lacking in artistic value.
And so my point is this - if I want a dreamy cinematic look, by all means, I am willing to go for it. But I also keep in mind that high frame-rate crystal-clear video is a potentially satisfying option.
An example of mixing technological genres might be tried in a 'behind the scenes' piece documenting a film production -- distinguishing background footage, this could have more of a video feel, whereas footage from the actual film would keep its finished cinematic form. Another example... during televised sporting event coverage, directors will sometimes apply a cinematic feel to previous events as a way of saying 'this did not happen today.' Anyhow, enough of that!
thanks for this bru!
Can the polarization be adjusted on the ND/PL filters. I've always thought that using polarizers on a drone would be very difficult because they are so dependent on the angle in relation to the sun. Thanks
Did you shot this on dlog or raw?
Hey your affiliate links aren’t active!